We have temporarily disabled The Houndmaster (Bone Chill Event queue) and Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

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
The Dead by Daylight team would like your feedback in a Player Satisfaction survey.

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!

Proof that 60% kill rate is to much

cclain
cclain Member Posts: 111
edited October 16 in Feedback and Suggestions

I make 40 game example
In this example you have 16 different survivor player and 10 different killer player.

Every survivor will play against 10 killer and every killer in my example will trial against all survivors.

a kill is = 0
a escape = 1
so for example the first killer have 2 win and 2 draws in 4 games → total to 58% kill rate
As you can see on the right, every killer is around 60 % kill rate and the average kill rate is 60%

But not every survivor has 40% escape rate and not a single survivor has an escape rate greater than 40%

we have :
- 4 survivor at 20% escape rate
- 8 survivor ar 30%
- 4 survivor at 40%
for an average 30% escape rate

This does not take into account the hatch which is not a victory on the survivor side but a tie

That's why 60% kill rate is a scam for survivor. 25 % of my sample can escape 4 of 10 games and 75% of my sample feel miserable

Post edited by Rizzo on

Comments

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111

    a sample is not realistic by number but by a gaussian curve were my sample can represent 97% of the current population ( thats not the case for me you are right)

    the point here is 60% kill rate for 10 killer isnt a 40% escape rate for survivor.

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111

    You make a point on something , we dont know when we launch a game if survivor are here just for challenge or for trying to win.

    But its a 4v1 game , so valide challenge only if survivor win
    Or
    Let survivor strong enought to 1V1 killer to not depend on your mate

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111

    i'm ok with that, so add the win as a condition for challenge in tome archive

  • Unequalmitten86
    Unequalmitten86 Member Posts: 331

    The biggest thing is that BHVR has said a 1K is considered a win. You have killers hard pressed for the 4K thinking that's a win that they will tunnel, camp, and slug. Not only that you have content creators showing how easy it is on win streaks and face camping to get the kill or mori. The thing is kill ratesat a 4K all the time should be 50%, with 4 survivor escape rate.

    It really comes down to player mentality and why they strive so hard for that 4K only to climb the ranks and get outplayed they complain. Some players are so used to content creating showing them this is how your supposed to play but in reality it's a learning curve and you need to figure it out for yourself.

  • NarkoTri1er
    NarkoTri1er Member Posts: 660

    people don't realize how flawed MMR system is, so hitting soft MMR deceives them into thinking "ohh, i am playing against very sweaty players, i'm at high MMR now" while not realizing they are actually playing against people of similar low-mid range skill of opponents.

    This is one of the reasons why they think "omg i'm so good" when they 4k in matches like these, but somehow the opponent is "sweaty and toxic" when they lose.

  • Rokku_Rorru
    Rokku_Rorru Member Posts: 1,331

    idk, I played killer more back then as there was actually reason to BP's wise, with BBQ etc. Plus killers would probably get more bonus in general too with the new incentives.

    even 55 percent as an aim at first would be a good middle ground honestly.

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111

    yes 55% kill rate sound pretty fair to play against

    Maybe with a ranked mod like LOL that could be better because.
    I mean, if you win as a team, more people will tend to try to survive or give as much time as they can to other survivor.
    moreover, if i am tunel but all team do gen maybe i can " win" as team and win some mmr, so even if my escape rate dont increase, my winrate increase wich will be felt less frustrating

  • CleanseThis
    CleanseThis Member Posts: 175
    edited October 16

    While I agree to an extent that's not really true. Crime statistics don't account for A LOT of things but an inference is made based off what is available and relevant.

  • Ohyakno
    Ohyakno Member Posts: 1,206

    What are you talking about? What does making survivor feel worse to play mean? It's so abstract.

  • Akumakaji
    Akumakaji Member Posts: 5,487

    Yesterday I played such an exeptionally good group and I could only eek out a draw with much, much sweating. This was one of this fabled eye to eye games, I guess, and I wouldn't want to do it every time I play, thank you very much. This is the kind of scenario that is utterly terrifying, to only play this kinda games all day, every day. Its why a strict MMR would be devastating. I feel that the 2K/2E matches are the worst: both sides sweat like mad, no one is the clear winner, both feel like they should have won :D

    But on the lower end, players also need to have a feeling of hope and that they have some chance of winning. DBD is so schizophrenic: on one hand it dumbs down skill expression and emphases handholding in many scenarios, on the other hand it has no come-back mechanic whatsoever and most games quickly snowball into one direction or the other. Apparently people hate the idea of comeback mechanics, because "hur dur why should I be punished for playing good?" or even better "why should THEY be rewarded for playing badly?"

    The Blue Shell in Mario Cart sometimes feels aweful: the guy on top gets hit by an unavoidable big missile and can easily spiral out of control and land in 8th place without anything they could do and thats not good. But if DBD had some sort of game director AI that discretely eats a coupld of pallets when we got 4 gens done with 2 hooks, or that spawns a medkit in the corner the survivor is hiding in, wouldn't that be okay?

  • Akumakaji
    Akumakaji Member Posts: 5,487

    Having tunneling and slugging being the de-facto way of playing killers these days. I talked a lot about this these last coupld of days, but since update 6.1 pulled the rug and safety net away from under the survivors feet and thaught many of them to do better or die, gen efficency spread like wildfire. Before you had a chase, downed someone and hooked them, while somewhere a gen was done. You got into another chase, hooked, another gen was done. Now the playingfield got smaller and things heated up. But since 6.1 many survivors wisend up to splitting up and pressuring all the gens at once, which is why you got this scenarios where the killer gets their first down and bing bing bing three gens pop and the killer is instantly backed against the wall.

    This co-evolution of efficiency over fun lead to gen rushing and kill rushing, both sides feeling (somewhat rightly) that they have no time for fun or playfullness, but have to push their objective to the max. And now both sides are lean, mean killing/surviving machines without any fat to them. With the genie out of the bottel we will never go back to the more fun and playful DBD area, unless its somewhat enforced and supported by game mechanics. pre-6.1 survivors fooled around, opened chests, became bone hunters, because they didn't feel pressured to do so and could effort to do so. Nowadays its "push gens or perish" leading to this 10min games.

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111

    I mean , your right.
    But maybe someting like give DS and OTR base line for all survivor ( so prevent killer to tunel)
    Give unbreakable base line ( to prevent slug)

    Now , thats can't stay like this or nobody gonna play killer

    up kick on gen
    up time on generator ( but reduce penalty if we are many on one gen) so survivor stop spread on gen and do only one.
    With one chase killer should see one generator pop and not 3 at begining of the game.

    a generator need 90 sec without addon/perk/other survivor and a median chase is 60 sec

    maybe up to 120 sec a gen so , we need to group as survivor on generator to be sure we did one during a chase

    I don't know if I didn't buff so much survivor, we need PTR to test, but something with more time on gen and less on slug / tunnel would be healthier for the game

  • Akumakaji
    Akumakaji Member Posts: 5,487

    See, balancing is a delicate thing. Players were already in arms when the gen time was uped from 80 to 90s, if gen time where at base 120s the player base would be up the walls and full on rioting.

    Same with base DH and Unbreakable. Why must everything be basekit? If a perk is worth having in your kit, then equip it, why dilute the variety and further and cement the meta in concrete, because the survivors can have everything they want without any disadvantages?

  • cclain
    cclain Member Posts: 111
    edited October 16

    basekit prevent sluging and tunel because its not worth anymore.
    I mean now every killer i play against have 2 aura perk and see every survivor every second of the match what's the counter play ? distortion ?? no its a garbage perk now

    edit : i give perk basekit to survivor but i give them 30% more time need on gend to + better kick to killer

    Post edited by cclain on
  • ratcoffee
    ratcoffee Member Posts: 1,593
    edited October 17

    You're right, if gens went to 120 seconds, killer queues would go to 10-15 minutes