The DBD - Hockey analogy
So, I have been trying to make sense of it, the potential reasoning behind it, and while some people have been like "yeah, it makes some sense", I dont think the analogy is even close to being correct. The only part that I think is correct is that "the person with the most goals wins" aka, 3 kills or 3 escapes is a win. But does that mean that the losing hockey team was less skilled? Does that mean that every player on the winning team was more skilled than their opponent? Because that's what SBMM was made for, creating a somewhat seperation between skilled players.
After a hockey match, the value of a player on the losing team can increase twice as much as any player on the winning team. The value of a player is something that I would consider closer to being comparable to SBMM than the amounts of time that player has been on a winning team. Especially if teams are practically randomized each time. Their value increases on their skill portrayed in the game.
So, my analogy with hockey here is that SBMM should represent the value of a player.
To break it down even further:
Kills and escapes is comparable to the timer of a game. The game doesnt end untill the timer is over in hockey, and in dbd the time doesnt end untill everyone either escaped or got killed. In DBD this has a bit more meaning, but IMO, they should be MMR multipliers: Killers could start out with a 0.75x multiplier on their mmr with each kill adding 0.25 and hatch being closed while the remaining survivor is injured/healthy also adding 0.25. Survivors having a team-based multiplier makes it a bit hard since people leave, so for survivors it would be a gen-based multiplier, where they start out with a 0.5x multiplier, each finished generator adding a 0.2 and a gate escape adding 0.5, and opening a hatch adds 0.25(would remove the 0.25 from the killer's mmr).
I think treating the kills and escapes as a multiplier, and treating SBMM as the value that people would want to "buy" a player to have on their team would help improve the situation a lot.
Now we have a matchmaking that would work really well for a tournament setting, but you cant really have a tournament if your team is randomized every game, let alone that you face the same opponent 3 matches in a row.
So please, use the tournament MMR you created for a gamemode where everyone knows to play for a tournament. Dont pretend it's a representation of skill when it can easily do the opposite.
But what would the goals be?
Well, for survivors, it would be based on the average chasetime against that killer. If the average chase time against a wraith is 3 seconds because of his ability, and you last 8 seconds on average, that should gain you mmr. If the average chasetime against a Myers is 2 minutes and your average chase was 40 seconds, that should lose you mmr. Having low chasetime would be bad for your MMR and discourage people from mindlessly sitting on gens and hiding all the time.
Same could be said for killers, but slightly different because otherwise some killers can cheese it(looking at you stealth killers), the average time between hooks, starting from the first hook, ending with the last hook. If the average time is higher than the same killers in your bracket, you lose mmr, if its lower, you gain mmr. But the most important part: it doesnt count hooks, you could hook 5 people in a row, then kill everyone with Devour Hope and gain more MMR than someone who has been chasing someone for 70 seconds. gets a hook with Pain resonance and Ruin and then gets another hook after another 70 seconds and gain 12 hooks that way, let alone times when survivors suicide on hook.
Yeah, the chance exists that all players will increase their MMR this way, but that chance is quite low. Just as the chance is quite low for all hockey players to increase their value. This would at least remove cheesing MMR a lot.
Right now, survivors can cheese by basically locker camping next to one of the exit gates, some killers(looking at you bubs and afk pigs) can cheese mmr by facecamping or basically forcing a survivor to die without the survivor being capable of preventing their demise in any way. With my suggestion, MMR is heavily based on the 1v1 interaction between players, where arguably "most" of the skill takes place. It completely removes facecamping from the equation unless every single killer facecamps. It gives a soft MMR cap on the high and low end because at one point, YOU are the average player of your mmr bracket.
Does it fix all the problems? No, but at least players cannot be carried to a higher mmr by perks, addons or better teammates. Sure, some of them can make it a bit easier in general, but slapping on Alchemist Ring on Blight wont really reduce your time between hooks significantly. You might down survivors faster than without, but without strategic skill, that means nothing unless survivors constantly run in your face.
I am not 100% sure if the type of killer should matter, basically meaning if Clowns are compared to Clowns and facing clowns means other survivors facing Clowns, or just in general, because both have their own up and down sides.
Now, why make this a discussion rather than a suggestion? Because I want people to tear this one apart, find all the issues that I cannot see myself or am too biased to admit to to basically give the devs all the information they need to define what players count as skill. To reduce as much time necessary for the devs, and thus reduce cost from BHVR. It's understandable that BHVR wouldnt want to give the dev team a budget to work on MMR as there currently is a system that is at play even though is obviously being taken advantage of by some and pushing away others. Yeah, you cant argue that players will leave a game regardless, but you also cannot argue that the playercount has dropped significantly harder since the release of SBMM, and even the combined effort of Pinhead and Sadako couldnt bring back the players. There is a financial gain for BHVR executives to open up a budget to improve a system that is more hated than the old system. And when people start preferring the old system, there are some glaring issues.
Comments
-
The latest Dowsey video explains a lot.
9 -
I started hate this hockey meme so much.
11 -
Yeah as expected people take something that's a stupid joke and run it into the ground
I know I make hockey jokes on some threads but I don't do it because I think it's some super important slight against the developers, I just think it's a dumb joke that makes me laugh and hope it makes others laugh as well
Also yes I am a hypocrite, I'm gonna make the occasional hockey joke here and there still even if it's starting to get old. If people think Shirtless Felix is at all relevant then I can have this
1 -
Actually Dowsey want to shape the MMR the way that benefit him the most, like hooks should count towards MMR and not kills....
What would happen I would kill every survivor with 1 hook, but according to Dowsey system that would give me low MMR, also Dowsey obsessed with 4k every game, thats why hates mmr, because have to play against other sweats. And making memes targetting DBD's devs, to blackmail them into changing mmr to dowsey's needs.
I am glad that devs arent falling for his demands.
1 -
I think you severely overestimate how much BHVR cares what that particular content creator thinks
Bit rude of me to say this but, I also don't blame them. He plays the game a lot and gets paid to do it, so what?
4 -
We're all hypocrites to a certain degree it's ok
2 -
I too make my occasional hockey jokes cause to me its funny af. So i say keep at it. I also tell random people to do bones in situations that dont even require it cause i find it funny. Fk the haters, keep yourself happy!
1 -
My MMR never changes.
i rarely escape as survivor, I do pip because I’m doing gens, totems, getting unhooks and taking hits and healing team mates. I get good chases but never escape i am ok with that as long as I pip.
Killer, I rarely get 4K but I don’t use perks mostly now. I seem to hook everyone and get 2K.
i feel I work harder to get kills if I don’t use perks. but then again.. if I bring perks I seem to get sweaty teams 🤣
0 -
Jokes aside - you could seriously cherish the meme. Some ice hockey skins would be funny i think.
0 -
Pretty good job so far.
2 -
You do realize that fun is a big factor to keep in mind? If you want kills vs escapes, you're ignoring fun. Which is why a lot of people left the game. It's why people like me, who ended up spending easily 1.5k hours on DBD in 2021(100+hours per month on average), are barely at 100 hours this year. Not much has changed meta-wise, it's literally just MMR that has impacted the fun of the game a lot.
If you want MMR to also be fun, you need to consider other things than just kills and escapes. Because lets consider the following moments:
- Jake is the first one to be chased by a Bubba, loops him for slightly less than 1 gen because of map RNG spawning him in a big deadzone, then gets facecamped. By the time Jake is dead, there is at least 1 more gen remaining, because even with 160 seconds, 3 survivors cannot finish 5 gens. That takes at least 170 seconds with vanilla time. So now Bubba has NOED Bitter Murmur and knows where everyone is and even more people get downed. Thats just 1 killer with 2 perks that can cheese the MMR system, without there being any real vanilla counterplay. So what could the survivors do here so that 1. They have a chance to a 4 man escape. 2. They can unhook without it being a guaranteed swap. 3. Jake not losing MMR? The answer is nothing. And yeah, Bubba is the most famous example, but any scenario like this is something you want to avoid if people cannot do anything vanilla to counterplay it.
- A Huntress being send to RPD with the worst generator spread available. How is she ever going to be getting more than 1 kill without being forced to facecamp/survivors absolutely screwing up? You basically lose MMR because you got send to a map that isnt made with your killer in mind.
How is the MMR any good, if there are scenarios where its absolutely impossible to "win" with the current settings? You'd just automatically lose MMR without you being able to do anything about it.
4 -
I still don't understand how people are still not understanding this. And worse, think they know more about the situation than literally the professional experts who are building the damned game!
The only part that I think is correct is that "the person with the most goals wins" aka, 3 kills or 3 escapes is a win.
Err, yes. That'd be hard to argue against.
But does that mean that the losing hockey team was less skilled?
In this particular instance, when you define "skill" as a objective measurable metric for algorithmic ranking purposes, yes! One team outplayed the other, and therefore at that moment their skill ranking was - by definition - higher.
Does that mean that every player on the winning team was more skilled than their opponent?
In hockey, teams are matched. You don't match based on who's playing. So the ranking applies to the team, regardless of who the participants were. But this wasn't the point being made anyway, so whilst this analogy I've given right now has flaws when comparing to DBD, it's accurate in terms of answering your question.
Because that's what SBMM was made for, creating a somewhat seperation between skilled players.
No it wasn't. It was created to try and create "balanced" matches, where balance is defined as 2 escapes, 2 kills on average.
Being as you clearly misunderstood the relatively simple analogy being made - that the final score can be used as a proxy for shots-on-goal (because you can't get the score without the shots on goal) - the rest of your post really doesn't address anything based in reality.
And when you're proposing a new MMR system, it's very easy to just say things like "use kills and escapes as a multiplier", etc. Show us the maths behind it, how it accounts for all scenarios and balances out. As a software dev myself, I see too many people who think implementing something is dead easy... please, try it! Make up a spreadsheet in Excel or whatever that shows all the formulas and metrics you're tracking so we can assess whether it actually works, or whether it's just wishful thinking.
2 -
this one never get old.
1 -
Totally agree, this whole hockey thing blows a simple analogy way out of proportion and context and runs it into the ground. It's just willful ignorance at this point.
3 -
As an actual hockey player, DBD actually CAN be like hockey. But the code required to place appropriate value on every single action a survivor does besides killing or escaping is wayyyyyyyy too hard for any game. Such is the nature of having an asymmetric game where wins and losses are not harshly defined
1 -
"In this particular instance, when you define "skill" as a objective measurable metric for algorithmic ranking purposes, yes! One team outplayed the other, and therefore at that moment their skill ranking was - by definition - higher."
You see, that is the problem, it's not. The team as a whole outplayed the other team as a whole, meaning the skill as a whole was better. But looking at an individual level, it breaks down completely. Considering MMR is supposed to be individual in DBD, you have an issue. My point with the losing hockey team being less skilled pretty much was directed at the individual players. Heck, it could even be that the hockey team as a whole was more skilled, but the goal keeper on their side was horrible at blocking shots, meaning that effectively 1 player lost them the game. Which is fine, but players around that player do not get devaluated because of that loss. It just means that their value would increase less substantially.
"No it wasn't. It was created to try and create "balanced" matches, where balance is defined as 2 escapes, 2 kills on average."
It was created to seperate veteran players from getting mixed up with new players. The biggest issue with the old matchmaking was players with 20 hours being matched up against players with 1000 hours. If MMR truly was made around balanced matches, then Bubba would have been nerfed weeks ago since he easily can get more than 2 kills on average by cheesing. Balance was only secondary, seperating veterans from new players was the primary reason.
"that the final score can be used as a proxy for shots-on-goal (because you can't get the score without the shots on goal)"
Oh no, I understood that, but with that reasoning, I could easily push the analogy to hits and unhooks/heals. Which dont matter. The goal for survivors is to survive. You survive through pushing your timelimit(gens) and looping the killer as long as possible(goals), the deciding "win" of the game is still killing 3 people or 3 people escaping. As a killer, you proceed to your goal through sacrificing your survivors, but there is a bit of a skill difference between a killer who has 3 minutes between hooks, and killers who have 80 seconds between hooks on average. You could need set-up time, like trapper, but hook all survivors within 120 seconds, taking 30 seconds on average. You could have very aggressive hooking like Nurse or Blight, and be able to hook survivors 10 times within 8 minutes, taking 48 seconds on average. See, the problem with comparing kills and escapes with actual goals is the following: the hockey game does not end, even if there is 1 goal, or 1000 goals, there is no end to the game untill the timer hits 0, or the opposing team surrenders. DBD ends when the combined kills and escapes hit 4. There isnt really any skill to a bubba facecamping all game, just to having NOED and Bitter Murmur to gain 2 kills for free. He literally did nothing for 2 minutes, got a kill for doing so, then m1's 2 different survivors once and wins. How is that by any means a skillful play? What did he do other than exploiting a few perks and basekit mechanics that have no counter to that point. Cleansing totems? Cant, Bubba can easily catch a survivor within 40 seconds, at which point there is physically no time to touch any totem. If you're unlucky with finding the next gen, he can down a second survivor before you finish the gen at which point he knows where both survivors are and can just slug for a 3k or even 4k. The only part containing skill that game was the first chase, the rest was literally impossible to counterplay.
So no, hooks and chasetime would be comparable to goals, because logic dictates, the shorter the average time between hooks, the closer you are to getting 4 kills, the longer the chase time as a survivor, the closer you are to getting 4 escapes. Just like goals dictate: the more you have, the more likely you are to win the game. Apply the results of the game as a multiplier(maybe even a negative multiplier), and you can gain only an insignificant portion of MMR if you personally happened to perform extremely well, just like the value of losing hockey players would increase insignificantly compared to if they won. Lets say the survivor mmr is 10 on average, you would need to survive untill at least 3 gens are done, then perform chase long enough to actually gain 10 points of MMR, because if you did 5 gens and 0 chase, you end up losing mmr.
On average, survivors would be losing MMR, and killers would be losing MMR, if they lose. There are some exceptions, but those exceptions would be an external example. It's the ONLY way you can have players have fun AND have a matchmaking that balances out gameplay in general. Because the teams are imbalanced. You cannot punish 1 survivor for something they cant do anything about, nor can you reward a survivor for practically doing nothing. That is a HUGE issue for game health. Because at one point, you cant ban players for being AFK anymore, as its been a proven strat to increase their MMR if they afk in lockers all game just to escape through the gate in the end. If MMR leads to scenario's where players who dont do a thing can increase their MMR and players who do pretty much everything lose MMR, you simply dont have a skill based MMR. Which BHVR is claiming.
Hence, comparing goals with kills and escapes is not a logical step. Escapes and Kills are the time pressure, looping and fast hooks are the goals. If survivors on average loop less long than the killer has time between his hooks(not correlated btw, hit and run would cause short loops while having quite some time between hooks, for example), then survivors tend to end up losing unless the killer makes a huge mistake. Just like survivors who loop a very long time and the killer having literal minutes between hooks on average, then the killer will most certainly lose unless survivors mess up super hard. But in both of these scenario's, that often also increases the average looptime of survivors or reduces the average time between hooks, because, lets say a match has lasted 7 minutes before the final gen pops, 2 people were hooked before, the first person was hooked on the second minute, the third person is literally just being hooked, but the killer ends up downing everyone and hooking them all in the next minute after someone tried rescuing without BT. Thats 4 consecutive hooks with 15 seconds each. That means the killer went from 3 hooks in 1,5 minute on average to 7 hooks with 1 minute on average. Since he gained 4 kills, that means his MMR would be multiplied by 2(in this case) and if the average hooktime is 40 seconds, he'd gain 67% of the average MMR, times 2(I am not gonna place the formula I have made specifically because it needs some tinkering on the survivor side, mainly how players are rewarded/punished for outliving teammates depending on the situation), but basically, 100% would be a tie, this killer would have 123% MMR, with 20 points being 200% and -20 points being 50%. AKA this killer gains about 6 points in MMR, since the average chase time for survivors went down by a lot in the end, they maybe went from just being above average to being just average, if not less. Since they lost, you divide by the multiplier, and they could still gain points, but it would be about 115% if they got chased by a killer for 5 gens and 75%-ish if they barely got chased at all, on average losing points. So they range between gaining 3 points and losing 10 points. As a whole, the team loses MMR. So how does this not compare to making goals? The killer "outscored" them in the end, the survivors had a goal lead over the vast majority of the game, but they ended up messing up and letting their opponent score a lot. You dont even need to keep track of that score, because the game naturally would head to the outcome being in favor of the side who "scored" the most.
THAT is why average time between hooks and average time being chased would be counted as goals. Because when you compare them, the killer practically ALWAYS has a better average hooktime than survivors having chasetime compared to other players at their rankings if he gets 4 kills. Even a facecamping Bubba could still do so, except that he has to hook the remaining survivors within the next 2 minutes if he wants his average to be 60 seconds between hooks. That would actually take some skill to pull off, because with all pallets in place and survivors splitting up, its extremely hard to do so. While survivors would lose a lot less MMR, even the one being facecamped, because 4 gens are done by the time he's dead. Meaning if his average chase was 30 seconds, but the average chase in general is 50 seconds, he would still lose MMR, it would just be a lot less because of the way his death has been achieved. Bubba would still gain MMR in this case, but it would be so slow that its inevitable that he would face people who brought toolboxes and actually can have 3 people escaping before the first survivor is dead to the point that he'd lose more points on average.
1 -
Oh, since when do hockey players have to play hockey against the Troll that escaped from the Hogwarts Dungeon? Would love to see that hockey game.
And I never said every single actions at all. I just redefined what a "goal" is in DBD, and I did the maths, it checks out. You can track the average time compared to the average time to other players in your same bracket. If you extremely outperform them, even if you die, you as an individual survivor should still gain MMR even from lost games. But if you perform worse, even if you escape, you can still lose MMR if you did absolutely nothing, especially if you did it at the cost of your teammates(I do need to add the maths in, but you should be falling at about 35% MMR, where 100% is basically 0 MMR, which, even with the 2x multiplier, you would be at about 70% of MMR and still lose points. You would have to have 0 hooks, 0 chasetime and all teammates dead at that point, to be fair).
The math checks out so far, I have found some outliers, but those came extremely close to being tied anyway. I need to do a bit more experimentation before I publish my finds, because its basically a free formula that the devs could use for a testrun.
0 -
There's really no point in putting this much thought into DBD.
2 -
The hockey analogy is a terrible analogy for three reasons:
(1) It muddied the waters and confused a lot of what Patrick was trying to say.
(2) It's an entirely different industry with different needs and outcomes. It doesn’t matter if the hockey players enjoy the game in hockey; what matters in Dbd is if the people playing the video game enjoy the game (the hockey players are paid to play and we pay to play). Also, the fact hockey isn't asymmetric means it's a bad comparison on many points
(3) Matchmaking is supposed to make the game more fun for as many people as possible. If this is not acheived, it does not matter how it is balanced since the game will bleed players and eventually die.
1 -
Come on man, don't immediately discredit what I said by making a LITERAL comparison when we are dealing in analogies. In the Hockey/MMR debate, a player on a bad hockey team that consistently puts up good stats, scores goals and gets shots on net etc can still lose every game. This does not make him a bad player. This is the DBD player who loops the killer for 2 gens, completes 2 gens, heals and unhooks, and then dies on first hook in the endgame because his team left him. In hockey, the good player on a bad team is eventually rewarded when good teams try to trade for him. In DBD, his MMR goes down and the people who left him to die go up. This is because no game developer has figured out how to code a SBMM algorithm to detect for every little thing outside of winning and losing. This is why most games with a ranked mode have a CLEAR win and loss. Games that do not have a clear win/loss condition like DBD are doomed to either make a ridiculously complicated spaghetti code SBMM that accounts for every single action taken by the player, or just hamfist a win/loss condition where it isn't clear. DBD has done the latter.
1 -
I win when they tbag bc they have an inferiority complex and are projecting it through a pathetic little dance
1 -
Hockey is 2 equal teams, following the same equal gameplay and rules, trying to earn the most points with very similar strategies in mind - to make a goal.
This game is nowhere close to being like hockey because:
1. Teams aren't even
2. Each side has a different objective
3. Strategies are vastly different as each sides objec5ive is a polar opposite of the other. Ie. One is to survive, the other is to kill.
Furthermore, rating one survivor's skill in this game is moot because the other survivors can totally throw the match in favor of the killer and a simple mistake, or just being outmatched, seriously impacts the skilled survivor. 4v1 isn't meant for competitive gaming, because SBMM/MMR has been introduced, every game we winonly gets sweatiwr and sweatier. That's why I'll intentionally lose some games because I'm not here for a sweaty experience. As survivor, I just want to have fun getting scared and as killer I just want to have fun scaring people.
Wish they'd at least give us a game mode intended for less stressful gameplay. Thr only thing I can think of that makes this game like hockey is how competitive it gets, and I hate that. That's why I don't watch sports. I hate sports. Really hope the devs hear the community out because SBMM/MMR is killing the game. New players hate it as much as veterans do.
1 -
I don't get it . Why is everyone focused on mmr / sbmm ? Play the game enjoy the chases and good plays and just simply ignore mmr/sbmm . HAVE FUN that's all that matters
1 -
Dowsey's problem that he wants 4k all the time, now he has high mmr, and he has to go all the time against survivors who want to escape all the time.
In the previous system he went against all kind of players and he could play any killer, he had like 200 games in row with 4k, its no longer possible with mmr, Dowsey plan to restore the system which favoured him and the streamers, while 99% of playerbase suffered from it
3 -
No one even need to use hockey, win/lose MMR is proven to be perfect skill measure in any PvP games.
0 -
The reason you and so many other people are having a hard time understanding the hockey analogy is that you completely missed that it's not comparing the games to one another. The analogy was about stat gathering.
The point of the analogy is that if you want to measure someone's skill over a large batch of games (that part is important and people gloss over it a lot), then you don't really need to go hyper-specific; someone's winrate is a reasonable proxy for their skill, overall. If they're winning more than they're losing, clearly they're doing something right, and if they're losing more than they're winning, it doesn't really matter how many skilled plays they're going for since it's not working.
Since the goal is just to have generalised skill brackets as opposed to like, a ranked ladder, the MMR system doesn't need to actually care how skilfully you played, it just has to care what your skill bracket is. Ideally, someone who abuses cheese strats like AFK Pig or facecamping Leatherface would rise up to a higher skill bracket than they can actually handle, but that part doesn't actually matter since those strategies are balance issues, not matchmaking issues.
I also thought the analogy was a little clumsy, personally, I think it kinda betrayed a lack of understanding of what the playerbase's (incorrect) problem with the MMR system actually is, but that doesn't translate to what he was getting at being wrong and it definitely doesn't translate to the way MMR is calculated being wrong.
0 -
le sigh... did you even try to understand what I wrote, or are you just interested in having your say and you don't care about whether you're wrong or right, or even understand the matter at hand?
You see, that is the problem, it's not. The team as a whole outplayed the other team as a whole, meaning the skill as a whole was better. But looking at an individual level, it breaks down completely.
Yes... and that point was literally addressed in the next comment regarding yours, wherein I stated: "In hockey, teams are matched. You don't match based on who's playing. So the ranking applies to the team, regardless of who the participants were."
I notice you skipped this comment entirely.
I'm not involved that much in sports, but what I do know is that teams are ranked for determining which team plays which. THEY DO NOT LOOK AT THE PLAYERS. Therefore, to say a team is more skilled (again, in context of algorithmic ranking) is perfectly acceptable and correct. That is not the case in DBD because you don't enter the game as a team... you enter the game as a killer, and 4 independent survivors who may or may not be playing together. But there's nothing team defining about it, and this has literally nothing to do with the original analogy anyway, so it's a huge red herring.
It was created to seperate veteran players from getting mixed up with new players.
No, it was created to create balanced matches as I stated. To separate veterans from new players doesn't require any MMR, you can literally just separate according to hours played. But hey, you seem to know everything about it so please provide us with the exact quote where this was stated from the devs.
Oh no, I understood that, but with that reasoning, I could easily push the analogy to hits and unhooks/heals. Which dont matter. The goal for survivors is to survive.
Loooooooool
You state you understood the analogy, and then literally contradicted yourself directly after.
The goal in hockey is to score more goals than the opponent. It's not to score shots-on-goal. They, as you stated, "don't matter".
The analogy for DBD is literally in the name "survivor" and "killer"; their goals are to "survive" and "kill" respectively. So how you managed to confuse this with hits/hooks/heals is beyond me, particularly when you then concluded that the goal is for survivors to survive (which surely should be the basis of the MMR, if the survivors aren't hitting their goals, they're not doing as well).
the deciding "win" of the game is still killing 3 people or 3 people escaping
Not for MMR. It doesn't give win/loss for the game. Only for the participants. And only insofar as it updates the MMR rating.
I couldn't be bothered reading the rest of your post because you went on and on about literally something that no-one said, and I didn't want to waste any more of my life. Please try to update your understanding because you seem to be very insistent on running down the wrong path and refusing to heed advice of people who know better that your understanding is misplaced, and therefore so are your conclusions.
1 -
Definitely not watching something from a guy like him.
1 -
Exactly.
Fking hate that people so much.
0 -
The ambassador from China called and has made a statement addressing why you should give them their wall back.
0 -
I think a timed game mode where no one ever dies would be very nice. There could still be a winner. For instance there is still event scored like gens completed and hook states to determine a winner, but nobody every dies and there for everyone gets to play the game.
I think that's the most frustrating thing in both sides. No survivor wants to wait five minutes only to get lethal pursued and camped/tunneled out in 5 minutes while their friends get to keep playing. When wait times were like 30 minutes, my god I'd be so pissed.
At the same time, if you gave killers equitable scoring options (hooks, downs with their power, etc) and they didn't have to feel like they needed to proxy and tunnel I order to have a shot at winning or even just keeping gens from completion in five or six minutes, well I'm sure that role would be little less stressed too.
But obviously, this type of game mode will likely never come out. I think if it did you'd see a little less toxicity from both sides.
1 -
Why not - Hardcore Survivor was great.
0
