Low mmr should be removed/Void in all stats.
I get you want the game to be really fun and balanced for new players, its admirable but it's not wise to balance around it or even include them in stats.
Now I'm sure through all these tests, killer or survivor you probably had 1 game where no survivors were touching gens.
I only had one game like this, but maybe peak players had more but I had a game where I was running Scourge Pain R (regressed gen with most progress by 15% on hook) and I had 5hooks and this perk still didnt activate... now i get I'm experienced but theres no way in hell anyone should get 1 hook, let alone 5 and not ONE person touch a gen.
These players are being put into stats, these stats are used for a balancing guide... is it even reasonable to include players not even doing their main and only objective?
This is like balancing around killers who dont attack.... can you imagine..
I just dont think it's fair or a good decision to include them into stats, remember all new players are placed at a set mmr too, so these players arent even the lowest mmr available...
Just blows my mind, thoughts?
Comments
-
You only had 1 game where survivors didnt do gens?
Idk about you but even at thousands of hours of playing I've had way more than just 1 match where survivors did not do gens, as both killer and survivor.
9 -
I had a baby wraith who could not uncloak. I pallet stunned him so he could get out but even standing still he would miss most attacks. It was painful to watch as my teammates who were obviously closer to my game play (I am an average survivor who gets Iri 1) start to bully this wraith and not bothering to even try to finish gens. I finished the last four gens and opened the gate. The three of them got slugged by NOED and hooked and I left them there. Karama and all that lol. I agree even having a new player on the MMR system means they can get placed with us who is not new is just unfair.
4 -
This couldn't be more of a misunderstanding of BHVRs balancing tactics.
Do you genuinely think those stats that they show us (the ones with overly simplified info on them) are the ones they use to balance the game? Do you honestly, genuinely believe that? They nerfed Pinhead because new players were struggling against him, and also nerfed The Twins addons because she was over performing in high MMR.
I truly don't understand why this needs to keep being said, as they have stated many times that statistics are only one of the reasonings behind balancing things, just because Almo has mentioned statistics while also talking about nerfs does not mean that's the only thing used.
5 -
I was just referring to during the tests, I'm also an off peak player so people in my lobbies play alot but I have definitely seen it multiple times as survivor through all the years playing lol
Yeah that too, at least he was trying to do his objective I guess? An wraith got nerfed, poor boy...
But yeah low mmr killers/survivors shouldn't be put into the stats or used at balancing, I only used the survivor example as they physically wasnt doing the objective while killers tend to be trying (they just arent very good)
0 -
I'm fully aware they dont look at stats alone, but they clearly do use them alot for balancing and including low mmr players or players that dont even try to progress the game just isnt smart.
The devs change what they want, but acting like they dont use the stats is also a lie.
Im not saying they ONLY use stats, I even said in the OP that they can be used as balancing guide (which they are) but including these people creates bad information period.
0 -
The worst part about this is the fact, that this wraith got 3 kills. So… from BHVR’s point of view, that player needs to be placed in a higher MMR bracket… and we need to nerf wraith, again.
1 -
Legion has a pretty confusing and strong power against Low MMR / New survivors and they've just buffed him up the wazoo, same for ghostface really, pretty clunky reveal mechanic (mostly changed in ptb though, we'll see how it works) they definitely don't aim to make the game easy for Low MMR survs.
1 -
For me the tests havent changed much when it comes to team mates, though killers were below average and stopped seeing so many nurses/blights and i've been seeing a lot of onis for some reason.
0 -
A low mmr legion isnt going to be good either though and legion is likely doing bad in most brackets and games... I'm just saying they should be taken out of the stats simply because half the time they have no understanding or arent doing their objectives as example. Even if they only use the stats to gain a rough idea what to look into having these players in slows down the process...
Giddeon for example, we all know it's not balanced for 80% of the killers if not more, we have known that for ages yet it hasn't been changed and the stats actually show it is.
0 -
Alot of tests made my games worse (well for killer mostly but survivors got more boring) the odd day was a little more relaxed, I know my lobbies are overly sweaty but in like 3 different tests I actually saw so many perks used I normally dont and I also seen more killers (like you said that's not common)
0 -
To me, not taking under account low mmr would be a mistake.
However, what is relevant is to analyse data on different frames, for instance "What is the most successful killer for killers within [500 ; 1000[ SBMM?" and compare it to "What is the most successful killer for killers within [1500; 2000[ SBMM?".
Why doing that? It's because the unbalances in the game are not the same for beginners and veterans. Same for perk usages, and what are the most used perks for each category of player (availability, ease of use, etc.).
They probably already do this kind of analysis, but I'd like them to share these results, I'd love not having to speculate :<
1 -
Oh I would love them to split the stats into mmr brackets (low,mid,high) and iv asked every time they do stats but sadly they dont want to...
But as an alternative ignoring the low mmr would also be okay as most player will be in the middle
0 -
I'll tell you why I'm not not a fan of ignoring low mmr then.
The low mmr bracket correspond to new players mostly (they'll start there right) and on online games, the first few hours are crucial if you want to keep the player hooked (tell me I'm funny).
Would you also ignore the high-mmr because they're not that much? That would be bad because there's certainly a lot of streamers in high mmr and they that act as the window of the store: if they feel forgotten, that's not a good ad for the game. I think high mmr is as important as low mmr.
That's why I really think that would be a mistake to ignore a part of the player base.
0 -
You can be assured that the information that the designers use when making any change is varied and detailed - stats are naturally more detailed than we often share, and we've been through the reasoning why we do not share these stats more often, due to the way people react and misinterpret them as the stats are a small part of the information that we use.
All factors need to be taken into consideration - players at high MMR, mid MMR and low MMR, new players are just as important as everyone else as are the casual players. So I tend to disagree that you shouldn't look at low MMR - but again, what the stats show there is not all the information that's used.
5 -
Oh I never even thought of that they just got kills and we all know kills=Skill oh now I feel even worse for this new player.
0 -
I'm aware it's not all the information used, and I'd love to see more detailed stats. I love me some good stats and it's a shame they're so vague.
And I understand you care about new players, that's great but I just dont feel including people who actively arent doing anything in them.
Once again, and I ask this every time you do stats, please make them abit more detailed or even split into low,mid, high mmr (we dont need mmr numbers). Having the stats split would actually make me happier, I wouldn't care if you took every player into the stats then as I'm able to analyse what's there.
Personally the stats are mostly useless to me as they're to vague. I love seeing them, but theres nothing to get from them
0 -
Personally, I would love that all stats were publicly available, like it is for other games (LoL is an obvious example). I'm the math-guy that asks to himself a lot of questions, and I'm sad I can't get the answers of my questions :'(
1 -
Yeah I'm the same, even if the stats weren't the most detailed they could at least split them into brackets or sections.
It wouldn't surprise me if the stats mislead so many players to believe things that arent true or they dont quite understand how things are impacted.
Cowshed was the most balanced map in the stats... bet loads of casuals just took that as fact
0 -
People are really really bad at understanding statistics. And when they don't understand statistics, the next thing that people will do is write off statistics all together. This is really obvious anytime that stats are shown and Nurse is at the bottom of the pile in terms of average kills per match. You might get some people suggesting to buff Nurse, and you'll get others saying that the fact that the Nurse has the lowest kill to death ratio is an indicator that the stats in general cannot be trusted.
Both of these responses are foolish, but you can see with responses like those above why the development team is not forward with showing stats for this game.
1 -
They definitely don't balance around new players as you suggested. Survivors have to not only be expert loopers, have good perks, and being unafraid to work on gens out in middle of an open dead zone. Even with the proper survivors, you have a low chance of escaping. It depends on how good is the killer and which perks he is using.
2 -
I would hope the developers balance for at least 3 different levels of play, if not more: High, Mid and Low. Each level has it's own challenges. For example, Nurse at low levels of play needs a buff. Maybe at lower levels of play, Nurses have 5 blinks to help users learn her. Then at high levels of play, maybe she only has 1 blink.
0 -
To be fair, they nerfed Twins for high mmr players. We all know competent survivors struggle against Twins... Don't we? I guess.
0 -
I think I have an example: I'm pretty convinced the last few nerfs of Wraith were meant for low mmr. I think it's pretty easy to understand how much of a noob stomper he was (and probably still is).
The why may be because new survivors against new killer usually end with the killer obliterating survivors. If changes destined to low mmr make dbd more attractive for new players, I think that's a good thing. Maybe dota doesn't need to do this kind of balancing because it is a symmetrical game.
0 -
I just want the stats to either exclude new/low mmr players or be split into brackets (low,mid,high) just so it's clear what is what.
Far too many casuals will not understand the stats or how different levels impact it so it gives them wrong impressions while people like me who have alot of experience and are generally curious on stats we get this water downed and vague stats which are completely useless.
These stats dont do anything in the state they're in
1
