http://dbd.game/killswitch
I believe that DBD would be a better game if you could have an option not to play against SWF
I think that SWF is killing the game. I wish there was an option not to play against SWF parties because it puts so much stress on the killer against these tryhards that less and less ppl will play the killer.
Comments
-
Yes punish people that don’t want to play solo. Ok
25 -
Queue times will sky rocket since people at least duoing up are about if not more common than solos.
Which is why this will never get implemented
19 -
This
Obviously not every single team is SEAL TEAM SWF who will make it their mission to make sure that not only do you lose but it's as humiliating as humanly possible, why would a killer ever even risk having to go up against that at any point?
While we don't know exactly how many players are SWF, it's been said that it is more than 50% (granted, this is ALL SWF so twosomes and threesomes are included) and I imagine a large chunk of that group would just not play anymore if the option to play with their friends was essentially stripped away.
11 -
And punish killers who play solo, because you want to play with your friends.
Then make it duo only, no more 4 mans.
Think of why killers don't like swfs.
Then think of a way to make it fairer for both parties.
8 -
If you remove swfs from this game, then it will be dead
10 -
Add AI bot killer in game to counter SWF.
Give bot can use every perks.
4 -
I don't at all
This would kill the game for reasons listed above
4 -
The devs are never gonna make that it so it limits your ability to play with people that you want. This game is good as dead if they do that. Even Duos wouldn’t help either. I’d rather remove comms than remove swf
0 -
Just because you don't have more than 1 friend that plays this game doesn't mean everyone doesn't.
10 -
DbD would die, and other asymmetrical game would take its place where you can play with your friends
7 -
There's absolutely nothing the devs can do a thing about comms, no way to enforce it at all.
11 -
"I don't want opponents that can fight back, I just wanna kill anyone without resistance".
12 -
True I’m just saying I’d rather remove that than just remove swf. I don’t want any of them removed I like talking to my friends about non dbd stuff in the lobby
2 -
If given the option, no killer including me would willingly go against any SWF. I know this, but queue times for more than half of the survs would skyrocket badly, if they ever actually get a match, which I doubt. This is not the way to deal with SWF.
Over the past several months the devs have been bit by bit giving solos more info and coordination options to approach SWF level, being careful to not strengthen SWF at the same time. The intent is to make it eventually not matter if survs are solo or not, and property buff killers around that new reality.
Whether this is possible, and how to get there, we've all been debating for going on 6 years.
1 -
They could stop dragging their feet and balance around the notion of survivors having coms, make an actual matchmaking system that actually puts people of similar skill against each other and keep people from smurfing while also keeping noobs away from the more experienced players. Swf isn't the problem, it is the devs unwillingness to properly balance this game.
3 -
Doing that would absolutely destroy all solos
4 -
SWF is a huge reason the game is alive. I would bet half the time you think you're facing a SWF, it's a solo team. SWF does not break the game. Improve at killer.
9 -
In other games where balance around SWF and solo has comms, almost noone plays as solo, since killers are too strong for that, and everyone in SWF groups, and killer still miserable
Because solo wont use the tools no matter what
0 -
I agree it would be a far more balanced game without SWF (or at least limit it to 2-man SWF), but very few killers would choose to play with SWF and the pool of SWF players in lobbies would have ridiculously long queue times and they would likely quit the game in droves.
Nobody is ever going to be fully satisfied with the game - it’s a zero sum game. Make one side happier and the other side gets more upset. BHVR have made the calculation that keeping SWF happy is best for generating the most revenue. It’s nothing evil or nefarious - just simply a business decision. Any killer player knows that an experienced, coordinated SWF breaks the game and makes it almost impossible to win, but many still choose to play anyway.
1 -
Meh, I can definitely tell when it is SWF vs. a good solo team. SWF can coordinate with designated roles for each of its members, so you see a lot more specialization. They can also pick complementary perks at the outset to put maximum pressure on the killer, which often leads to no-win situations for the killer later on the game. And of course the whole team can instantly materialize in an instant around a hooked survivor because you are playing against a team of people with high map knowledge + comms.
I am not saying to get rid of SWF, but it obviously makes a big difference in gameplay to the point where it is like an extra perk for good players. Let killers opt out and have longer queue times if they want. I don't see how that hurts anybody.
2 -
I don't understand why you think that...?
0 -
Because solos ≠ SWF? What’s hard to get about that?
2 -
Not so. They can create separate queues. Maybe killers (and other survivors!) would like the option to not play with SWFs. Why not not test the two-queue idea? It can't be worse than the recent MMR tests. We might find that it works swimmingly. (We might also find that no one wants to play against SWF and that queue is dead. Which is not something a lot of people want to hear, but it's an important bit of data nonetheless.)
5 -
I think that bad players are killing the game. I wish there was an option not to play with and against bad players because it puts so much stress on the player with and against these useless players so that less and less ppl will play the game.
2 -
Oh, I see what you're saying. I understood the comment in the context of buffing killers in SWF matches only, assuming there was a second queue. Which sounds like a better idea to me.
0 -
Splitting an already dwindling player base just for playing with friends is a terrible idea and will kill the game, as several others have already said above. No killer will choose to play against SWF if given the choice, not even for faster queue times. The fact people are asking for an option not to play against SWF should be sufficient evidence of that.
2 -
There are a lot of killers that claim they like playing against SWF let's call their bluff
1 -
Maybe. What's the harm in testing it for a few days, though?
We can trade anecdotes and hypotheticals all day, but at some point we just need to collect data.
2 -
I'd love to see how the game is for a whole day with this option. I know I'd appreciate it as Killer.
0 -
thing is you can't remove 3rd party comms.
1 -
Yeah and I would want to tbh
0 -
I agree. Finally someone who gets it.
1 -
A more effective matchmaking system would help with that. The devs say they're working on it, and their recent tests undoubtedly are part of that.
0 -
I meant they cannot interfere with comms being used, which is the real strength of SWF, although splitting the playerbase imo is a bad move.
0 -
Removing SWF or limiting it to duos only would effectively kill the game. Comms can't be removed, only balanced around which is what they're already trying to accomplish with buffs to solo.
Nobody would willingly opt-in to playing against SWF. Why have potentially harder games when you can just stomp solos who'll do half the work for you?
8 -
may be one of the worst ideas i have ever seen. might as well shut down the game right after doing so
2 -
Personally I wouldn't want something that would absolutely butcher queue times
3 -
Why? SWF is fair and balanced, all top tier killer players love playing against them. There shouldn't be an issue.
1 -
I'm a both SWF and solo Q enjoyer, and let me just say, i would PAY to not get matched with SWFs when i'm in solo Q.
I'd rather have a lobby full of randoms, cuz there's a higher chances that i'll actually get any help from them than from 3-man SWF i got thrown into, cuz they'll leave me to die 9/10 times.
It should be an option for both sides to not want to be matched with SWFs
4 -
I'm a solo player and swfs absolutely directly (and often negatively) affect my gameplay, but stopping people from playing a *game* with friends isn't the solution. I'm not even sure there is a solution tbh. If given the option to not play against swfs, majority of killers will take it. The devs won't let swf die out.
I do feel like every time survivors get thrown a bone (a buff or new beneficial perk) it gets abused by coordinated swfs and it's solo survivors who bear the brunt of the inevitable nerfs more than anyone. So I do sympathise with killers on the swf issue.
2 -
Definitely not a no-win, but I get how it can feel that way. I think killers get used to capitalizing on unforced errors rather than forcing mistakes or making the best available play every step of the way. Most solos are going to hand a 4k on a silver platter, and it's easy to fall into the trap of never really thinking about what you're doing in a macro sense because you don't have to most of the time on killer. It's hard to flip that switch against survivors who are playing intelligently
0 -
I don’t have any friends in dbd.
I play in Oceania which has a lower pool of players.
im also a killer main and don’t need friends only victims.
When I play surv I play solo.
If you think having full teams versing pugs is fair then 90% of pvp games will disagree with you.
5 -
MuSt CoLlEcT mOrE dAtA I AgReE.
0 -
Yeah it shows
4 -
I remember my time during the launch period of the game where no SWF existed, alot of people either kept leaving the lobbies to find the lobby their friends were in or they would ask others in their lobby to leave in order to make room for their friends.
Because of that, getting any games back then took ages and i rather not bring that back.
1 -
they can't/won't remove SWF, so the question becomes: Why haven't they come up with any form of (de)incentivizing it? Giving the killer a 50/75/100% bp bonus post match (depending on number of premade,) reducing the stacking potential of perks in a premade party, having SWF members have a scream notification every time one of their premade are downed, anything.
many SWFs arent even the problem necessarily, its the upper end of their potential to exploit the balance of the game. There needs to be something either balance or progression related to offset how absolutely demoralizing it can be.
3 -
Ok, but then you would also have to give survivors the choice to opt out of playing against certain killers.
Then, we can all collectively enjoy our lobby queue simulator.
2 -
Nooooo, that will increase que time and split the playerbase !!!
Jokes aside, swf is not that big of a deal. If you get a bully squad with Ds, Dh, Bt then..... I'm sorry for you.
But it's not every game, and most of the time swf don't capitalize on information very well (can tell from my own swf experience xd)
1 -
Yes, but that would absolutely destroy que times. Buff SoloQ and then rework maps and killers for a better result.
2 -
Maybe. But my point is we won't know if we don't try. And recent MMR changes have been just as disruptive. What is the harm in trying it?
0
