Option to OPT out of SFW?
It's clear the game was not designed with the ability for you to be able to speak to others. If you were then there would be voice coms. So a group with coms is next to impossible to beat for an average player. I think an option to opt out of these groups would be nice. If you have to wait longer to play with your friends then so be it. Even some really good killers can't beat a half way decent SFW group. Its tiring when you are forced to play super sweaty when you play against groups who think they are gonna enter a pro league or something.
Comments
-
Are you sure?
0 -
Opting out of ANON would provide far more value. Anon players tend to play in the most antisocial methods because they think they can get away with it, and they can. The percentage of Knockout bleedout Killers using Anon mode, and the percentage of cheating Survivors are far higher in Anon than the normal.
2 -
I am not understanding what that has to do with SFW?
1 -
So a group with coms is next to impossible to beat
No it's not impossible. No matter which killer you pick.
If you have to wait longer to play with your friends then so be it
Yes because that would not concern you. But suppose survivors saw which killer they are going to face - suddenly it's not going to "so be it".
Even some really good killers can't beat a half way decent SFW group
See video I posted above.
Its tiring when you are forced to play super sweaty when you play against groups who think they are gonna enter a pro league or something
This looks like you just lost your match and you don't like it. So you want easy mode. But the thing is, that kill rate is for a long time already above 50%. Especially in lower MMR brackets. This is multiplayer game - every time you win, someone else lost. You already win more then 50% by playing killers (talking individual share of vs each specific survivor) and you still ask for even more
3 -
No it's not impossible. No matter which killer you pick. See video I posted above.
It litterally is. Like your source is a person whos job is to play this game all day everyday who asked other people who play this game all day everyday. I am talking about average people. Not people who live and breathe the game. SFW has an overt EXTREME advantage when the game was never designed with you not having coms. If they are playing against someone who plays the game for 8 hours a day, every single day, then yeah they are gonna deal with SFW better because they know the game to an absurd degree which pretty much any normal person who plays the game doesn't. All that video proves is "can the top players play with an arbitrariy rule and still win? Yup!". Wow what a revelation! People who are extremely good at the game are in fact extremely good at the game! So if they can do it then that means you should be able to! Anyone whos played a video game in their life knows anything at a top level doesn't apply at lower levels. Entire metas are different in some cases.
This looks like you just lost your match and you don't like it. So you want easy mode. But the thing is, that kill rate is for a long time already above 50%.
You realize 50% is not not a good kill rate in a game where you have to kill 4 people right? Which correct me I am wrong, is not the the entended range they want. That doesn't translate to "two survivors escape each match". I don't think its an unreasonable request. Hell you can give extra XP or bloodpoints. Its clear people want to force this game to be competetive so might be better off just adding a competetive mode on the other hand. But it's clear you play exclusively survivor who looks at satistics on a website that is making a best guess. SFW is busted in a game that already bends over backwards constantly for the other side who explode the fourms because the game is even for a change.
2 -
No, you can not opt out of SWF. You have never been able to. You cannot currently do it. You will never BE able to. This has been made very clear by devs. Idk why this thread comes up so often.
You cannot punish people for playing with their friends.
8 -
I will first address your second point - so 50% is not fair and you want 100%? Ok let's go at it the other way around - you can't seriously consider you or any of your friend dying being an acceptable scenario. So in a game where the goal is to escape - the only acceptable outcome is 4 out. See? Does that sound entitled? Why wouldn't your version sound exactly the same way? 50% is exactly - you are just as likely to win each individual match as you are to loose. That's already a compromise.
As for what I play - it's fairly even, but overall mostly killer. I am not willing to endure all the quirks this game has in soloQ (only very rarely when I feel a bit masochistic) so if I go solo, then I go killer. On the other hand - if I go SWF, there's 50% chance I will absolutely not use voice comms whatsoever (so much for your unfair advantage).
As for the game wasn't planned to be played like that - the game was always planned to have SWF from the VERY beginning. Devs said so themselves
As for your points that only experts can play against SWF - you are totally wrong. Being in SWF does not make you better looper. It does not make you more efficient on gens. It does not prolong your chases. The main advantage of SWF is - that you play with people you know and you can have expectations. That's it. That's the biggest advantage. Comunication is also very useful, but it does not come close to the fact that with SWF you'll have 4 reliable people while in soloQ you'll most likely have at least 1 person that will be dragging you down. That's by far THE main advantage. However if you are beginner and your friends are beginner - then you'll just create 4 survivors that are dragging each other down - so it's absolutely easy to stomp that.
And if you now pivot to experienced survivors - then those can and will be in soloQ too. I have been accused of being in SWF a lot of times just because I do sabotage even in soloQ. 4 single but experienced players will be way stronger than 4-man SWF that is just learning the game. And if you say but there are too experienced survivors - then so are killers (and now that video is SUPER relevant).
1 -
It comes up because people do not want to do it.
It will keep coming up until the game is shut down because people will never want to do it.
The rationalizations on both sides are sad.
SWF is a harder match.
Killer is not compensated for the work and most don't enjoy it.
Messing with the status quo on the topic threatens income.
So OFC, this won't be changed.
The community could however say " Yah, its harder cause coordination and familiarity, so you have to work harder to entertain them."
2 -
I recently dodged a full 4man ANON group because I saw too many anon cheaters lately.
2 -
As your idea would only leave soloq... Have fun waiting 20min for one match of a good solo team that still destroys you.
And yes, I know what I'm talking about.
4 -
It's clear the game was not designed with the ability for you to be able to speak to others.
its been confirmed (and should be obvious) that SWF was planned since before initial release since it was added one month after. The game might not be completely balanced around it but it definitely was designed with it in mind.
If you were then there would be voice coms
no, not at all. Voice comms in-game is not a thing because it is not possible to moderate - and it should be known how horrible end game chat can be and was when there was no filter…
also it wouldn’t help soloq because of language barrier and people not able/wanting to use voice comms for whatever reason.
6 -
Permission to quote this response whenever a "new" account makes a discussion about this same topic for the hundredth time?😭
1 -
They did plan for SWF and KYF modes while first making the game, but couldn't have both ready for launch,. So they focused on KYF and then added SWF shortly after once it was ready. Imo they underestimated the impact of comms and teammate selection on the game, but that's just my take.
As far as opting out of SWF teams, since something like half of all survs are in at least a two-man (threes and fours are wayyyyyyy less common outside of the sweat MMRs) removing them from the pool would absolutely wreak queue times for everyone, and make matchmaking anywhere near fair-ish impossible. The playerbase size just cannot support that.
The overall game experience at all levels of skill is always kept in mind when they consider changes, not just the most efficients.
1 -
TCM has a feature that shows when people are in group/voice chat. I always dodge them as they're often toxic and extremely sweaty. I'm not looking to get frustrated playing a game.
Just something to consider, I guess.
0 -
Dude…. SWF does not equate to a harder match. That’s the biggest misconception. MOST SWF’s are no better than your average solo Q team, maybe even WORSE because they are more prone to the circle of altruism.
Yes, please do! 🥹
2 -
You're completely right about the altruism aspect of SWF groups. They want that 4-man escape. They want to get that save, especially during EGC or against a camper. They will try to prevent a direct tunnel. All of this should be taken advantage of by the killer.
It's how despite being on Red Forrest or in the swamps or whatever as my beloved Piggy I still do unusually well against those groups. I'll sometimes pull them all down into the basement, or intercept the savior and snowball. Understanding and taking advantage of their tactics & tendencies.
0 -
Yes punishing people for playing with friends so somebody can continue their 1000 win streak on a killer should be the devs priority! Any game would punish their players for playing with their frends… silly silly companies that don’t do that!
2 -
the last time I played in a 4 man swf with coms it was to laugh at my friends when they messed up head on plays
0 -
I’ve had many solid teams ended up giving me a 4k because of altruism, after kicking my butt most of the game. It happens allll the time. From 2-3 hooks in 5 gens to a 4k because they couldn’t let the last man die. XD
2 -
Exactly
0 -
SWF is better as in it competes better.
If it was not better, you would see tournaments organized by randomly pulling players from a pool of people that want to play.
This isn't worth arguing over for two reasons.
Its an insane assertion.
Its also the reason the primary question keeps coming up. When you dismiss the valid experiences of players with a hand wave and "They're actually weaker", the player is going to get angry.
The points about altruism are of course true, and if you're trying to show new players the way, sure it clearly lies in exploiting a SWF determination to have 4 out.
But that doesn't make it easier or even hint that such adjustments equate to an enjoyable new play style for either side.
1
