Proof that 60% kill rate is to much
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
Comments
-
That sample size is beyond irrelevant in proving anything at all. Minimums for sample sizes are 100, but realistically its way more than that to determine any kind of real result. (Like 1000+)
Anyway BHVR have already said its an average not a guarantee because there's so many factors that will influence the game. There's also absolutely zero data from you from each game to go off of. Were there any people giving up? Doing challenges and losing because of it? etc etc etc. There's more goals than killing and escaping that influence how people play the game. You will never get an accurate result because you can't account for every variable.
22 -
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.1 -
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 mate1 -
The game is 4v1, you can never have 1 of the 4 be as strong as the side who only has 1
11 -
i'm ok with that, so add the win as a condition for challenge in tome archive
0 -
I made a similar comparison a while ago showing probabilities of survivor loss streaks as kill rates increase. I suspect at least some correlation between loss streaks and survivors giving up on hook, as losing every match over a 1-2 hour play session leads to frustration and burn out. 50% was far healthier.
12 -
Nobody wanted to play killer when kill rates were lower. Some people are only going to be happy if we get to the point where playing killer is so miserable that the devs are forced to use killer bots in public matches.
Post edited by I_Cant_Loop on12 -
I don't think 60% kill rate is terrible for the game, but I strongly disagree with the methods used to get there. Making survivor feel worse to play so kill rates will go up isn't a good solution.
And if this was the only way to do it, then it wasn't worth it.
11 -
The problem is: A killer could alternate between 2Ks and 3Ks and have an "acceptable" 62.5% killrate, never once suffering a major loss.
But if you die as Survivor, it feels like like a 20-0 blowout, and in this "acceptable" scenario, that's happening for the MAJORITY of the playerbase.
10 -
As a reminder that this is the only game in existence, with MMR that killers can go on long winstreaks without ever losing. Many years of nothing but one sided balancing around horrible skilled killers while expecting survivors to play 100 percent perfectly without any mistakes. Doing gens, looping perfectly, hoping killers will make mistakes. I think the biggest problem that ruined the game is removing skill expression completely from the game so bad killers can win. This is not something you should see in games with MMR, especially. 60% is also not counting disconnections so we know for sure killrates are much higher than advertised.
9 -
I'm in agreement with @GeneralV . I'm fine with a 60% kill rate but not if it's accomplished by diminishing the enjoyment of another substantially sized group of players. If I'm going to lose more than I win as survivor then at least make the matches enjoyable.
8 -
50% kill rate is a too low tbh when a killer reach usually under 52% kill rate they tent to lose more game than survivors (im not a killer main btw just clarifying i play both sides) usually around 55% killrate killers on average still have a 8% winrate over survivors so if the balance was around 52 to 55% killrate on average that game would be way less volatile the top tier will prob be around 60% back like old days and that's ok currently the high tiers killers are so high from 65% to almost 70% killrates it's too much extreme
5 -
As a reminder that this is the only game in existence, with MMR that killers can go on long winstreaks without ever losing.
As a reminder, also goes for the survivor side. If you are a very good survivor player with a very good SWF team with you you can do exactly the same thing, not to mention that winstreaks killer wise, there are less than 5 players in whole DbD community that actually managed huge streaks thanks to enormous macro and micro gameplay knowledge gained from playing all sorts of tournaments outside of pub matchmaking. And no, DbD is not the only game with winstreaks. But MMR in other games is way better unlike in dbd, where very skilled killer can go against team with 1+ baby survivor, or very skilled survivor team can go against baby killer. But hey, quick lobbies over accurate ones, right?
Many years of nothing but one sided balancing around horrible skilled killers while expecting survivors to play 100 percent perfectly without any mistakes
this game is literally balanced around terrible players from both sides.
I think the biggest problem that ruined the game is removing skill expression completely from the game so bad killers can win.
completely removing skill expression? I wonder who is the one who called any kind of skill expression "exploiting" so that we can see both sides being dumbed down more and more. And please stop with that hardcore us vs. them stuff.
This is not something you should see in games with MMR, especially.
again, MMR is in terrible state thanks to people who constantly complained about lobbies because they weren't instant, but the same people nowadays keep saying "akshually, we never needed MMR, this is a party game". Community is fully the one to blame.
60% is also not counting disconnections so we know for sure killrates are much higher than advertised.
60% is counting going next on hook and griefing, both of which tremendously inflate killrates.
9 -
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.
2 -
Yeah, I will just leave this here as an alternative…
3 -
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.
4 -
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.2 -
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 frustrating0 -
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.
0 -
What are you talking about? What does making survivor feel worse to play mean? It's so abstract.
0 -
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?
1 -
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.
1 -
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 game0 -
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?
2 -
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 killerPost edited by cclain on1 -
You're right, if gens went to 120 seconds, killer queues would go to 10-15 minutes
1
