Could anyone explain how game is survivor sided?
Comments
-
Thanks for the long response, I appreciate a person giving so much thought to an answer :)
I think that you are partly right at what you said about the MMR system, ie that being matched with someone vastly out of your reach can plummed your chance of winning, but I don't think that the tunneling I did is soley responsible for me getting matched against tough players. I consider myself a pretty good killer player, definitely not the best and still with some holes in my knowledge and mechanical skill, but I am pretty good most of the time and can stand my ground against a lot of the tougher teams, safe for the very best and well coordinated SWF teams.
Just like you explained how many people underestimate the influence of ELO at higher rated games, I think many players also vastly underestimate how the game changes gears and plays differently from what they might call a more casual match. From my time on the forums it seems that not many killers get too many survivors who basically hog all the gen time they can get, like literally, even in chase when I reverse the direction of a loop, they might nap 0.5s of gen time out of it and were I to abondon that chase, they would be on that gen before my back is even turned. Against such efficiency you can't spread hooks - you might not need to hard tunnel one survivor either, but you most certainly must ping pong between two survivers and drive up those hooks and hook stages on them and only take opportunity hits against the others.
There is one thing were most SWFs are very predictable: they want the 4E or at least 3E, so with tunneling you will often provoke even the gen jockeys to jump in for a protection hit, and this can give you breathing room if you strike those down. But you need to slam down hard on that team to eek out a win and must be at your a-game. If tunneling is made too weak basekit, there is literally no way how a killer in high MMR can pressure survivors to come and help their team mates. At least in the past you could listen in keenly and guess that OtR was in play, but now with Iron Will back to 100% its a coin toss and I think that a visual cue that OtR is there might not be unreasonable - in the best case scenario the perk would do what its supposed to do and let that killer seak other prey.
When I play survivor, I notice that my regular duo mate often fails to see the finer points from the killers POV: yeah, that guy is now tunneling at 4 gens, but 3 of this four gens were also worked on solo and are between 60-80% … thats a situation where I might also start to get mean, even though when from the surface it looks pretty chill. The efficiency race of the last 2 years has advanced both roles game in a way that they have to start hard and fast ASAP, least they get backed against the wall in an unwinnable situation, so I thank the best way to solve the issue would be to look at where the game was 3 years ago and what made games feel so differently then.
When I started DBD in 2021 most games weren't played at such a breakneck speed like they are today: I would get into a chase, down and hook them, while one gen got completed. Chases another survivor, downed and hooked them, while a second gen got completed. Now with the playing field smaller, the game heated up and things got more interesting.
But today that doesn't happen anymore, because the 6.1 aftermath breed it into survivors that they should split up with the sole exeption if they can tackle the mid-gen first. So now when the first chase is over, either 2-3 gens pop or the main gen pops mid-chase - both situation that already back me against the wall and make things uncomfortbale.
4 -
Because even your initial statement doesn't hold up when you actually dive into. You can just pick up a killer, slug and tunnel, and that's it? Easy game? Heck no. Every time people start the argument like that, they've lost it, because in that gameplay, in those strategies, that's half the whole story right there. You've skipped right to the third act.
I don't believe at all in that disparity between survivor and killer win streaks. Killers getting that high of win streaks are anomalies; those are flukes beyond flukes. There's no way that if they were facing competent teams back to back, that they'd ever get into the double digits, because 1 good team will just take your whole streak away. Considering there's 4 survivors, I'd say that double digits escape streaks are more than enough for 1 survivor. And on the contrary, I've heard of a survivor streak where, rather than a simple escape streaks, they didn't even give the killers a single down. It wouldn't be a high-numbered streak, but still, seriously? That's the game state we're in.
I debunked this in another post, but long story short, what killer second chance perks are there? Survivor second chance perks are you making a mistake, getting hit, and getting downed, but the perk bails you out. There's no killer perk that turns a missed hit into a down. The closest thing is NOED, which can be destroyed and reveals its own aura, and other endgame perks that buy time... to what end? Delaying the inevitable escapes.
Slugging and tunneling, I understand the complaints. But bringing add-ons? Killers aren't allowed to do that? It's hard to go a match without survivors bringing a Styptic or BNP, and some even go perkless and itemless with no hit to their team's domination of the killer.
And I don't think skilled killer play gets you more than a draw if the playing field is even. The problem with y'all's arguments is that you always frame it as the killer being strong and competent, and the survivors being unorganized and incompetent. I know that's the average match nowadays, because the devs orchestrate that matchup result through their bad MMR system. But it doesn't mean that killers are just dominant by nature. Given a good survivor team and a good killer, the survivors are set to win the match against basically any killer that isn't Blight or Nurse. The math has been done. If we give a little room for error on both sides, still killer falls say short of doing their objective before the survivors can. Your only hope is getting matched against survivors who don't know what they're doing, or aren't efficient enough. A competent 4-man SWF, or 4 competent solos beat the killer near enough every time, which is why those are the matches that this bogus MMR system is designed to prevent.
3 -
This is coming from someone who thinks current Freddy is competitive viable, if I remember correctly. So I'll very much take this with a grain of salt.
1 -
Its not used as proof more so example, you saying its harder to consecutively play as sef than killer only helps my point
Not sure if you know this, but playing at random intervals doesnt make streaks die faster.. blight 2k streak also played at random intervals… what is your logic1 -
But when did I say that?
What I've said is that you can still win trials with Freddy, which yes you can do. His kill rates are proof of that.
However, I've never said he was "competitive viable" because I don't think comp DBD should be even considered when talking about balance.
16 -
In actual high level games where everyone knows what they're doing the game is survivor sided. That however is not the reality of the match making system. And it only takes 1 or 2 bad(or clip farming) survivors to completely nullify the skill of the other ones if the killer is willing to abuse them. for the vast majority of the playerbase this game is killer sided due to the simple fact that you as the killer have full agency on the outcome of your match unlike as a solo or duo survivor
1 -
And yet y'all can never pinpoint what exactly gives killer default advantage. The math, any way you slice it, says the survivors have time advantage. 25-second chases can be game-losing. So any team capable of doing that can win. The reason those top SWFs lose is because they're facing nothing but Nurses and Blights, seeing as those are the only killers who can compete at that level. Maybe they lose to a lesser killer every now and then, through a mishmash of bad communication, bad map RNG, and unnecessarily risky plays. There's little to say about top level other than that.
At bottom level, obviously the killer's gonna win more, because although he's not playing to his fullest, as a noob, the survivors don't even know what a gen is. It's why killer buffs will not and cannot give a killer a straight increase in wins across all levels.
At mid-level, where both sides are getting competitive, they're still learning, and have room to improve, I think survivors are still advantaged. I don't know if that ever wasn't the case at mid-level, because gens have always been too quick to do, and except for some maps very recently, loops have been strong and abundant. I think that because killers have lost so much, and survivors gained so much in recent years, mediocre teams are now starting to beat experienced killers. MMR forces quick queues without regard to what level the players are at, in contrast to when MMR was almost perfect when it first launched. So the average survivor team has 2 good and 2 bad players, and the killer is decent (because only the most resilient killers have stuck with the role). The increase of gens to 90 seconds, and the quicker killer kicks and weapon recovery, are a placebo effect, especially since base BT, anti-camp, and now 70-second hook states completely trump them. If the killer chases the good survivors, he loses. If the killer chases and tunnels the bad ones out, he might win if the good survivors can't make up the difference. But that usually doesn't happen because the bad survivors aren't always that* bad, and actually somewhat know how to loop, supplemented by exhaustion perks and DS/OTR, or none of the above, because some loops are just an arbitrary time waste for killers. And that's without flashlight/pallet saves or instaheals or body blocks. So all this stuff is working against the killer; where's the killer start taking advantage? When he hooks someone? As long as 1 stays on gens, the pressure is still consistently on the killer to not make any mistakes. It's only after 1 survivor dies that it starts to turn to his advantage, and that requires tunneling. Sometimes you can tunnel all game, and either it's a bad chase to take or some mix of strong loops and altruism happens, and you're barley eeking out 1 kill by the time 5 gens are done. How the heck is that, "The killer is OP and in complete control"? I can go on, but I think you get my point.
2 -
There's no way that killer streak is provable. We've never had a killer capable of that. Endlessly facing bad teams would do it, but that's my point.
1 -
You're mistaken. It's not Survivor-sided, it's swf-sided.
Solo is probably the most miserable role right now, after that Killer while swf floats a 1000 metres in the air with all their advantages. They can either nerf swf which is the easiest and most logical way or buff solo so much that they're basically swf in strength while also buffing the living **** out of Killers to make up for it, which seems like unecessary work, but they started this path and stopped right in the middle for some reason.
Let's see what the new HUD improvements will look like.
2 -
Are you suggesting Momo lied about his winstreak?
5 -
I play killer 50% of the time and get a 4k 95% of the time. I play survivor 50% of the time and escape 5% of the time…
you don’t need detailed discussion - the devs own it and say it’s killer sided
10 -
If survivor played better they would win more often as someone who plays solo survivor it blows my mind how truly terrible the general survivor player base is. It 's things like not doing a gen when a killer is in chase, hovering around a chase with a flashlight for a save that will never come (some people hover around a chase to just watch, it's happened to me). Somehow getting two tapped by an m1 killer when you can hold w and a least get at least 5 seconds, getting grabbed by a a killer with a terror radius, hiding in lockers at full heath and getting grabbed out of them, Saving in front of a killers face and expecting them not to chase the guy with one less heath state, or pressing 2 to slap another survivors butt when there is a survivor on hook and another in chase.
I have never seen a more sorry group of gamers then other survivors it's as if they've never played a video game before. And to the P100s who never bothered to get better and are consistently the worst on my teams and treat the game like it's VR chat please do a gen you'll have more fun when you are winning.
4 -
@zarr already tackled most of your points in his post about competitive level DbD. However, we don't need to discuss theoretical situations as we actually have stats from BHVR that have a large enough sample size that concrete inferences can be made. And, in every one of those stats at high MMR, Killers kill more than Survivors escape. That's more accurate and useful in discussing the 'sidedness' of a game. I'm not arguing that's a bad thing as I think the Killer role is stressful enough that Killers should win more than they lose.
However, when examining a large enough sample size we can determine what is happening objectively versus the subjective nature of an individual's experiences, Killers kill more than Survivors escape at every composition from solo queue to 4 person SWF. That is, by definition, Killer sided.
10 -
I hope my post does give you something to think about. If you are interested in trying an experiment you could start with a Killer you enjoy playing who you haven't done any tunnelling with and stick fast to an alternate hook strategy where it has to be a different survivor hooked each time and see how you feel about the matches after two or three months. It might give a different perspective.
I'd prefer my oft-mentioned strengthened gen defence while all survivors are alive to strengthened repair speed as soon as survivors start to die but the suggestion above is probably far more timely and possible than waiting for changes to game mechanics unfortunately.
3 -
Momo7 streamed the whole thing and he plays on NA region which, no offence, is notorious for having bad players.
it's not impossible to get 2k streak on S tier killer with meta perks & addons while facing worst players dbd can offer until ppl from the same comp club as you gang up to stream snipe you.
3 -
the escape rate of iri-1 -swf-4 survivors is 48%, anything below this exponentially depletes the escape rate
The kill rate BHVR is aiming for is 60%, which the stats show has been met. High MMR SWF groups are breaking this balance, but everyone else isn’t (Solo - Duos - Trios Escape Rate: 40% OR 60% Kill Rate for the killer, which means things are working as intended). There’s no "exponentially depleting" going on with escape rates, you’re misusing the term. The escape and kill rates are in a balanced state, aside from High MMR 4-man groups escaping more often than intended, according to official stats.
The highest survivor escape streak is around 50-60, yet killer streaks with competent people get to the 3-4 digits
This is just inaccurate. Hens holds the highest escape streak with 200 consecutive 3-man escapes against some of the best killers in Europe. Killer winstreaks tend to get higher because killers can go full sweat mode solo from the start, while survivor winstreaks rely on four people playing at peak performance, including randoms who might not even care about escaping. Coordinating four people? That’s always tougher than just one.
Survivor "second chance" perks are conditined whilst killer "second chance"are mostly passive and promised value
Do you even play DBD? Both sides have second-chance perks, some conditional, some guaranteed. Even then, considering that the Killer can bring 4 perks while survivors bring a total of 16, it would make sense for Killer perks to guarantee value more often. But that's not even the case.
Killers will complain survivors are to oppressive with flashbang, toolboxes, exc exc but they themselves will slug,tunnel and have access to addons.
Players from both sides complain constantly, so it’s a pretty weak argument if you’re saying the game’s killer-sided based on that. You opened your post by griping about slugging and tunneling.
but the escape rate practically provides with us at best; surviviors can tie whilst a killer is expected to get a 2k at worst, and with some skill a 3k
A 2k is the balance point in DBD. It keeps matches from being too easy and letting everyone escape every game. A 2k is a draw, not a win, for killers, and that target 60% kill rate is supposed to bring the average up to about 2.5 kills per match. For anyone who’s not biased or just trolling, this is actually a healthy number. If we’re going by stats like you are, then the game’s balanced at all levels, except at high MMR with survivor squads, where they’re escaping more often than intended, making it survivor-sided at that level.
2 -
yes, you caught me at the fact i assumed a 48% at iri 1 with a 4 man swf is interesting, i didnt claim it was to high i claimed that even at the best, killers still have the advantage, not including high performing killers who at higher skill level, probably perform higher.
As for killstreaks sorry about hens, i dont watch him as much but regardless his streak ended at 200, this doesnt change the fact that killers streaks are higher. Unless hens streak is still alive it doesnt change the matter of it
Regarding what you said about perks, list examples of surviviors second chance like ds, dh, adrenaline and suddenly those perks have heavy conditions that can be countered by killers gamestyles, whilst killers have perks like noed, deadlock, coup, which reward the killers for passive gameplay or losing? Regardless of the fact killer perks should be stronger, is it not a weak game mechanic these perks get value from poor gameplay
As for what i stated about slugging and camping i just wanted to fully address that first so nobody immediately yelled about gen rush squads and the like
0 -
If this is true, you should play competitively and stream and you could make some good money. Sorry, I'm a bit skeptical on your claim. Even the top streamers who literally play this game as their full-time job don't 4K 95% of the time.
If you're referring to the devs' stated target 60% kill rate, then yes technically by the numbers it's "killer-sided". But we all remember what happened when kill rate were lower. Nobody wanted to play killer and survivor queue times were much longer. The balance has to be based on incentivizing the most people to play on both sides and keep the ratio as close to 4:1 as possible. The devs are telling us that 60% kill rate is the sweet spot. If you play survivor and don't like it, then you will leave and others might leave too and the balance will shift and the devs will have to adjust the target kill rate accordingly. Apparently enough people are happy playing the survivor and killer roles to keep the balance as-is.
2 -
I agree with you, but when it comes to winstreaks, the real answer is that winstreaks with good players only fall when they are matched against other good players. Usually sniping. The reason why killer winstreaks go higher is that it is harder to snipe a killer who can see you and dodge with 4 players, than it is to snipe a group of survivors when you can see if it is them, and you only need one person.
Even the biggest blight and nurse winstreaks would not go over 20 games if they were always facing competitive teams on their level.
3 -
This is coming from someone who thinks current every killer is garbage, if I remember correctly. So I'll very much take this with a grain of salt.
5 -
“Momo7 streamed the whole thing and he plays on NA region which, no offence, is notorious for having bad players.”
Based on what exactly?
2 -
My logic is being able to play more makes it easier to get those streaks. As survivor, you'd have to schedule a time when all 4 people can be on. As killer, ANY time you want to play is sufficient. Even if I could guaranteed wins ever match as survivor, I would need a minimum of like 500 hours of back to back matches with a SWF to make an attempt at that 1947 winstreak that was mentioned. That's a whole lot easier to do when I can just work on it whenever I have some free time if I'm playing killer. More time=more attempts to reach higher winstreaks.
0 -
for starters on the fact he got 2k streak to begin with
2 -
so because he got that streak that means that NA players are bad?
2 -
I actually don't understand how someone can say that the game is survivior sided if killer with 500-1000 total hours played can beat swf team with 20-30k hours combined in 1v4.
4 -
At the highest level with an experienced and coordinated SWF on comms the game is very much survivor sided, which is why survivors are so limited in perk choices in comp matches.
The game used to still be quite survivor sided at the middle level and killer sided at the low end as baby survivors are hopeless at using map resources efficiently.
But I feel that the game has gradually become quite killer sided below high level players, of course some maps and RNG can sway that a bit but much of what made the game very survivor sided has been eroded away over the years.
0 -
Let me re-phrase that:
It's 4-man SWF-sidedAs someone who plays duo and trio just as much as Solo can definitely tell that this is the case. The random players are often well below your own skill level, they simply want to troll your group, or just give up the moment the killer sees them.
Though if you DO get competent teammates, you will tend to win more often.0 -
Both roles are extremely limited in comp DBD, and the devs stats say the game is killer-sided at high MMR.
8 -
Even in the highest level tournaments with no restrictions, killers were still performing at the same levels of kills and win rates as the BHVR stats.
The "no holds barred" tournament play style, which is effectively the live game, is equally killer sided.
6 -
Even with the Devs also saying it the killer mains will always disagree.
1 -
I agree with you a lot. Especially on this.
This idea is off topic and maybe you’d like to discuss but I think a dying “consolation” prize of sorts could go a long way in making dying as a Survivor more tolerable.
2 -
when facing survivors of the highest skill level and with the best coordination and loadouts, even the strongest killer players struggle to keep up. a lot of people think that this is meaningful for some reason.
in reality, the balance as it relates to the top couple hundred to a couple thousand players (at best) for a game that's sold at least 60 million copies is hardly helpful. the game needs to be balanced like that for the remaining 59,997,500 or whatever players to have fair games - there are 4 potential points of failure for a survivor team, but only 1 for the killer. compound that with the fact that most survivor matches don't have communication, or if they do it's just idle chatter among friends or the kind of thing that can be seen on the survivor HUD anyway, and I hope it's obvious why it doesn't matter that the top 0.005% of the player base can almost always win using teamspeak/discord/skype
3 -
Some of these explanations are crazy delusional. Killers are faster, they have weapons/powers that can be thrown, placed, or used infinite amounts of times. The add-ons also assist them while survivors perks are conditioned to after X happens it no longer works, u need to be near someone or it doesn't work, we must do these thing that take away doing gen time so this could work, not to mention some perks got a re work to having to do things to get them (distortion). All whistle the killer has perks to, hear, be faster the entire time. Denile is not only a river lol.
2 -
If the killer isn't doing those things, the survivors have way more of an advantage.
0 -
0
-
What happened to the game when the MFT meta was in full swing with pre nerf ds? 10 minute survivor queues cause killers stopped playing.
1 -
The Technically leans towards killers. The game is marketed as "Escape". I feel that the balance of the perks stride slightly to a killer with exception of few. What makes this game extremely killer sided is playstyles. Camping, tunneling, and slugging are just lazy and you don't NEED perks for that. It shows you have never played online games before and need to win to feel good about yourself. Survivors hide to much and don't do anything in soloq but try and be the last one. I find it silly that the main objective is gens but you get the least bloodpoints for them. Then there are those pesky SWF'S that are just well cordinated and honestly nothing you can do to slow them. Plus the game is riddled with hackers so there's that (another sign you don't belong playing video games).
Aside from a few perks I feel it's balanced well.
3 -
Yeah that's what I meant by swf. Should've made it more specific. But I meant 4man swf, sorry for being unclear.
I sometimes play duo or with 2 friends, and even one bad random can throw the match immensely. But we're usually just playing with little thought and abit of coordination, so not as efficient as we could.
0 -
I'll say it again and again, both sides need some anti momentum in place to make the game more forgiving for the casual playerbase.
Survivors - Second chance meta (Unbreakable without the speed and DS when unhooked, UB doesnt last permanently) to stop tunneling, the most complained about thing on Survivor side alongside slugging.
Killers, Anti-Genrush (Corrupt and Deadlock)
like, it's the casual playerbase who need help and new players also to have more time to make mistakes and learn, and also to stop good players from dominating too hard… this game suffers from that heavily.
it's needed addressed since forever.0 -
Oh, I completely agree. BP alone are a great example. You could be in chase for half the game, buying your team crucial time to finish generators—arguably one of the hardest and most important contributions you can make as a survivor—and still end up with the least amount of points. Given that survivors are designed as the weaker role, (which is good) it would make sense to offer greater incentives or rewards for playing it.
Increasing rewards, like more BP or even special end-of-match bonuses for surviving a “bloodbath” could make the experience more enjoyable and rewarding and might even encourage people to stick around in matches that feel one-sided. I also think making some QOL changes would be great too. People aren’t frustrated simply because they’re losing more—they’re frustrated by how they’re losing. It’s one thing to lose in general, it’s another to lose to strategies like tunneling, slugging, or camping, which can feel unbalanced and demoralizing, especially with the need to bring perks to counter these things when they can be done completely perk less on the other side. If dying were less about being personally targeted or left incapacitated on the ground for minutes, players would be far less likely to feel that their losses were unfair. So working towards discouraging that kind of play would really help. Everyone has opinions on how to do that, I think providing a base-kit gen regression that is linked with Hooks where one hasn’t been hooked consecutively could be useful, to reward killers for spreading hooks and to help lessen the feeling of needing to bring only gen regression perks, opening up variety. And in turn, gives all survivors a chance to play the game.
What bothers me most is the narrative that frustrated survivors are somehow just “entitled” for wanting improvements. This makes no sense because when killers were frustrated with the game, their concerns were seen as valid (which they were!), which led to the huge overhaul of the game and the addition of recent changes that improved the killer experience of what we see today. Many remember when queue times for survivors stretched endlessly because killers were dropping off; they weren’t having fun, so they stopped playing and it impacted everyone. The game shifted, and I think that was a good thing—it needed to happen for killers to enjoy their role again. But both sides deserve a fun, balanced experience; if one side is consistently unhappy, it affects the health of the game overall. And right now, survivors are really struggling.
If killers were struggling to enjoy the game, it was worth making changes to keep them engaged. I’m glad the killer role improved, it really needed it! By that same token, if survivors are now struggling, their concerns should be equally valid. Balancing for one side over the other without consideration isn’t sustainable, and dismissing survivor concerns as unreasonable only creates more divide in the community. Both sides deserve a game that respects their input, fosters fun, and provides fair rewards for their efforts. After all, if one side stops playing, then nobody plays. And that doesn’t change no matter which side stops.Sorry went on a tangent lol passion and all that. 🙈
2
