SBMM and MMR need to be eliminated
The result of sbmm and mmr is getting the same boring matches over and over and never improve bc you encounter only pp of your level.
I propose to remove it completely and add a system where player with less than n° of hour will only match themself until they reach the cap of h° and will get trow with everybody else.
Comments
-
I propose to remove it completely and add a system where player with less than n° of hour will only match themself until they reach the cap of h° and will get trow with everybody else.
What you propose here is not a removal of sbmm and MMR but a separate newbie lobby/queue like R6S has where people under level 50 queue among themselves until they reach level 50 and can play with the rest.
1 -
Indeed yes bc after, when they play with everybody else, the will not be different mmr but just random lobbies of player in my vision.
0 -
Oh boy, that wouldn't work. There is an immense difference between someone with 100hours and someone with 1000+ hours. In any game.
Throwing them together in random lobbies after the newbie level would be the same problem you want to address now.
8 -
They would improve if they face someone better than them, I get that getting obliterated is not the higher point of multiplayer experience, but out of 10 matches how many would be like that? 1? maybe 2? The rest would be fun games .
When you reach a mid high level of skill Sbmm and mmr are the most boring thing ever, every match is the same and you need to create your own fun.
The most fun i ever had in multiplayer game was long ago where no game had any sbmm or mmr.
0 -
Thinkin your underestimating how often they would be obliterated…
When you reach any point most matches become the same cause everyone is running the same bloody thing or doing the same bloody thing 90% of the time. Don't think sbmm and mmr have anything to do with that.
4 -
Yes please i love bashing new players and getting matched against the top 1st.
0 -
There used to be absolutely no SBM/MMR. People were quitting over getting stomped over and over and over. Besides, personally I like the current MMR system. I get put with people who generally actually try to play.
1 -
After 2 Vs 8, I don't know how I'd feel about MMR being removed from the game. 2 Vs 8 is the closest experience I've had to no MMR being in the game, since it's so loose you can end up being turbo stomped and double teamed by two incredibly skilled and co-ordinated Killers, or face two total newbies and loop them all game for max boldness points.
No MMR would mean more variety and a lot more exteme one-sided games, but probably also more escapes and easier Killer games overall, whereas the current system means consistently sweaty games with no chill, no escapes and Killer games that require more focus to win.
I'm not sure which of these choices I prefer.
I think a playtime based system wouldn't work well because there would be no built in defence against smurfing.
1 -
that is alredy the case how it is right now lol
1 -
how many hours do you have? in my lobbys everyone gives up over the slightest inconvieniences.
1 -
Call me crazy but I'd rather go back to grade based matchmaking
3 -
Same here.
Rank-based Matchmaking with a big Rank Reset was peak DBD for me. When you got set back to Rank 11 or so after being at Rank 1, you had good games for like 3 weeks. People who were really good ranked up fast and played against others who ranked up fast and people who ranked up slow, played against people who also ranked up slow.Only the last week before Rank Reset the Matchmaking was not that good because players who struggled reaching Red Ranks ended up in Red Ranks and so the games were less quality.
The problems arised when they decided to make the Rank Reset more lenient so that you can only get set back one color. This meant that those people who needed time to rank up were in Red Ranks basically immediatly, lowering the overall quality of games.
And BHVRs reasoning for that back then was strange. They said that they dont want people who dont play as much to miss out on things (reaching Rank 1 in this case). Which is such a nonsense explanation, since it is normal and SHOULD be normal that players who play more also get more. And they invalidated their own reasoning with the introduction of MMR and Grades, where only players who play a lot will reach Grade 1 and the most BPs.
Returning to Rank-based Matchmaking with a huge Rank Reset would be a blessing. DBD has always been less fun with MMR, especially because their way of getting or losing MMR is the worst way possible and the low soft cap of their MMR-System, which basically makes it feel like there is no MMR at all.
5 -
The logic of you argument is questionable. If you are playing people at your own level (or better) you are forced to improve. Playing people inferior to yourself in no way leads to improvement. While I agree the MMR system needs some tweaking, it is far better than the alternative.
Although I see in later posts you are arguing the opposite. I can't follow the context.
1 -
I think the issue with MMR is one it isn't a broad enough spectrum before people are lumped together, and two the system still favors Que time over everything else. MMR is fine but the second they can't get a lobby right away, they throw one side or the other to the proverbial lions. My MMR is right up there but I still get Potatoes regularly based on the times I play.
1 -
Ranked based Matchmaking was the best system. If you Play every day and are good you become stronger and stronger survivor or Killer.
You can easy Go Back to easy Matches If you lost a bunch of Times. Mmr was a mistake.
We need Something Like rbm but with 100 Ranks every 10 Ranks a new Pool. So you have the best Games for all.
0 -
Exactly, grades encouraged a little bit of everything. You couldn't exclusively rat as Survivor, because you needed chaser. You couldn't facecamp (or 17m doorway camp now) because Hunter would drop. Survivor needed to heal, and Killer needed to spread the pain a bit. It encouraged 12 hooking because Malicious/Sacrifice lost Iri if you got early kills, whereas currently early kills are the main way to play.
Emblems weren't perfect, Plague deletes Altruism for example, and Wraith/Huntress/Nurse 'chases' don't properly count towards the emblems, but those were flaws to iron out. Sadly they threw the baby out with the bathwater instead.
0 -
that would be so horrible and boring to have endless onesided games.
0 -
That would be even way worse than the actual nonsense. We just have to get back to the old rank system. This had much moure depth to skill measurement than kill and escape, which is the laziest mmr possible. Still the devs refuse the accept their failure on sbmmr and actually create something to evolve the game.
0 -
Stop with the blanket statement, "MMR bad" because y'all don't know what you're talking about. MMR in theory saves this game. Basing it off kills vs escapes only, and making it super loose to cut down on queue times (MMR BHVR edition) is what you're really having issues with. When MMR first came out, it was perfect. So what if queues were a minute or 2? You at least knew the skill level you were facing: your own. All the people wanting to go back to random matchmaking, yet claiming that they don't want the game unfair/unbalanced, are hypocrites.
Just make MMR the way it used to be, and base it off more than just kills and escapes, and it'll be perfect. I don't know why nobody's suggesting this as a solution. It's so obvious.
2 -
It's not about how often they'd be obliterated. It's that it happens at all. When it happens to much to survivor, which will absolutely happen if we bring random matchmaking back, we'll be back to year-long killer nerf sprees. What MMR would do (if they fixed it) would put like-hour'd, like-skilled players against one another so that the devs can even begin to get good data on what works, what's OP, what's common, what's trash, etc. Because right now there's a ton of might as well be random matches, and the devs are actually trying to base their changes off that. Killer getting stomped all game but gets 4 because of too much altruism at the end? Overperforming. 2 great survivors die because of their 2 trash teammates? Survivor must be too weak. It's not working. We need consistency in our matches.
0 -
Around 4k.
0 -
>You at least knew the skill level you were facing: your own
Boring, this is not a competitive game.
0 -
It's been baffling me for some time, why such emphasis on number of hours. I get that it shows experience and would show the player has had a variety of matches but many people relate hours to skill level. Years ago I had 300 hours and beat a team of survivors that had over 1.5k hours. Some people pick things up quicker than others.
0 -
Yes, having the game be unplayable for 1-2 weeks each month while everyone of every skill level is sweating to rank up was so much fun.
0 -
Ah yes, and now it is way better, you are right. Having really skilled players and almost babys in the same queue is way better. Sure.
And having to play against a Killer who has 10 hours because an appropiate Killer chickened out when they saw that one Survivor had more than 50 hours is also completely peak Matchmaking.
Calling the game unplayable during Rank Reset time is so stupid, it is not even funny anymore.
0 -
Ya know, when you say it doesn't matter how often it happens then a sentence later your talking about what happens when it happens often it kinda makes us think you're just trying to wake us up from our nap >.>
That aside, mmr kinda works already but players keep tossing any good data for the devs out the window via lobby dodge, hook swings, letting people escape (yes even this can be bad in excess), and the like.Your also not going to get consistency due to these human factors. Depending on how tight you make the match making, people would be waiting lot longer, and as people already hate the 10 min wait for 2v8, it probably won't go well.
0 -
ok thats double as much as i have. Maybe around 4k hours i'll also see people that actually want to play the game again
0 -
The issue is that MMR in DBD is not swingy enough.
Basically, think of your MMR like this. Wins are weighted heavier than losses, so they count more. Your average matched game should be in that first (-10 to 10) percentile with Matchmaking increasing the range of the bell curve every time you wait too long. if queues are good, you seem to match in the first percentile. If they're a bit slow, they seem to match in the second percentile (the -20 to 20 range here). The model starts to break down, apparently, when you get long queue times and it opens up to the third percentile (-30 to 30 here). If it's a worst case situation like with 2v8's massive queue time disruptions, you get the whole curve, and even top and baby MMRs get thrown in (that less than 0.1% shown, or the tails of the curve). As queue times get longer, matchmaking suffers more and more. The INTENT is therefore to keep brackets having enough smoothness that sometimes you get people below skill, sometimes above, and sometimes just right. This gives a nice bell curve of results to draw from when the game matches you with another opponent.
When this system was designed it was intended for chess. Chess has a wider bracket for MMR than DBD. This makes sense for chess because you can't stay in the right bracket of player if you always get babies or always get pros. You need a wide range to learn and also reflect skill. In chess, winning more doesn't boost you more than losing lowers you, and in chess, the bracket isn't so narrow you are restricted to a limited set of people right in the peak of your bell curve with NOTHING for the lower and upper percentiles.
DBD isn't chess, though, and the way BHVR does MMR is that this bell curve seems to be very narrow AND winning boosts you more than losing lowers you. So not only is the bell curve narrower than shown here, it's also got a longer tail than expected because the game expects you to win more than you lose as Killer, but lose more than you win as Survivor. The result is you need to lose twice as much if you accidentally boost into the wrong bracket by winning too hard. Right now it is possible to get terrible lobbies as Survivor all the time but simultaneously get amazingly strong lobbies as Killer, because Killers are designed to win more on average. That's fine, but it's not balanced for how the MMR actually seems to work. And none of this would even be an issue if BHVR massively relaxed MMR for everyone, and made it so a loss or win are equal levels of skill adjustment.
Basically, I theorize that this is a problem related to not keeping the bell curve normalized for MMR, and it can be fixed by normalizing it. It's a statistical issue, not a skill issue, when you get lobbes super out of your range on either side - be they very baby players or super strong players.1 -
You guys are encountering people of your level? Wonder what that's like. Be a nice change of pace from being stomped by people with 10k more hours than you every match.
1 -
I've witnessed too many missmatches in my lobbies and those of the streamers I watch. A part of it is from lobby dodging from either role.
I think MMR should exist, but it needs to be based on chase time (and different chase time for different killers). Nurse can injure fast, while Trapper can't. I feel like nothing singular in DBD (e.g. doing gens, healing, unhooking, kicking gens, hooking) expresses as much skill as the time spent in chase. The longer the chase, the more MMR the survivor being chased should get, and less MMR the killer chasing should get. And vice-versa.
Basing MMR on survival/kills (whether it's individual or group-based) has been flawed since the beginning, in my opinion. You can survive just by hiding all game and bringing perks that let you open the exit gate super fast. You can get free kills by bringing NOED or the tombstone addon on Myers. Neither of these express a skill, really.
0 -
Basing it on Chasetime is also not really great.
When I play one game as Survivor on The Game and one game as Survivor on Haddonfield, my chasetime will be drastically different.
And if you have some Meg in your game who uses every Pallet and gets to a long chasetime, but then creates a giant Deadzone, this does not mean that the Meg was the best player.
1 -
Totally agree!!
0 -
Nah, SBMM is fine, sweatlords get to play with sweatlords and I play comfy and get other comfy gamers.
Why would I want it to change? I dont, and ill complain if it does.0
