Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Is survivor too strong now?
Sure solo Q is more bearable now, but killer also now is essentially dealing with SWF levels of information from the survivors every match.
Comments
-
It's not, and killers really aren't because this is not the thing that makes swf strong.
17 -
Survivor has been too strong for years.
19 -
In the average game where survivors play bad? No they’re fine.
Objectively though? Yes they are way too strong.
Most games survivors play bad so it’s fine but when it’s actually good vs good players the game is extremely unbalanced in survivors favor. We don’t judge objective “balance” based on average games, we base it on good vs good. This is why matches at the higher end are complete messes in terms of balance since they’re not what the game is balanced around.
16 -
You have a very funny way of using the word 'objectively'.
13 -
Do you disagree with it?
If both sides play perfectly the killer loses almost every time. You rely on survivor mistakes to win.
11 -
Where are all these weak killers when I play!? I haven't gotten out in 8 games straight now
14 -
I would like to see your "objective" evidence please? I assume you know that objective can be proven with data and facts...I will wait, cus frankly the only real data that I have seen come out is the one that says killers have a 60% kill rate, and that number is...flawed for a number of reasons.
7 -
i mean that has been the case for years. its just that bvhr has been balancing around soloq players for long while. maybe now they'll balancing around more efficient play? I don't know.
0 -
True.
That is our hope.
0 -
information dont making solo q well xDD if you paint a rock gold, it's still a rock!
Come on I'll show you, we take 4 very good survivor without info, without call (the old solo q version) and still the killers get 0-1 hooks on 5 made gens, the exception here is Nurse, Blight, Spirit, I mean the logical mind tells you that, doesn't it? someone who doesn't make any gens (is useless) and dies in 10sec will still remain bad no matter how much information he gets
What makes a swf strong is that you create your own matchmaking, you only take experienced players in the lobby (5k+ hrs) and not Claud who is afraid and hides a lot, the Meg who cleanses all totems and opens chests, Urben Nea dies in 10secs, you get all that in "hIgH mMr" You hardly see any more experienced players, understandable who also wants to be matched with silver and gold players all day long in csgo, for example if he is global? either they no longer play dbd or only swf, why play with bots in solo q when you can create your own matchmaking and win every match ez?
3 -
No
7 -
I can't speak for every solo player, but it's definitely not the case for me. The additional info helps me make more informed choices but overall my gameplay hasn't changed. And I certainly don't feel like part of a swf when I'm playing lol. Swf support each other and coordinate to pull off plays to help all 4 escape. Solo players are still a mixed bag of skill, with the general goal being to get themselves out first and foremost (there are exceptions, including myself. I'll die for randoms), or to get their daily or to get their tome challenges done. Or to just hide on the edge of the map because they're scared. I don't get to choose my team mates. I'm certainly not surviving with friends here.
6 -
I'm not sure I agree yet. It actually is nice to have a little bit of intel on what the other Survivors are doing, but I don't know the location or the context necessarily. And of course, using voice is the main unbalancing factor in any SWF, but that is what it is.
I will say that I noticed this morning that gen progress is now shown per Survivor. That might be a bit much. For example, I saw a Survivor was working the last gen this morning. I went and started another gen as a backup. But when I saw that the other gen was north of 90%, I made a beeline for an exit so that I could hit it the very second the gen popped.
2 -
Mmm no, it's just that many killer players are poorly skilled
5 -
To answer your question from the perspective as killer and survivor, survivors are definitely NOT op. The recent balance change they made was actually way more in favor of killers than anything and I'd argue killers are incredibly strong if not op now. If you are not getting kills, you are probably not very experienced with your killer, struggle with tactics or not efficient with mind gaming.
What it all boils down to, and some of you have said it yourselves, is time played in the game. It has nothing to do with strong perks and everything to do with the amount of time (experience) someone has in this game. If you can't catch a survivor, you need to move on and find the weakest link. That good player will usually fall apart because of their weak link.
2 -
This is propaganda in action. The proof was in the perks people used inside SWFs vs when they played alone.
The old meta build for a SWF was : DH, DS, BT, Unbreakable. Every player ran those perks and it was insane. Run those same perks outside of a SWF and it crumbles because you have zero information. What's the difference? The SWF can say the killer is doing this/that for the entire game. You always know what to do and where to go.
Furthermore I encourage you at some point to stream snipe a team of 4 players in a SWF that use active call outs (doesn't need to be Hens level). Imagine youl slug Jake and start a chase with Nancy; Jake will call out over voice coms , "not to worry friends I will use unbreakable if he keeps chasing you." The chase immediately ends and you hook Jake. Is that whole interaction fair? Actually yes that makes the SWF interaction feel "fair". When survivors called out that the shack generator was at 80% you could run over there and interrupt it.
Imagine for example if the killer could see who was linked with whom and what there perks were as a side effect of being in a SWF group. That would make SWF have a "cost". The problem with SWF has always been that it makes you instantly more efficient without any cost.
-"If both sides play perfectly the killer loses almost every time."
This is the reality. It is also raises the question : why should I play any killer besides Nurse/Blight?
DBD would be a far more interesting game for both sides if every killer that was Not Nurse/Blight had their MMR softcapped at ~1550 or lower. This would mean that if you are sitting beyond 1600 MMR as a survivor then nearly every game is against a nurse/blight.
Every other killer in the game would have a cap below that but could have a "float value" to surpass the soft cap if you keep winning. I personally feel Doctor is the weakest killer in the game so his MMR cap for example might sit around 1200 MMR. Trapper might rest around 1300 and you can fill in the rest.
Adding soft caps like this will never happen.
- Survivors would hate it because good players would have 95% of their games against "actually viable" killers /gasp. People who were bad at DBD would see a lot of the killer cast but the person you see playing Doctor would be good so you would be mad playing against a very good Doctor.
- It would make all the killers viable. This just won't do from a sales point of view. Have you noticed by the way that in order to play killer you need to buy the Killer and then you need about 5-6 DLC's to make a few possible viable gen regression builds? Furthermore have you noticed that Pinhead was released in September of 2021 and Deadlock has appeared in the shrine ZERO times since then?
1 -
I remember Overwatch, where a 3 tank / 3 healer team was the best choice at esports level, so it got nerfed--and made things worse for most of the players, where you were already struggling to find anyone who'd fill those role.
A lot of games have the problem that, at high and low levels, it's effectively two different games. The solution isn't to make things tougher (more unfair, less fun) for the people at the bottom.
1 -
I just need a weaker corrupt to be added as basekit andi 'll be happy to play as killer , but right now is still so disappointing that they know some maps are incredible unbalanced than others but they still didnt gave nothing to the killer side to compensate ... like they did with basekit BT and the HUD info for the survivors....yeah am not saying it should be reverted BUT what about killers? (not talking about perks btw)
its been years .... of killers wanting an early game mechanic because of bigger maps / Bs survivor spawns, how difficult can be to code a weaker version of corrupt , like what about using a PTB to test that, like we did with "basekit Unbreakable and the mori" ; can we get a PTB with corrupt basekit for 30 seconds not showing the auras of the blocked gens to test how it goes.
0 -
This kind of question is pointless because the game has way too many variables to reach a conclusion. Survivors can vary from a full 4 man swf with meta builds and a Coldwind offering to a solo team in Midwich. In the same way killers can vary from a meta Blight to a Trapper with yellow perks. In general I'd say both sides have some things which are too strong or too weak, but the biggest chunk of matches are balanced.
2 -
In the average game where survivors play bad? No they’re fine.If both sides play perfectly the killer loses almost every time. You rely on survivor mistakes to win.Where's the line between survivors play perfectly and survivors play bad? Because your definition of average game shouldn't be bad, it should be 'average' or 'normal'.
0 -
Well with an mmr system it self adjusts. So hypothetically at the lower end they’d lose some more games initially but the mmr would adjust them to where they were winning/losing the exact same amount as before, so not really.
0 -
Ever notice how they DO NOT show the full statistics?
Post edited by Anti051 on2 -
Its called skill gap on survivor side my friend
1 -
Are you really trying to imply the old meta only worked with playing in a swf? Unbreakable at the most maybe, but to say bt/ds/dh only worked in swf is absolutely wrong.
But you're entire post is proving my original statement. Choosing your team is the strength of swf. The ability to coordinate perks. Comms or not that is the strength. The ability to see everything survivors see in the hud right now doesn't change that fact and almost means nothing with the scenario you mentioned with Jake or Nancy if they were solo with the hud update. Because you still can't communicate any of that stuff.
0 -
It's both sides. People who play dbd just aren't good.
1 -
But if all these killers are apparently fighting seal team 6 I was wondering who I'm playing against. Also it's always hey survivors won well they got super perks and items. Killer 4ks well that's just skill issue dafuq
1 -
Because in this game a good survivor team will lose 5 matches in 1000 played, if they get unlucky RNG that's it, everything else is skill issue on survivor side why they losing
0 -
Any evidence of this? Or is this a trust me bro, kinda thing?
0 -
-"The ability to see everything survivors see in the hud right now doesn't change that fact and almost means nothing with the scenario you mentioned with Jake or Nancy if they were solo with the hud update"
The ability to see that a generator is at 90% progress is nearly game breaking. If the player working the generator with 90% progress gets of the generator then you immediately run around the map to find the generator at 90% instead of starting a new generator.
Playing in a SWF has always broken the game. Obviously the hud upgrade is not the same but it gives you stupid amounts of information.
Think back before the time of the hud update. If someone gets hooked in solo queue you might have 3 people go to the hook. The hud change removes that as an option. Also you know to go for the rescue if someone not on a generator suddenly has chase indicators.
BT/DS/DH/Unbreakable with exactly those four perks was significantly weaker in solo queue than when you ran those perks in a SWF. I check every player to come in my lobby. If I don't like the look of a lobby then I don't play it. I can verify that people who played solo against me with those perks did worse individually than teams who had the same perks.
0 -
According to survivor mains "NO! Killers received 0.2 secs faster pallet kicking speed last year and 10 WHOLE SECS added to gens. So killer is easier than ever and solo queue destroyed!"
0 -
The nerf killer grim the top down but buff survivors from the bottom up. It's a completely stupid logic.
They say it's a casual game, but will nerf killers based on the skill of .01% of players vs the best survivors. They'll also nerf killers based on new survivors unwillingness to learn the killer. (Release Freddy is an example.)
They'll then buff survivors because casual players are either struggling or complaining, but will not nerf survivors based on 95% pick rates. (Looking at you dead hard) They'll nerf killers because of it tho.
1 -
0.2 seconds pallet breaking is nothing
10 seconds gen speed with all gen progress addons/perks makes no difference at all, even if gens were 3 minutes they would still fly how unbalanced game is, survivor mains just can't accept simple facts because they don't like losing to killers, when they die, they did it because they tried some fun things like flashlight saves, or looping killer for fun or whatever, but a team that wants gens + out as fast as possible will never ever lose a match in this game if skill gap isn't issue
0 -
0.2 seconds pallet breaking means 1,8 seconds less needed time to catch up for 110 killers and 1,2 seconds for 115 killers. that can be the difference between a save vault or getting a hit.
3 -
Exactly. It is a double standard.
Twins is an example of this. Nerfed because of the .1% at the top end but survivors aren’t nerfed because of the .1% top end.
0
