Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Why do killers think this game is survivior sided?
Comments
-
She cannot move cross the map or around anything, whereas unknown can.
She requires higher skill expression. Has worse zoning.
Has pretty horrific information but better than unknown having none.Post edited by Rizzo on0 -
What I meant by better map pressure is that she can harass any gen on the map, whereas the unknown can't. Maybe map control is a better way of describing it.
Worse zoning? She literally renders loops useless by just placing one of her three crows.
She gives easy information. You can just fire some crows at some distant gens, if you don’t hit anyone, it’s relatively safe to assume there isn’t a survivor there, so you just eliminate 3 possible gens from needing to be patrolled and you can check the others now.
5 -
Optional features have sub-50% usage rates. When people were offered 50k BP a match (for 10 matches) for the wiggle skillchecks, they said it was somewhere from 40-50% usage IIRC. So even if we were worried about say, Nurses with a theoretical 100% ban rate, there are still 50% of the playerbase not even using the feature, so they'll still get lobbies. Also like you said, you dislike Wesker and still wouldn't ban him.
As far as the DC rates, negative extremes seems to be the primary driver. I keep advocating for things to get rid of negative extremes, like this Killer ban idea, map ban idea for Killers (so no Autohaven on Ghosty or indoor map on Huntress), surrender feature to replace a bleedout, or comeback mechanics (such as a lesser basekit NOED if 0 kills into endgame, or gen speed boosts on Survivor deaths). All of the negative extremes are what make normal people hate playing the game. I view the babyragequitters as an unfixable problem, but everyone else can be helped with these things I normally advocate for.
1 -
This is actually what a small, but vocal, minority of killer players want. They want to basically be playing a PVE game, because killer is supposed to be the power role.
3 -
I'll admit I only skimmed this, but:
Players who BM are always going to do that. They want you to take them seriously. You won fair and square, but you lingered at a hook for a second too long? Camper. You won fair and square, but you tunneled because they were bodyblocking? Tunneler. You lost? GG EZ Baby Killer.
The best thing you can do about these people is to not give them the satisfaction that they crave. They want to get a rise out of you.
Reducing the EGC timer won't make things better. Sure, it'd reduce teabagging in the exit gates, but it'd also reduce the time survivors have to make endgame saves. If survivors teabagging in the exit gates annoys you, force them out. A killer downs me and humps me, I laugh it off. It's not worth getting mad over.
0 -
Truth be told, the killer role has been fully playable and winnable for a very, VERY long time.
7 -
You have to keep in mind there's actually no such thing as a draw in the game. Draws require both sides to neither win or lose which is not possible in this game. Survivors aren't actually a "team". The game is set up to be 4 individual 1 v 1 situations going on simultaneously. That's why at the end of the survivor screen, there's no "survivors win". You, as a survivor, either survive or you don't - you personally either win or lose. There's no situation where the killer and a survivor neither win nor lose (except for server crashes, ha). That means a 2K is a loss, as you can't draw. Again, draws require all parties to neither win or lose. If 2 survivors escape, then that means 2 survivors lost, 2 survivors won, and the killer is stuck in a grey area where generally the community has agreed that a 3k+ is required for a win. With that thought process in mind, then the killer would lose in this situation. Even if you ignore the devs statement that the game is 4 individual 1 v 1's going on at once per match and assume that the survivors are together as a team, it still wouldn't be a draw, as again, a draw requires NO part has any wins or losses. You can't have the killer not win and the survivors partially win - that literally is against the definition of a draw. If the killer doesn't win, and the survivors even partially win, then clearly the survivors are the winners. Again though - that's only if you assume survivors are a team that wins together (which they aren't in DBD).
Now it's true that a 2K is considered MMR neutral, but MMR adjustments are historically not tied to win\loss conditions. MMR only cares about one thing - trying to balance the game. That's why in MMR systems (ie ranking systems), you can have situations where you can win but not go up in rank, or lose and not go down in rank - Chess is an example of this. It doesn't care if you win or lose, it cares about the balance of the whole system and tries to adjust accordingly to make future games more balanced. BHVR uses a very simple ranking system, so they decided to go with 0-1K can reduce your MMR (though not always - you do have a minimum threshold to prevent people from MMR dumping), 2K is neutral, and 3-4K can increase your MMR (up to the ceiling).
0 -
Hold on though, you can't swap the definition of wins and losses out arbitrarily.
If a survivor getting sacrificed is considered a loss for the survivor, then their opponent won. That means every time a survivor dies, the killer wins.
If the killer doesn't win, and the survivors even partially win
But you yourself stated that survivors don't 'partially win'. They either win or lose. So if you want to treat the game that way, a 2K is a net neutral for the killer, with two wins and two losses.
You can't call it a loss based on how 1v1's work because it's not a loss for the killer in that setting. It's two wins and two losses. What you're doing is swapping between two different perspectives on wins and losses in order to pick-and-choose whichever supports your argument.
There's a reason pretty much everyone agrees a 2K is a draw for the killer.
6 -
Reducing the EGC timer won't make things better. Sure, it'd reduce teabagging in the exit gates, but it'd also reduce the time survivors have to make endgame saves. If survivors teabagging in the exit gates annoys you, force them out.
Forcing tbaggers out gives them exactly the satisfaction they crave— they want a reaction from Killer, and they see the Killer coming over to the as that reaction, an opportunity to disrespect them further. I'm not giving them that satisfaction, but it leads to my time being wasted on waiting till the bunch of monkeys is done gloating. Also, Survivors usually make their saves in first two minutes of EGC and spend the rest milking the timer for the opportunity to BM, so I wouldn't say they use all four minutes wisely and only for useful things.
A killer downs me and humps me, I laugh it off. It's not worth getting mad over.
People can ignore BM for only so long. Nothing good ever happened of telling players to accommodate themselves to the toxicity rather than introduce in-game measures for limiting the said toxicity.
2 -
She is worse at zoning, she does not render loops useless by just placing crows. You do render loops useless as the unknown though, in two ways.
With crows you will actually have to see where you are shooting as well, have fun guessing blind corners on precise crows whereas I can just shoot the wall or the ground with Unknown and laugh. Or drop my image during chase around the loop and laugh some more.With crows I had to hit either a 1 send or a 2 send to even make the ranged hit happen, and even then it removes the effect after a hit; Unknown just… keeps the effect because that needs to happen for some stupid reason. Oh and around corners you dont have to worry about survivors losing their effect either as Unknown, as they cant look at you.
Yes shes worse at zoning by about a factor of 10 there.
She gives information congratz… theres 15 broken aura reading perks that do the same job and are better. Id rather have map traversal than crows that only temporarily show me someone on a generator. Her tracking is one of the worst in the game. Have fun with information on survivors not on a generator its a 100% guess on that one.
So yes, Unknown is a broken and braindead expression version of Artist.0 -
If you miss the shot after hitting them the first time to put the status on them they can break out by looking at you before you can fire another shot and have to put the status on again. It also has way more travel time on the projectile than Artist or Huntress so is harder to hit and easier to dodge.
2 -
Forcing tbaggers out doesn't give them the satisfaction they crave. How you react in the endgame chat gives them the satisfaction. Forcing them out means you're not wasting your time. They'll tbag until the timer is almost up, and what have you accomplished by not forcing them out other than wasting your own time? Nothing.
Survivors don't always make their saves in the first two minutes of EGC. Sometimes it takes a little longer.
You're not really accommodating toxic behavior so much as you are ignoring perceived toxic behavior. It isn't toxic to tbag. The survivors are gloating that they won, so what? The killer humping a survivor on the ground is gloating that they won the chase, so what? At the end of the day, it's just a game and getting worked up over a bunch of polygons and pixels isn't worth it.
The best thing you can do is report abusive chat, and move on. Tbagging and humping are not reportable offenses.
1 -
A single well placed crow can force survivors to abandon a loop. You can't just say "Unknown is a broken braindead version of the Artist" without understanding how she works.
The Artist requires prediction, timing, and map awareness to maximize her power. Survivors can’t just mindlessly hold W in loops when she’s nearby because placing a crow at a key spot forces them to either abandon the loop or get hit. A well-placed crow on a vault or a pallet completely changes how survivors must approach the chase, disrupting the usual looping mechanics and creating a real challenge for them.
Sure, the Unknown has more straightforward mechanics with his ranged attack and map traversal, but that doesn’t make the Artist inferior. The Unknown’s abilities are great for mobility and pressure, but the Artist excels at multi-tasking pressure—she can zone, track, and injure survivors all from a distance without physically needing to be in the same spot. This requires skill in managing her crows and prediction of survivor movement, something the Unknown’s abilities don’t offer.
Her playstyle offers much more depth in terms of map control and zoning, while Unknown is focused more on direct engagement and relentless pursuit. Both killers have their strengths, but the Artist is by no means inferior—her ability to disrupt loops with a single crow takes finesse and knowledge of survivor behavior.
1 -
Forcing tbaggers out doesn't give them the satisfaction they crave.
If that was true, tbaggers wouldn't spam noise notifications around the gate in an attempt to make the Killer come over. They specifically want the Killer to chase them out, so they could spit the Killer in the face — this is what makes the happy.
They'll tbag until the timer is almost up, and what have you accomplished by not forcing them out other than wasting your own time? Nothing.
I denied them the final opportunity to mock me and didn't give them what they want. At least I had that.
Survivors don't always make their saves in the first two minutes of EGC. Sometimes it takes a little longer
In my experience, survivors have plenty of opportunities to heal and get the save in the first minutes — the rest they spend on BM and disrespect. With current anti-camping measures and certain Killer powers no longer working near the hook, the save is quite easy.
It isn't toxic to tbag.
If it isn't toxic to tbag, then where are the examples of positive tbagging? When it's seen in a friendly light? The answer is never. Tbagging is seen as an attempt to insult other player.
At the end of the day, it's just a game and getting worked up over a bunch of polygons and pixels isn't worth it.
Would you keep coming to a place that is supposed to be recreational and meant for fun activities if there is constantly a group that is insanely competitive and keeps insulting people and loudly mocking them whenever they win at a board game? Would the answer "so what? don't pay attention" be enough?
1 -
- Anti-face camp doesn't work in EGC.
- Survivors spam loud noise notifications to annoy the killer
- You didn't deny them the final opportunity to mock you. You wasted your time, and only encouraged the behaviour.
- In my experience, someone usually opens the gate while someone's still hooked and the killer is camping because what else are they supposed to do?
- Tbagging is neither toxic, nor is it positive.
Your analogy doesn't really work, because the reason people do this is because they're protected by online anonymity. It emboldens them.
The only actual toxic thing they're doing is abusing their opponent in the endgame chat, which you can turn off.
4 -
Anti-face camp doesn't work in EGC.
Killer powers still don't work near hooks even during EGC. Also, Survivors usually 99% gates, so they could go for the save, and then open the gates in one click, so they have even more time than 4 minutes.
In my experience, someone usually opens the gate while someone's still hooked and the killer is camping because what else are they supposed to do?
Survivors usually capitalize on the fact that the Killer can land only one hit on them — they go for the unhooked Survivor, that Survivor blocks them with an afterhook BT and they manage both get to the gate.
You didn't deny them the final opportunity to mock you. You wasted your time, and only encouraged the behaviour.
How coming over to the gate and watching the survivors tbag discourages their behavior?
Survivors spam loud noise notifications to annoy the killer
And to make the Killer come to the gates. Coming over in that case gives them the satisfaction because they know the Killer gave in to their mockery.
Tbagging is neither toxic, nor is it positive.
If that was true, tbagging wouldn't have been so frequent. There is a negative and disrespectful connotation behind the gesture.
Your analogy doesn't really work, because the reason people do this is because they're protected by online anonymity. It emboldens them.
Why? These people are just having fun, why are their actions different when they're in a public place instead of an online game? Why suddenly sucking it up and accommodating them is no longer an option?
1 -
I do agree with you that you could implement a catch-up mechanic, especially if a survivor was tunneled out to put pressure on gens.
Some of the other changes would have to be tested, such as the surrender to bleed out option to prevent people from simply running into the killer and forcing a surrender to find an ez way to avoid a DC penalty. I don't think I would agree with a basekit NOED at the end game though. I do sympathize with people who go into end game with no kills, but at the same time I don't think adding basekit perks into a game to make the game easier for another side because they were unable to get a kill.
I can use myself as an example — I struggle with Deathslinger and that's a skill issue on my part. I don't like how slow his ADS is and it's something that people need to master to get better with him. With your proposed change, I could find a survivor out of position, basekit NOED them, hook them far away from the exit gates, and facecamp them. There is no counterplay to this at all, which is the issue. If someone attempts to trade, I can NOED them as they're touching her. If she somehow gets off the hook, I can use my harpoon gun to catch people, doesn't even have to be the survivor in question — and basekit NOED them doing the same thing. Just because I've had a game where I struggled with kills as Deathslinger, doesn't mean that I want kills handed to me and it wouldn't help me improve at getting better with the killer if I can pull off unsavory tactics like I've mentioned. The survivors have no counterplay to getting this survivor off of hook, someone comes to the rescue I can basekit NOED the person saving, while still preventing the trade as she's so far away from the exit gates causing my 0k to become multiple kills at that rate. Additionally, I could even apply more pressure by actively choosing to slug the survivors in this situation as well.
A killer ban would be harder to implement — in my case, let's say I ban Wesker from my games. Do I get other killers that I can also ban? Do I get three options? Even if it was implemented, my choices could affect my MMR rating and affect queue times, we need to take this in consideration as well.
1 -
You really can't compare random games to a 1v1 tournament style level of match. 😂
These people actively make it their jobs to proactively get better by having other skilled players to verse in a private match. These people more than often (I'll use Doc as an example from Elysium) even with his high leveled form of play, he also utilizes a red filter to allow him to see the killer's red stain which helps him loop for longer and not fall for mindgames as easily. These people also play in stacked lobbies where they play SWF and I believe they hardly if ever play solo-queue by themselves.
I had an almost 2 minute chase against an Artist the other day, does this mean that all survivors can pull off chaining multiple loops in succession easily? It all depends on the killer in question. Does the killer have counterplay to being looped? Does the killer have the ability to zone the survivor successfully? I do not consider myself to be a DBD comp player and we should not compare high level gameplay to regular queue times of a match. 💀
0 -
A single well placed crow … a single not even hard to place aoe shot from Unknown will force you from a loop. And if you linger there too long, guess what drops on the ground? So yes Unknown is a braindead version of the Artist. With a get out of jail free card.
The Artist requires all of that. Unknown doesnt, and is rewarded too heavily for any room for counterplay. Doesnt remove the effect after a damaging hit, but even RESETS the effect. After hook can just teleport somewhere, even cross map. Can close down loops in 2 separate ways.
Unknown is a braindead, broken version, of Artist.
Artist is picked half as much as Unknown she is down with Freddy in terms of pick rate, thats really all that needs to be said. She is inferior on every level. Because, much like the nurses kill rate shows 3 times now, the majority of killer players that play this game lack skill.If you miss a shot with unknown on a loop then hate to break it to you hang up your skill towel, you dont have any. Its a very hard skill to miss on loops. Comparative to having to be precise AS WELL AS using a 1 or 2 crow with little time on Artist its not even in the same realm.
Or you can just drop your image as well after so long on a loop, you get a get out of jail free card if you cant manage to hit an aoe ranged ability, and m1. But to suggest artist around a loop is more dangerous is over representing something that is picked TWICE LESS than the unknown. For a very good reason.0 -
Amongst many reasons:
- Lack of ability of the player, combined with being unable to accept their ability may not be as good as they believe it to be.
- Exaggeration of how many times something has happened, when in reality it's far less, combined with frustration.
- To troll and gain comments and likes from heated discussions.
- The current MMR state, and how it can unfairly throw people into trials against opponents who are very much more experienced and skilled.
- Not learning to play the game to gain experience; instead just wanting quick, easy wins, which ends up with those players facing significantly better players much too soon.
- A singular bad experience, which is sufficiently frustrating enough for them to need to rant.
- Influencer bias.
Probably many more besides, and this isn't a Killer problem; this is an issue which depends on the external variants impacting on an individual's ability to cope with what is thrown at them. Hence why you do get some rather venomous spouting on various forums, but also more noticeably the distinctly few discussions created, when compared to how many people play this game.
2 -
I think people are already Kobing on hook so this wouldn't add a new avenue for game sabotage that doesn't already exist. Also, it would likely be locked behind conditions like 1m+ on the floor, or max recovery, or at least 1 Surv is also dead. I think 1m+ on the floor (total) would be enough that it wouldn't be abused at a greater rate than current Kobes are.
(Link provided for clarity, any readers don't res the dead thread there)
My full basekit NOED idea was a lesser NOED, such that you only get the Exposed, and you only get Exposed as long as no one is dead/dying. Hooks count as dying, so they aren't exposed once you get your down or your hook. Then if the Killer facecamps and the person gets unhooked, the exposed returns, so the onus is on the Survivors to either cleanse, or buy time with a trade for a cleanse. 'Lesser' was the word carrying the heavy lifting here that I didn't fully explain, so I can understand the rest of the theoretical/taking issue with the idea.
Killer bans I start with 1 slot per 5 Killers released (round down), so at 39 Killers you get 7, and at 40 you get 8. I also suggest 'previous Killer' for any number of the slots (with the default option being 1 previous Killer, and the rest are blank). For SWF, the leader determines everyone's ban list, and for solo it would function as normal.
As far as MMR being impacted, I think we all would agree that if everyone brought a BNP every match, their MMR would be impacted, but they currently can still do so. Same with a Syringe. Same with a Killer player being carried by a strong Killer choice, and not their skill itself. In a sense, we already have this Survivor facing specific Killer MMR problem, because we don't have Survivor MMR against each Killer. For example I might suck against Plague, but am a juice-lord against Oni or Chucky. Alternatively I could be garbage against Wraith specifically, but have no problems against all the better Killers than him. This would provide more accurate MMR for people using consistent ban lists.
As far as queue times, as I've said, less than half of people use optional features, so they would be minimally affected. That being said, it would still impact them. To counteract this I'd suggest a 50% and 25% BP bonus for the 5 and 10 least banned Killers respectively. This would also use the previous Killer ban list, so that Killer players can know which were played too often also. If one Killer is permabanned, that shows an obvious design flaw that the Killer is so garbage to play against, that no one wants to deal with them. These are the matches where we currently get (even normal, not only babyragequit) people DCing on first sight of the Killer. Since that was a dead match from the start, it prevents a dead match from ever occurring. I don't know about you, but waiting 5 minutes just to have a teammate DC because it is a Skull Merchant means I now have to wait another 5 minutes for a 'real' match, but I also have to wait for her to actually kill us too, adding who knows how much longer to my 'true queue' time.
0 -
A single not even hard to place aoe shot from Unknown will force you from a loop.
This is just not true. You are over representing the Unknown's power to make him seem a lot stronger than he actually is.
And if you linger there too long, guess what drops on the ground?
The unknown can drop clones at loops, but Artist can drop crows at loops and effectively forces survivors to leave them. What's your point exactly?
Artist is picked half as much as Unknown she is down with Freddy in terms of pick rate, thats really all that needs to be said.
This could be due to a variety of reasons, but imo Artist is not played often because of boring or clunky gameplay and relatively high skill floor to use properly.
She is inferior on every level.
She's not. I've already proved how she's better in almost every way.
Because, much like the nurses kill rate shows 3 times now, the majority of killer players that play this game lack skill.
Irrelevant.
3 -
For both survivor and killer, my understanding has always been that a 2k is a draw. Survivors are primarily trying to survive; 2 succeeded and 2 failed. Killers are primarily trying to kill; they killed 2 and didn't kill 2. Both sides accomplished exactly half of their goal. That couldn't be more of a draw and therefore seems perfectly symmetrical as an outcome.
Given that draws ostensibly exist, it makes no sense to me to assert that killers should outright win 50% of matches. Neither side should win 50% of matches, as survivors should win as often as killers do and ties should be relatively frequent. That would be a game balanced such that neither side has the advantage. Balancing around a 60% kill rate implies, as others have said, that the game is currently being balanced to be killer sided.
I am not opining on whether this is a good or bad thing - I do think there's something to be said for making killers intimidating, and I think losing feels way more soul crushing as killer - but I have to call it like it is.
2 -
This could be due to a variety of reasons, but imo Artist is not played often because of boring or clunky gameplay and relatively high skill floor to use properly.
What I have been saying all along. As Unknown is not, his skill floor is low, too low, and then ceiling is higher than Artist.
This is just not true. You are over representing the Unknown's power to make him seem a lot stronger than he actually is.
Stay at the loop and get hit UVX, or stay at the loop and get an image.
Artist has one tool and has to be precise, Unknown has 2 and does not need to be even close to the same magnitude of precise. You can shoot a wall or the ground. Artist you have to wait for them to cross the crows path.The unknown can drop clones at loops, but Artist can drop crows at loops and effectively forces survivors to leave them. What's your point exactly?
You can outplay crows at loops, specifically ones with blind corners and stay in the loop. Unknown eventually will drop an image and you just die. She has a single way to down you around a loop with crows.
Unknown has 2 ways.She's not. I've already proved how she's better in almost every way.
If by prove you mean denying data and actual skills available to both sure. You have proven not understanding either killer.
Because, much like the nurses kill rate shows 3 times now, the majority of killer players that play this game lack skill.
Relevant when you look at her pick rate versus unknown, TWICE as less. This is why her pick rate is so low, because just like nurses kill rate 3 times in a row DESPITE BEING, the strongest killer in the game. She is picked low and has terrible kill rates.
Aka majority of killers lack skill. Not saying you specifically I dont know your gameplay.
This is why Unknown is a broken and braindead version of Artist. You can refute data that's fine though, you can have that opinion.0 -
There are multiple people trying to boil it down to 4 1v1s but that is not at all how the game is played. This is 100% a team game. Almost no survivor would say they won if they were the only person to survive a 3k, for example, and survivors will seldom win in the first place if they don't respond to the needs of their team.
2k is a draw for both sides. 3k+ is required for a win as killer. 1k- is required for a win as survivor.
There is no explicit win condition set by the game, but this definition is based only on the following:
- DBD is a team game.
- The killer's primary objective is to kill survivors.
- The survivors' primary objective is to survive.
Even if you would die on the hill of agreeing with the first bullet, though, if you're assessing game balance, it only makes sense to weight each 1v1 equally. Two wins and two losses is functionally the same as a draw. You are .500, average, directly in the middle between the best and worst possible outcome. The same is true for the killer, who is between obvious win (3k+) and obvious lose (1k-) conditions and who has completed exactly half of their primary objective.
Please link where the devs say DBD is 4 individual 1v1s, because that sounds like it's being taken out of context. I could see them saying this while explaining how SBMM is implemented rather than describing how the survivor role is played. It's a hard argument to make, even for solo queue, that DBD is not a team game.
2 -
You can outplay crows at loops, specifically ones with blind corners and stay in the loop.
The artist places a crow at a loop. If I go one way, I get downed, and if I go the other way, I also get downed, if I leave the loop, I get downed. Tell me what exactly is the counterplay here? If you think there is any, you have proven not understanding the artist. At least you can actually loop the unknown.
Artist has one tool and has to be precise, Unknown has 2 and does not need to be even close to the same magnitude of precise. You can shoot a wall or the ground. Artist you have to wait for them to cross the crows path.
Just because Unknown is easier to play than Artist doesn't make him better.
If by prove you mean denying data and actual skills available to both sure. You have proven not understanding either killer.
I have proven that Artist has better zoning, map control, and information than Unknown.
If you think Unknown is OP that's a massive skill issue. He's low A tier, but not too strong at all.
3 -
- There are very few killer powers that don't work near a hooked survivor.
- Survivors 99 the gates in case they need to do an endgame rescue. This is common knowledge, but there are also players who only care about whether or not they themselves escape.
- In any game that allows it, players will tbag. It's funny to them. It's not something to get mad about. It's annoying, sure, but at the end of the day it's ultimately meaningless and not worth getting triggered over.
- Imagine you play a board game with a group of friends, but one person is always super toxic. They get upset when they lose, and make excuses for their loss. When they win, they gloat and insult the rest of the group. What do you think happens? The group decides that, from now on, they're not going to include that person anymore. This actively discourages that sort of behavior.
- Online anonymity emboldens people to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. The benefit of online anonymity is that, so long as you aren't breaking the rules, you are only answerable to yourself.
- By not forcing them out, you're only encouraging their behaviour. The more of your time they waste, the more they enjoy it.
The only reportable thing is abusive chat, and that's something you can turn off. Not everyone was raised to practice good sportsmanship. If I enjoyed a match, I'll approach the killer in the exit gates, drop my item at their feet and leave.
All the changes in the world won't stop poor sportsmanship.
1 -
Because, generally, when people talk about the balance of a game they usually mean how the game preforms when everyone involved is actually good at the game.
In that environment it's a pretty agreed upon that only a handful of killers can even compete and the majority are dead in the water.
There's also a problem that when someone or something says "killer" that includes every character from Nurse to Trapper which have 2 very different performances in games with good players. Almost no one would argue Nurse is dummy strong but other killers are generally regarded as needing buffs. Saying "Killer is OP" and someone thinking you're talking about Trapper and Pig level and someone thinking about Nurse and Spirit level are 2 different things.
So you could say survivor favored because most killers cant do much and be correct and also say killer favored because the ones that can are a a little ridiculous and also played the most by a lot. Hence the problem high MMR players have with extremely stale killer pools of like 3 killers.
However in the scope of the overall game or lower skill levels, which includes the many more who are not that good at the game (most players), all those killers become killer a lot more viable.
But then we have a conflicting standard with killers like Nurse where in average hands she's horrible. Those who say make the game better for the average player is usually against buffing killers that the average person struggles on. In my experience at least. So it feels like many of those people (not all or maybe even most) want to balance for average/bad survivors but good killer players. Which leads to friction.
Something else that needs to always be remembered in these types of conversations is that there a lot of conflict/differences in the way the devs think and the ways most players think in regards to winning. As we can see with the huge killrate/winrate debacle as well as the way MMR handles survivors in particular.
The devs still leave the question of "what is a win" kinda in the air as a "well it depends on the player", but have decided to balance around a 60% killrate. They have also decided to count the match as 4 separate 1v1's instead of a 1v4 like the vast majority of the community does.
Yes even that peanits post stated that "well it depends on the player" before someone brings it up. As it is, it seems the devs don't generally consider anything as a definitive win condition for the game to even have a winrate, but they have a goal killrate that they go for.
2 -
Yea I mean you are free to believe whatever you want on Artist and Unknown im not here trying to take your opinion on them, even when those opinions are at odds about what is known of both killers. You are free to your opinions. Maybe you dont want your killer (Unknown) nerfed? I cant say, I dont know how and what you play.
Fact of the matter is though, when we match up what we know about each power there is a clear winner, and its Unknown.
It only gets worse for Artist when we look at pick and kill rate data on these as well, and its a clear standout. You have one killer at 64% kill rate, and the other at 58-60%. And pick rates of 2.5 vs 1.3.
And we didnt even talk about maps with elevation, against Artist if you lose on anything thats not Autohaven or Coldwind, welp those are some of the worse survivors in the world. She essentially becomes powerless on any map with elevation difference, or large stairs.
So again, its a braindead version of Artist. Broken for several reasons as discussed above. There clearly needs to be work done on him to bring him more in line with whats reasonable for killers. But let me just state again you are free to believe or have opinions on things, even if they are completely opposite of Data, and powers, about both killers. It shows a lack of understanding when faced with facts but thats okay, its an open and free discussion.Hope this helps clear up some of your confusion.
Post edited by ChuckingWong on0 -
I think you're over-relying on kill rates and pick rates to make your argument. While those stats provide some insight, they don’t tell the full story. A killer having a higher pick or kill rate doesn’t necessarily mean they're outright better in every aspect. Ease of use plays a huge role in those numbers. The Unknnown is an easier killer to use effectively, which naturally results in higher kill rates, but that doesn’t make him a better killer overall. The Artist, with her more complex abilities, has a higher skill ceiling and rewards those who take the time to master her.
Regarding your point about loops, while the Unknown can drop a clone to disrupt loops, it’s nowhere near as oppressive as the Artist's ability to deny loops outright with well-placed crows. As I mentioned earlier, a single crow can force survivors to abandon a loop, and it requires far more skill and precision to pull off than just dropping a clone. The Artist excels at creating scenarios where survivors are forced into bad decisions, which is a big part of her strength.
You also dismiss her zoning and information-gathering abilities, which are crucial to her playstyle. Yes, there are aura-reading perks, but those are limited and often situational. The Artist provides consistent information about survivor positions, even across the map, allowing you to control the flow of the match in ways that perks alone can’t replicate.
Just because the Unknown is simpler to use doesn't make him stronger. In fact, the Artist's higher skill requirement is what makes her so effective in the hands of a skilled player. The Unknown may seem stronger to less experienced players, but in high-level play, that complexity and ability to outplay survivors is what makes the Artist shine.
Finally, assuming that I'm defending the Unknown to avoid a nerf is a bit off-base. My focus here is on actual gameplay mechanics and strategic depth, not personal bias. Let’s stick to the facts: the Artist has better loop control, better zoning, and offers far more strategic options for skilled players. The fact that she’s harder to master doesn’t make her worse.
1 -
simple to say, even though killrates are near the perfect state (60% on average = 50% winrate), nonexistent MMR is basically what gives the illusion of good balance because even these killrates are massively inflated by player related factors.
0 -
60% kill rate =/= 50% winrate, it's much higher than 50%.
3 -
5 outcomes of the match (0,1,2,3,4K), each outcome counts itself as 20%. 60% average killrate equals to 2k on average, which is a tie on killer side. Literally basic percentages and maths lol.
0 -
Except the outcomes are not evenly distributed at all, with 2Ks, for example, taking up a significantly smaller proportion across the board.
Your model assumes totally equal chances of every outcome when the game's mechanisms aren't just sheer 100% RNG. DBD doesn't work like that. You can't apply 'basic percentages and maths' to a complex problem.
6 -
well, if we wanna talk about RNG, there is one 4% RNG that affects matches more than all other kinds of RNGs combined lol. The one that is inflating killrates so much that if it was excluded from stats and actual optimal matches were taken into consideration, killrates would be extremely lower
2 -
That's a complete change of subject and you know it. It's not even subtle.
It's entirely irrelevant to your erroneous claim of 60% killrate = 50% winrate.
5 -
one could also arguing that the longer survivors stay in the map after the last gen is done the worse is the play, even if that means that they are trying to save someone.
That invalidates the argument though. If they're trying to get an extra save, then it's not universally a 'worse play' to stick around.
I always wonder why people pop last gen if someone is on the hook, this will most likely cause the killer to camp the hook, making a rescue harder. Why not just save and then pop the gen.
Most killers will probably not make much of a distinction between a gen that's about to pop and one that has already popped and will just start doing an EGC kill secure camp even if the gen hasn't popped yet, but in case they don't, if you get the save but you can't finish the gen because it's being defended, that could end up being more costly.
4 -
I mean, that's an oversimplification. If someone takes the last chase that clears the final two gens, is that a bad play just because the killer camps them out after?
5 -
The hooked person is usually in chase as the last gen pops. Just bad timing.
4 -
I have a different solution. EGC ticks down faster the longer survivors remain within a certain proximity of an open exit gate. x1 per survivor, up to a total of 4x.
6 -
Absolutely.
1 -
This. All of this. Hit the nail on the head.
3 -
I have a lot of fun with this game...most of the time. But this, absolutely.
DbD has to have one of the most awful player bases I have ever had the displeasure of interacting with. I play killer and survivor, and while both sides will complain that the game is killer sided or survivor sided, I've definitely noticed that killer mains are the worst between the two.
Heck, killers, in general, seem worse. Rarely will I play killer and run into jerkish survivors, but I'm lucky if I can go a game without it just being slugging and tunneling anymore.
5 -
Gotta love how quotes suddenly isn't working, lmao.
1 -
Homie that's on the killer choosing to stay in chase for that long. That's not the game being 'survivor sided', that's a killer being a bad killer.
One of the most important things about killer is knowing when to drop chase.
3 -
The thing is, at least from my experience, these days surviving isn't hard because a killer is good, but because the killer is using the cheapest, most boring play styles.
Before taking a break, because I was no longer having fun and people should do that when such a thing happened (something the players of this game seem to not understand, but that's off topic) my friends and I were getting slugged. Immediately. Multiple games in a row.
And then left to bleed out.
No hooking. No chasing. No gens. Just left there for multiple minutes. And after reaching out to other friends to ask around, this seems to be the newest trend in killers.
And when stuff like this happens so often it seems to be a known trend and Behavior does diddly all and then salty killers have the gall to call the game survivor sided, it's...laughable. Add to the fact we now have statistics saying otherwise, and...yeah.
5 -
Because you brought up plague, I also think that Behavior should implement a killer blacklist.
I do have a friend who DCs whenever she gets a Plague, because she's very squeamish to vomit. She handles other killers fine, but get her in a match with Plague and she genuinely cannot deal with it. I think implementing a blacklist for killers (limited though) would actually deal with a decent amount of DCs.
2 -
i am changing the subject because i said that even 60% killrate is overinflated because goal is to balance the game revolving around the current barely existing MMR system with maths saying flat 60% KR = 50% WR? I guess it wouldn't be relevant to balance e.g. League of Legends around 50% WR per champ because every match can be RNG based due to champ pick order lol.
1 -
That I think is the consequence of us having way too many chase oriented killers in the game. It was fine in the past, but now if we look at it there are a lot of characters focused in the "1v1" aspect of the game, and few who are focused in the "1v4".
Killers like Old Freddy, Singularity, Old Doctor and even Myers are extremely important for the game because they teach you things like when to drop chase, when to go for each survivor and how to control the map. I think some killer players these days are hesitant to drop chases because they are used to characters whose only power is ending chases quickly.
That doesn't mean killers who played the characters I mentioned would never commit to a chase, it only means they are more likely to know when to drop it.
5