BHVR said: "The average kill rates are a little lower than we'd like"
so, BHVR said in the June DU "kill rates are little lower", but, earlier in this year they shared with us this Graphic. Every killer has basically 50% rate every match, so 2 survivors died per match. Lower than expected? this is balanced? or this "little lower" have a focus in a determinate MMR? i miss anything?
Comments
-
I’m guessing they want it slightly above 50% so that on average new players are getting 2-3 kills. This will probably make them play longer
3 -
Old data
31 -
I don't know why everyone always says they want a 50% kill rate. The only percentage I've heard them use is 60%
Source: https://squadstate.com/feature/dead-by-daylight-creative-director-talks-sbmm-moris-pinhead-the-grind-interview-with-dave-richard
18 -
Interesting, thanks
7 -
That's such BS.
12 -
Honestly those kills are this high because in many games,a lot of survivors just give up and dc,so they still count as kills.
Also the rates might be a bit over 50%,but not a lot of players play killer because after a game or 2,you're already burned out and bored of it.
13 -
If that's aggregate data, it's not really telling us much. They could be looking at MMR brackets and balancing around the middle - kill rates are definitely inflated in the lowest bracket, after all.
4 -
Isn't this from before MMR was implemented?
0 -
No before MMR, Freddy has 75% kill rate and most killers were in the 60-65% range.
0 -
From the little research I'm doing, this info is from before the current iteration of MMR, which would make that data outdated.
5 -
As others have said, it's aggregate data. The devs seem really hesitant to be transparent about kill/escape rates and MMR. I think it would make for a slightly healthier discourse around the game. "Here's where X killer is at this MMR bracket, and for reference, here's where your MMR is." I really don't see the issue with that. We already have MMR elitism with imagined numbers. And people flip out about imbalances that might just be bad matchmaking, but they have no way of knowing.
10 -
Seems like there are different opinions between the Devs:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/866726#Comment_866726
6 -
I see...
The 60% figure does come two years after that comment so maybe there was a change of heart? That or they can't make up their minds
4 -
Maybe, but this comment is from Peanits aswell and to me it sounds like 50% is still the goal:
In general I found multiple 50% kill rate statements from Peanits, so that can atleast answer your question why people mention 50% as goal for the kill rate.
4 -
Okay yeah that's more recent. That answers the question to why people say 50% and raises a few more about behaviour's internal communications
0 -
Definitely.
There is also this comment, which might be an explanation why a 50% kill rate might be considered to low:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1237813#Comment_1237813
0 -
60% kill rate is fine. As Killers not entitled to 4K, Survivors not entitled to escape. But everyone can be entitled to have fun, tunneling & camping arent fun.
Its how Killers make their kill, not the kill itself.
I prefer to die in End game where everyone have fun, than escape by M1 on Gen hold match because someone else in tunneled.
10 -
That would all be fine with me if they didnt buff tunneling and camping.
6 -
I quess they balance for little over 50% kill rate since selfish and uncordinated solos tend to slightly inflate kill rates more than swf can bring them down.
1 -
If tunneling and camping was a serious problem wouldn't overzealous be meta? If all the killers do is tunnel and camp then overzealous is a permenent increase to repair speed that only switches off if the killer stops tunneling/camping!
2 -
Both you and BHVR do seem to share the same mindset indeed. It's not a compliment tho. Js.
4 -
If you think tunneling and camping arent an issue I think you should try to play survivor more.
7 -
I'm not asking to remove camping and tunneling. You can do that if you want. But you should be punished for it.
5 -
8% repair speed bonus is totally super significant especially when you have to spend 14 seconds cleansing a dull totem first. /s
7 -
I really wish the Devs would give us an update on the kill rates... Maybe twice a year? Especially with all the changes happening, even maybe more often when there are a lot of changes? I think the community can benefit from knowing this information.
1 -
Honestly I’ve always assumed the devs look more at how many matches are in the 0,1,2,3 and 4 kill buckets and aim to have the 1-3 buckets be the most common than they do at a simple average. Averages are an ok rough indicator for if there’s an issue but they don’t tell you the variance or swinginess of the data set. My impression is they want 0 kills and 4 kills to be the outliers, they want someone escaping each game, and on top of that they’d like the average kills to be 2 or maybe slightly higher. That way the gates end up being opened most matches but not before at least one player dies, it’ll almost always be a close call one way or another is the goal.
0 -
Are you saying killers shouldn't be punished? Because they have been, for a long time. Killers camp and tunnel because they have no other options especially when they get a bully squad (happens a lot in higher MMR). But when one goes down and loses, the other 3 survivors get toxic. Especially after the game is over. All because the survivors want to have fun at the expense of the killer. And I get why killers keep leaving the game. Always losing because survivors have OP skills, using the same one's over and over because it ensures a win. To me that's just boring. Then you have to think of new players. Telling people GG EZ or Get Good isn't going to make people want to play more. Balancing the game because it is heavily survivor sided (most of the community are survivors, so it makes sense because they have the loudest voice in the room) is going to make more killers return and newer players want to play. So I hope you're talking about killers because they have been punished and silenced for far too long. It's about time they get buffed because truthfully, killers should be powerful. That's the whole concept of the game. Survivors aren't vengeful ghosts, demons, mutants, ect. It would be like saying the bosses in every other video game needs to be nerfed to deal the same damage, have the same health and abilities as the main characters, or even less. Survivors shouldn't be as powerful or more powerful than the killers. And they shouldn't be punished for being what they should be.
4 -
No, they have not been punished enough for camping and tunneling, in fact the next patch just rewards them more.
I'm not gonna read all that.
Post edited by Rizzo on5 -
New players rake in 4K after 4K because at beginer MMR Killer is so much easier than Survivor, at intermediate is where Survivors start putting up a semblance of a challenge with windows, throwing more pallets, not missing every single skillcheck etc.
Do the math, Overzealous is actually a hindrance to your team as it needs at least 2 whole gens worth of work (180 charges) to start paying off (and thats assuming an ideal situation where you find a totem and dont have travel time), thats the reason nobody uses it, because its utter garbage and it benefits the Killer, not the Survivors.
If camping and tunneling are such a problem why arent DS and BT (the real counters) used more?.... wait a second, they are actually 2 of the 5 most used perks....
1 -
I can read. In fact, I went back and read everything else you said despite you refused to read everything I said. Sorry you don't like the changes. But they're happening and there's nothing you can do about it.
8 -
Imo what they meant with lower kill rates wasnt targeted at every bracket of mmr but just the higher ones. Its ez af to get a 4k against very poor survivors that just started the game, but playing against 2k+ hour survivors is a hell of a lot harder to kill
0 -
If they removed the games where a survivor DCs from the aggregate data I'm going to bet the kill rate would be significantly less than 50%.
Ragequitting doesn't hurt the Killer; it makes their job easier and gives them more BP. It does severely hurt the other survivors though.
Regardless, BHVR shouldn't balance around a 3v1; they should balance around a 4v1. Killers shouldn't be punished because some survivor players shaft their team by doing a rage DC.
0 -
Thanks for letting us know. That clears up that.
2 -
Good to know but this can also bias the data in the opposite way. For random DCs, it can have killers get a higher number of kills than they would have gotten otherwise, but rage DCs usually happen when a team is getting stomped and would remove the matches where killers are dominating. I get a decently large percentage of rage DCs in my matches especially when the person goes down and is on death hook.
Not sure if there's a better way to handle it. I'd be curious what the percentage of games are with at least one DC as they seem fairly common, but the matches with DCs may just be more memorable.
1 -
Thats a mistake, DCs are important and give a lot of insight on what people really hate, for example if you have 2000 DCs per month on each side and 1950 of the Killer DCs are in RPD or 1950 of the Survivor DCs are against Twins its a clear indicator there is a problem with both things.
When people prefer to eat a timeout than playing in certain conditions you should really look into said conditions, Im willing to bet certain things have a much higher DC ratios than others.
2 -
Ah ok, that makes more sense.
0 -
there are multiple dev that work on the game and make different killers. each of them have targeted goal.
regardless if its 50% or 60%. They're not hitting their targeted goal.
0 -
Oh lordy, thank god, praise be BHVR for understanding this.
I am not being sarcastic, or disingenuous - I keep getting survivors making statement DC's and going, "I hope BHVR doesn't actually think I'm winning these games."
4 -
If games with a dc are not used to collect data, real kill rate with the dc is above their expectations
1 -
Is there any reason for players to not know the current average kill rate for killers and what percentage the developers want it at?
Just judging from the last stats that were release, it looks like kill rates are around 55% and with this patch, I'm assuming the developers are wanting it closer to 65% to 70%.
*** Also, the "Unstoppable force" comment.
2 -
Well of course that's the case, but it's also why matches with a DC shouldn't be considered in kill rate analysis. When a surv (or survs) DCs, it essentially throws the game for the whole team, making the data there absolutely useless. What precarious balance there is depends on there being a 4v1.
Which is also why habitual DCers should be banished to the shadow realm, but that's another discussion.
0 -
In my opinion the logic behind this comment is that the devs know killers want more kills (I mean, duh) to be happy but crucially I imagine the belief is SWF won’t mind because so long as those people are having fun with their friends it’s not the end of the world if 2/3 of a group get killed. You’re still having a good time with your friends and you just move on to the next game. The SWF escape rate is acknowledged to be much higher than solo as well so perhaps these changes to boost kill rates won’t even affect SWF that much.
As for solo players… well I guess they’ll just have to get on with it.
0 -
So why did they nerf pinhead? I remember them saying him having a 61% killrate was too high and toned down his add-ons (mainly engineers fang).
1 -
There was a Dev stream a long time ago where they stated that they were considering a 2-2 outcome with two players dying and two escaping a balanced outcome, which was quickly translated by the community to "the Devs want a 50% kill rate".
Though I have no idea if they ever used that number themselves, but I honestly would't be surprised if this just ended up being the longest ongoing misunderstanding we've had with BHVR.
0 -
DC's are not included in kill rates, just as an FYI.
And please bare in mind that the data in that graph is months old and doesn't fully represent the game at present time.
5 -
what about games where someone kills themselves on their first hook, sandbags, or otherwise ints?
While i'm glad DCs throw out the stats as misleading, there are other arguibly more common factors that seem to get ignored as potentially skewing outcomes.
0 -
pretty impossible for getting survivors who've suicided on the hook to be excluded from data. Hence I was specific to the point raised that this was DC's.
2 -
Is there no way to internally track things like number of self unhook attempts, % of passed skill checks in stage 2, etc?
2
