DBD is killer sided and I'm tired of people pretending it isn't.
Comments
-
The devs even said themselves that "you should not be using this data to draw conclusions". As you are literally doing right now. They say this because they understand the data is skewed themselves and does not show the full picture.
We can go over the reasons why kill data is flawed data if you'd like but I'm sure you've already seen it as it has already been brought up on these forums ad nauseam for people trying to draw conclusions from it. You're clinging to this data because it supports what you already want to believe.
6 -
Lol sure good data prove the data at high mmr is flawed. You seem to be missing the point its data at the highest mmr where its the most unflawed. See I know I am right its killer sided at high level the devs made it that way facts 🤣. Prove me wrong with data. You cant, you lose. Check and Mate!!!
0 -
60% isn't 3K on average. It's less than 2.5K on average (2.5K is 62.5%). But you also have to factor in the fact there's 5 ways the game can end, 0K, 1K, 2K, 3K, 4K. If BHVR wants the killer to have less 0Ks on average, then the kill rate will go up.
3 -
I dont want your vods I want all the peoples games data that play the game (like the devs have) at high mmr you dont even know what mmr you play at also youre only one person you might be terrible at the game for all I know. Thats not data thats one persons experience.
Sure shoot away at why you think its flawed on the kill rate side d/c's letting go on hook? That dosent happen prevently at high mmr making the high mmr swf data the most un-skewed. The problem you have is you go by what you feel and not what the data shows. Close to a hundred thousand people play the game not just you and your vods.
I win 80% of my killer games does that men the killer win rate is 80% now?
Also the fact again that a killer can go on a 1000+ win streak and the top tier comp team in the world can only go on a 200 speaks even more into the game is killer sided. If the game is swf sided why do they lose so easily?
1 -
I win 95% of my killer games at a guess yet I am not claiming that anecdotal claim is representative of the overall reality in the game and why is that? Because the sourcing of my data is flawed - the sample size is too limited and doesn't take into account all possible variables that lead me to winning pretty much every killer game I play. This is what you cant seem to comprehend with regards to the flaw in citing "the data" as a basis of your argument.
Yet you swear by the same data that would 'mathematically' indicate that Nurse is the worst killer in the game and SM is by far the strongest.
"If the game is swf sided why do they lose so easily?" - because the majority of survivors are awful at the game and stacking 4x awful players together doesn't miraculously result in winning matches.
I can't keep repeating the same point over and over in different ways, if you don't get it you don't get it so just move on.
4 -
Ahhh so the best top 5% swfs are bad sure got it lol.
The nurse is the worst player in the game now if you go by top mmr she way higher here let me show you an old data since they dont show the new one for top mmr. Even when in all ranks not just topp mmr shes at 52% still means killer is the stronger role. Every set of data has shown the game is killer sided.
1 -
" I want all the peoples games data that play the game"
Pointless data. As I've already gone over with you this would be "average games". Our conversation here is referencing objective data, meaning it has to be data from "good vs good" matches. If you want to argue average matches over objective we can talk about that as well, but these are two different topics.
"you dont even know what mmr you play at also youre only one person you might be terrible at the game for all I know."
No one does. However with enough game experience you can understand what players are good, average or bad. I've got over 10,000 hours in DBD. This gives me a pretty good sample size to know what good or bad players look like. For how little information we are given, that sample size is generally speaking as good as it's going to get. Also as I already referenced you can watch my stream to determine how good of a player you think I am, it's not hidden.
"That dosent happen prevently at high mmr making the high mmr swf data the most un-skewed."
Lol yes, it does. If you played at high mmr you'd know this.
"The problem you have is you go by what you feel and not what the data shows. "
I am a heavily unemotional person. Nothing I am saying here is based on "feelings" at all. It is all based on data collected from many, many high mmr matches. I regularly have comp players in my lobbies and the average hours of people in my lobbies are 3k+ hours for each person. That's how you can tell you're playing at higher mmr.
"Close to a hundred thousand people play the game not just you and your vods."
As I already mentioned earlier, this is two different conversations. Do you want to talk about objective balance or average game balance? This statement is irrelevant if we're talking about objective balance.
"I win 80% of my killer games does that men the killer win rate is 80% now?"
No it doesn't. This is misunderstanding data.
"Also the fact again that a killer can go on a 1000+ win streak"
So you reference that my data is irrelevant because there's hundreds of other people playing the game and not just me, and then continue to reference one player that goes on a streak like that? So one person confirms your point but not mine? Nurse and Blight are exceptions to ALL rules and should not be used for balance of all the other killers, that is just silly. I would nerf both of them. Most the entire killer roster is not doing anything remotely like that.
"the top tier comp team in the world can only go on a 200"
It was actually more than 200. That's the wrong number.
I want the game balanced around skillful play. Not tunneling and camping.
This is why I dislike youtubers that make "win streak" videos as it misrepresents the games balances and confuses people who don't understand the game.
4 -
You're probably not wrong tbh, it will be killer sided if you're in the match 😁
3 -
"you should not be using this data to draw conclusions"
So even though the devs are actively telling you not to draw conclusions from their data you are refusing since it fits what you already want to believe. You are using data as evidence that you are being told not to use.
" I play at high mmr and im telling you it dosent happen often"
Let's see your vids to prove it then. My stream videos are recorded and available to all.
8 -
Sometimes when things are said so much it is believed, regardless of it is factually false or not. This is the case here.
The true reality is the game is broken in the favor of killers. We have to remember that this is game a killer can win over a thousand times in a row and nobody escapes. That's messed up!
4 -
A killer whos trying to win is obviously gonna do well against a group just goofing around, that goes without saying.
Cherry picking lobbies is also gonna increase your winrate considering youre actively avoiding a challenge whenever it presents it self. This is probably one of the biggest issues in the game and definitely needs addressing.
6 -
"The problem with your logic is its subjective if you think someone is
playing well or not. If you are at a very low mmr and see a mid tier
player play good you will look at them like they are at a high mmr."True, except I'd say someone with 10k+ hours and in the .0001% of the population to have as good of a gauge as it's going to get.
"Yes they have lol they literally have said they purposely skew it to be killer sided and want the killer to be the power role."
Wanting it to be, and it actually being are two different things. They also balance for the "average" player. Meaning even if they were wanting it killer sided they'd be trying to make it killer sided for the "average" player, not for high mmr or "objectively". Again, different things. This also assuming they understand their game balance well in general.
"How is it rude or condescending you claim it high you cant prove that I claim its low I cant prove that."
That's now what you said. You gave belittling judgement towards me before even seeing anything.
"But since you want to put the claim out there link the vods. "
It's on my profile.
1 -
If you are an average/low skill survivor then of course the game seems killer sided.
As for winning 1000+ games, I agree that should not happen in most scenarios but these are top 1% players playing the S tier killers with the sweatiest builds and against public lobbies that are made up of the average low skill survivor.
You know what breaks these stupid win streaks? Survivors who are in the top 1% because the top level of the game is survivor sided.
3 -
I am bad at math, but yes I know that 66% is actually 3K, but my overall point stands. They intend for there to be more 3Ks than 0Ks. Survivors are not supposed to be escaping every match. But many survivors think they should be able to.
0 -
How can you know anything about methodology or what the devs take into consideration? Do you work for BHVR or have access to their internal processes? I know Mandy and Peanits both said they do not release all data or methods they use to calculate things.
0 -
Im going through the video its almost no survivor gameplay just skull merchant and some twins and plague you losing all youre survivor matches the survivors have no idea to loop in any of your killer matches which you won almost all and your survivor teammates played terrible in all of the survivor matches. I literally saw nothing that indicates high level gameplay ill keep watching just to see if you do any better but from what I can tell none of this says high level mmr.
This is no indication of my mmr either but ive been matched with crush, skerms, jrm, ayrun on survivor and against oh tofu, stalkyboi, spooknjukes, vulpixia multiple times. They're gameplay is much diffrent then what I just saw. I also used to run scrims.Even with all that i wont claim to be high mmr because i have no idea if i am or not.
1 -
yay another complaint thread-killer main
but in all honesty yes many killers and survs have a major skill issue
1 -
Dbd isn't really either sided because at the heart of it , it isn't really a competitive game no matter how much people try to argue it is, its more like a fist fight where you can beat a sweaty swf and then turn around and lose the next one anything can happen, there are too many variables that can determine whether you win or lose like teammates, builds, maps, etc... survivors sometimes can just be running the right thing to perfectly counter everything you do out of sheer bad luck and sometimes there is no clear cut winner and you have to make your own set of rules for whether you won or lost example: 2 dead and 2 escape did the survivors who escaped really win or did the killer win? If you answer a tie then you made up your own set of rules for what you consider a win or not because the game doesn't tell you that it's a tie, this will always be a semi balanced party game where the power is constantly shifting between roles
0 -
The game is balanced around bad teammates. Just how it goes. My survivor mmr is definitely far lower than my killer one as well. I'm above average on survivor but not that great, I'll admit that. The games I'm talking about you'll see more when I'm on killer, that's more the "high mmr" I'm talking about. You only get to those levels on survivor by doing swf and I almost strictly solo queue.
Many of those killer games they knew how to loop, it just looks like they don't when a mind game works.
1 -
You can conclude that without too much brain power: SM being the strongest killer due to the raw data - Nurse being the 'weakest' killer based on the data.
I never asserted that I know the specific data variables that are being included or not but I think it is pretty safe to say that when data produces results that see Nurse as the weakest killer in the game, clearly not all variables are part of the collation here.
0 -
You won more then 60% of the games as killer so again it proves killer is the power role and the role that wins more making it killer sided.
Even from the indications of your videos it shows its killer sided.
So at a lower mmr you lose as survivor and at a claimed higher mmr you win as killer. So where is the point in your vods that its not killer sided you were even winning with sub optimal killers at "high mmr" proving my point even more.
Like the old saying goes the proof is in the pudding.
0 -
"You won more then 60% of the games as killer so again it proves killer
is the power role and the role that wins more making it killer sided."You are too stuck on "winning". Whether we win or lose is far less important than how we won or lost. Did I win because they made lots of mistakes or because I played well? It matters.
"So at a lower mmr you lose as survivor and at a claimed higher mmr you
win as killer. So where is the point in your vods that its not killer
sided you were even winning with sub optimal killers at "high mmr"
proving my point even more."It's because I'm able to recognize why I lost. If it's because me or my team played bad, that's not a balance issue.
2 -
I don't really buy into that. What even constitutes a "high MMR survivor"? Considering how survivors are always dying fast, even those with a lot of hours I think we can establish there is not really any skill component to playing survivor. The only deciding factor is how experienced is the killer? Considering how killers can always win, then we can see killers that do lose mean the killer has very low skill (low MMR as you put it).
What ended the killer winstreaks was not some special survivors, it was because the killer actually made too many mistakes.
1 -
If im stuck on winning? thats what this whole post is about that killer is the winning side what else would we be talking about here it dosent matter how you won its a win.
To your second point exactly and all the data that bhvr collects played good or bad (players at high mmr make much less mistakes) indicates that the game is killer sided and they want it to be killer sided.
You doubled back now and said you dont play dbd at high mmy on survivor and had all these things trying to prove to me you know how it is at high mmr as survivor which is it? Now you went from its not about winning. Cant argue with someone who cant admit when they're wrong 🤷♂️. No point in talking about this anymore since its not about winning anymore even though thats what this whole thing is about.
0 -
Why is it so hard for people to understand that the unknowns wallbang is intentional
3 -
No what breaks the win streak is survivors stream sniping knowing who they are going against where the killer is what perks they are bringing then bringing the exact counter play builds to beat that killers streak. Which is how momo lost their streak. Not because it was the top tier 1% survivors. Momo stomped 100s of top high mmr survivors before this group cheated to break the streak.
2 -
To be fair, the top 5% SWFs aren't the opponents for each of the top 5% killers.
I do not recall the actual numbers but to explain it, let's say the absolute max MMR is 3000. Then we would assume that the top 5% survivor players would be pretty close to that, right? However, because the strength among different killers varies quite heavily, it is entirely possible that we have some Nurse and Blight mains out there that are at that max MMR while the best Myers / Freddy / Trapper only has an MMR of 2000. Keep in mind, they can only take the top 5% MMR on each individual killer for their data.
This would however imply that the best Myers / Freddy / Trapper only plays against people that are way below the top 5% survivor range. We don't know the actual MMR numbers and all that but what we do know is that the combination of MMR and balancing puts us at a roughly 60% kill rate. You don't climb much further as a killer, if you can't keep that up but you will fall until you can keep it up. So the actual balancing is quite hard to rate because the matchmaking puts killers against survivors in a way that pushes kill rates to that point.
The results don't change but it's important to remember the influence of MMR on these numbers. Many matches I win as a killer, I absolutely don't struggle in any way because at least 1 survivor is pretty bad. The matches that I lose though, typically feel very different in that regard. 4 survivors that all play decent or good are quite scary.
1 -
" thats what this whole post is about that killer is the winning side
what else would we be talking about here it dosent matter how you won
its a win."That's flawed thinking. How we win or lose matters way more than if we won or lost. For example, I could lose 70% of my survivor matches and hypothetically not think killer is overpowered or that survivor needs buffs. How? Because it matters why we lost. If most of our losses are from me or my team playing bad then those losses are meaningless because it's our own fault. We have agency because we could have changed those outcomes by getting better at the game.
"To your second point exactly and all the data that bhvr collects played
good or bad indicates that the game is killer sided and they want it to
be killer sided."I'll repeat this for like the 3rd time. "you should not be using this data to draw conclusions"
You need to stop using that data for conclusions when they have said themselves not to. Forget it exists. Them wanting it killer sided, does not mean it is.
"You doubled back now and said you dont play dbd at high mmy on survivor
and had all these things trying to prove to me you know how it is at
high mmr as survivor which is it?"No, it's because you're not understanding what I'm typing. I do play survivor at high mmr as well. Saying I play survivor much worse than killer or that you don't get to the max levels without swf isn't saying I don't play survivor at higher mmr. Those are not synonymous statements as you are taking them.
" Now you went from its not about winning."
It's never been about winning, I never back tracked on this. You are the one that's been obsessed on win rates to this point. I've been trying to convince you of the flaws in that rational this whole time. Thinking about the game in simply terms of if you won or lost, is flawed thinking.
"Cant argue with someone who cant admit when they're wrong"
You haven't told me anything I'm wrong on.
"No point in talking about this anymore since its not about winning anymore even though thats what this whole thing is about."
You don't understand the conversation. This whole time I have been trying to get you to realize that the core way you are viewing the topic itself is flawed and too narrow.
3 -
That just means the mmr is terrible. The numbers that bhvr gets are completely different from what we see in game and they balance the game to be a 60% kill rate and also in the killers favor theres no denying this they have stated themselves plenty of times and it seems like theyre numbers are going right with what they want and that is for the game to favor the killer i.e. be killer sided.
0 -
I know. My point was, that the game absolutely isn't so horrible in balancing that you are always screwed as a survivor. It might just be that more often than not you go against a killer that is actually good enough to uphold that kill rate, which is a different issue with the same result.
Even if you were to nerf a killer, their kill rate would stay at around that level. The same happens in most cases a killer is buffed. Discrepancies of course happen, when a killer becomes way too easy or way too hard, or survivors kill themselves on hook way more often.
2 -
I completely understand that im not saying the killer will always win. I also get that nerfs and buffs dont effect things to drastically its the game overall that adjusts for the 60% kill rate. Even the lowest kill rate though is 52% on a bad day which is still going to the original point that its killer sided. Its the devs game and they want it to be killer sided we still all play it.
1 -
So pure math with no human variable can be wrong? We all aren’t just robots?
Jokes aside the 40% escape is per survivor and it’s an average. So it just showcases how there are either more than intended escaping often with higher or less with lower than.
The killer expectations are still with draws being the highest amount and 3k’s being the second most prevalent. This showcases that a slight edge to the 1 over the 4 but not in a way that they should be dominating.
1 -
Its been shown at all leverls of mmr to be less then a 50% escape with swf and solo dou and threes. They posted the kill rates on all and all went toward less then 50% escape rate. No one saying that the killer is dominating what im saying is the game is killer sided and balanced to be killer sided.
2 -
Yes I agree the escape rate is tied to that number. As I had stated that is for each individual person. Where the kill rate is meant for the entire trial. It’s different data standards. It is easier to showcase specific Killers being at point x where they want them to be, but much more difficult with each individual survivor. 40% is a nice number for a 4 man team.
0 -
Agreed. Though, I believe, if we discuss this then it's important to keep that in mind. After all, as you said the lowest kill rate on that graph is 52% but it's on Nurse of all killers.
This shifts the issue a bit. Killers with insanely high skill floors will naturally be quite low in terms of kill rate (look at Singularity's stats on Nightlight or Nurse in the stats you posted for reference). I find it hard to rectify drawing conclusions on actual strength from the numbers alone. Freddy is very deceiving in that regard. Though most us would agree that he is pretty terrible, his kill rate is among the best.
This all becomes important when we think about how the game could be adjusted to make it more "fair" (I put fair in quotation marks because in an asymmetrical game I find that pretty hard to define).
0 -
I totally agree im not arguing that, thats an okay number but im just continuing the conversation on is the game killer sided or not.
1 -
Yea of course thats why on the next chart for high mmr shes way higher and trapper is lacking and even less lacking then nurse simply because they have game sense on how to play killer in general. I for one wish it was more fair but they have to many killers and to much to do in order to get everyone to a higher skill level. Thats one reason im so amidite about removing tunneling because i know for a fact it affects the numbers at lower mmrs. At higher mmrs tunneling dosent work well and then killers eventually balance into an mmr where it only works a little more then half of the time. Which also kind of sucks because thets like the casual gamer or maybe someone who is trying a little harder then most which is probably a large portion of the playerbase and thats why its complained about so much.
0 -
First of all, I really appreciate the actual recorded gameplay. It makes it a lot easier to see others perspectives and I know the headaches and effort it takes to do so.
But watching your 12 hour VOD from the other day kind of shows where I think the disagreement can stem from.
On the left hand side are the killer games (with gens remaining). On the right are the survivor games. You, personally, escaped twice in your eight games played as a survivor which would be an escape rate of 25%. The team though never won (technically you did leave before the final results but I think its safe to assume in most of those matches) with the best result being a tie between survivors/killers.
In the killer games on the other hand, you did exceedingly well, winning eighteen of the twenty-four matches for a win rate of 75% and a kill rate of 77%.
Now, I know you want to focus on the "how" instead of the raw numbers and I absolutely agree to that to an extent. I'm not arguing for balance changes here. What I'm trying to show is that this reflects my experience and, assumedly, others experiences when loading in to Dead by Daylight. If I play one side and can win 60% or so with confidence and the other is a complete guessing game where my personal skill doesn't seem to matter at all, how can you fault them for feeling the game is tilted toward the more consistent role?3 -
I agree as they have stated their goal is to have it feel like a horror film. In that case the killer usually kills most the cast. I feel the balance they need to do will always be held back by the extreme mobile killers. This also has the trickle down effect to giving the mobility boosts to survivors. Thus maintaining the huge divide, in the higher skill games, of effective killers and survivor perks.
0 -
Top 5% survivor MMR escape rate is of course accounting for the fact we're talking about the players facing the top 5% MMR killer players in the game, who are of course gonna be playing the strongest characters in the game yes?
Because in the top 5% of 4 man SWF players I'm pretty damn sure the top 5% of killers playing Myers wouldn't fare so well compared to those playing Blight. So if I were to guess, it's maybe a 10% swing based on the killer you play (and I think I'm low balling that).
So if we split the difference across the 35 killers, and assuming an even distribution of killers across that 48.6% to 58.6%, this would mean only 5 killers would be even or better than a high level SWF escape rate, and 30 killers would have greater than a 50% escape rate?
This would mean that for 85% of the killer roster, the game is survivor sided at the highest levels of play, yes? It's quite easy to bend numbers to your narrative. Statistics are only as good as the data you choose to ignore.
I wouldn't rely on these stats numbers so heavily in your argumentation.
2 -
No if you look at the data even trapper at high 5% mmr has a 56% kill rate. 56>50 meaning its a slightly killer sided.
1 -
What is top 5% MMR Trapper though?
Is that the top 5% of Trapper players or top 5% of all killers? Cause I very much doubt you are getting any high level Trappers playing the top 5% MMR 4 man SWFs.
Again stats are only as good as the data you choose to ignore.
The best that could be said based on the data available is that the matchmaking is killer sided.
2 -
1.500 hours is basically nothing.
2 -
The issue for this game is that the difference between an experienced and coordinated SWF and average solo queue players are night and day. Killers can snowball very easily if mistakes are made, and in solo queue (a collection of random weirdos, often with extreme skill differences, who can't communicate with each other) a lot of mistakes happen. It's just the nature of the game.
In your average solo queue match, killers are too strong. If the matchmaking gives you one or two players who can't loop for more than twenty seconds total, and can't find gens when you are looping, then you are screwed (this happens a lot due to the matchmaking prioritizing speed over accuracy).
But an experienced SWF with comms can stretch a killer very thin and avoid many snowball sitations that solo queue survivors can't.
Balancing between these two player groups is genuinely challenging, so I sympathize with BHVR in trying to balance them both. But balancing them requires subtlety. Blanket nerfs for survivors just makes life even harder for those who are already struggling. The nerfs need to be more targeted. Maybe if solo queue was less of a mess (mostly due to matchmaking), balancing between these two groups wouldn't be so challenging.
0 -
Thanks for watching them, I'm actually surprised you spent that much time, unless you jumped to end screens anyway. Either way thanks for collecting. Hope you watched though, the way the match ran is way more important than the end screen. I also tend to say, you'll have heard it a lot in game, that I try to never tunnel or camp and play very fair. It costs me many games I could've won if I had tunneled.
I'd say notice the frustration in games. Winning more killer games, but way more frustration on those games as well. Lost survivor games we're chill and not stressful. Why is that? Well I'm not saying those killer games were perfect obviously, but speaking in generalities, many of those lost games we're still few mistakes and lost through balance problems where I had little agency in changing the outcomes. Meanwhile in the survivor games where we lost a lot, why did we lose? Me or my team played badly. Those matches aren't frustrating because I know it was more our fault and me or my team getting better at the game or making different choices could have changed the outcome, we had agency. Killer lacks agency against higher mmr swf coms groups unless they choose to tunnel.
The game is balanced around survivors playing bad or making mistakes, if they don't you lose. For an inverse perspective, imagine on survivor your outcome was based on how well the killer played? If they didn't make any mistakes you lose regardless of how well your team played, that would feel very bad no? This is essentially how people feel about current Nurse or old Spirit, it's about how good they were not how good you were, which is why everyone was/did complain.
1 -
The study is actually based off of all the killers and there individual kill rates that play at that 5% mmr including 4 man swfs.
0 -
To be honest, when I play as a survivor, I can relax my eyes, mind, and heart when I get hooked. But when I play as a killer, I don't have a moment of relaxation. I have to keep hunting non-stop, and especially, my eyes have to be constantly vigilant.
As a killer, I used to camp and tunnel when I first started playing this game. However, I soon realized that it only annoyed people and wasn't effective against high-rank survivors. I never use red add-ons, like the Tomb-f*kin'-stone, which are considered cheating. So, even with very good basekits, as you mentioned (for example, The Unknown), it's still incredibly challenging for me to secure 4 kills against high-rank survivors. And I believe they're not always a party of four, and even they're all matched strangers. If I want to secure 4 kills, I have to carefully protect the gens while hunting and killing, so having good basekits is necessary.
As a survivor, I don't see any killer's basekit as a problem, unless they use red add-ons. If they have a nice playing style (no camping, tunneling, or red add-ons), and I'm lucky matched with well-coordinated teammates, so I can survive somehow. The result is also based on which perks we use, can they counter the killer?
Truly, I used to think like you when I was still learning to play survivors, but not now. I agree that each person will find it difficult to face certain killers. To me, they're Wraith, Ghost Face, Trickster, Skull Merchant and Good Guy (no mention of player skill).
2 -
Is that a "I think" or "I know"?
I've read the very pages where those stats were released, and there is nothing I've seen that concretely proves that statement is true.
You know for sure that the Trappers in those results are Trappers that are in the top 5% matches of all killers?
4 -
The new study i cant find but its "i know" they released info with solo dou threes and full swf on high and low mmr and the 4 man swf still only escaped 48% of the time at the 5% mmr
0 -
Yes, and my original assertion is these results at 48.6% are against the top 5% of killers in the game, and the top 5% in the game will be playing the best killers in the game...
So my original point is, you cannot prove that majority of the killer roster does indeed have a better than 50% escape rate vs. Top 5% MMR Survivors in a SWF.
I can't disprove either... but based on guesstimate, I would say most of the killer roster has a greater than 50% escape rate in this scenario.
This is what I mean by you can't prove conclusively the game is survivor or killer sided via stats. It depends on what data you choose to ignore.
3
