Is the killer being slightly better than the survivors the healthiest way for matchmaking to work?

Options

This discussion is inspired by Scott Junds latest video. Specifically the point he starts to make at around 6 minutes in:

https://youtu.be/ccYLse6kWnI?si=Zuz6lHpWxnfs_ANr

Before commenting I want to reiterate that flaming content creators or attacking them personally is not allowed so please don’t do this. You may not like what Scott says here, but I think he raises an interesting point about matchmaking in the game that I would like to hear genuine opinions on.

So the point of Scott’s video is that recently he has been finding his matches harder. At the start of the video he states that usually he wins all the time but in recent sessions this is no longer the case, causing him to speculate (as other content creators have been doing) that something has happened to MMR. He then makes a point later in the video that he believes that him playing regularly against survivors who are less experienced than him results in good matches because his playstyle paired with less experienced survivors= a better time for everyone involved. He doesn’t have to “use strats”, he can go for chases, he can 12 hook and everyone gets to play the game. So is this vision of DBD truly what ideal DBD looks like? Is this DBD at its most fun?

Here are my problems with his take:

  1. I cannot get on board with wanting to face lower skilled players. I understand his point but it just doesn’t sit right
  2. Is this game really fun for everyone if no survivor escapes? 12 hook 4K’s are obviously better than 4 Hook 4K’s but survivors not escaping due to always being outmatched by the killer player doesn’t seem fair
  3. He may play his version of “fair” but how many killer players will follow his personal DBD code? It seems very naive.
  4. The point he makes about winning all his matches seems odd when he then admits later on he prefers facing lower skilled players. It’s a weird combination of a flex and an insult. If you’re winning ALL the time, you should be facing harder opponents. If he doesn’t want to sweat in those games then stick with your usual playstyle take the L, and go next. Refusing to match your opponents sweat levels is a you problem.

Now here’s where I do sort of see his point:

  1. Optimal, sweaty DBD absolutely sucks
  2. The game prioritising kills over how the killer achieves those kills will always be an issue. If killers were rewarded more for playing the way Scott says he plays then the game would be much more enjoyable. And you wouldn’t need to stomp babies to do it.
  3. It’s a repeat of a previous point but it is true- generally 12 hook games are more fun than 4 hook games. I just think it would be nice if high hook counts could be achieved playing against skill matched opponents. However Scott seems to think that’s impossible, and that the survivors need to be slightly worse than the killer. Is this true?

I’m curious to know what you guys think about the argument he made here.

«1

Comments

  • Nazzzak
    Nazzzak Member Posts: 4,590
    Options

    "I straight up think most content creators are lying when they say DbD is unfun when matchmaking is strict"

    I think it's because it affects their job at the end of the day.

    Lots of content creators run popular YouTube channels. People subscribe and watch their videos because they're presented as being the best of the best and at a level that others aspire to reach. MMR being stricter means potentially less favourable content for them to share, but it also makes their gaming experience look similar to that of the average player. For example - they love their winstreak videos, those draw in lots of views. Tighter MMR means those will be harder to achieve and that popular content, which literally provides their income, may now be taken from them.

  • cheetocultleader
    cheetocultleader Member Posts: 1,259
    Options

    I was excited about MMR, but reflecting back on it, I preferred the game without it. Sure, there were days where each and every match sucked, because I am not the best player out there, but there were days the matches were great, or fairly balanced, and more random silly matches.

    Basically it went from casual to competitive. If you're a streamer though, I''d think you'd want competitive -- that's kind of the point I would think? I'd rather watch a streamer lose sometimes than win every match because they're facing lower skilled players every game. You're not really learning anything about the game after a while otherwise, and that leads to a fair bit of bullying from some streamers.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Nope not at all, he even said that if he tunneled or played sweatier he would still win, but he doesn't care about winning therefore he doesn't so no, he is not upset about his losses...

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    I think it is somewhat fair, when playing survivor it is basically better to get a killer that is slightly stronger but plays nice, first of all you get chases more which means you can try to get better and maybe even try out some new stuff whereas as killer if the survivors are slightly weaker you get the option to go for tricks more often instead of having to play it safe all the time, the problem is that by not playing efficient you decrease the time the game lasts and the amount chases/possibilities to try something out, do something skillfully gets less. Sure most people want to win, but for me it is more about chases, could I have a good chase pull off some neat trick than that's a win in my book. The problem together with matchmaking is just the maps don't play along very well sometimes... I don't get to try something because sometimes everyone just predrops and runs to the next pallet, not really much to do besides kicking the pallet... Because of the ability to chain them.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Ok? Doesn't change the point that he does not care that much about winning to change the way he plays right?

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    You do realise that there are still not enough people to get constantly match with players with 10k hours and above or comp players? The same thing will still happen, maybe not for every streamer doing win streaks, but I have no doubts that for example Knightlights Nurse streak will still not be broken, just because there are not many 4 men squads that can win against a comp nurse.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Yeah obviously, but you seem to miss that the matchmaking did not match people acurrate because it could not find accurate matches... The problem was that people waited ages to find a game and even then didn't find one, Otz mentioned something about Dowsey looking for a match for 2 hours on Twins when it was stricter once and did not find a match. So unless for some reason there are more better players now than compared to when mmr got introduced the problem will somewhat stay, there will still be a gap between the skill of the players.

  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,095
    Options

    Oh i´m not missing that point. After a certain queue time, the mmr search range should continue to widen. Just like its supposed to do.

    The problem of not finding any suitable opponents is kinda self inflicted by the 50+ win streak streamers. Of course the system stuggles to find any opponents that have an equal high amount of win streaks for a fair match. Adjusting the mmr takes time. In which the streamers will have to take the pill and just wait.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    I don' think it has anything to do with winstreaks... They would not necessarily lose more just because they are not going for a winstreak... Most winstreaks even have restrictions, so they could probably go even higher. If you for exampel look at those ridiculosly high win streaks like 500+ on Nurse Blight Spirit and what not... do you really think there is something to adjust there? They should be at max mmr for like 400 + games at least... I don't think there can be better oponennts, at least not more likely now than before, unless there are more better players now.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,184
    Options

    Ideally the game should be balanced around the killer going for hooks over kills. But that isn't the case. It's the exact opposite and worse, if you don't tunnel as a killer you not only don't get the advantage of not having someone out early, but you'll also have to bother with more survivor perks that way.

    That means, that a killer has to play a lot better, if they want to be able to go for more hooks than if they were to tunnel someone out early on. The problem is, that you cannot really measure, if the killer plays better than the survivors. At least not accurately. You can make an educated guess but that's about it. Because it's impossible to tell who plays better when the skill expressions on both sides differ so majorly.

  • Nazzzak
    Nazzzak Member Posts: 4,590
    edited November 2023
    Options

    And I'm saying he doesn't have to change the way he plays, so I'm not sure what your point is tbh. He can keep playing the way he plays. Stricter MMR doesn't mean he can't.

    We don't even know that BHVR have actually touched the SBMM, these streamers are only theorising based on the fact that they've had a slew of difficult games, ie losses. Their response is to film these videos and tell us why they aren't happy. I'm inclined to think these apparent losses bother them a bit, but I guess agree to disagree.

  • Grigerbest
    Grigerbest Member Posts: 1,334
    Options

    The thing is that (I was saying this for decades), equal skill survivors and killers will have a 100% escape rate, if killer play "fair".

    The problem is within killers tiers. Some killers are just not designed to play "fair", if they want to have at least 3k.

    With equal or higher skill survivors - killer side isn't looking that attractive.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    That is more about mentality and playstyle than about being a streak, players that go for streaks like the challenge or wanna be comptetive or whatever, that does not change just because they are not counting the wins in a row, and even if the win loose once every 10 or so games, so what? Do you really think they will loose more mmr than they gain by winning 9? Also those guys play so many matches anyway, so sure it would go up slower, but I don't think it matters overall...

    There are not too many top tier players doing 4 men escape streaks the same as there are not many top tier killers doing killer streaks, so if we take into account when they play and the server and what not, do you really think you can expect those guys to get matched with each other? I don't think that is reasonable, sure in a perfect world you would get such matches all the time, but the issue is the amount of players, you just don't have enough players on that level for this to happen frequently.

    The reason this (50 50 win loss) does not work here is the same reason why for example pro players in starcraft don't get 50 50 win loss in public matches, because they are just usually that much better than the guys they play against. Even there it happens very often that pro players go against Grandmaster players that are not pro players and those guys loose in 9/10 cases at least, probably even way more. And that is for the ordinary pro player someone with around 6k + mmr, if you look at the top players, like Serral, Reynor, Clem Maxpax, on the european server, those guys barely loose to other pro players, except for those before mentioned guys. So let's say the normal pro players is basically our streamer does winstreaks, he knows what he is doing, he is a really good player, and our comp players are basically those 4 top pros... And now think about it, those guys already don't really match each other too often because of different times they play, you are expecting a full on 4 men swf, which are a small minority of players, that is also reeeeeally good at the game, good enough to stand their ground against guys with 6-8k + hours, another reeeeeally small minority of players, and those guys are supposed to match the other really small minority of players constantly? This is so rare my man, for the sake of finding matches most matches are severely one sided.

    Sure if that is the choice you have to make I agree it would be fair, but can it be expected? In a perfect world this is what it would be like...

    Once again, same as before, new players are a really small group, would take ages to find games against other new players... So basically the same as I said for the other side of the spectrum.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    15 min would be fine, Dowsey queued for 2 h and didn't find a match, that is not fine... You do realise the difference. But yeah sure I would find that amound of queue time fine, however in the survey they BHVR did basically nobody wanted to wait longer than 8 minutes for a match... sooooo We're in the minority here.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    If all those good players that make content about the game are unable to play, because they have hourlong queue times, what do you think how long it takes until they revert it because this free advertisement does not work anymore?

    People that have such huge streaks on Blight and Nurse won't care about that, those guys are that good that unless they go against a full one 4 men comp squad they still are more likely to win than to loose. But sure if you try the same on a lower tier killer you will really struggle.

    Also I have no clue how the matchmaking is apparently suddenly able to find better matches... Would also be glad to know, or to get word from BHVR what changed.

  • egg_
    egg_ Member Posts: 1,933
    Options

    I don't really have much to add but I wholeheartedly agree with these statements

    That being said, I played killer most of the weekend, and didn't really notice that much of a difference in my matches

  • Nazzzak
    Nazzzak Member Posts: 4,590
    edited November 2023
    Options

    What you're ignoring is that BHVR did those tests over the course of a week and only on *one* of those days did some streamers have long wait times, such as Dowsey's two hour wait. That was obviously excessively restricted matchmaking. I watched Otz's stream last night to hear his concerns on the matter, and he did not have extended wait times.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Content creators already put in the work by coming up with funny ideas or comical characters and what not, but the problem is that you cannot really try those things unless you are really good, I find it kind of sad, since some of those goofy content creators did really fun stuff, but it just does not work anymore, since the games go faster in both ways and what used to be good plays back then just does not work anymore, it just seems to be all about skill these days, which isn't a bad thing in general but those guys just don't get the attention anymore, despite being funny and entertaining...

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Obviously it was for stricter matchmaking, however the point is if you want it accurate to that amount you will get this result, that statement stays true, it is probably still not really equal in that sense, people will just have to play sweatier, but do you really want to see Otz play comp level sweaty for 50 matches in a row? That does not sound too interesting if I am being honest, there are only so many killers that are interesting to look at at this level, and I don't think a single m1 killer is one of them, so half the killers would already be boring to watch...

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    edited November 2023
    Options

    If you want to learn how to loop it is more beneficial to play against people betterr than yourself. Also just because the other side is slightly more skilled does not mean you will automatically loose..

  • PotatoPotahto
    PotatoPotahto Member Posts: 250
    edited November 2023
    Options

    Then MMR window should've been widening faster. Literally any other game with MMR manages to deal with super good players, if BHVR doesn't do that it means they don't want to.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    You asked how to make people play survivor... And I gave you a reason what might motivate people to play survivor... So it is kind of the question you asked.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Does it though? Dota 2 for example has probably 50-60x the amount of players DBD has... And it still cannot manage to put people together accordingly, look at players like Wagamama or others when they try ot play with friends and look at the absurd duration the queues take and the massive amount of unbalanced games they get... It is not like other games can manage such things properly. Sure if those guys play ranked or solo then it works, but as soon as you get groups of players bigger than 2 the system basically fails.

    If you widen the mmr window faster you will get more unbalanced games, basically leading to similar stuff like we had before, it just depends on how many people are online and playing whether or not it is needed.

  • Archol123
    Archol123 Member Posts: 3,751
    Options

    Some would for sure, that's like the whole reason why some people start scrimming and doing 1v1 because they wanna get better, I'm not saying it will fix it all, but it is at least some motivation, so it was the question you asked beforehand.

    I never thought of looping the killer as sweating in any form, sure the macro play will be a bit more stressfull, but isn't it normally so that killer is more stressfull than survivor regardless? So I don't think it is too rough.

  • MikaelaWantsYourBoon
    MikaelaWantsYourBoon Member Posts: 6,564
    edited November 2023
    Options

    No it is not.

    Even if you get better, you will always go to against someone who is better than you. That's what is Scott suggesting.

    And my question was that, how you will make people play survivor when they lose and lose.

    If you don't have actual answer , please don't mention me again.

  • Seraphor
    Seraphor Member Posts: 8,859
    edited November 2023
    Options

    I kinda agree with Scott, if only because I play similarly to him.

    I like to play fair, go for 12 hooks, allow everyone to get a decent BP score, probably let one or more survivors escape depending on how the game goes. But I can't do this when I'm forced to play sweaty to not lose at zero hooks.

    If I'm better than the survivors, I have the freedom to adjust my playstyle and generally me being better than survivors = great game for everyone. If survivors are better than me, either I walk away with a crap score, or we all do because a 'gen rush' situation occurs (naturally, not survivors 'fault').

    But, that's such a fine line to walk, it's not practical to expect it every or even most games, and probably more importantly, not all killers will play this fair. In fact I'd say the majority don't.

    So in theory Scott is right, in practice, probably not.

  • DrDucky
    DrDucky Member Posts: 680
    Options

    Scott does not care about winning though? As he said he has played the game for like 6 years, winning and the game itself just becomes not that big of a deal after all that time.

  • Nazzzak
    Nazzzak Member Posts: 4,590
    Options

    I don't think anyone wants it restricted to that extent. I'm sure BHVR received the feedback on that loud and clear.

    Anyway, I've just seen that Mandy confirmed in another thread that they raised the soft cap a few weeks back. Which is what Otz theorised happened. I don't agree with Otz on alot, but I agree with him that raising the soft cap primarily impacts those in high MMR (those who are competitive and want to win) while the impact on the casual (majority) player base will probably be negligible. You may feel it'll make for boring streams, but not everyone watches streams or cares about the experience of content creators. They just want to play and have a chance at a win once in awhile.

  • Kaitsja
    Kaitsja Member Posts: 1,632
    Options

    In a perfect world, the ideal match would be one where 2/4 survivors are at the same skill level as the killer, while the remaining 2 are slightly below the killer's skill level. This would, hypothetically, allow for a 6 hook game where the killer walks away with a 2k and two of the survivors escape.

    MMR is best when it's strict. At some point, people who play competitively have to ask themselves why they're playing. There's no proverbial carrot for them to chase. They've already proven how good they are. So, if they aren't playing for fun, what are they playing for?