The second iteration of 2v8 is now LIVE - find out more information here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/480-2v8-developer-update

Lobby Shopping vs Going Next

13

Comments

  • appleas
    appleas Member Posts: 1,128

    Lobby shopping could be resolved by making matchmaking more strict. The game can't backfill a 50 hour killer into a 2k hour survivor lobby if the matchmaking range is much more strict.

    This issue of having loose MMR for a quicker lobby wouldn't have happened if there was a better distribution of player count on both sides.

  • Blueberry
    Blueberry Member Posts: 13,666
    edited May 23

    "We still don't see it as skill removed as even if they know the killers
    heading for them, they need skill to avoid being seen by the killer,
    which direction theyre coming from, and yada yada. Maybe if they relied
    on it we'd agree but what we see from survivors and when we're in a SWF
    (admittedly our friends are rather more relaxed than some SWFs) its more
    of a bonus (supplement?) than outright replacement for skill. But at
    this point we think its going to end with our views different."

    Again, I am not saying it removes all skill, simply that it removes a lot of it. Agree to disagree though that's fine.

    "Maybe we're wording it poorly. We're not ignoring the point (well since
    the last post at least), our response was that SWFs aren't that much a significant advantage. We do not deny they are and advantage,
    but its not like they completely break the game (despite how hard they
    try or how much people complain)."

    We're gonna have to agree to disagree again here then. I 100% disagree with this. SWF is a massive advantage, it is not small at all. They could all run zero perks and I still think it would tilt in their favor, that's how much of an advantage I think SWF is. If you were asking me to play a match as survivor for a million dollars I would take the 4 man swf with no perks over 4 solos with perks every single time. It's not even close.

    It's okay if we just disagree.

  • JPLongstreet
    JPLongstreet Member Posts: 5,876

    They tried much stricter MMR about a year or so back. All the veteran players hated back to back to back sweaty matches, and hated the longer queue times for those sweaty matches. Then it was quickly changed back.

  • appleas
    appleas Member Posts: 1,128
    edited May 23

    Isn't the point of matchmaking to pair a group of players with similar "skill" (Escape/kills) together? If the matchmaking gives the veteran players a 50 hour Survivor occasionally, it's fine?

    Long queue times means that there are not enough veteran players AKA bad player retention and not enough players capable of meeting the demand on both roles. The faster queue time measure was implemented as a quickfix back in 2022 because not much people were playing Killer at that time. If that issue still persists now, it means devs haven't done enough to fix the player count for both roles.

    Backfill is the side effect of allowing matchmaking to bypass MMR for the sake of faster queue times. If the faster queue time system was removed, all the "backfills" even after someone dodges the lobby would be still be of similar MMR.


  • Junylar
    Junylar Member Posts: 2,005


    So you are completely okay with the idea that DC penalty is only eaten by those who have legitimate reasons to quit? Because real quitters can just die and go next, without penalty.

  • Raccoon
    Raccoon Member Posts: 7,716

    And the loss of everyone's add-ons, offerings, items, etc.

  • WolfyWood
    WolfyWood Member Posts: 472

    I also would add that League of Legends, another PVP game has implemented forced anon-mode in its competitive queues and has had lobby dodging penalties for awhile.

    A vastly different game, but the problem of lobby shopping was the same there too, and the changes were successful in severely impeding the ability to lobby shop while not overcorrecting people who had legitimate reasons to leave a lobby.

    There is no reason why DBD can't or shouldn't do the same.

  • AssortedSorting
    AssortedSorting Member Posts: 1,347
    edited May 23

    Survivors that have had their lobbies dodged by the Killer already have a longer queue time than normal, so their matchmaking range gets expanded to expedite matchmaking. This means you get more skilled survivors against less skilled killers more often. This causes increased burnout for newer killers, and negatively impacts the killer pool.

    At least unless they've changed anything with how backfilling works.

    So yes, killers that cherry-pick lobbies are damaging future games. I'm surprised they don't have a soft-ban like League does with multiple sequential lobby declines, if not simply to ward against bot spam who would cause an issue in the other direction: low MMR bot accounts causing newer survivors to go against harder killers.

  • Mr_K
    Mr_K Member Posts: 9,224

    Lobbies can be formed without a killer and the killer chosen would fall within the average range of the survivors.

  • Yharwick
    Yharwick Member Posts: 521

    I'm aware of how it works I just don't think it matters very much. The MMR is already rather loose and either you go against a worse killer which okay easy game, it's even coll, or you get a good killer which can be a learning experience of you they ever want to actually get better.

    I swear all this complaining about MMR wouldn't even be a problem if people focused on getting better instead of excuse fishing for when they lose and I mean that for both sides.

  • AssortedSorting
    AssortedSorting Member Posts: 1,347

    Well then, why don't we help people focus on getting better by reducing the fish in the pond.

  • burt0r
    burt0r Member Posts: 4,160
    edited May 23

    Ah, I don't know about the anon mode since I haven't played for a year but the leaver penalty in lobby wasn't for lobby shopping per se but because people would rage quit when their intended champion was picked by the opponent or banned.

    You could call this lobby shopping but I would call it simple rage quitting.

    Well, you are correct that both stem from a sense of entitlement to some degree but I would also say that a specific killer character with or without 4 gen perks doesn't mean they will play toxic and therefore not a valid reason to exit early.

    (Even I, during my experiment phase, had people exiting on hook against me for one of the dumb reasons mentioned in this thread.

    But in my eyes, a survivor squad with matching skins, names or group wide last second item switches are a dead giveaway for a team that's not out to play a normal match but to "interact" aka deny the killer at any given opportunity, guarantee a miserable match for the average casual killer.

    I personally have never dodged lobbies or rage quit (except for one time when a swf abused one of the old fat shaming spots aka exploit) but I did use the one minute waiting time, since one survivor always not ready up till last second, to check their profiles and played the match either way.

    However I am guilty of not engaging with survivor that last second switch or are overly "interaction hungry"/annoying during the match.

  • Gmoore23
    Gmoore23 Member Posts: 193

    I think lobby shopping is mostly happening because of bully squads. I don't see them that often, but I personally don't enjoy games with them, so I just hop into any other lobby. Obviously that isn't ideal for anyone, but neither is dealing with those bully squads.

    Quitting in game is just trash, straight up. That's for everyone involved. On Survivor side and one of your teammates quits? Suddenly the team is at a massive disadvantage. On Killer side and that happens? Suddenly the game is not nearly as fun and, maybe it's just me, you just feel bad for the rest of the team. I remember one time I was playing Knight on Midwich (nothing crazy, especially with how I play), and the first two people I hooked just gave up on the spot. I let the other two out because nobody was gonna have fun at that point, but somehow we did. They gave me a couple hook states, a few gen damages, but they did the gens while I just kinda spun around for the most part.

    That's really long winded, but I'm just trying to say that while hopping lobbies isn't ideal, I also get it more than just straight up quitting mid-game. Hopefully that all came across right because I'm bad at words as it is, but then plain text behind a screen can be interpreted in ways not intended.

  • MrDardon
    MrDardon Member Posts: 4,033

    I'd even go so far and lock both Killers and Survivors onto their loadouts as well. Because technically you could still last second switch by using the build presets on the top right.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,426
    edited May 23

    Not exactly.

    If you lobby dodge you do so knowing you're not really effecting anyone. It's pretty harmless.

    If you give up you do so knowing you're going to cause the cascade of problems I listed before, and doing it anyways because you don't care if you screw over everyone else.

    That's a pretty significant change in mindset imo.

  • Spare_Them_Mori_Me
    Spare_Them_Mori_Me Member Posts: 1,673

    Your move, @WolfyWood

    You have me invested in this discussion. Very curious to see it play out. :)

    The mindset differences are very much there. But fundamentally, there are very different results depending if its in lobby or in game. And to me, it sounds like giving up in game is getting scrutinized a WHOLE lot more than killers dodging in lobby.

    Both are pretty ######### imo. But to each their own. If killers wish to be coddled and run from the scary survivors, so be it. But to those that don't, I salute you.

    To the survivors who hookicide at the slightest breeze, please go play Roblox dbd and/or mobile. Ty

  • Alice_pbg
    Alice_pbg Member Posts: 6,556
  • JPLongstreet
    JPLongstreet Member Posts: 5,876

    I still see it as a player prioritizing themselves over their teammates and their opponents.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,426

    Like I said in my first post, supposedly matchmaking does that anyway. So it's not really making a difference.

    If MMR worked well then sure. But it doesn't.

  • Sava18
    Sava18 Member Posts: 2,439

    No I don't want hooks suicides to be in the game, that's what my first comment was.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,426
    edited May 23

    Well I'm mostly saying that from community sentiment that even with MMR the skill levels are wildly inconsistent and they go from getting stomped to doing the stomping back to back.

    If we go off the assumption that matchmaking is actually pretty good outside of backfill then yeah leaving could possibly fill in someone wildly mismatched.

    In which case I'd say both are a problem, just to very different degrees. Additionally with backfill it's a potential mess up while with a give up it's reasonably guaranteed.

    Like a strong breeze vs a hurricane but saying "but are they both wind?". To use a more common expression, apples and oranges "but are they both fruit?"

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,426
    edited May 23

    That's fair. In that case I would say at the very least backfill should not loosen it's criteria compared to a normal search. In addition I think a working AFK detection + removal of perkless unhook attempts suggested was a good approach to the issue.

    Giving up has a much bigger fallout so it's a more serious issue and takes a much more selfish and entitled mindset to do that action compared to the other imo.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • spirit72
    spirit72 Member Posts: 227

    Well, maybe and maybe not. Those 'baby survivors' aren't always such babies.. A good bit of the time, in my experience, it turns out that that p1 Mikaela was just taking a break from their p100 flashlight-slinging Claudette :)

    But it does allow the Killer to take at least some measure to avoid potential abuse. For instance, if I see more than two flashlights, that group can wait for some other chump to ready up.

  • lemonary
    lemonary Member Posts: 9

    Seeing prestiges is one thing, it's bad enough itself. But killers being able to check profiles is even worse.

    I took a long break, came back to finish the rift. I had a solo lobby with two P100s and EIGHT killers in a row dodged us, the 9th was a sweaty Billy way out of that MMR.

    The whole lobby dodging is a joke and exactly as bad as giving up immediately as a surv. Not better by a single inch.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,426
    edited May 28

    How exactly do you "shop for new players"? Leaving and requing just resets your search. In a working MMR system it wouldn't matter, you can't "shop for new players" because you'll never get matched with them.

    There's only 2 ways afaik for that to happen:

    1. A killer to leave a baby survivor lobby and you get backfilled in, which as per your argument that's what killers are looking for so why would they leave? That'd be a very small amount of the time in that case wouldn't it? The backfill would also have to be very aggressive and loose.
    2. The MMR doesn't work by default so backfill doesn't matter as the games can always be mismatched from the beginning.

    In 1 backfill is too aggressive so, as I already stated in a previous comment, the matchmaking should be tightened at the least so that backfill isn't so aggressive if that is what's happening. But players leave hard lobbies not easy ones so that still doesn't explain how you can "shop for new players" reliably if you need to get backfilled in. If anything you'll end up in harder lobbies as killer a ton more as those are the ones people leave. So really this would be affecting killers negatively more (which should still get fixed).

    In 2 the MMR itself is the source of the problem because it's too loose, so changing leaving won't really solve anything. As per my first few statement. So MMR should be tightened in general.

    New players and vet players shouldn't be matched up I agree. But if that's happening in any sort of reliable frequency that points to a general MMR matchmaking issue and not just a leaving lobby issue imo. So the MMR is the main problem not the dodging. Fix the MMR and you fix the dodge "problem". Change the dodge system and we still have mismatched lobbies.

    If this is happening, dodging is just a scapegoat when the actual core problem is the MMR matchmaking. Dodging itself shouldn't reasonably be doing any harm as it just resets the search. The problem comes if the search itself is flawed.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    As someone who got matched against a prestige 100 when i had less than 10 hours of gameplay, and against 2 80+ prestige survivors, one 75+ prestige survivor and one 40+ prestige survivor when i had less than 15 hours……. no. I didnt even had a single prestiged character by that point

    Until the matchmaking is properly fixed and dont backfill horribly, dodging some lobbies is a must.

    Full stop.

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146
  • Thusly_Boned
    Thusly_Boned Member Posts: 2,957
    edited May 28

    It's been said already, but apples and oranges here:

    One is in match, the other isn't. I won't lose my items/add-ons and 10-15 minutes of my time in a lost cause if a killer dodges my lobby. Worst case, I wait another minute or two for the next one. Usually, like 30 seconds.

    And let's not forget that survs can and often do dodge lobbies as well.

    I don't dodge often, and it's never because I am dodging just shopping for a lobby of newborn potatoes. It might be because it's 3-4 TTVs who you know aren't going to play an earnest match. Or it might be when I have a challenge and am not even prioritizing a win, but with a killer I rarely use and just don't want to face a squad of P100s.

    And I know many experienced survs will load into a lobby, see a bunch of P0s and P1s in base cosmetics, and nope the hell right out of there.

    Ditching in game is another animal altogether.

  • JPLongstreet
    JPLongstreet Member Posts: 5,876
  • Marioneo
    Marioneo Member Posts: 808

    This playing as Killer theres no way to circumvent the DC penalty i have to playout the match yes i can leave whenever but ill get a penalty everytime i DC.

    Playing as Survivor anytime something doesn't go my way oh see an Artist or i get downed in 10 seconds im first chase i have this ultimate 3rd option hook suicide to circumvent the DC penalty and not playout the match screw over my teammates and i can do this infinitely without reprecussion cause its built in the game.

    How is that fair? It's an outdated mechanic that needs changes just make it you have 3 chances to 4% but the meter doesn't drain when attempting

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    Cool, but i wont get stuck as a prestige 1 killer with 25 hours against a survivor team with 340 prestige in total. If thats the price to pay, so be it.

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    I get it perfectly, but im fully confident that people would still do it even with DC penalties, as survivors clearly prove (it would be less frequent, i will give you that).

    And i dont want to get a penalty just because a prestige 87 killer decided to get one.

    I understood it from minute one.

  • BbQz
    BbQz Member Posts: 83

    Maybe survivors should be able tol see the killer they are vs to make it more even. Would save a bunch of dying on hooks vs skull merchants lol… maybe at the 15 second mark you can't edit your load out or perks but it reveals the killer and people can decide then if they wish to move forward. Killers gain insane amount of info during the lobby and can shop and cherry pick non swf non flash lights or items they can even check profiles and find newbs. Survivors can't do any of that and you see that fact ripple into the match when people give up early

  • Rulebreaker
    Rulebreaker Member Posts: 2,028

    We'd like to ask what happens after if a survivor don't like what they see?

    Does the whole lobby get removed? We then get both sides lobby shopping till doomsday. Only 1 dips? Then each survivor who stays knows who the killer is and can switch builds accordingly and while the killer can also switch perks, they can't switch power.

    And we feel the need to repeat this: currently survivors can switch entire load outs with the click of a button at the last second. All the info killers get at the start is only info survivors let them have.

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    I think comparing a lobby dodge that means 20-30 seconds of additional search with ruining a match of 7-8 minutes a bit misleading at best…… or deceitful at worst.

  • spirit72
    spirit72 Member Posts: 227

    And that's fair enough! But in my experience, the types of groups that all bring in flashlights are also built to grief even in the event that a Killer comes in with both Lightborn and Franklin's. Nah, I'll move on, there's more where they came from.

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    Im a simple man. If theres 3 or 4 flashlights, i inmediately bring lightborn

    Thats not a dodge for me.

  • Tzimiscelord
    Tzimiscelord Member Posts: 146

    As i already said in a previous thread, i dont think backfill should skip MMR.

    But thats not really a players fault. Especially not a 20 hour killer who doesnt want to fight presiges 80+.

    Thats the fault of the guy who thought matching people with 2k hours in the game and people with 20 was a good idea.

  • Jim_Tonic
    Jim_Tonic Member Posts: 555

    Well if a killer decides to dodge a lobby im in, i'll never know because i dont pay attention to the boring lobby screen anymore. But if a survivor ragequits mid match i have downsides on both sides if i am their teammate or the killer.

    So you alredy have a big difference there. Though i wouldnt mind if it were to be implemented exactly like you said, as long as we can get rid of people that dont even want to play the game im fine.

  • HerInfernalMajesty
    HerInfernalMajesty Member Posts: 1,841

     (it's not just killers. survivors do that to other survivors too). You can't have both.

    I’ve noticed how bad it’s gotten. It’s not enough to impose arbitrary limitations onto the Killer. Now Survivors have to control how other Survivors play. If that’s not entitlement I don’t know what is.