Killer winstreaks

Here's a question for you.

Is it a problem with someone does it as a survivor team as well? You know the same kinds of teams that otz plays with when he plays with hens and ayrun and they do these "hardcore survivor" challenges? And they go on big win streaks?

Is it also a problem when survivors do it? Because hens/aryun/otz are also doing big win streaks and they are even handicapping themselves as survivors to using only certain perks, or no perks, etc.

Hens Lumpy Dan and Laser do that is true, however that is not the Hardcore streak that was mentioned... The Hardcore survivor challenge is 4 new accounts and play them up to iri 1...

That is not a new one, they are doing this for years now... Also the players are not the same...

I've never really seen the point in winstreak challenges in DBD as the criteria for what even counts as a "win" in this game in relation to killer gameplay isn't standardized. Like every person who does one has their own little rule set and way classifying what they'll consider a win or a loss and while some are extremely strict others are extremely loose.

When you can just tailor the rules to suit your desired outcome I don't see the real value in it. I also don't think they say much about the overall state of the game because the results aren't necessarily repeatable by the majority of players. No matter what game you play you're going to have outliers that are over performant, but you can't really balance around the most extreme edge case player. This especially true when you're dealing with challenges played under arbitrary user defined rules. It would be one thing if this were even a semi-codified universally accepted rule set and the results were consistent across multiple players of varying skill levels. That generally isn't what is happening though and most people who play this game aren't remotely close to that level of skill.

Survivors not having streaks of the same length makes sense as in the case of survivor the understanding of what constitutes a "win" is much more concrete. You have to escape and generally speaking DBD is a team game until it isn't which is how basically everyone plays survivor. There are more points of failure that can come into play no matter how good a singular survivor is that can just flat out result in death. So a winstreak is much more likely to be broken earlier than a killer's who's qualifications for winning are much more nebulous and depend solely on their individual skill rather than a team's collective skill.

Aaaand where does this contradict what i said? Otz said he´s completely stopping with his kill streak videos on a video thats 5 days old.

Want me to link it?

Unless you are a comp player with the strongest stuff on one of the top 3-4 killers... Then the odds of you facing a 4 men comp squad that would be able to win are fairly low...

I don't think he would... A strong swf of pub players would lose this without much effort... I'm sure in some of the 500 matches Knightlight played were some strong SWFs in there... But the gap between good swf and a comp swf is way bigger than you seem to assume... Think about it, in those 500 matches not once have they finished all 5 gens... And Knightlight himself said that the only way for him to lose the streak is against 4 comp players...

Because matchmaking never worked that way?

At the best of times it pitched top 1% player against the top 10-20% to reduce queue times and that's only a guess already. It then got even sloppier when they softened everything about matchmaking.

Only at the beginning of sbmmr was it even close to what you describe and that ended with those 1% having 2hour+ queue times.

Even if the numbers work out the way you describe here, that 1% player is going to go up against a 1% opponent either 10% of the time or 5% of the time (using your top 10-20%).

So in 100 games, they're up against that top 1% team at least 5 or 10 times. By the time they hit 1000 games, it's 50 or 100 times, which means they're still unstoppable against a similarly skilled team.

The current SWF escape streak is about 220 ish games in a row, with a 4 man comp team SWF, which is the strongest force in the universe according to the forums. And yet they were beaten and the streak broken, which is what you'd expect from anything resembling balance in a game.

Having a killer steak this long is concerning at a minimum. Having it be determined by play style and not particular perks or abilities/add-ons makes it more concerning, since a play style is more difficult to balance. It's actually be nice if it was an obvious outlier of 'oh, clearly this add-on is overtuned', but the fact that blight, clown, twins, and nurse were the top 4 streaks last time I saw a full list means that tunneling is so strong even m1 killers can be unstoppable.

Yea...not impressive to me. I mean, props to the people who stayed consistent and kept going. But I never liked how a killer can go on a 500+ winstreak while survivors struggle to even get 10 wins a row in an SWF. Let alone 3 wins in a row as a solo que. There's just so much more that can go wrong on the survivor side, that the odds are incredibly stacked against you in terms of making it out alive.

Survivor winstreaks aren't impressive b/c you need a sweat-fest SWF like Eternal to pull it off consistently. Having even 1 sub-par or bad player on your team lowers your chances of winning so much.

Killer winstreaks aren't impressive b/c of playstyle, less things that can go wrong, can dictate the pace and set the pressure, etc.

You rarely ever see survivor winstreaks, where as you hear and see killer winstreaks quite often. Again, props to the ones who went on the streaks but this is just my opinion on em. They aren't equal.

First of all, I don't really care about this win streak argument but wanted to correct the fact that matchmaking only ever worked like @Firellius said for a very short time around the implementation of sbmmr, which led to insanely long queue times for the top of both sides. After that it got changed and then softened at least once again. So even my 10-20% might be a low guess.

Second, @AmpersandUnderscore your statistics are based on a wrong assumption.

Tldr: You forgot that the matchmaking algorithm doesn't only pit the 1% killer against the 10-20% survivor but the same bracket percentage on both sides with however much skill comparison really involved so the chance can be waaay lower than the 5% in this example.

For the sake of the arguments I will use idealized factors like 20% fix for the top bracket used by the matchmaking, instead of 10-20% and 1killer/a 4men squad for each %.

The matchmaking algorithm is also assumed as purely RNG in the respective bracket, seeing how many people question it on regular basis on here and my personal experience that ranged from 4men swf styling on me to 4 obvious solo so bad I had to carry them to the exit in consecutive matches, despite the same playstyle for 50-100 hours during my experiment. Also because any real factoring of the algorithm would be pure speculation and make this whole thing too complicated for my after-work-brain right now.

So with that out of the way:

No matter how the matchmaking algorithm works it never only puts the 1% killer (1player) vs the 20% survivor (20 4men swf) but all 20% killer vs the 20% survivor.

So the chance of the the top 1% meeting the other 1% isn't simply 5% but, just like rolling a 1 on a d20 twice in a row 1/20 times 1/20, so 1/400 aka 0.25%.

Of course this doesn't take any real work of the algorithm into consideration but also not the real amount of players in each of the % on either side. That ratio could be the perfect 1/4 but is more likely to be 1/3 or 1/2 or even more on the killer side because to be one of the 1% on killer side needs only one person and for survivor 4 need to work together.

So with my idealized model the chance of this blight main that has his 1,6k win streak to meet a swf on the same level would amounts to 4 games.

Clock that tea C3. 💅