Why do killers think this game is survivior sided?

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

• 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.

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.

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. 💀

Amongst many reasons:

1. 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.
2. Exaggeration of how many times something has happened, when in reality it's far less, combined with frustration.
3. To troll and gain comments and likes from heated discussions.
4. The current MMR state, and how it can unfairly throw people into trials against opponents who are very much more experienced and skilled.
5. 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.
6. A singular bad experience, which is sufficiently frustrating enough for them to need to rant.
7. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

60% kill rate =/= 50% winrate, it's much higher than 50%.

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.

I cut you short in my last replay, something came up irl.

Ill try to give a better reply now.

Unless there are only 2 people left in the game, thats an invalid argument, 1 can stay at the gen and 1-2 (depending on remaining survivors) can go for the save.

Can we agree that a team that gets 4 hooks are playing worse than a team that gets 1 hook? (same game but different teams)

Absolutely.

This. All of this. Hit the nail on the head.

I would not say that the forum is killer sided, i often post both for killers and survivors as i play both sides, and i want the game to be fair for both sides. And i feel i get more resistance from the forum when i argue in the killers favor, and not by a little.

And tbh.. this "us vs them" is bad for us all.