DBD is slightly killer sided (and that's great!)
When I say the game is killer sided, I mean specifically at average levels of play. Average kill rates are 53% according to nightlight, meaning killers have a 6 percentage point advantage over survivors on average.
That's great, IMO. As a survivor player I'd even prefer slightly more killer buffs to make escapes slightly more difficult - I like playing the underdog role, which solo queue survivor certainly is, and if the devs want to get back to the ~60% kill rate they've previously stated as their ideal, I have no objections. IMO the ideal DBD is one that is slightly-to-moderately killer sided.
I'll admit, at the absolute top level, with players making the fewest mistakes a player can reasonably be expected to make, the game is survivor sided, where most matches where the survivors are truly sweating they'll win, barring some very specific killer- and map-specific circumstances. Unfortunately it'd be impossible to balance the game for that without making the game unacceptably killer-sided in the average (think 90% kill rates or higher), but there's only a couple dozen survivor players capable of that level of play, so in a game with something like 100k daily players it's acceptable to balance primarily for everyone else.
Comments
-
The game is probably the most balanced it is has ever been.
Sure you can point to specific examples for both killer and survivor that need to be addressed. But overall it is in a good spot.
I weld agree the game is currently leaning more towards killer but I think with proper teammates most killer's are manageable which is why SWF still have more an advantage in most matches and why solo Q is struggling.
8 -
It is as it always has been.
Nurse > SWF > Other killers > Solo Q
The gap is closer though
8 -
It's not Killer sided.
It's who ever wants to win sided and brings the most powerfull (and overpowered) things in the match.
22 -
53% is 7% lower than the desired killrate by bhvr when they balance. thats not killer sided-
27 -
they should bring back lightburn and stun-fatigue for nurse, so she has counterplay outside of mindgames
1 -
True, but thats also not the official bhvr statistics, where i expect kill rates to be way higher.
7 -
Fair enough. I'd expect them to hover around the same level, since last time we saw them it was 61%, and that was during the gen kick meta. with that drastic drop in regression I'd bet on a 4 or even 5 percent drop.
1 -
MFt nerf will be enough, I wouldn't make global killer buffs right now high tier killers already stomp most lobbies
0 -
53% kill rate is slightly killer sided. It's less killer sided than the devs (and I, as a survivor player) want the game to be, as I already pointed out in my post, but killers having a greater than 50% chance to sacrifice any one given survivor is indeed killer favored
2 -
I expect it to be about the same, because in solo queue, killer compensated with heavily camping and tunneling, which inflated the kill rate again.
1 -
53% isn't killer sided. Not even the slightest.
16 -
IMO two kills and two escapes should be the ideal outcome of most games. I don't care about made up win conditions that streamers came up with to determine who won the game. The 39% escape rate during the eruption meta that did not even account for games with disconnects was not even remotely balanced. I'm shocked that so many killer mains still fight so hard to defend it. It probably contributed more to the game losing players than anything else in recent memory. DBD is a PVP game and should be balanced as such. They shouldn't make killers stronger because of immersion or any other silly reason. I think a lot of killer mains have been conditioned into believing they have failed if they don't get at least three kills every single game.
7 -
Wasn't a kill rate slightly above 60% the desired kill rate by the devs?
11 -
Without the current Meta-Combos like For the people + Buckle Up / Made for this + Hope, it is.
However, the biggest issues are the differences on the killers itself.
1 -
Slightly? *rolls eyes*
Play both sides and I think you'll know the real thing. Watch Twitch too. Killers are winning all the time and it is painfully boring to watch.
Play killer: Wins like 99% of the time.
Plays survivor: Win like 1 out 10.
Someone says the stats show a killrate is like 60%. Did you know they are not accurate? People DC, people ragequit, people kobe. They don't count these and people usually do these things when the killer is like noob-stomping which is most of the time. The killrate is probably like 80-90%.
People please. The game is so killer sided it is not even a question any more.
18 -
Blight=Nurse
3 -
60% is good that also still takes account suicides. Killer is the harder role. In game like tcm 50/50 is fine because it's team vs team.
6 -
60% is balanced. Just need to balance swf and soloQ closer. Killer is all alone so he deserves to win more when playing well. Survivors give up all the time so real kill rate would be maybe even below 50% still.
5 -
Lets be real here, a dataset of mid-high MMR , which is what nightlight provides is much more indicative of the game balance than a full on inclusion of all MMR's/Players, where you'll get overinflated killrates from Low MMR tipping the stats to seem killer sided.
everybody knows that DBD's sidedness is a progressive scale with MMR because as soon as people understand the loops and how to be effecient then the killer is bottlenecked.
Low MMR - Killer sided because survivors don't know how to "loop" and either just W key or attempt to hide.
Mid MMR - 50/50 tipped in favour of whoever brings the strongest stuff
High MMR - extremely Survivor sided because survivors know how to loop, know checkspots, how to abuse perk combos etc etc.
10 -
Exactly. Suicides are a big factor for solos and often overlooked. There are no stats about this, but there are a lot of first hook suicides for whatever reason. Which affects the rest of the team and the kill rate.
As example there is always watching a streamer when dc penalties are turned off. People dc left and right whenever there is even the slightest inconvenience.
4 -
I wouldnt call it killer sided when a chunk of the percentage is just player incompetence. Bad plays may balance the overall # but doesnt reflect gameplay/mechanical balance.
8 -
A 53% kill rate is mathematically not killer sided in MMR terms, but the contrary. The devs want 60% kill rate because that would mean 40% win rate for killers (as they need a 3K to win) and a 40% win rate for survivors (as they only need to escape to win).
So, having a greater than 50% chance to sacrifice anyone is still survivor sided, as they are winning more games than killers.
5 -
What kind of math did you take in school that 60% is balanced?
The amount of blatant gaslighting and mental gymnastics on these forums is mind numbing.
4 -
Like I said survivors give up all the time and lose many games because that inflating kill rates. Killers has to work lot harder to win anyway it's 4vs1 so they have to do 4× more work that survivor has to do to win.
6 -
Can you recall when you started playing this game?
I can...
Survivor gameplay makes no sense when you start. The things you want to do to be a good survivor are extremely non intuitive. And added to that, don't even sound fun when honestly described.
Killer on the other hand makes total sense. You just kill people.
So at the low end, you have a total shitshow, and your stats are a mess, and if you balance out of that. You don't have balance. You have abuse, and here we are.
😀
8 -
What kind of math did you? A killer need at least a 3K to win according to MMR. So, 60% kill rate = 40% win rate for killers. And as a survivor need to escape for it to be counted as a win, 60% kill rate = 40% win rate for survivors.
In other words, having a 60% kill rate is the most mathematically balanced the game could ever be. That's why BHVR want the kill rate to be that. Explain to me how pointing this fact is gaslighting or doing mental gymnastics.
8 -
i think it is just survivor sided for both medium and high MMR. the difference is that at medium MMR, high MMR killer can beat medium MMR survivors with most killers. most matches at the higher bracket are medium mmr vs high MMR killer. that is why I think most killer had somewhere between 61% to 57% kill-rate. when it is high MMR vs High mmr killer, the killer powers matter more so only good killer powers that provide meaningful challenge to looping are viable for chasing gameplay. The other killers rely on tactical hook camping/altruistic gameplay to win or 3 gen to win which are both boring for killer to play and boring for survivor to play against. when the killer is good at chasing, the killer can play offensively but when killer is bad at chasing, they need to play defensively.
5 -
when Riot made League of Legends, they wanted the champ Yuumi to not be viable & lose when played in the mid lane (that is, have a 0% winrate in the mid lane). however, mid Yuumi has a 20% winrate! Quick: does this mean that League of Legends is balanced in favor of Yuumi mid, or does it mean that Yuumi mid is slightly more viable than the developers intended (while still being bad)?
Post edited by ratcoffee on1 -
A lot of people are listing reasons why it's ok the game is killer sided, and citing them as reasons why they think the game isn't killer sided. That's great, a lot of them are great reasons, and I agree with them! The problem is, they're reasons why it's OK that the game is killer-sided, not evidence that it's not.
0 -
The strongest part of playing a 4 man SWF is that you can secure you have 4 competent survivors in one lobby.
If you don't play 4 man swf, there's a chance that matchmaking will screw you by throwing to you someone who will sewer slide on first hook or do 5 totems for his archive.
That's why 50% killrate means the game is survivor-sided. It means that SWFs and decent players when they are lucky to get together are winning way more than 50%.
6 -
Everyone is pointing out that it's not killer sided though...
5 -
So, equal win rate for both sides is the game being killer sided? Got it.
Not surprises here, to be honest. Everybody knows that anything that isn't 100% an advantage for survivors is proof that BHVR is killer sided.
2 -
The last official stats were from just after 6.1, but before the gen kick meta has solidified. The perk stats from that same time frame listed Thana as a top 3 perk, so likely the window covered the couple weeks before the nerf where it has a nearly 100% pick rate.
The gen kick meta skyrocketed kill rates way higher than 61%, but we haven't gotten official kill rates since about a year ago.
3 -
DbD's balance is a combination of many different factors. The killer, map, builds and skill level of each player can affect the outcome of a match and which side is more likely to win.
A noob Trapper on Haddonfield against a coordinated team with full meta builds is much less likely to win than an Experienced Wesker on Wrecker's Yard against solo survivors.
There's absolutely no point in trying to gauge what side the game favours when so many different factors change between matches that all effect which side is more powerful.
2 -
Fair enough, I probably should have looked deeper into how the data was gathered and when before using it for a point. I always found it weird how the gen kick meta only brought killrates 1% above the desired killrate, figured it would've been much higher like 65 or 70. hopefully they give out stats more often.
0 -
That's what they're trying to do, but they're using evidence that it's killer sided in order to do it. Which is fine, it's good that on the individual level the game is killer sided! It's just also good to be honest about this fact
0 -
When even in comp settings with heavy perk + item restrictions for survivors the killers still struggle to 1-2K , thats a blatant indicator that DBD is not "killer sided" in the slightest. "Skill issue" claims are also invalid because well... they are literally *competitive players*
As i've stated before, Above mid MMR the game leans HARD survivor sided, once survivors learn how to juice an extra 30-40 seconds out of a chase , its gg over for killers because there simply isn't enough time in the match to account for 60-70 second chases, you quite literally only get about 4-6 chases in before all 5 gens are popped.
7 -
thank you for not being toxic about it
0 -
In my post I specified I was talking about the game on average. If you care to read my original post I did mention the caveat that at the top level the game skews strongly in favor of survivors, but with the double-caveat that most people aren't playing at that level so it's irrelevant when talking about averages
2 -
your argument that the game is killer sided boils down to "Well if the survivors run straight at the killer, the game is killer sided!"
A good balancing philosophy is trickle down balancing, an item/Perk being balanced in high MMR will mean its fine for every MMR below.
However the contrary is not true, for example, while FTP+Buckle up in Mid-low MMR rarely gets big value, the same combo in High MMR is full on broken and makes Killers absolutely miserable.
Point still stands, when both sides play the game correctly, its extremely survivor sided and theres no way around it.
8 -
Essentially what I'm getting from you here is that the game is not killer sided on average, if you ignore all the people who make it killer sided on average. That is indeed how averages work, yes
5 -
Can you please explain the math behind this, how a 60% kill rate transfers to a 40% winrate? It doesnt add up with my math, so maybe you can explain.
1 -
Pretty sure ragequits, DCs and and kobes all count as kills if the bots die.
1 -
Let's take 100 matches.
- 100 matches = 400 survivors.
- 60% killrate = 240 survivors.
- 240 in 100 matches = 2.4 survivors killed per match.
- Or, if you want it shorter: 60% of 4 = 2.4
So, to put it simply, that would means 2K in most games with occasional 3K on average.
A 50% kill rate would means that killer always draw with survivors (2K in every game), while survivors win 50% of their games. So, no wins for killers. That's why a 53% killrate is not even close to be "killer sided", at contrary, it means that killers are losing most of their games.
In other words, in his attempt to claim how grateful he is that the game is "a little killer sided", he has proved that it is full survivor sided.
6 -
The evidence you have provided shows it is not killer sided, but extremely survivor sided. Next time understand what you are talking about before saying anything if you don't like to be told how wrong you are.
6 -
This is the problem with using flat statistical averages though, a 2k is probably the least likely outcome, although possibly a 0k is less likely.
Most of those games are going to be either a 0-1k or a 3-4k with the state of the game. So while you seem to be implying that a 53% win rate means killers never actually win a game, ever, in reality it means that about half the time you win with a 3-4k and about half the time you lose with a 0-1k.
The exact middle scenario of a 2k draw wouldn't skew the results as it would contribute the least toward a standard deviation, being an exact 50/50.
In reality, if killers actually wanted nothing but buffs, all they have to do is give hatch every single game. That alone would lower kill rates significantly, since BHVR seems to want to force a specific kill rate for the entire game.
4 -
As i've quite literally stated before, the game is extremely survivor sided once survivors know what they are doing and play at a minimal effeciency.
You can't make "sidedness claims" from the "average player" because the average player doesn't play the game correctly (effeciently)
Its akin to claiming the game is killer sided because the survivors threw themselves at the killer.
If you want to figure out what side is OBJECTIVELY stronger you have to look at the skill bracket where both sides play correctly, and that happens to be, you guessed it, High MMR / Comp level.
3 -
And if they all bring the most broken and strong things...then yeah, I'd say it's killer sided
0 -
Wait...buckle up has some use now??? Wow, goes to show how long it's been since I played, lol
0 -
Well I mean, if people DC and all that other stuff... it's their fault that you lose the game and shouldn't even care about the game at that point
0
