Killer winstreaks

So the playstyle is too good? Shouldn't every killer just tunnel/slug every game to win and doesn't that mean with other playstyles you handicap yourself? It's kinda surpricing that tunneling is not more common how superior it is?

You need to keep in mind that survivor win streaks take a lot longer than killer win streaks, because for one you need to have all 4 players available and the gameplay is way more boring because for the most part you are only holding m1 on a generator and matchmaking being how it is the majority of killers those guys face are still way below their own skill making those games quite boring for them... So if they play like once a week for like 3-4 hours with like 4-5 games an hour at most they get max 20 games a week, therefore they take like 10 weeks to reach 200 wins in a row, I think this is basically what Hens and his friends are doing... Knightlight basically did 10 nurse games a day for his streak, which alone shows you why his streak went way faster... And you are expecting a streak with that high of a number to be this new? Come on man, those guys would have been doing this for many months to go up to like 1600 wins in a row or what not... Besides the point where they limit themselves when it comes to perks and items...

Hens and his friends are currently doing a win streak again, I think they are around 170 wins in a row? But like I said before they are only doing this like once a week at most, maybe once every two weeks? I don't know exactly... So for their streak to go this far up will just take time...

They sure show a whole lot about matchmaking that's for sure.

Not saying that to devalue the skill involved, the skill is exactly why it's even possible. They're at the point where they can make the overwhelming majority of softcap inhabitants fold like wet paper, and every single player in that set is their matchmaking pool. There's an absolutely enormous skill variety all in the same pool.

It's a win streak for the killer. The killer is fixed and has a 100% chance to be in that match (from their own perspective). There isn't a 'chance' on the killer roll when it's the killer queueing up.

The only variable here is the opponent.

But isn't that the devs job to do player experience better not killers? What about killer experience if you play fair survivors will play hard and punish you. Gen rush and bodyblock etc which really is miserable experience when you handicapped yourself. That what is usually forgotten killer is player too and just want to win or have good time.

Here's another argument I heard we are killers not survivor friends and killers don't play fair but kill mercilessly. Many take roleplaying seriously and want to get really into the character so choose to play as hard they can some even enjoy it when survivors has bad experience. So relying on killers playing fair is not what should be done and how game should be balanced...

Anyway I think devs should do something about tunneling maybe bring old ds stun back with longer timer 60s is quite short. Then give killers boost they need and some incentives to play more fair way. For now it's like killers responsibility to play fair to offer survivors good experience. Yeah it's boring to tunnel and tunnel but unfortunately it remains best way to win.

So im gonna keep using it when I want to win and play only fair after some wins as it's ok to me get then bullied and have bad games. So I take account player experience I deserve some good games and give survivors some good games. But it might be mistake as if we killers did tunnel every game maybe it actually would be considered problem and fixed.

There is MMR loss prevention after a certain point. I don't think they can meaningfully tank their MMR. Not enough hours in the day given how much they play. The placebo effect is a powerful thing

This is exactly what i'm talking about. Right now, the game is balanced in a way that at the "average" level, black (the killer) wins 80% of the time. And at the highest level white (the survivors) win 80% of the time.

Not really a good time all around.

Do we know how hard it is to reach this softcap? Is it a situation similar to red ranks? How much can the skilled people go above it? How wide is the matchmaking parameter to include the bulk at the soft cap to shorten queue times for the top percent?

I would argue that the softcap makes this issue even worse because we don't know how far the top percent can even get above it and how wide the algorithm picks from and how it matches them.

I'm not sure asking the community what an acceptable wait time for a match is is the way to go, but regardless, the more extreme wait times expected under a stricter matchmaking would mostly only apply at the extreme ranges, and affect relatively few players as a result. And like I said, they could even stricten the matchmaking only at the upper brackets, with it getting more and more strict the higher the MMR is. Certainly people that have won hundreds of matches in a row are few and far between, and deserve to have a matchmaker that first searches for strict matches for 10 or so minutes before it decides to feed them their next victims that will end up just another number on their streak counter.

Nurse and Blight absolutely are OP, they win consistently even in the tournament setting where you have teams of survivors that practice together constantly, have call-out systems and coordinated strategies and so on. Survivors have restrictions, but as do killers, comparable in severity. Blight has a whole arsenal of busted add-ons that he doesn't have access to, and yet for good tournament Blights the expectation is still a 4k, the deciding factor of who wins usually being how many gens are left standing at that point. And the base balance that we measure these killers by (and that is also the infinitely more common scenario in the game's actual mode) is one where survivors don't even have communication, let alone being a coordinated team. It's actually insane that these killers can beat the best players unified within the best teams, with years of competitive experience and honed coordination and communication. No wonder they then go beat up hundreds and thousands of random groups in a row without it often even being a challenge.

It is true that they can go on long streaks or have ridiculously high winrates with just about any killer. And although I expect they would struggle to get 1600+ with any killer but Blight or 500+ perk/add-onless with any but Nurse - because these killers are still far and away above the rest, apart from maybe Spirit -, that is precisely why the other major issue is matchmaking. Any sufficiently competent killer player in this game (so not only some of the best that compete in tournaments like Knightlight or V1, but really any experienced killer player that is at least decently skilled) can get winrates that even some of the best players in a game like Starcraft can only dream of (on the game's own matchmaking), and those players are worlds better at SC than even the best DbD players are at DbD.

Like I said, the crossplay off scene when it was active had enough players for fast queues and matches filled with skill and experience. Maybe you overestimate how many players it takes at this level to match them among one another. And if they don't get matchmaked away to the next random 500-hour Meg in the first minute of their queue, they will also find each other more quickly. Plus, the streamers that actually go for ridiculous streaks like that aren't all too common, and they aren't all too popular or integral to the game's popularity either, at all. The game could absolutely survive (on twitch and otherwise) if someone that sets out to win hundreds of times in a row had to wait a relatively long time in matchmaking after a certain number of wins. And it's not like they couldn't alternate matchmaking specifics either, such as loosening things for players if they have had strict matches for the last 5 queues, or whatever. There's absolutely room and possibility to stricten matchmaking to a point where streaks like this aren't as feasible, without affecting things too much outside of the relatively small pools of high MMR players (talking about players well above the "soft" cap of course - that cap is precisely one of the major issues with the matchmaking).

You're answering the wrong question. You're asking 'If we choose the killer and survivor teams at random, what are the odds we get a top 1% team on each side?'

That's not the question I'm responding to, nor is it relevant to a killer win streak conversation. We're looking at 'what are the odds a top 1% killer gets a top 1% survivor SWF when the killer queues up?'

Again, these are killer win streaks, so it *only* matters if that exact killer player is in the game. A match with any other killer player doesn't count against their streak and, for the purposes of this conversation, we don't care about that game. It doesn't count against my win streak if you lose, for example.

But those swf aren't always available, because of time of day or whatever and even moreso because 4 people have to be playing together at the exact time your specific killer is looking for a lobby and be in queue.

Either you neglect these factors and I would call the result you come out with heavily flawed or you include them and come to a drastically different conclusion.

And that comes after all the simplifications I made for my explanation.

But I am done with this discussion. You don't have to accept what I am telling you and I am no longer in the mood to entertain you, explaining the same thing thrice.

Tunneling is not problem neccesarily but it's viability is. It's too superior to other stragedies and very simple. So there is no reason to choose other options than being nice or wanting to show skill expression. Focusing on 2 survivors is maybe only reasonable one but why even do that? Empathy is my weakness I would probably tunnel every game without it and take my wins. It's playground with one good toy to choose...

It's debatable, the strongest killers (i. e. those that should be compared to the strongest loadouts survivors can bring) have a plethora of restrictions. And again, I hold that survivors actually gain a world more from the competitive setting, because the killer is just that same one player they are in any setting, whereas the survivors get to be a 4-player team that practices together constantly, has communication and coordination.

From the base balance perspective, Nurse and Blight are pretty abhorrently OP, which is the perspective of a group of survivors that don't know each other, and therefore have no coordination (of loadouts, strategies, tactics), nor communication. Again, this is the base assumption of the game, and it is infinitely more often the case in the game's actual game mode than the scenario of a seasoned 4-player SWF on comms. I think A tier killers are barely balanced under that base assumption, and a fair few B tier killers also get to be A tier with certain add-ons.

As for whether there should be more killers that can consistently win in a tournament environment against actual survivor teams... Well, while I do think a couple more S-tier killers would be neat to have for that environment, it has to be noted that first of all, killer vs. survivor balance does not really matter in competitive formats because both teams play both sides, there is an inherent competitive balance established in that format, a team can win even if their killer only gets 5 stages, simply because the other team's killer may have only gotten 4. Secondly, in these competitive environments, balance rules can make the lesser half of the killers more viable, with map picks, perk and item limitations. Thirdly, and it may surprise you, but most killers perform well in the comp setting. Sure, not many of them consistently 4k like Blight and Nurse can, but many of them are perfectly competitive, 3/4ks not being uncommon, averaging around 2.X, skill still making a huge difference in how well the respective killer players perform. And finally, this of course does not matter at all for the game mode that 99.9% of players are actually playing, which is just public matches, in which those consisting of highly skilled 4-player SWFs on comms facing off against highly skilled killers constitute 0.X% of all matches, if that.

I don't think the queue times would get very bad unless they go for extreme streaks like that. I mean, one simple change would be to just extend the period within which the matchmaker searches for an accurate MMR match by 1 minute for every, say, 300MMR beyond the soft cap. So say the soft cap is 2000, and at that cap the matchmaker will look for other players around the 2000 mark for 2 minutes before it widens the range. Now at 2300MMR it would take 3 minutes before it widens the range, 4 at 2600, and so on. At the upper end of MMR queue times would still just be around 5 minutes, and only of course if it doesn't actually find other players of that rating in that time. And again, these players not being matchmaked away after one minute with 500-hour Megs that happen to be at the soft cap also increases the possibility of even matching them with others at their MMR range that may be in queue wait time. It also has to be noted that with a stricter matchmaking, the MMR of these players would never even reach too ridiculous heights, they wouldn't be expected to have as high winrates anymore or let alone go on winstreaks of hundreds of matches. The reason Dowsey for instance had hours-long queues is simply that BHVR had had the MMR rating system active in the background for weeks or months prior to actually basing the matchmaking on it, meaning he racked up wins without actually facing higher-rated players that themselves are also winning. He would have simply lost his streak earlier and his MMR would not have been inflated astronomically. And also, the amount of players at these extreme upper MMR ranges also is and will be fairly low, so the increased queue times won't affect many players. And I really doubt most of the really popular streamers and content creators will be up there, they just don't play hard enough, and often also aren't as good as those tournament players.

The point he (the one of us who typed that) was more "it's not the devs job when it's the players fault" kinda deal than strictly just tunneling. But we'll follow this to.

Tunneling will always be viable, it's a given when one side needs to eliminate the other in an asymmetrical game. That said it only works if you can actually catch them and in a timely manner. We've seen people try and tunnel survivors who are much better than them and they loose. Badly at that as smart ones will glue themselves to gens (maybe take a hit to buy time) causing them to "gen tunnel" as people like to call it now.

We (or I in this situation) want to say this: The playground has more than 1 good toy, it's just people seem to have the same favorite.

You are correct about a lot of these streaks boiling down to the average survivor players are just not so good but playing a blight streak for example and getting this high undeniably requires a lot of skill to pull off, even if you bring strong stuff. I have seen these blights play and they are undoubtedly extremely good. You do not get 1600 wins in a row without at least being good at the killer.

I mean, yeah that's true.

I THINK Oracle got beat, so even if you have all the players on, it's apparently much easier to lose as Survivor.