General Discussions
General Discussions
What you think would be good kill rate balance the game around.
I think 70% kill rate would be balanced. As now killer can get 2K with just few hooks because of tunneling in a match so is that kind of game balanced? I don't think so that's why I think game should not be balanced around 50% kill rate. Even with 70% kill rate I think the game would remain survivor/swf sided.
Comments
-
If the kill rate is 70%, the game wouldn't be Survivor-sided.
I could only imagine the outrage that would come of the game having a 70% escape rate.
70% of either is not good.
Post edited by Pulsar on18 -
You underestimate the power of the forum killer-main!
20 -
Underestimate the stupidity more like
7 -
Killrate shouldnt be the main point of balance
Hooks should be. 8 to be exact
10 -
Yeah... That's a no for me.
3 -
2 -
Hook-Stages would be so much better. Together with "completed Gens".
2 -
I think rework Freddy and release Spirit were around 70-75% kill rates. I would say if they went from 60%(current) to 70% the game would just be just way too easy/boring for killer.
0 -
Remember that DCs aren't counted as kills currently. If they were, I'd bet the kill rate is already around 70% right now.
3 -
The kill rate already 70% they just not counting the dc games in the stats.
3 -
Yeah but devs only look at the kill rate and 70% kill rate would mean more hooks.
0 -
Im survivor main but play killer enough to see how survivor sided the game is once you face competent survivors.
1 -
How would you increase the survivability of survivors at the low end while decreasing the survivability of survivors at the high end?
3 -
No, a 70% Kill Rate would mean more Kills.
Hooks are independent of Kills. If you make facecamping viable for instance, you could have a 70% Kill Rate with a 3 hook average.
6 -
Am I missing something? Are you saying a killer should be able to get a 3k with just a few hooks because of tunneling instead of a 2k...?
2 -
It be based on win rate not kill rate.
0 -
Tbh the actual rate is probably something like that. Last official kill rate was 60% but that doesn't include games with a disconnect. Which happens a lot and usually results in all players dying or disconnecting.
0 -
Kill rate isn't equal to Win rate.
A 3k game for example has 2 winners and 3 losers, that's a 75% kill rate, 25% escape rate and a 40% win rate.
A 1k game has 2 losers, 3 winners, with a 25% kill rate and a 60% win rate.
Meanwhile a 2k game also has 2 winners, 2 losers and a tie-equivalent. That's a 50% kill/escape rate, a 40% win rate, and crucially the killer has not won, they've drawn.
So to say that the kill/escape rate should be an even 50/50 is grossly misrepresenting the game. The disrepancy is due to an imbalance of 'kill rates' being calculated out of 4, but with 5 players present in the game. Both the killer and a given survivor can 'lose' the same game. It will never correlate.
Historically kill rates have always been around 60-70% average, apart from pre-6.1 where they dropped to 50% which was deemed too low. So 60% +/- 10% seems about right. By the discrepancy between kills-out-of-4 and 5-players-per-game, It should be above 50%, but not as high as 75%.
1 -
Im here to tell you why 60% kill rate is the perfect number.
60% means in 10 matches, there are 4 matches with only 1 escape, 6 matches with 2 escape. The chances for 2 escape is greater than 1 escape.
If the kill rate should be 70%. In 10 matches, there are 8 matches with only 1 escape, far greater than the chance for 2 escape. You know what happens after? Survivors dont do Gen, they only hide to get hatch escape because the result is the same: 1 escape.
The chance to get 2 escape must be higher than 1 escape so Survivors feel they should do Gen.
In coming killers comment "remove the hatch then"
5 -
but its not the killers fault if survivors suicide on hook or disconnect because the first chase didnt went like they wanted.
1 -
I think there should be Hook count and Gen's progression system. Certain Gen's progression fits to certain Hook count.
Which side is losing will be buffed, while the other side nerfed. The further the gap, the stronger the buff/nerf.
So in low MMR, killer has a huge lead (3-4 hooks to 1 Gen done, survivors will get buffed). In high MMR, survivors has a huge lead (3 Gens done to 1 hook, killers will get buffed)
0 -
It's also not the survivor's fault either. But they get their game ruined. Still is relevant to overall experience of players.
1 -
You need usually at least 7 hooks to get 3K so that's in my opinion is balanced match. 2K you can get with 3 hooks and that match is not balanced but heavily on survivors favour. Tunneling keeps kill rate artificially higher compared to amount of hooks.
0 -
Killer could get 6× 2K:s and 4× 4K:s and have that 70% kill rate (still loses most games...) 4K is most common result already when killer wins. Im fine with 65% kill rate too but it should definetely be closer to 3K than 2K as usually those games are heavily survivor sided with just few hooks I can get 2K but never had chance to win or even get 6 hooks out of 12.
0 -
Still no where near the power of the Survivor-main.
1 -
Oh so 2K is a lost, thats why you want 75% kill rate.
4 -
Ive said this before, but I think the game should not be balanced around kills but should instead be balanced around hooks.
The ideal thing, for me personally, 8 hooks; anything less is a tie/loss.
1 -
Like I said killers are just usually lucky to get 2K out of bad games so obviously it's loss. In kill rates this looks fine and just keeping them at 50% makes this game extremely survivor sided not to mention how often survivors just give up. So developers should aim for 65% kill rate minimium unless they want to balance game around hooks then I could see lower kill rate fine. I don't think killer getting 2 hooks and then few more at endgame to get 2K as a draw. I did suggest 70% kill rate not higher. I think it has to be achieved by nerfing swf:s.
0 -
That would be good but devs said they balance around 60% kill rate.
0 -
Well it depends if you judge the game for survivors individually or as team.
Either the winchance for each survivor is equal to the killers chance to win. Or the survivor team's chance is equal to the killers chance to win.
- Survivor escape chance = Killer chance to 3k or 4k. ( community normally agrees >2kills is the killer win)
- for tthe team based version it's the Chance for >2 escapes = chance for >2 kills.
The current judging system in dbd trends more to the latter, while IDV as example gives a 30% point bonus to the side with >2 escapes or kills.
Theres probably some stochastic stuff to get the detailed numbers. Too lazy to solve currently. E is the escape chance, K is the killchance, per survivor.
For the solo judging: E = 4EK³+K⁴
For the teambased: E⁴+4E³K = 4EK³+K⁴
E+K = 1 ( chance to escape plus chance to die is 100%)
0 -
I had the idea of the amount of survivors in game that would determain gen speeds so it would generally benefit killers to spread hooks instead of tunneling out one survivor. It would also help in situations where a survivor DC's or kills themselves. Early game should have a slower generator rate to encourage grouping up to progress generators, making it easier for the killer to scatter the survivors (naturally slowing down gen progression).
However anything that I think of requires a lot of developer time and money and since this game is seven years old already...
0
