http://dbd.game/killswitch
I hope BHVR is not making a mess with the new 'Abandon' feature
"Surrendering in the following conditions does not incur a Disconnection Penalty, but will not count as a completed trial". <This is what is stated in the patch notes>.
With the introduction of the quit function, it is possible to save a lot of time during matches, skipping the very tedious part of the mori/slug/hook etc. when you are at the end of the game.
However in the HUD when a survivor abandons there is no difference compared to when they disconnect in the middle of the game ("bot" appears in both cases) and this also happens during the tally screen.
I hope that the game does not get confused and is able to distinguish between the two cases because this could lead to imbalance on the escape rate / kill rate calculation, as we know that when a survivor disconnects, the result of the game is not counted, while in the case of abandonment the game is supposed to be already won by the killer.
This obviously also concerns the killer, if all 4 survivors are bots, and killer abandons right after, how is the game counted? Someone said the game counts a loss for the killer…
I have heard conflicting answers even from Dev Managers on this forum and would like to understand.
Comments
-
I have heard conflicting answers even from Dev Managers on this forum and would like to understand.I think this is where we all are.
As you said, the option allows people to skip the tedious portions of many trials. That's a great improvement and shocking that BHVR has taken so long. It also seems really simple to deal with:
Survivors slugged and leave - win for killer, loss for survivor, what ends up happening to the bot is irrelevant
Survivors all bot, killer leaves - being step 1 would have happened, just go off that
The idea of survivors hiding out would need a few more layers, but not much.
I do hope they continue with the idea and there are few more tedious areas where they can expand it, but primarily they need two different words. One to indicate you can leave but its a loss, one to indicate you can leave but its a win.
0 -
"This obviously also concerns the killer, if all 4 survivors are bots, and killer abandons right after, how is the game counted? Someone said the game counts a loss for the killer…"
Unless we get a correction, this is not accurate from what I've gathered. In this scenario the game isn't a win or loss. So your mmr wouldn't move.
Obviously still lots of problems with this. Generally speaking if the survivors are able to abandon then it's because they've already lost, so it should be a win if the killer abandons in this scenario after they have, but it's not. So now this scenario would allow someone to perpetually smurf since their mmr wouldn't be getting raised while doing this over and over. Alternatively if you want your win and don't want this to happen you're now forced to play the rest the match out against bots…which is also a problem and very boring.
If the survivors are able to leave when "the game is over" I don't understand why the killer is forced to stay when "the game is over". If "the game is over" why would the killer leaving not give them the 4k for mmr?
A lot of this doesn't make sense to me in design. Obvious solution, once all survivors remaining are bots, abandoning as killer should give them the 4k as the game is won by that point. This prevents smurfing and also doesn't force the killer to play a match out against bots.
If we find out new information that any of this is incorrect I'll change the post so I'm not posting incorrect info, but as far as I know this is how it's working from what Mandy has said.
0 -
Surrendering should never count as a win or loss for the Killer, in my opinion. A loss for Survivors, sure. To the argument that you can't raise your MMR that way, I would ask, why would you want to raise your MMR? One, it's a score that you can't see, and two, it certainly doesn't get you any equally-skilled opponents.
0 -
Can someone come forward from devs and explain when and when not or what if it lowers your MMR, when it counts as a lost or win or nothing like I am so confused. Like should I use it or not like what.
2 -
So you think a killer should be forced to play out a match against all bots?
While MMR is very flawed, you will on average be playing against much better players closer to your skill the higher your mmr goes. People want to raise their MMR because skilled people want to play against other skilled people, this is pretty normal in most games.
-2 -
From a survivor stand point the abandon needs work. Now if all survivors are going to lose and we just want to end the match early why should we have to sacrifice our bonus?? We know it's a no win situation so as we bleed out we have to wait for the bonus??? I understand losing whatever you brought in because that's fair. It isn't like a survivor can just abandon when they feel like either.
as for a killer the same thing. If there are no gens done between the last two survivors because they are holding out why should a killer get punished for it??? The killer isn't holding up the game the survivors are. Also if everyone is a bot why should the killer get punished because bots are terrible and they can predict movement so there's no room for human error.
The changes that are needed is everyone keeps their bonuses and it shouldn't count as a loss for a killer.
0 -
I am not referring to the increase/decrease of the MMR, but rather to the skewing of the escape rate / kill rate of the various killers, because if a survivor surrenders the game might not be counted and a hypothetical 4k for the killer might become a draw.
0 -
I think when a player abandons a match, it's counted as a loss for them. Hopefully that's counted in their kill rate to ensure the numbers stay the same.
If that's the case, then I suspect the kill rates won't change much as a result of thos update. My thinking behind that is becayse any time the survivor abandons the match, they generally have very little chance to escape. They can still stay in the game to try for the escape if they want, so the survivor player experience is mostly improved with this since they get options now. But the overall kill rate should increase due to survivor disconnects by maybe a few percent at most (I think) because the survivors can usually only abandon in cases where everyone's slugged or hooked, or everyone else is a bot, etc.
Meanwhile, killer disconnects will help correct the kill rate back down. Killers can DC after no gen has been completed for 10 minutes, with the killer taking the loss (according to Mandy on a different post here iirc).
I suspect killer DCs are less common than survivor DCs, which should mean that they lead just to an overall suppression of the impact of the abandon match feature on overall kill rates. So I would guess that we'll see a very minimal change in the survival/sacrifice rate as a result of all this.
0 -
So you think a killer should be forced to play out a match against all bots?
Where did I imply that? I just said when they surrender, they shouldn't get a win or a loss. The match should just end right there, and everyone takes home whatever bp they earned.
While MMR is very flawed, you will on average be playing against much better players closer to your skill the higher your mmr goes. People want to raise their MMR because skilled people want to play against other skilled people, this is pretty normal in most games.
Yes, it's normal, but knowing that MMR is flawed like it is, it's almost pointless to raise it. The ideal thing is to try to keep it mid so we can have decent matches without dealing with sweat lords on either side.
0 -
"Where did I imply that? I just said when they surrender, they shouldn't get a win or a loss. The match should just end right there, and everyone takes home whatever bp they earned."
You implied that because you said they shouldn't get a win or loss, aka not gain mmr ranking. So if they do want to climb their mmr from their matches the only alternative is forcing them to play against bots.
"Yes, it's normal, but knowing that MMR is flawed like it is, it's almost pointless to raise it. The ideal thing is to try to keep it mid so we can have decent matches without dealing with sweat lords on either side."
Flawed, does not equate to pointless. Those aren't mutually exclusive. It can be flawed and still have a point. IE people that are skilled want to play against other people of equal skill, not forever crush on low mmr players. Not to mention that's purely bad for player experience and retention. What you're referencing does not remove sweat lords on either side. All that would be accomplished by what you're suggesting is forcing casuals to play against the sweat lords, of not even equal skill sweat lords, so even worse.
0
