http://dbd.game/killswitch
Stop using kill rates as evidence of anything...
… while the "going next" epidemic is as common as it is. Like genuinely kill rates are such a flawed stat. 4 games in a row now (and the genuine hundreds I've had while playing dbd) where the survivors just instakill themselves on first hook.
Whether it be because they don't like the killer, they sucked at the first chase so they just give up immediately. It's insane. Yea unsurprisingly, those "instakills" count towards the killrate. Let alone the kills you get afterwards because they just left the other survivors in a 3v1 at 5 gens.
It's so common that it genuinely makes me not believe a single "kill rate" stat out there.
Edit: The amount of games in a row with "go nexters" has climbed from 4 to 7 after I wrote this… it's ridiculous dawg.
Comments
-
"I don't believe it because it goes against what I want to believe"
We've known that KR's have been an issue since before this latest epidemic. 60% is far too high and doesn't include DC's.
Perhaps we should look into making the game more enjoyable for everyone?
30 -
No I don't believe it because it is an objectively flawed stat to use when things like survivors going next, can alter it entirely.
Survivors going next isn't some "latest epidemic", it's always happened. Where do they state it doesn't include dc's? Because dc's are no longer people just quitting but they turn into bots. Do the bots not count as a kill? What about the rest of the teammates that are now in essentially a 3v1 and they get killed? Is the game entirely null and void?
That doesn't even count for people killing themselves on hook which happens constantly. I need to update the main post in fact because after I wrote this, the amount of games I had with "go nexters" went from 4 in a row, to 7. It's a complete joke.
-18 -
Any match with a DC is thrown out.
They are capable of separating hook suicides, as seen with the SM information they presented where they stated suicides made up 2% of her total KR.
Well, be glad then, because the game will get worse. Removing hook suicides without actually ADRESSING anything is one of the decisions of all time, to be sure. Up there nerfing SC simply because it was used frequently.
20 -
They are capable of it, but do they do it is the question? And what is there to address? You can't address that. People kill themselves from a bunch of nothin.
Have a bad first chase? Suicide.
See a killer they don't like? Suicide.
See a teammate of theirs go down quick? Run up to the killer, do the "come on" emote, and suicide.
-10 -
And you've never stopped to ask yourself WHY? You just assumed everyone else to be entitled brats?
They are real people with real feelings about the game, same as you.
They are likely frustrated by how poorly the Survivor experience seems to be going these days. A bad first chase often leads to a poor game. Seeing a strong Killer usually means the match will be over quickly, without much opportunity to gain BP or Archive progress.
There is little reward to "toughing out" bad games as Survivor. The BP gains are abysmal, Archive progress often directly detrimental to your team and the frustration of playing well and having nothing to show for it builds up over time.
Survivor is uniquely frustrating in that you can play perfectly, but it won't matter if your team doesn't play well. You rely on them, and yet BHVR refuses to consider it a team game, opting to consider it a 1v1v1v1v1 instead.
All of this builds and builds until people chase a perfect match. This is what we are seeing now, years of build-up. We have to address how miserable the player-base is if we have any hope of fixing this issue.
22 -
I'm sorry but that's a poor excuse.
They'll quit not because the killer is strong, but because they just don't like the killer. You can't solve that.
They'll quit not because bad first chase = poor game, they quit because they can't handle they had a bad start. Killers can have bad starts too, and you don't see them constantly just immediately dcing after a bad first chase. It's ridiculous.
You cannot solve entitlement. You can make bp gains great, and they'd still go next. "Years of build up" brother survivors have been given SO many changes to improve the experience. Genuinely, how much hand holding can they expect? Do we need to add a basekit system where the gens will just passively start repairing themselves to make it a bit easier too?
-10 -
I did not know I was speaking to the supreme master of DBD, the one who can determine other people's thoughts so easily, my apologies.
Your absurdism fallacy isn't clever, but it does reveal that you have no true rebuttal, which is fine.
Try to check your own bias.
21 -
Hey silly goose. You do understand that you literally sound the same way, correct? What's the saying, "don't throw stones from glass houses"?
You yourself are determining the entire thoughts of the whole survivor playerbase.
-7 -
well, if they can excluse hook suicides, then they have been lying to us when they said they can't punish people for giving up on hook because they technically can't tell if person tried to use 4% or just wanted to go next.
-4 -
I have long suspected that kill rates are actually massively inflated because of the "go next" idea. BHVR SAYS they remove DCs, but they don't remove "go next" and also, i doubt they completely remove DCs from the equation either.
Basically though, all it takes is for someone to "go next" in a single game, and its basically a 4k at that point .
-7 -
Honestly, in my games people letting go on hook has completely dropped. I can't remember the last time I saw someone do it.
12 -
I'll stop using kill rates as evidence when the usual 'game is insanely survivor-sided' argument is supported by anything more than 'everyone knows that lol'.
Until then, bad stats still trump the 'trust me bro' card.
31 -
I recently started again, no teachables or anything and have been slowly going through every character in order. People will literally give up on first hook against anything that slightly inconveniences them, whether it's agitation only Trapper or adept Wraith attempts.
Frankly if the game is that unbearable to play that even objectively weak killers with little to no perks are reason enough to "go next", maybe it's time that the people who are routinely giving up move on and find something else to play.
7 -
I think the reworked Skull Merchant was the prime example of that. She was a very mediocre killer and there was good no reason as to why she was the killer with the highest kill rate. People say that it was because she was easy to play, but so is Hag and she doesn't have such high kill rates while being better than SM in every way.
What shocks me is how many survivors still DC against SM even though she has been soft kill switched recently. Also, a lot of survivors still haven't catch on with her rework and still think they are facing the OG character. This is very clear when they always disarm the drones before sitting on a gen.
I think that survivors unwillingness to learn/play against certain characters 100% plays a factor in tempering with kill rates. To which extent I don't know, but it definitely plays a part.
Unfortunately, I don't think BHVR can do anything to soothe this problem. My only suggestions is to first create a menu on DbD's title screen with a guide to play/counter every single killer, and second to make a banner on the screen whenever they rework a killer, so people that don't read the patch notes aren't caught by surprise. I know that gamers don't read, but it should help a bit.
1 -
Freddy is clearly broken and Nurse needs urgent buffs. If the stats say so, it must be true.
"Perhaps we should look into making the game more enjoyable for everyone?"
Fun = Win. Yeah, that turned out well with 2v8 or current Chaos Shuffle, where they are basically giving away undeserved escapes, but noone seems to be happy anyway.
-12 -
I hate this concept of "Well it's not fun so I'm going to quit". It's such childish behaviour. Stop chasing your specific requirements for a "fun" match. Not all matches have to be fun. The whole point of having a fun match is that it's more fun than other matches. If every game was "fun", then the things you find fun become not fun, but monotonous instead. To enjoy things, you have to sometimes not have fun. Fun is only a comparison to things that are not fun.
If you're not having fun, don't just quit, uninstall the game.
Then I'm sure you'll find fun somewhere else. Go play Lego Harry Potter. You'll win every time and I'm sure you'll have lots of fun.
-9 -
Every killer main forgets that bhvr disables almost every second chance perk in end game, guaranteeing at least 1 kill out of pity. Every map has become smaller, thus lowering the need for gen regression, yet they bring 4 anyway. Almost every decent tile with a window has now been replaced with a garbage replacement of two pallets next to a tree. I'd consider that killer hand holding.
Every time I see a killer main complain about "the UI is hand holding" or "base kit BT is hand holding" I can't help but laugh. The UI was added to bridge the gap between swf and solo queue. That way perks can be balanced in a way where it doesn't feel like SWF has a massive advantage over solo queue (have killers already forgotten that whole line of criticism?). Base kit BT I laugh even more because any killer who genuinely complains about it has never once seriously played survivor for anything other than tome challenges.
14 -
Even with going next being fairly common, out of thousands of matches and players, going next would likely only make up around 3% of total kill rates. You would need at least one survivor going next in every single match to have a noticable impact on kill rates.
From a personal standpoint, I haven't had someone go next in months.
5 -
Tell me you don't play killer without telling me you don't play killer… Sigh i hate this absolute one sided way of thinking.
-12 -
well yk how most of these situations where ppl act like "omg killer is so op and easy to win" and then other people offer them to play fullon optimal match against an actual competent squad? They become silent, absolutely silent.
-16 -
I am iri 1 killer and survivor every month. I can call out the hypocrisy of killer only mains while also playing killer.
11 -
Yet you are purely biased on survivor side. Hmm.. i play both sides as well, and i can see issues on BOTH sides. Killers arent awarded a pity 1 kill per match eather. I have matches where i get 1-2 hooks sometimes and so does many other killers out there. Even killers with thousands of hours struggle in some matches.
It is easier to get 4k though if someone ragequits on first hook just because the colour of the grass was wrong. Or DCs and gives me a bot. So yeah i do think the kills on hooks are counted in kill rates and they are making them look a bit better than they actually are.
-11 -
So what is the point here? If the kill rate is artificially high due to going next, that means that the kill rate in “real” matches where survivors actually try is lower than the 60% reported average. So to keep the target 60% kill rate, killers would need to be buffed and/or survivors nerfed. That would seem to go against the preferred narrative for a lot of folks here…
-3 -
Why should those players have to play against "an actual competent squad", when Killer Mains themselves only rarely play against those players?
19 -
What you choose to believe and what the facts are are two different things lol. Killers are awarded at least 1 pity kill if they know how to play the game. If you are getting 1 or 2 hooks before endgame that's a skill issue, or you're playing pig/myers/onryo. Every killer B tier and above can get at least 1 kill for free, that's how the majority of the community feel.
Having a one off game every 1 in 20 matches isn’t killer "struggling" to keep up with survivor, it's one match where the killer had a one off game.
Just because I'm pointing out killer bias, which is the topic of this thread and my criticism, doesn't mean I also don't acknowledge the issues with killer. I dislike how certain killers require slowdown while others don't need to run it. But at that point, it's a core issue with the game design and less of a killer problem.
8 -
Lets just agree to disagree.. Hope your games go well and enjoy the incoming anniversary event.
-8 -
I think that's the insinuation, yes.
0 -
Agreeing to disagree then editing your post is an…interesting choice when trying to come across as intellectually honest and not biased, especially considering the content of your edit...
15 -
I edited to add something into my post. I removed one line. Which i can say again. I press X for doubt that you play much killer due to the things you say.
-13 -
That is the point.
There are a small number of very, very loud people, on these forums at least, who put an insane amount of ego into the game.
If they lose, it can't possibly be because they made a mistake, or have anything to learn. That's impossible in their mind. They're "max MMR" gods at the game, and probably the second best players ever (right behind whichever streamer tells them exactly how to think).
So if you believe you can't make a mistake, and you struggle with the game, or - entity forbid, you lose a match, it can't possibly be your perfect gameplay at fault.
No, the game is broken. It has to be.
So, anything other than buffing killers, while nerfing survivors is simply unacceptable to some people. Because admitting that the game is balanced, or even stacked in your favor, when you lose, means you have to face the idea that you aren't the perfect, (second) best player to ever exist.
And that just simply can't be possible.
20 -
"It's fine that the game is unfun for others as long as it's fun for me"
Like jeez, didn't think I'd have anyone arguing AGAINST making the game better but here we are.
1 -
Over my past 5 Survivor games I had 3 where at least one teammate gave up (not counting giving up for hatch of course). Two just going next on hook and 1 literally going to the killer and letting them down and hook them.
-4 -
Nah, I am telling you that not everyone is out to get you. Survivors aren't a hivemind of evil children.
Players are people with feelings. They want to have fun, they want to enjoy the game. This is undeniable. Few people, on either side, enter the match with the sole purpose of ruining the game for others.
From my literal years of experience, with most people who give up early, it usually isn't just about THAT game. It's often about the 5 games prior that also went poorly, it's about the toxic messages they got, or the BM or whatever else.
I am saying that heavily punishing suicides, without trying to address common pain points for Survivors, is only going to make the problem worse over time, which is something none of us want.
14 -
You added an entire second paragraph. You can check your original post because I quoted it when I responded to you in this message:
You are adding a tired and disproven killer talking point that survivors give up because of non-game related, immature reasons. This is simply just not true for the majority of cases. If you would have had that in your post originally, I would have talked about it. But in editing afterwards, my response will now be taken out of context. Thankfully, I noticed.
8 -
And here we are. Why, why, why. When you bring up these survivors are killing themselves on first hook of the match, they just say its because of the 5 matches prior. Bullshit
Seeing a strong killer? This occurs with all killers! Regardless of how "nice" you try to play. Quit making excuss for babies ruining other player's experience.
OP is right. While BHVR doesn't count matches with DCs, they still count 3v1s where one survivor offs themselves 5 seconds into the match. Also, no this isn't recent. It's been going on for years. Just before they would DC before hitting the ground.
-8 -
I'm only going to speak from my own experience because that's all I can do. I've had people give up instantly because either I've found them first, they don't like the killer I was playing or the wind blew the wrong way. How do I know this? Because they didn't give me the opportunity to even think about camping, tunneling or whatever. Must be because I play a meta killer then, right? No. It's happened to me as one perk Trapper, as no slowdown Wraith, Billy despite constantly bonking into walls (seriously, I suck as Billy).
To argue that "survives give up because non-game related, immature reasons" has been in any way disproven implies that you know the mentality of every single person who has ever "gone next" and that none of them have ever done so out of non-game related, immature reasons. Somehow I doubt that to be the case.
-3 -
So then 75% of the playerbase is entitled children, so we are doomed regardless in your view.
It does surprise me just how little compassion and how deeply tribalism has taken hold. "It MUST be that the other side is out to get me, there's no other possible explanation."
14 -
I wish the devs would create a balanced game and stop creating one-sided, pay-to-win killers that nobody wants to play against. My interest in spending money or supporting the game is pretty nonexistent lately because they completely disregard solo queue. The kill rates indicate that the developers believe the killer should win regardless of skill, as they have chosen killer. Having a 60-70% win rate in any other PvP title would get the character banned from play or called OP, yet that's the average experience in Dbd.
9 -
The point of anecdotal evidence aside, you are also assuming that they are disconnecting for those reasons you gave, without asking them for their rationale. That implies you 100% know the mentality of every single person who has ever "gone next" against you. So in other words, no you don't know.
Also to make an equivalent statement, assuming people are disconnecting for your killer selection, being first found, etc, do you know how many killers disconnect on the load screen when they see a map offering? I would also consider the killer offering screen dc an epidemic. Killers are allowed to "go next" for free, without penalty, all because they don't like the map. Or, better yet, they can just stand in a corner for the entire match if they massively lose their first chase, wasting everyone's time, trying to farm sympathy from the survivors.
If you're going to complain that this is only a survivor issue about not wanting to play against unfun or boring things in the game, at least acknowledge killers do the same thing to the same degree.
3 -
Likewise, imagine how little compassion someone must have as an individual to queue up to a game knowing that if they don't like the killer or if they get found first, or any other reason, they'll ruin it for the other four people.
-8 -
And I'm telling you, that you can't physically fix people just giving up because they give up over the dumbest things. That is what I don't think you understand. There is no fixing it.
People give up over anything. They give up over unfixable things, you will NEVER fix that problem outside of just straight up punishing giving up. You can't fix a survivor having a bad first chase. You can't fix a survivor not liking a certain killer. You can't fix a survivor not liking a certain map. You just can't.
If they had a bad 5 past matches, DON'T QUEUE. That's the fix. Stop queueing if you aren't having fun. Like???
Yes yes, let's keep using kill rates under the post where I've said that using kill rates makes you look silly because it's an objectively flawed stat. Thank you for proving my point.
-10 -
You're, there are also plenty of killers who just give up and wait by an exit gate to end the game. That's also an issue I hope gets addressed. I also hope lobby dodging, perk switching and such also get addressed but that's not what this thread was about.
As for the "I must know" thing, obviously I can't know, just like you can't know that they're doing it for completely reasonable reasons. Maybe trapper is an unfun killer, but still, I can't see it warranting several games in which the first survivor goes next,unless almost every game has a survivor with some emergency going on in the background.
So yeah, hope that covers your whataboutism adequately so we can go back to the actual topic.
-7 -
You're right was how that post was meant to start, mobile seems to have deleted the second word, apologies
-3 -
The whole problem is the game is insanely killer sided where survivor skill expression has been severely minimized.
People go next because their input doesn't mean anything and has no bearing on their win objectives. That kinda translates to being miserable.
Now, let's prevent them from going next. That'll certainly end well.
6 -
It's not whataboutism. Both topics are discussing going next. They are the same topic. Please understand the logical fallacies you're going to accuse me of before throwing the terms around irresponsibly.
Your whole second paragraph was the point I was trying to make. Either my assumptions and your assumptions are both valid, or none of them are. For you to discard mine as wrong and then describe your own as true was the whole point of that.
As for your first paragraph, they are related to the topic at hand. Killers can adjust their builds based on what they see in pregame, often times out of spite (flashlights into lightborn, toolboxes into Franklin's or more slowdown, etc). Survivors cannot do that. If the survivors were hidden from the killer, which they should be out of fairness, killer "go nexts" would skyrocket. Survivors cannot adjust anything or lobby shop, hence they are forced into more matches they would have dodged to begin with. Killers have the luxury of having a good deal of knowledge on what survivors will bring and can counter accordingly.
5 -
I've always been seeing people state that the devs should just fix the "issues" with the game so survivors would stop killing themselves on hook to go next yet I don't think I've once seen anyone suggest how. This is not a 1v1 game or a team game with both sides having equal players is an asymmetrical game that's almost impossible to balance. How much more hands holding mechanics we have to give to satisfy the survivor players before it destroys the killer player experience? It'll risk making this game end up like Death Garden where they tried to balance it for the high ranking players, but it completely destroyed balance for the casual players.
-4 -
The game isn't "insanely killer sided". The same way the game has never been "insanely survivor sided" outside of like… literal release time when infinites existed. This game is designed so bad, that it's genuinely killer and survivor sided at the same time. I've never seen anything like it.
But no people don't go next because their input doesn't matter, again… sorry excuse. They go next because they had a bad first chase. They go next because they saw a killer they don't like. You can't fix that, you can't solve that. That will never change.
If people are that miserable, that they can't handle a bad first chase or they can't handle going against a killer they don't enjoy… then they shouldn't be playing the game, instead of ruining it for other people. DBD is genuinely the only game I've ever seen in my idk atp, 16 year span of playing multiplayer games where people who give up or dc are somehow defended. It's the most asinine backwards thinking, I've ever seen.
-10 -
I couldn't care less if they fix the issue or not, the whole OP was about just not using killrates as a piece of evidence for something when people who give up on hook are a part of said stat.
-7 -
I have survivors giving up EVERY single day for stupid reasons. I mostly play survivor now and people give up when they are found first or the killer doesnt please them. Its constant and it hurts us as a team and we end up losing because someone starts raging at 5 gens and gives up.
I've also lately had plenty of trolls. They load into the game and drop every single pallet or just stand doing nothing following the killer being a menace.
I added it into my post because it happens almost daily if not daily. I don't see anything wrong with adding something into a post i forgot to put there afterwards.
Anyways i'm not going to keep talking about this. If you play killer as much as you say good for you, if your matches are always easy and you always get 1k at least again good for you. I personally don't believe that is true. This forum is filled with survivor mains who only see the game from survivor side and are extremely hostile in their answers and extremely biased without seeing the other sides point of views at all. You came across as someone like that in your post thats why i answered.
The downvotes of every killer supportive message is prove of this.
-6 -
And I'm telling you, that you can't physically fix people just giving up because they give up over the dumbest things. That is what I don't think you understand. There is no fixing it.
This is a huge overstatement of the problem though.
People have always given up over "killer they didn't like" or "bad map" or "downed in 3 seconds". People have not become more petty over time.
The "go next" epidemic has gotten severely worse because of game balance changes. Period. The devs have openly, explicitly, and deliberately spent 3 years now to increase the kill rates. Survivors are, objectively, dying more often than before.
And, honestly, that wouldn't be a problem by itself. It's absolutely possible to make it so that playing a match where you don't escape can still be fun. DBD used to be that way.
But in the pursuit of making the game objectively more lethal for survivors, they've removed a lot of the "fun" aspects. Unfortunately, they've made the survivor experience more hopeless in the process.
And any of the issues that could help lessen that burden are put on the back burner. Literally. Phase 2 is the "anti camp, anti tunnel, anti slug" portion of the qol changes, and "not getting to actually play the match" has been a top complaint of survivors for about ten years now. These issues have also objectively been getting worse as they continue to "increase kill rates" through map, tile, and pallet reworks, reduced chase times, removing stealth as a play style (in their "hide and seek game"), and forcing more reliance on your teammates.
No, instead of addressing any of those issues, their first priority is "anti go next", with the "promise" that maybe, some day they might look into the core reasons why those matches are hopeless. At least, until people burn the forums down over the next few months and they backtrack most of phase 2, (which people have already started posting on the forums with this goal in mind).
7
