How to EZ win as Survivor...or .... How unfair game is.
Comments
-
39% escape rate does not equal 61% killrate. The killrate is actually closer to 75%.
Reason being, a full game lasts about 15 minutes, so killers can get 1 4k, 1 1k and 2 3k's and be at 70% killrate. Survivors can have 6 matches in the same time, be tunneled in 2 games, die in 3 others and escape in 1, leaving to an escape rate of 15-ish%
Escape rate should be around 50%, killrate preferably at 70%
As for MMR only going up when a killer gets more than 2 kills, not really. It can go up with only 2, it can go down with 3. It depends on the MMR of the survivors you're facing. Having a survivor with 5000 hours and the rest being at 50 hours, with you being only 150 hours, you can gain mmr by simply killing that 1 survivor. It's an extreme case, but possible.
0 -
Can you please explain to me how do you pretend to have a 50% escape rate and a 70% kill rate at the same time, please? And where do you get that killrate is 75%? Or what any of that have to do with what I said to you? And how in this world a 39% escape rate isn't a 61% killrate? Because you are mixing-up possibles individual kill/escape rates with average, or I don't even know what you are talking about.
And yes, 2k could mean MMR go up, but also that can go down. That's why instead of specific cases, when talking in general or in average, you assume the best hypothetical scenario: If every survivor granted or discounted you the same MMR, 2k means 0 gain, in other words, you need a 3k to gain MMR. Same for the killrate, as of course many players would do better that 60% and others worst, but again, we are talking averages here.
To make it clear: 60% killrate = 40% won games for killers (games that ended in 3k) and 40% won games (games that the survivor escaped) on average. So, "39% escape rate" means the game is balanced as killers are winning the same average of games as survivors. Hence, my "stop using the 61% killrate as a point without even know what it means".
0 -
Ok. So specifically for you. I want fair games. I want both sides to have same chance to feel bad (because bad feeling hurts more then that good game you already forgot), so both sides should loose with same probability. To achieve this, new kill rate should be 40%. So major buff to survivors should now come that would on average make survivors escape ~20% more often.
Surely you will now agree /s
Again. Anything above 50% for any side is unfair. And to be absolutely precise, we are talking about kill rates.
And to restate what was said again. Given your "match pure wins and consider it fair" mindset (that just is not fair), even under these conditions 60% kill rate is not fair outcome. It would have been if kill distribution was equal. But 2k does not happen in 20% of cases. So 60% kill rate is not fair no matter what.
0 -
Do you forgot to switch accounts? Because the comment was for other user and in the other posts where we "interacted" (to put it slightly) at least you made some sense. Also, I think you and me have already talk about this topic in enough detail by now.
I'm not going to even try to understand the rest of what you said there, but I'm going to do like I take seriously at least some part of it and just answer that 40% winning is 60% losing, so both sides are already feeling equally bad. So... there you go, I guess? 🤣
0 -
I just want to add one thing here - 2k meaning that no team won means that 2 people has lost the game and two of them won the game, screwed is the killer who did what he should and yet did draw. Screwed are survs that was killed, because even if they done everything what they could they lost even if killer did not won.
0 -
switch accounts??? I don't get what you mean. I have one account only. Who are you trying to merge me with? Also I can show you my steam account (that contains my name for a very long time now) if you don't believe me. Actually I played against one killer main here in 1 game (Xord) and yes - under my only name that I use :)
And again - no are just ignoring my whole post. 60% kr does not produce 40% wr even under your conditions (as pointed above) and even if it did it's still not fair because draw (and even 1K as opposed to 0K) is 100% better feeling then loss which you absolutely ignore on purpose.
And again. When I play killer draw feels fine to me. It's always like - good match. It clearly showed that the match was balanced and both sides did their best and achieved something. That is satisfying (well it's not if you get 0-1 hook until endgame and then get a draw by huge survivor's blunder, but I feel the same even if I 4K in such a game - unsatifying win under those conditions)
0 -
dude think 60% killrate is true....its 25% true
if dount realise.... at same post they say 60% killrate they say NURSE IS D TIER
have your own brains
ppl who say that KILLERS ARE GOOD are the only ppl with skill issue . bec you cant go up and see what good survs are and real game is
0 -
And Nurse, with the lowest killrate, still had 56%. As for the devs saying she's d tier? nah.
And I play in High MMR, a lot of killers are good. People who think they are bad are people who either cant acknowledge they have been outplayed, or people who have tried the same tactics 10000x and failed 9000x and still think their tactic is a winning one.
Sure, the highest mmr doctor wont be at the same mmr that the highest mmr nurse can play at. But Nurse's high mmr ceiling isnt even met by SWF. SWF's ceiling is somewhere between Blight and Nurse. As for "what good survs are and real game is". People are "good" survs if they win more than 50% of their games. The "real game" applies to everyone playing. If you're talking tournament tactics, that's not the real game. That's only 0.1% of the game. The tournament scene is TINY, compared to the game.
And if you are like "these killers are not viable at tournaments, and thus need to be buffed", that same logic can be applied to survivor perks and items. Because funnily enough, most of killer perks ARE viable in tournaments. In fact, some of the worst normal gameplay perks are amazing in tournaments because they almost solely counterplay tournament strategies. Monstrous Shrine was always amazing in tournaments. Forced Penance too. Both were the best at countering tournament levels of play.
Seriously, looking at data from the game, the majority of killers hover between 65% and 75% killrates. The average killrate is at about 69%. The 61% came from the top 5% players. Considering a 2k isnt really a tie MMR wise(you gain most mmr from your first kill, the least mmr from your last, this also means 2 kills gains you MMR, not as much as a 3k would(especially if the 4th went through the hatch), but you still gain MMR). Having the top 5% of players being at about 2.5 kills, is quite significant. Especially considering that realistically, you are expected to lose 50% of your games. Killers need to learn to lose more often. Winning 80% of your games earlier simply meant you werent in the right MMR scale. If you lose more than 50% of your games, you're simply not good enough with that killer to be in that mmr scale.
There is no MMR scale where players have to wait extremely long times for matches. Some MMR scales have less players than others, meaning you basically have the same 3-4 groups of SWF and 1-2 solo players and the same 7 Nurse players in the highest of MMR, but thats only natural. An MMR scale should ultimately become a bellcurve, that means if you're not at the highest point, you should expect to lose more often.
0 -
I know this dabbles in chances instead of the actual rates and thus is purely theoretical, but remember that we cant just say that a 50% chance to escape is fair. It's more about the chance to win as a killer being the same as for a survivor to win. A survivor wins when they escape and the killer either wins with 4 kills or "3 or more" if you swing that way.
If the escape chance per survivor is x, then the chance for them to be killed is (1-x). A 50% chance to escape would mean a 6.25% ( (1-0.5)⁴ ) chance of a killer win if you only consider 4 kills a win or a 18.75% ( [(1-0.5)³+(1-0.5)⁴] ) if you consider 3+ kills a win.
An equal chance would be ~27.5% if you only deem a 4k a killer win and ~38.2% if you deem 3k+ a win.
Obviously i could be wrong and should have considered survivors as a team but even the game doesnt so why should I?
1 -
You are right. In fact, right now that 60% killrate means both survivors and killers have an 40% winrate as for the killer the win condition under MMR terms is 3k and a 60% killrate is 2.4 survivor killed per game on average.
Survivors thinks that 60% killrate is the game being killer-sided because it was in September the first time BHVR got to that number, so now survivor lose more games and makes them think "killers are OP" when in reality is now when the game is balanced and not survivor-sided in winrates.
1 -
50% kill rate would equal 2K but 61% kill rate however is way above that. It's not 3K though which would equal 75% kill rate. But that 61% kill rates equals around 2,5K per match so 2K might be the most usual outcome but 3K is also very close maybe like from 20 games nine ends in 3K and eleven ends in 2K just my quess. But however dc:s are exluded from stats so those would probably increase kill rates even further.
0 -
It's 2.4k per match, which is 3k around 40% of the time. That means 60% killrate = 40% winrate for both sides on average. That's what that means.
0 -
If you want to be specific it's 2,44K per match I think that's 44% win rate for killer and 39% win rate for one survivor. But however many matches usually are blow out for both sides either killer getting 4K or at least 3 survivors escaping.
0 -
60% killrates means 6 out of 10 survivors are killed = 60/100. 100 survs shows up in 25 matches, so its 60 kills across 25 matches. 60/25 = exactly 2.4 kills per match. it mens that avarage killer kills 2 survivors in 3 matches and 3 survivors in 2 matches in circle of 5 matches. If we concider killer wins with 3+ kills, then killer win in 2/5 = 40% matches. Then 60% killrates means every survivor die 60% of the time, so escape occurs in exactly 40% cases. So 40% matches survs win and 40% matches killers win... But it is not etirely true. As survs are not a cooperative team, but competetive sole escapers, this means that some of them win in 100%, some only in 40%, and some never. Remember avarage killer kills 3 survs in 2 matches which means 1 of them escape and thus - won the game. Killer win or los is never strictly tied to survivor win/los, unless survs plays as a swf team, but even then its not as simple, some survs do not concider killer win if any surv escape for example.
0 -
People thinks all SWF are sweaty players.
And I'm here playing with my friend that blows the gen everytime
1 -
I think the kill rate was shown to be 61% so my math should be right. Sometimes I get 1K one game and then 2× 3K:s a row so I won 2 out of 3 matches and still performed below average kill rate. Dc:s are also exluded from stats so kill rates are most likely even better if those matches would count. Those survivors who say 3K is not win for killer are probably salty that you beat them they would probably made excuses why you're 4K was not win too because you didn't play the way they liked.
0 -
Would a killer add-on that applies baby Franklin's count too? Saves a perk slot as well.
0
