Why do the devs want the game to be so easy for killers?

Options
13

Comments

  • KaTo1337
    KaTo1337 Member Posts: 463
    Options

    Yes. 3K or 4K increase your MMR, 1K or 0K decrease it.

    However: Every killer has their own MMR.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 23
    Options

    what about for: 1,2,2,3? That's a 50% kill rate. But only a 25% win rate. Also more likely than the bouncing between getting 0 or 3 every match completely skipping the middle of 1 and 2. Those are not realistic results in your example.

    In a theoretical on paper yeah 50% kill rate could work if we could guarantee extremes one way or the other. But extremes being the most common occurrence aren't how things work, that's why they're extremes. The killer is not bouncing between 0K and 4K all the time, most of it is in-between.

    It's not going to be 0,4,0,4,0,4,0,4,0,4. It's going to be more like 0,2,4,3,1,3,2,3,4,2. Which is still a 50% win rate with a 60% kill rate. Add 1 kill and you have the 62.5 you were given.

    To be 50% kill rate it'd be more like 0,2,3,3,2,1,2,3,2,2 which is only a 30% win rate.

    As far as I have put together at least. Having a 50% kill and win rate hasn't worked out in any reasonable model of how the game and matches would actually go which include 1 and 2K's not just 0 or 4 and 0 or 3.

    Matches with DCs and players just giving up early obviously shouldn't be factored in. That's a separate issue and not normal intended gameplay.

    3 of 5 outcomes are not wins for the killer (0,1,2). So it should be favored towards them a bit imo.


    @RpTheHotrod idk if this is similar to what you were trying to express.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 23
    Options

    Just because its 50% doesn't mean its balanced when the game is asymm. At least if you mean win rate. See above post for more details.

    2K's count but not as a win. So as far as "winrate" goes they are not a win. You can't win half your matches if that half is all draws.

    If killer was extremely likely to either lose or get a draw, no one would want to play it. They need wins too.

    it's not like most other PvP games where the only outcomes are win/lose where 50% works. Having win/draw/lose throws off the 50% a bit. 2 out of 3 outcomes are not wins for the killer.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • xltechno
    xltechno Member Posts: 1,026
    Options

    As long as you don't think of SM as an uncontrollable killer, defeating her is usually fun for stoic survivors. It's rewarding because there's a lot to think about other than chasing, rescuing, and completing gens. A survivor she can't control can't even beat a meat factory doctor.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 23
    Options

    Well, I can't speak for the majority but in my experience I have a lot more middle of the road 1-3Ks than sweeps in either direction. If that's truly more common than I'm not sure why I would be different. It might have something to do with my playstyle not being to tunnel and camp maybe? Not really sure there as to what would cause the discrepancy if there is one.

    I'm also not sure why 60% would guarantee unbalance. Well, win rate wise at least. I think part of the issue is a 2K would technically be "balanced" but it also isn't a win for the killer while 2 survivors still won. But the killer needs to win too, so you can't really settle on a 2K being the average. The only real options left are things above a 2K which already pushes us above 50%.

    It's either "win" or "didn't win" for win rate, and a draw is under "didn't win".

    At least as far as I can tell.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 23
    Options
  • HerInfernalMajesty
    HerInfernalMajesty Member Posts: 1,014
    Options

    My issue with the whole kill rate debate is that we don’t have enough information.

    Okay, what do we know? We know for a fact what Bhvr tells us. They say that at “regular mmr” that the escape rate is 40%. And at “high mmr” (above soft cap right?) that the escape rate is closer to 50% for swfs. Was it 45% from these last numbers? I can’t remember.

    But that doesn’t paint the whole picture. For every Survivor who has an escape rate of like 20% means that the other 20% is being made up somewhere else, either with people who have higher than a 40% escape rate or distributed amongst people who have a little over 40% escape rate.

    The distribution curve below the soft cap probably has Survivors escaping less than 40% of the time at the low end and above 40% at the high end. Once you get over the soft cap the phenomenon probably resets and it happens again. You probably have Survivors just above the soft cap who suddenly escape less than 40% while the best of the best Survivors probably escape more than 40%. It still averages out to around 40%.

    It’s impossible to know without more data but from the common complaints it seems like this is what is happening. Killers suddenly having a hard time against Survivors right below the soft cap and Survivors suddenly having a very difficult time out of nowhere once they hit the soft cap.

    Just going off of my personal feelings it feels that the lowest mmr survivors create the room for higher mmr survivors to escape more than 40% of the time. This is where these stories of nightmare Survivor teams come from. There are probably a lot more Survivors who escape less than 40% of the time than we think. And again that has to be made up somewhere else.

    That’s not even mentioning that mmr will probably throw a low mmr Survivor into a lobby with a higher mmr survivor just to force out a closer to 40% escape rate. Either by giving the low mmr Survivor a better chance of escape than normal and/or by making the match much more difficult for the higher mmr Survivor.

    I think that the dirty secret is that low mmr players escape much much less than 40% of the time.

  • Firellius
    Firellius Member Posts: 4,045
    edited March 23
    Options

    Maybe you're more lenient with the hatch, but generally speaking, if the killer gets 3 kills, the fourth is likely to die too, which is likely why it trends towards 4Ks. Not tunnelling or camping may also indeed trend you towards more moderate outcomes too, but that's just a guess.

    I'm also not sure why 60% would guarantee unbalance.

    Going by the Nightlight statistics, the current winrate (That's 3K+) is roughly 49.5%, versus a kill rate of 56%. If you were to inflate the kill rate, unless its a buff that trends 0Ks towards 1Ks and 3Ks towards 4Ks, you're going to see an increase in winrates. If you want perfect balance, the rate at which 3K+ occurs should be equal to 1 - KR. Stats above indicate a survivor winrate of 44%, which is 5.5 percentage points below that of killers. That is a pretty considerable swing.

    With the complicated nature of DBD and the various killers each having their own individual outcome trends (Instadown killers like Hillbilly and Bubba for example have a uniquely low likelihood of scoring 0K due to their ability to camp a down in EGC, something not shared by, for example, Nemesis) it is virtually impossible to really get a lock on good balance. But what we're seeing at the moment is that the game can already be quite killer-sided at killrates between 50 and 60%. Trying to kick the KR up towards 60% is likely to make things less balanced.

    Unless it's some utterly meaningless change like ditching the hatch, which wouldn't do killers much good in upping their winrates but would inflate the killrates, thus pissing off everyone. Normally I'd say that's not an option, but BHVR has proven in the past that they are willing to implement a change that's worse for both sides of the fence.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    Oh this is new. I know he hadn’t said anything about it for a while (since HUD update I believe). I’ll check it out and return with my thoughts.

  • Ryuhi
    Ryuhi Member Posts: 3,717
    Options

    Yeah its pretty new. Hopefully it could give a bit of weight to the pregame lobby showing perks or something similar.

  • xltechno
    xltechno Member Posts: 1,026
    Options

    I watched the quoted match from the beginning, and it seemed like Orz was having a hard time caring for him. plague wasn't that good of a killer, and I got the impression that Orz was thrown in to the match plague with three survivors. However, overall, it was like one of the survivors was replaced by Orz in a balanced match, so the match looked good with Orz leading the way to some extent. And since the survivors were highly aware of gen completion, they did a good job. In the end, dbd is a game about how to do everything to complete the gen. This was proof that even in soloQ, survivors can defeat killers as long as they have a strong sense of gen completion and take some serious actions.

  • SirXenomorph
    SirXenomorph Member Posts: 103
    Options

    Either split the fourm or, what I would think will be better, give an opportunity to choose which role you as forum member has in the game. Like you can choose from survivor main or killer main. In that way it is better to distinguish these who almost only play killer and these who almost only play survivor to see which part of them come and talk down the most. Also it makes it easier to see which complaints will be made by each party.

    I just do see it a lot that these killer mains, I think they are killer mains, every time talk down the real issues because they do want the game pretty easy for themselves. Not even waste a single second thinking about how, when it becomes easier and easier for the killers, it inevitable becomes more and more harder for the survivors. So many things that need to be changed to make it a more fair game, but yet it will always the killers who get the more advantage changes. The changes for survivors are little and to be honest to not even help at all. Since all these "changes" who should help us as surivors already are outplayed by the killers.

    Best example is the thing with the adept trophies. Killers do not have to play good anymore, they just need to get full on dirty mode (Slugging, camping and so on) and hook all 4 so they get their trophy. This change was made, because majority complaint how unfair it is that survivors just need to escape with their three perks. And here again it was unlogic. Because as a survivor you sure has to escape, but till you CAN escape it is pretty hard, since you have 3 perks only which you maybe not even can use any efficent. Need to make 5 gens and open the gates WHICH ALL are seen by the killer. Sure the killer also has only his three perks in, yet he can decide of play it still fair for the survivors or just go full on dirty to make it an easy trophy. Meanwhile the survivor still need to do all 5 gens no matter if he decide to play "fair" or "unfair" since a survivor do not really have any possibilites to play unfair at all, since no survivor can do a gen faster than the gen can be made. It is not like he can just open the gate and run out at 5 gens already, like the killer can go all out dirty and slug everyone in the first 3-5 minutes. Since the change killers do not earn their trophy anymore they just get it for free, because they are not in need to really play the game "like it should be" means hunt properly do not use dirty game styles (Tunneling, camping, slugging, proxy etc.) just play as the game intended it. The most common argument is that these stuff are game mechanics. And yea they maybe are, but yet they are only game mechancis because if they would be blocked the whole game would not work anymore. These so called "game mechanics" are not intended as killer playstyle, they are possible, but not intended to been used on purpose. Everyone who say it is a game mechanic so the game want me to play like that is wrong. I as a survivor also could just run and hide all the time it also is a game mechanic, yet it is not what you as survivor should do.

    For short only because you CAN means not that you HAVE to! The killers should think about it. Every killer who use these playstyles DECIDE to play like that, because they are not good without that and do not want to try become better at all. Yet they still come out and complain that this game still is to hard for them. So maybe the next change to calm their souls is that the match starts with all four survivors on the hooks maybe? Since killers want it so easy that they do not even need to do anything anymore and get still like 40k bp out of this match.

  • sinkra
    sinkra Member Posts: 287
    Options

    A 60% kill rate is a 60% win rate. It's a 1v1 x4 confirmed by a dev.

  • sinkra
    sinkra Member Posts: 287
    Options

    There are many games where draws are possible. In those games the average win rate is below 50% of course.

  • CursedPerson
    CursedPerson Member Posts: 62
    Options

    A 58.5% avg is not way underperforming BHVR has not posted anything since so...?

  • Aven_Fallen
    Aven_Fallen Member Posts: 15,401
    edited March 24
    Options

    It is the easiest it has ever been. And not really hard at this point anymore.

  • xltechno
    xltechno Member Posts: 1,026
    Options

    In my personal opinion, the top 5% of players in this game are far from advanced players, and have barely broken out of beginner level. In fact, 95% of the game is what you would call a beginner in other games. 80% of players don't know about the pallet loop that is advantageous for survivors other than god pallets, they don't know the exact waiting position when waiting for the killer at the pallet wall, and they just hear the heartbeat and run away from the gen without assessing the situation.

  • Unusedkillername
    Unusedkillername Member Posts: 121
    Options

    They don't there are other reasons survivor feels bad

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,392
    Options

    Prove it.

    Because I still sit in long queues just to have one of my teammates or myself tunneled out.

  • Paternalpark
    Paternalpark Member Posts: 429
    Options

    I don't know what servers your on but I never experienced this. Played when key/hatch was a thing.

    Q times have never been a problem where I go and right now I'm constantly getting 100% for surivor in the day and 100% for killer at night.

    Since this last patch it's been 25% on surivor at night.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    I watched the video Ryuhi shared. Not sure if that is the experiment you’re referencing. Near the end, Otzdarva mentions issues he saw while playing survivor but he didn’t actually advocate for improvements to the survivor role. He just mentioned specific issues, and even hinted that these ‘issues’ may be what keeps the 60/40 split that he says the devs want (but when the devs wanted a 50/50 split last year he still complained about how miserable playing killer felt). In any case, his killer videos are much more in-depth and in them he tends to propose good changes.

  • SuperCop
    SuperCop Applicant Posts: 137
    Options

    You mean 2 escapes? 3 Gens isn't a win at all or equivalent in comparison to deaths. Escapes are. And survivors are content even if it's just 1 escape though 2 is better. More than anything survivors just want a fair match.

  • crogers271
    crogers271 Member Posts: 1,381
    Options

    Killer mains do more to convince me in threads like this that there is a massive balance problem in this game than survivors.

    Look at the standard: 20 4ks in a row - the fact that this is even an expectation by certain players shows the problems. Like if you took the challenge and only got 15 4ks that would somehow prove killers were actually balanced?

  • Aven_Fallen
    Aven_Fallen Member Posts: 15,401
    Options

    It was originally 10 4Ks, they raised it.

    But I dont prove stuff like this. During Ranks someone said that I am probably a low Rank-Killer with my opinions. They did not believe me that I was at Red Ranks. Then I showed a Screenshot of me being at Rank 1. Then they said there is no proof that this was really me (despite the name being the same).

    I just know, even if I would have recorded myself getting a Winstreak of 20 4Ks in a row (let alone that this would be ridiculous anyway, why 20 4Ks to prove something), they would have just said that I am low MMR and there it is easier to go against Survivors.

  • Rokku_Rorru
    Rokku_Rorru Member Posts: 952
    Options

    this is what always makes me laugh, this is by far a stretch in any competitive game, the fact content creators go on 50+ win streaks is absoloutley absurd, and it has never been addressed as to why it happens.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 24
    Options

    Yeah I don't think we need to increase the kill rate radically at this time.

    If the win rate info is showing it's 50% then it should be fine where it's at. Considering all we have access to is nightlight for info, as far as we can tell the game is pretty balanced right now overall.

    Although my only concern there is the win rate potentially being inflated by people giving up and such, hence SM being at the top of the list despite not being great. So the actual balance of the game when people are playing normally is quite different. But I think that's a whole different conversation.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    edited March 24
    Options

    Ignoring the issues with Nightlight does it at least consider matches with DCs? I know BHVR does not but since these often end in the deaths of those remaining survivors I’d love to know what the true kill and win rates are.

  • Deathstroke
    Deathstroke Member Posts: 3,080
    Options

    It does not feel killer sided when I play or im just only killer getting all the decent teams. Im just alone agains't these coordinated teams and it's rough even if you win. I acknowledge I play on console so pc killer might have completely different experience as many killers are not designed for console. We have no assist like in fornite we have aim assist to close the gap on pc even it's not enough. So I think the game is by design pc sided.

    Still when I play on my 4 man team we win almost every game at least 3 man out. We don't even talk on mic so we could potentially win even more. Last loses hapoened exactly because no communication we tried basement save on endgame and killer had noed and was good camper. Also 3-4 gen camper and tunneled one out. It might now be bit more challenging than last summer as dh and mft were big help extending chases but our gen pressure still is too good for killers.

  • Choaron
    Choaron Member Posts: 124
    Options

    I play both roles equally. Killer is undeniably easy. It's the easiest role in DBD, above 4-men SWF even. It's just a naturally less "chill" role than surv because you're alone and in constant pressure so you need to know what you're doing to the bare minimum, which often isn't the case (no offense).

  • ArkInk
    ArkInk Member Posts: 456
    edited March 30
    Options

    I'm convinced people who think you can just casually bulldoze either side consistently without losing are either sweatswamping incessantly with all meta perks or are so new they haven't met a proper team/god killer.

    If you want harder games, play weaker killers. If you're about to say you do play weaker killers with no meta perks and still always 4k at a high level, I'm sorry, but imma need some footage of the streak my guy.

  • LeFennecFox
    LeFennecFox Member Posts: 1,176
    Options

    EU players aren't gods at the game they pretend to be they just run the strongest everything more

  • Ilikechips
    Ilikechips Member Posts: 90
    Options

    The devs haven't gotten to their minimum 60% kill rate or whatever stupid goal they have. That means more killer buffs on the way, more survivor nerfs on the way. I personally believe they want a 70% kill rate at least. That means most of the time survivors will lose, sounds pretty fun right?

    How ever easy you think it is for killers, just know that it will only get easier. The game will only get worse for survivors.

  • HexHuntressThighs
    HexHuntressThighs Member Posts: 582
    Options

    Killer is only easy if you’re playing Nurse/ Blight, that’s it. Either you’re just really good at Killer or you don’t play enough to get good teams, it’s that simple.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,392
    Options

    Two questions.

    What constitutes a good team and how often do they occur?

  • HexHuntressThighs
    HexHuntressThighs Member Posts: 582
    Options

    A team who is always spending time on gens when not in a chase. Split up on different gens too. Not afraid to letthere mate sit on hook and pop the gens out out more others on them. Bringing really strong perks as well. It’s pretty rare on killers I don’t play alot but for the killers I spend the most time on I would say it’s about 6/10 games are really good survivors. During events/ certain time of day it can be like 8/10 games. SWF is not a requirement, I’ve read into plenty of good solo queue teams as well.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,392
    Options

    Hmmmmm

    For me, personally, I get a team that challenges me maybe every twenty games or so.

    It's really the macro play that separates them.

  • HexHuntressThighs
    HexHuntressThighs Member Posts: 582
    Options

    Every twenty games is crazy, maybe you're just a really good killer? I consider myself to be good, I still win the majority of my games but I can easily tell if it's a good team or not. Im defo a trash survivor tho, unless I run windows of OP and then I can easily loop for ages.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,392
    Options

    I'm pretty garbage at Survivor as well.

    It's possible, I'm rusty but I've dabbled in comp before I took a break