What happened to per-killer MMR?
For the longest time there was a perception (I'm not sure if it was directly stated by developers or just assumed) that continues to be widely accepted by the community that there is per-killer MMR when matchmaking. That is an absolute load of bologna. Without a doubt, every single time I play a killer for the first time I get matched with full SWF/Comms teams with lobbies having combined playtimes totaling over 5k hours easily. How in the world am I expected to even understand the basic functions of a killer when I have to play "tutorial" against players who rightfully assume that MMR is functioning as intended and I should know what I'm doing?
Answers
-
it does exist, but its not completely separate, if i remember right, if its a new killer or one who hasnt been used in a while you get a slightly lower mmr on those but you are not getting a new player mmr. however the consensus is currently the primary focus for matchmaking is que times over mmr matching.
5 -
This is true. Early on in my experience, I got okay with one killer, and then tried Nemi. I did poorly in my first couple matches with him and found myself demoted into some kind of super intro MMR where the survivors didn't seem to understand their goal was to do gens. They were exploring the map more than doing objectives and barely knew to hold W in chase.
When I saw what was going on, I started "missing" attacks in chase, Nemi-punching trees and stuff, and letting them get practice and enjoy a bit before I took the 2k or 3k. I wanted them to enjoy and keep playing, so I made sure to let one or two live each match, but I can confirm, one killer got good matches for me, one got me survivors who were learning to walk :D
0 -
Like @InvadeGames said, its seperated per killer, but your lowest killer will always have 70% of your highest killer, as BHVR assumes that you retain a certain general skill set and game sense, no matter what killer you play. This sometimes feels pretty harsh with new killers, though, as there is basically no grace or breaking in period: if your main killer has reached to lofty hights of the soft cap MMR, then every new killer will be already thrown in with the big fish.
3 -
This is exactly the problem. Even if there was a "grace period" where you start off at a significantly lower MMR but are rapidly increased if you just destroy a team on this new killer would be SIGNIFICANTLY better than how it is currently. This would even give Killers the opportunity to go easy on survivors if it means they have more time to get comfortable with the mechanics. You simply shouldn't be punished for being good at a single killer when there are so many varieties of Killers in the game.
1 -
Imagine the insane grind you'd have to do if there was a system like that.
0 -
What do you mean?
0 -
You'd have to play each killer until with each killer the MMR would reach your level, you'd have to play a ridiculous amount of games and face a lot of players that are likely not as good as you.
1 -
That's why I brought up there being a situation where you start at a much lower MMR but for X amount of games your performance is heavily weighed into MMR changes. This makes it so that if you want to take it slow and get used to mechanics you can take it easy on survivors but if you want to be the devil incarnate you'll get up to your MMR quite fast.
As somebody who has a lot of time in this game, I can assure you that being high MMR as killer is not something that you want. High MMR as Killer just ensures that you'll likely get matched against survivors that know every weakness of your killer, have comms that are better than any perk in the game, and want nothing less than to make you miserable for their enjoyment. Being a "nice" killer is very incentivized in this game as it means your MMR stays lower than it otherwise would be. Having a long road to get up to your highest MMR would be a massive luxury to people wanting to have an enjoyable game with other players.
I do get how some people have a concept that there is no victory outside of seeing the entire lobby killed off as soon as possible. Those players can have their high MMR matches all to themselves.
1 -
I've been playing this game since 2018, I know how high rank/mmr killer matches have always been. The thing about a properly working MMR is that it should fix itself given enough time. Not even saying that you're not good enough here, but with many killers you would struggle against very good players even if you were an extremely good killer. I still think the game looking at your overall killer performance is the way to go, personally.
0 -
That's why I'm saying that a threshold of 70% of your max MMR is far too high. Sure, it should fix itself over time and given enough data from matches. The problem is that if you have a Killer who you main and has a significantly higher MMR than your other killers the skill floor that it starts you out on killers you've never played a single match on before is far too high. It gives no room for familiarization.
For clarity sake I'll present you with a situation which better explains the struggle that is occurring. Lets say that I get Rank 1 every season with Hag and can stand my own against just about every team I come up against. Now I decide to purchase Mastermind and give him a go. I don't even have a grasp on how his mechanics work yet and I get next to no option to do so. This game gives you nothing more than a text box with a rough summary as your introduction to how a killer works unless you want to do your own homework outside of the game. Now, I'm playing against players who know how to run loops perfectly and how to counter my killers weaknesses. Weaknesses I'm not even privy to myself yet. I'm not even given the opportunity to use my abilities to the point where I can even get a grasp on how they function. I'm relegated to being an M1 killer that waits for bloodlust to kick in just to do anything productive. This teaches me nothing about how to play the killer. Sure, given time I have no doubt that I will have zero issue with this killers mechanics. However, the situation that the game is presenting me with right now is entirely not conducive to improving this familiarization. The game is telling me that I need to spend literal hours failing as a killer to get him to a point where I can even begin to learn how to play him effectively. This is a direct indicator that something in this system is not functioning as the "balancing mechanic" as it should be.
Reducing the skill floor to something like 50% while also increasing the influence matches have on MMR increases by 25% would result in the same outcomes in MMR to players who can't or choose not to operate at the lower MMR rating while also not making it punishing to players who aren't.
2 -
As has been explained already, semi-unique killer MMR exists (which is why getting your killer adept when that killer first drops is always easiest).
I think that for new killers or killers you're playing for the first time, your MMR should be 70% of the average of all your other played killers, not your top one.
I mean it should be fairly obvious why; a basic M1/looping skillset is fairly interchangeable for most killers, but not all. There are some killers who are wildly different, or who have limitations to offset their powers (if you've even seen a baby nurse try to play her like other killers, you know what I am talking about).
And vice versa, if you are super strong/experienced with one of the more unique killers, you're going to have a hard time at even 70% of your MMR for that killer with a more basic killer. Or if you are used to killers with anti-loop and try one with nothing in that toolbox.
I mean I play most of the killers (save for one or two), but I certainly am not nearly as good with some as others. I think more people would play more killers if the system were a little more forgiving.
0 -
It would not really make sense if you are at a much lower MMR when trying out a new Killer. Because while you are new to the Killer, you would still not forget everything you know about Killer gameplay. This would be very obvious with 4,6 m/s-Killers - while you would not be experienced with their power, you would be experienced with everything else. Which would make it very hard for low MMR-Survivors to play against you, since the general Killer gameplay does not differ that much for most Killers.
And while it would certainly feel good for a short time to stomp everyone with a new Killer, it would just lead to more frustration because then you would raise up faster and more, making it harder very soon.
It would also really mess up matchmaking if a new Killer is released, because this would mean that you would end up with thousands of players trying out the new Killer on a low MMR, which would result in horrible queue times for everyone trying out this Killer and in horrible matches for the Survivors they go against.
0 -
Matchmaking doesn't exist. MMR is a lie. We're at the mercy of God whenever we queue and He hates this game and its players as much as we do.
0 -
MMR is also taken from survivor side if you main them and go play a killer game once in a while giving no real time to learn the powers right.
0 -
If existing MMR didn't heavily influence others killers, any time a new killer came out low MMR survivors would get massacred and high MMR would wonder why no one is playing the new killer.
0 -
your first 1-3 matches are gonna be below your mmr but after winning those, your mmr will be nearly same with your highest killer.
0 -
Thats why I was thinking they could add a heavy weight (+25% MMR influence or something) to matches that are won at the starting MMR.
Its not like you don't already come across random games where your team gets steamrolled by a killer regardless of MMR.
0 -
If your average killer MMR is sufficiently high enough, then "the first time you play a killer" has a decent chance of being at high MMR because the first time you play a given killer their MMR is set to a little below your average MMR.
But per-killer MMR definitely exists. After fairly extensive playing I have:
Chucky, Wraith, and some other killers at consistently high MMR, because I generally play seriously with then.
Pig and Ghostface at mid MMR with wildly varying lobbies because I sometimes play chill.
Myers at dead bottom MMR because I generally only play mirror myers for fun and jumpscares and generally let everyone go. To the point where I get nothing but new PlayStation survivors who don't know which way is up and I've had to resort to killing them all in an effort to increase my MMR out of the gutter so my opponents can actually appreciate it and have some fun too.
0 -
Just like with swf matchmaking there's no perfect solution. Can it suck to try to introduce a new player that's gonna be an obvious weak link to survivor or trying a new killer near your regular mmr? Of course. Is it a good idea to let experienced players intentionally go to baseline mmr as easily as simply letting another player be the party host or swapping from Clown to Demogorgon? No.
Individual killer mmr has always existed, but it has always put your "fresh" mmr somewhere in the "near your regular/highest mmr, but a bit below it" range as far as I know.
0
