If DbD tries to be competitive game how come there is no killer and map ban option?
Like the 4 survivors voting for a killer to be banned, and the killer with most vote is banned.
While the killer can ban 2 maps for example.
Another option would be a vote for concede a lost game for survivors, after 5 minutes could be part of the game, or if 2 survivors left with 3+ gens to repair, or for even killer if 5 gens flied in 5 minutes.
This would make game more balanced enjoyable, and most often banned maps and killers reworked.
DC is showing that something wrong with the game, it would be better to cure it
Comments
-
DC is showing that people can't handle losing. It's not a game problem regarding that.
14 -
But then Nurse players would never find a game because she would always be banned. Won't someone think of the nurse players?!
For real though, they should add map bans. They would quickly realize which maps are disliked by many people.
5 -
I genuinely wish you could opt out of one killer when it comes to matchmaking. My games are oversaturated by Wesker lately (literally had him 3 games in a row) and I'm tired of him.
0 -
I'd love a map ban.
I can't stand Coldwind. I just don't play it anymore, either I farm with sruvivors, either I'm afk the wole match on this map.
2 -
Removal of map offerings.
Introduction of an offering to NOT go to a certain realm.
As for avoiding this or that killer ... not really convinced.
Not that some killers would not be able to play anymore (we don't all hate a certain type of killer, let's not generalize the case of some neurotics to the whole community), but I don't really see the point; even if I admit that I could do without games against Legion...
0 -
Killer ban is more like that you dont want to face a specific killer because you always go against and getting bored and tired.
Like Wesker and Legion, i am sick of those.
Wesker especially he is still very popular, and even in mediocre hands very strong
0 -
killer bans would lead to longer queues
map bans should be in settings, just 4 maps as killer you cannot go to, and 1 map as survivor thats the same (so therell be up to 8 maps that cannot be gone to per game, but likely less than that since survivors will end up doubling up on votes - and a swf should get 1 ban)
2 -
It wouldnt.
At start at the game, they voting for a killer to be banned, then killer player can switch to other killers, which of plenty to play.
Like we already have over 30+ killers, why is big deal to play other than 1 killer?
0 -
lets say youre a twins main, youve put in 1000 hours as twins, never play as anyone else, and thouroughly enjoy the unique playstyle that twins has that no other killer comes close to
the survivors ban twins, you want to play twins, not any other killer, so youre forced to dc
all the killers are unique in their own way. you remove the ability to play one killer, and then theres no alternatvie - you want to play the killer you chose, not some substitute
2 -
So a player ignoring 99% of the gameplay, this is quite problematic in my opinion.
Already causing problems like, Wesker is extremely overplayed just like Legion, I rarely want to play because the same killers all over again, because others refuse to play anything else
0 -
The simple matter of fact is that DbD does not try at all to be a competitive game.
2 -
They are balancing the game around top players recently, like to beat a decent killer you need a tournament like SWF
0 -
if you feel like playing a specific killer, doesnt matter who, but for example you have a daily for blight, or you feel like nurse, or you simply want to practice a tough killer like billy, the survivors can ban that killer, and then you dont get to play the killer you want to play. this is really dumb
0 -
This isn't how the matchmaking works. To my understanding, killers have their own MMR. So my Nurse and my Trapper might be hitting very different groups: it matches a selected killer against a group's MMR. That's why it would make ques take longer: it would first have to form a group of roughly the same MMR survivors and checked to see who they had banned and then find a killer to match.
Now I guess you could say we get rid of that concept, but that's another step.
Also this.
0 -
That's more a function of balancing around average/low level killers in 6.1, not top level players. Killers power crept a ton because of how much gen kick slowdown got buffed+added gen time. Quad slowdown is carrying a lot of bad players right now.
0 -
It's probably cause this game isn't competitive at all
Maps are seeded... with no way to select a seed
Killers are not allowed to switch in pre-match lobbies... Honestly I think the whole pre-match lobby should just be skipped... unless they add more to it other then waiting for an extra minute
0 -
It's not competitive at all. Some killers and survivors are playing as if it is, but it's not.
3 -
RNG makes this game non-competitive because a competition would suggest that both sides have an equal chance of winning.
Something which RNG nullifies, because of the variables that already exist (map set ups, killers camping/tunneling while survivors have no defense against that, survivors bringing gen speed perks/tools while killers don’t have defense against that, etc etc) making it impossible to a 100% ‘fair’ match.
Different Maps work better with certain killers as well as with certain survivor perks. Banning certain maps isn’t going to make it that much more competitive, if it doesn’t directly even benefit the killer or survivors.
0 -
No matter what some parts of the community make it, DbD is not a competitive game by nature.
It lacks the boundaries that would make it competitive and fair, so the default is, for lack of better term, casual/random. The reason it feels like it is or should be competitive is the players who make it so.
Whether that be by policing how others should play (the "you should always try to win at all costs and playing in any other way is akin to cheating" comes to mind, and on the other end, the survivor rulebook), by defaulting to the strongest/most "meta" things they can (aka this community's obsession for tier lists), or promoting the mindset that self-worth = wins only (I'm thinking for example the obsession for winstreaks, but also people here defaulting to assuming the win ratio of random people they're arguing with).
Generally, I think the better people do at the game, the more they want their prowess to be acknowledged, even though competitiveness might not be the core of the game. The content creators did not, in my opinion, help with that mindset.
But all of that is only my opinion =)
1 -
Because it's an asymmetrical game. Every game would have both sides banning the best perks/items/add-ons to have vs them.
0 -
Ban simply wouldn't work with the game due to the asymmetrical nature. Survivors banning a killer has no trade off, because they can't pick to play as that killer and anyone trying to queue up as a popular banned killer would just have long queue times.
Map bans don't really change anything since map offerings exist and honestly I think either side having any control over what map is picked is unnecessarily. I would much prefer that maps are always completely randomly picked.
Technically survivors can already concede as they can just let themselves die on hook. But I wouldn't be against a conceding option.
As for DCs. They mean nothing in terms of balancing. People will dc for any reason. Making changes to the game based on people dcing will only create a larger problem of people dcing more because they want something changed. Which would be super problematic.
0 -
Even if bhvr supposedly balances dbd top down, it is still not a competitive game and it will never become one.
-You dont need bans in competitve game genres. For example in fighting games 99% of the time in tournaments there are no bans. So bans wouldnt make dbd more of a competitive game.
-There is no official dbd tournament series by bhvr. This shows that they understand that dbd is not meant to be a competitive game.
-The unofficial dbd tournaments by individuals have different rules and standards of what can be cosidered as a victory for the killer or the survivor side. There are tournaments where either number of hooks count or hook stages count or number of kills. Certain killers are allowed in some tournaments, certain killers at specific stages of the tournament in others. Certain number of specific survivor perks are allowed in some tourneys, while in others all survivors can run whatever they want. The list goes on. All this stuff shows that the game does not have a definitive win condition for either side. When you play dbd and a killer gets 2 kills and the other 2 survivors escape..What is this considered? A tie? Most players would agree on this. In a competitive game there is no tie. Every game has a definitive result. One team or player wins and the opposite loses. So when you play bo5, ft10 or even a single game there will always be a victory or a loss for each side.
-Solo queue experiece is completely different from swf one. Even a duo swf experience is different from a 4-man swf. This makes MMR a joke. Having different MMR for solo queue and different for swf would make sense. The way this game works is that you could have a mediocre 4-man swf that is really efficient going up against a decent/good killer and having a 3-man out, The same players in a solo queue environment could be below average or even slightly bad players, not being able to have good decision making or efficiency, since they heavily rely on the rest of their team. Furthermore typically solo queue is killer sided favoured, while 4-man swf is survivor favored (except for top tier killers with optimal builds, like nurse)
-The ranks are a joke and always have been. Just grind the game and you can reach rank 1 pretty soon, even as a completely new player. Something that does not work in real competitive games. Aside from the MMR in these games, there is a global or server ladder that is related to the win percentage of the player and is actually tied to the MMR, if we exclude rank decays in some.
0 -
Actually, BHVR recently announced an official tournament
Also draws can exist in competitive games. TCGs like MTG and Yugioh have conditions that can cause the game to end in a draw.
0 -
Why would they want to make an asymmetrical game competitive? This isn't valorant or overwatch.
1 -
Far to abusable to add vote bans in an asymmetrical.
1 -
I don't think killer bans would need to be a thing, but you absolutely could do it without it affecting queues. You simply make the lobbies drafting lobbies, but the killer needs to be able to draft as well. The easiest thing would be perks. I could see something like this:
- Coin toss for survivor or killer picking first, doesn't matter.
- If killer first, they ban a perk, no survivors can use it.
- Fist survivor then bans a killer, killer bans second perk, second survivor bans a killer, killer bans a third perk...
You get where I am going with this. You end up with four killers banned and four survivor perks banned. However, there is a huge problem with this system. Chances are, with bans, survivors are going to likely always ban the same killers, and killers would ban the same perks. You would likely see Nurses, Blights, Spirits, etc almost always banned, then perks like Dead Hard, Unbreakable, Deliverance, CoH, etc.
I don't think there needs to be a banning system on either side. I do agree that no map offerings should be allowed by either side. Additionally, I think a map banning option should be available for both sides. You either do banning by realms or by maps. If you do it by realms, all maps in that realm are banned. I think you end up with 10 or 11 realms if you ban 8 total? If you ban by map, I think you end up with 30+ maps still. Either way works honestly.
0 -
They've made it abundantly clear that they don't intend for it to be a super competitive game. Look at how many changes organizers have to make to the game when they try and run a tournament. Their main goal is fun, not perfect balance.
1 -
Lol, no you don't. If you want to win so bad, just bring a green medkit and hard split on generators. Predrop every pallet and throw W. Maps are extremely safe and have a giant surplus of resources. That will destroy 95% of killers
1
