The Dev's are right in making the game SWF sided.
I'm gonna take you through a thought experiment here:
Imagine if the top 3 killers got gutted, their powers and add-ons were heavily nerfed and they ended up on the lower tiers.
The game would fall apart for about a week, killers who had become accustomed to the stronger killers would suddenly be unable to keep up with strong SWF's, and for a brief period experienced SWF's would get non-stop easy wins. However, after the meta settles, and the new top 3 characters arrive(Pyramid Head, Wesker, Artist) adopt a more tunneling and camp heavy play style, the game will more or less go back to normal.
However, imagine if instead, SWF got regression penalties when with a party, and killers got buffs when survivors were partied up.
For lack of better terms, it would be a f***ing s***show.
Weaker teams would be unable to keep up, stronger teams would struggle to 2E's, weaker killers would become strong, and stronger killers would be unstoppable, it would be ridiculous.
The dev's are correct in making the tilt towards survivors, I'm a killer main and I agree with it, there's no version of this game that could survive without killers being at a slight disadvantage, the only thing we can really ask for is that it feels good to chase with every killer.
Comments
-
Aren’t the top three killers right now Sadako, Wesker, and Blight? At least numbers-wise.
0 -
The stats don't tell the full story, if that's the case then Nurse is D tier.
0 -
Yes, of course it’s not the full story. I’m just saying that all three of the killers I mentioned are really good. Nurse is good too obviously but more than two killers excel at this game.
0 -
It really depends, if you play against the average solo Q team which literally do not even know how to chain tiles, maybe even trapper without traps and no perks can look good, however if we talk about players that actually know whats going on id say about 3-5 killers should actually be able to keep up.
0 -
Imo the game will always favor survivors. It makes sense from a business perspective. You cater to your majority.
Survivors buy more cosmetics, they bring their friends in to play who in turn buy more cosmetics amd expansions etc...
Sure killers do as well. Survivors outnumber killers 4 to 1. If the game is easier for them and they feel the win more they will keep playing. Keep playing and keep paying.
It just makes business sense. Think about this. Swf is an advantage (especially with comms) the killer is givin nothing to compensate for that level of coordination and communication. They just have to deal with it.
So the game definitely favors the survivors. That's how BHVR makes the most money. Imo anyaway.
2 -
Yeah, but most survivors are solo queue players who aren’t skilled. Lol. I do think around 3-5 killers are good for the highest tier of survivors but every killer is good against where most of the survivor playerbase falls (low to mid skill).
0 -
Where do you guys take information about top killers from? There is no proper ranked, no proper stats. In addition, each game has good amount of luck directly dependant on opponent's perks and whether they are SWF or SoloQ.
So where?
2 -
Post edited by Boons123 on0
-
Sadako is an absolute noob stomper. An experienced SWF on the other hand will likely wipe the floor with her. It's the same as with Freddy. In lower MMR they are absolute nightmares to face because they both have ways to confuse survivors that aren't as familiar with the game. People with more experience on the other hand know exactly how to counter these 2 killers for the most part, which is why they don't perform too well against those.
This is not exactly good balancing because you also cannot buff these killers without making it more miserable for inexperienced survivors. One side will suffer, no matter what.
On the topic of potential SWF nerfs: I don't think punishing survivors for playing with their friends is the way to go. It might be fine against the high level seal team 6 squads you find in maybe 1 out of 10 games (if you're really unlucky) but for more casual SWFs, which make up the majority of DBD's player base according to Peanits, this would be horrible. The only healthy way to close the disparity between soloQ, killer and SWF is to buff soloQ and killer so that they are closer to SWF level.RNG in the game and when tha
0 -
I feel regressing either side is bad, but they need to focus on the whole picture. For example, if swf are getting more escapes than solo, balancing for solo is better to increase those escapes. If killers are getting less than 50% kill rate, then killers need to be buffed.
It's balancing in the way that swf stay as they are, and soloq and killers are brought up in the line with them. That's the way which would work best.
1 -
"weaker killers would become strong, and stronger killers would be unstoppable, it would be ridiculous"
Why do these hypothetical scenarios always assume that the hypothetical change would also bring the end of balancing altogether? If they handicapped premades and killers became way too strong, killers would have a series of balancing changes following the update.
If they made the game 5v1 with current balancing, the balance of... everything would be out of whack. But no change like that comes by itself. Perks and mechanics would have some massive changes.
Same if they decided to make the game 4v2. Do you truly, honestly believe Blight would have no changes if that were to happen? Do you realize how incredibly strong Trapper would be if he had a buddy to provide the pressure for him while he closes off every viable survivor path?
Don't be shortsighted. If they were to nerf premades to close the gap with solo queue, killer nerfs would become an inevitability. Premades would stop having such a massive edge over solo-q, and solo-q would stop being killer fodder to keep killer kill rates seemingly "balanced".
That is, of course, if they were to do it correctly. Changes like that are as likely to go right as they are likely to go wrong.
2 -
They should separate the modes, plain and simple. Make it so there is a "solo queue" and a "team queue" option. In "team queue" you must have 4 survivors, in "solo queue" you can only queue up with one other survivor, and the matchmaking sets it up so only 1 duo of the 4 is possible.
Then balance the game differently in those 2 modes.
This is no different than say, CS:GO where they have a "ranked mode" and a "casual mode" and various other game modes where the game is literally balanced differently. In casual for example, you get armor and defuse kits for free, and you get a little bit more money. In ranked mode, money is more tightly controlled, and you get nothing for free.
1 -
Additionally, it isn't simply a 1 for 1 issue. You can nerf top tier SWF and survivors without actually nerfing average survivors as a whole. This video sums it up great at the timestamp i linked talking about the BASE JUMPER item in Team Fortress 2. But the whole video is worth a good watch:
Top tier survivors and SWF abuse crazy loops, like shack going into a jungle gym going into cow tree going into another jungle gym going into a great filler tile etc. This type of thing should be nerfed. Shack should be nerfed (maybe so its like the one on dead dog). Crazy main buildings like asylum that have literal infinites without entity blocking need to be fixed.
Doing these things won't hurt the average solo queue survivor, because they aren't abusing these things to begin with. They are busy predropping the shack pallet immediately 3 seconds into the game and still getting hit through it anyway.
3 -
Can you read the post?
0 -
The point of the post isn't to say that balance will just magically disappear if killers get buffed, I don't know where you got that idea from. I'm saying that the game needs a tilt to survivors because most players are casual, and at casual levels, killers dominate, I hate the idea that more balanced = good, balanced games can be fun if you're sweating, but if you aren't they are boring as hell.
1 -
Where do you get official stats for the game?
0 -
"However, imagine if instead, SWF got regression penalties when with a party, and killers got buffs when survivors were partied up.
For lack of better terms, it would be a f***ing s***show.
Weaker teams would be unable to keep up, stronger teams would struggle to 2E's, weaker killers would become strong, and stronger killers would be unstoppable, it would be ridiculous."
If you mean something else, clarify that
1 -
Sounds like killers have no reason to play then
2 -
And, uh, did you really read that? Because even with you isolating (one of two opposing) hypotheticals there as the sole context, your whole post is devoted to proving to the very conclusion directly stated ("it'd be a shitshow"). The bigger burst though: you argued it byway of these "we assume blah blah blah...." factors that weren't even present--let alone assumptions--before topping it with a thinly veiled insult to unseat "their position" entirely on a grounds of "just mad cuz they loose"
C'mon. You clearly didn't read the thread and just spewed some canned response you've got on deck to positions and personalities (and flaws) you just presume. That's an exercise in propaganda, not discussion.
That's bad enough since forums are useless when posters aren't engaging in good faith attempts to at least understand each others positions and evaluating (and reevaluating their own) in an ongoing process--but don't go putting this on them.
Don't double down man. Own your mistakes to improve upon them.
0 -
Oh how blind I am
0
