http://dbd.game/killswitch
My problem with the 60% kill rate target
Comments
-
There's ways of doing that that don't ensure that the game is in the place it is now. At the end of the day, the game is still PVP and the power role shouldn't be as easy as it is. That power should come with a greater responsibility.
3 -
Ever wonder why killer sometimes feels so easy — and other times insanely hard?
Can u think about that? What’s really causing that difference?ez EZ EZ ez Ez tutorirla kilelr u just have to get gid Gud
might be a simple answer.
But is it really the right one?-8 -
Are you talking to me or a brick wall?
8 -
You just quoted me. So guess who?
But maybe it applies to both.You can reply or nah.
That’s on you.
-10 -
My point, just to get that out of the way: the “power role” isn’t actually that easy by default. It only feels easy in a lot of matches because many survivor teams don’t understand the tools they have. They don’t use them. They don’t treat it like a PvP game. They play poorly—sometimes even recklessly.
I get handed so much for free in so many games. Either because they underestimate the killer, rely too much on their build, their SWF, on the hope I miss or overlook something—or because a few players are just here for a casual horror experience with skill checks and friends. They don’t really want to learn. They’re not playing the same game.
And the thing is: 1 or 2 survivors like that in a team? That’s all it takes to hand the match to the killer and make it feel “easy.”
Is Killer really the “easy” role that’s supposed to “take responsibility” — just because the survivor team isn’t playing smart or well? I don’t know.
Is that really the Killer’s responsibility—to make sure the match feels fair when the other side isn’t even trying to win? I’m not so sure.
-2 -
I doubt fair “ties” possible in game as high frequent cases. So many bugs, RG dependencies, unclear MMR system just makes it impossible
-1 -
yipp .. and:
Most “ties” don’t come from clean, balanced gameplay — they come from chaos, mistakes on both sides, and lucky timing that just happen to cancel each other out.
You rarely create a tie through intentional, smart decisions. The game isn’t designed that way. It’s binary at its core: you kill or escape, you hook or rescue, you finish a gen or you don’t. There’s no real neutral ground.
Sure, you can force a tie — like letting two go as killer — but that’s meta behavior, not a natural PvP outcome.
A tie usually just means both sides played inefficiently. If you play efficiently, you either win or lose. normally: You don’t tie.
-6 -
Killer can get pretty easy and pathetic tie by tunneling one guy whole game and then catching other in endgame and hooking him in place where it’s impossible to rescue. Not gonna lie, such situations happened with me when I was killer. In 50% of such cases I felt so bad as player that let person go or just didn’t respond anything, because I admit my play was extremely poor. Or in contrary, it was sfw that used unfair play themselves and I don’t regret about same treatment.
Survivors also can get pretty easy 2 escapes just because killer played “fair”. No skill encouragement, pure gen efficiency and killer decision to not being sweaty and unbearable. I also feel bad when escape such trials, because don’t feel I deserved it.
So, ties purely evolves around killer being too bad/too nice.
4 -
True. You’re right… most ties happen because either survivors or killers get “too bad” or “too nice” towards the end. It goes for both sides. In rounds where both killers and survivors play efficiently, the outcome is usually clearer. Ties do happen, but like I said before, not because there’s some system that provokes them — it’s because of chaos and mistakes.
You can’t really design a system that “forces fair rounds” or “creates ties” naturally. Same goes for those situations where both sides are just being nice or not taking it seriously. Ties always come from chaos, not from some mechanic aimed at balancing rounds more evenly. Right? (Maybe I’m missing something here though)
-1 -
.
-1 -
The matchmaking in this game is just abysmal. How is it possible in a functioning MMR system that my team of clueless bad full solo players is going against One Pump Willie's Pyramid Head on stream? 4k at 5 gens 2 minutes into the match with the 2nd person going down and rage quitting immediately.
While when I play killer, I consistently get 7k+ hour survivors that are either in SWFs or just skilled solos and I'm lucky if I scrape a 2k. I'll get a match where the survivors are average and I get a 4k maybe once every 6 games
0 -
I think you misunderstood what I meant when I said it should have greater responsibility.
DBD at its core relies way too much on mutual respect, which is why the concept of a rulebook exists on either side among other things. But I don't mean that. I mean that Killer is ideally the overseer of the trial. The Killer is essentially one means to an end, while escape is the other. As such, the Killer is actively working against the Survivor's escape as much as they're working toward it and teamwork is key.
The issue right now is that BHVR has balanced the game so that Killer has to do that less. There is more autonomy given to them to handle incredibly coordinated Survivor groups, while the average group of Survivors struggles to even be on the same page about what their plan is. It takes what should be a game of equity and not equality and turns it into an unfair experience where the only way to handle 90% of Killers is to become 10% of Survivors. That is a baseline denial of that responsibility that I mentioned.
The players follow the course of action that the game dictates. It's why Killers continue to camp/slug/tunnel excessively despite whatever patch comes along and why more and more Survivors excuse giving up entirely. They're natural decisions that make sense. The game doesn't know how to balance that and BHVR certainly struggles to do so as well, but regardless of that it isn't the players' faults for not doing it either. Just to clarify that I don't think it's a YOU problem personally for playing Killer.
4 -
This is a big point. I think it's super important as killer to try to assess a team as individuals and as a whole each match. I'm super fair. I'm against slugging, tunneling, and camping. Sometimes I also do things I thought were gross cause I got frustrated and I end up regretting it. Sometimes I even apologize.
But if the team rushes me as soon as I get one hit and tries to bodyblock and sabotage everything I do then my own code of ethics is forfeited. If they're going to be crappy, so will I. Whether I'm playing killer or survivor, I think killers deserve the hooks they earn, even as the one being hooked, and I actually hate when I'm on a team who flashlight saves me after a long chase. Let them have the hooking they worked towards.
But I try to notice who is acting what way on the team. If one person is never present during the shenanigans then I can assume they're just a soloq playing normal and working on a gen. I will probably let that person leave. I'm very often that soloq survivors trying to mind my own business but it's pretty rare the killer distinguishes that fact and they hit me just as hard as the others.
6 -
I am not for the 60% target, especially since that target excludes DC matches most of which involve a 3-4K stomp for killer, and is thus probably lower than the real kill rates. Imbalancing the game intentionally leads to frustration for survivor role, and boredom for killer role, as it violates basic game theory, which is a balance of challenge and reward to create a flow state. The high DC/suicide on hook rate (when it was still possible) was no coincidence. It is due to the survivor experience feeling very unfair due to poor balancing. If the 60% was for escape rates instead of kill rates, you would see far more killers DCing and far less survivors DCing. Designing the game to be unfair for survivors doesn't make it feel more like horror atmosphere, it just makes it feel like a poorly balanced horror PvP. If we want a better horror atmosphere, then BHVR should not be giving killers such easy wins with so many wall hack perks and gutting survivor stealth gameplay. Old DBD atmosphere was far more suspenseful than today, which has gone from hide and seek to a game of tag.
Nightlight is not official data and thus an unreliable source. It should not be used to make balance decisions for either role.
The high percent of 4Ks is because killers have the ability to snowball matches as survivor teams are much weaker once 1 survivor is dead. But this does not change the fact that the 3 remaining survivors have an abysmal chance of escaping in this circumstance, which greatly benefits the killer in terms of balancing. In theory, these snowball matches would be much less frequent if the kill rate target was a fair 50%. You would have more close matches near 2K, which in my opinion, are the matches that are the most fun for both sides. Long before the kill rate averages were so high, facing a truly skilled killer main was still a struggle for survivors. Nowadays, you often die to cheese tactics by mediocre killers helped by an MMR system that is unable to reliably measure player skill.
1 -
The only issue I have with the 60% kill rate... is the fact Nurse and Blight sit at a comfortable 67% and 69%, and due to averages this is perceived as fine.
7 -
I understood u. I get where you're coming from, I really do. But I have a really hard time agreeing with your point — and uum, that’s tough for me, because it’s just not my experience.
Even an average Survivor team — or honestly, even a really bad one — the kind where you think, “Okay, this round’s gonna be chill,” can absolutely blow up in your face the second you give them an inch. Not because they’re good. Not because they have solid movement or any real sense of positioning.
It’s just that even bad groups can punish you hard if you give them space.
Survivors just have so much stuff they can stack on their side to completely strip you of momentum, regardless of how well they're actually playing.Like..
Super bad players. But what do they do?
"I’ll just run upper main... ez. Killer can down me here, no problem — we’ve got sabo. Let’s deny his first hook and show him what kind of match this is gonna be."
(I already expected the sabo play based on how they were moving, so I checked the downstairs hook just in case.)
And the rest?
Nope. Not with me.
I went to hook anyway — and of course, Ace bodyblocked and took a hit just to use the speed boost to sprint trying to the next hook and trying break that one too. and again: Not with me.
And you never know what people are running. The whole Survivor fun-perk roulette can hit you anytime — even if you go soft at first, it’ll smack you mid-game or near the end.
(Go easy early, and by mid-game you're suddenly dealing with all kinds of nonsense.)In that match, they basically gave me the opportunity right at the start. And they clearly forgot a few things too — like, more Unbreakables? So, more sg, ftp, maybe a bu?
This is a PvP game. And as long as even the “super bad groups” throw in everything they’ve got and bring every tool they can, I’ll do the same.
And y — even those groups can win easily without being anywhere near the “top 10%” — if you give them space.
Of course, people say the usual:
“EZ just git gud, tutorial killer. Just don’t make mistakes. Just play better. Just land every shot.”
Yup, I’ve heard it all.(I honestly missed a lot that game too — frustration over the sabo stuff really messed with my focus and aim.)
But I’ll only take that kind of advice from people who actually show me solid movement — not from insta-down Survivors who only win because of the “skill, skill, skill” loadout they brought into the match.
So y — I’ll keep camping, tunneling, slugging.
Like you said: probably doesn’t matter what patches come out as long as the game stays the way it is.both sides are just power-creeping their strongest stuff. Killers and Survivors.
Even the worst Survivor groups are doing it.You get that every single match.
Doesn’t matter if they’re good or bad players — every single one.Why exactly should Killers be expected to take responsibility at that point?
Responsibility for what, exactly?
So Survivors can have their little fun time with u the second you give them the space to breathe?I really want to understand it.
Like, actually understand it.-8 -
As Survivor, you just have so much more room to play differently — to mess around, try dumb stuff, go for funny plays or do random nonsense just for fun.
As Killer, you don’t really get that luxury. Not at all.Honestly, I think Survivors are in a much better position to “take responsibility” and make the match feel fair — if they want to. Just my opinion.
-5 -
I've never once ever felt like survivors cared about my fun in this game at all, but I'm supposed to care about everyone else's. I've had a whopping 1 survivor give me a free kill when I had a bad game and that was back when Oni came out and it was my very first game playing him. 1 time lol over 6k hours
-3 -
Oh, come to my lobby whenever I play survivor… I’m always down for some fun meme plays. :D
I know how boosted the game is for survivors, so I often just don’t care — especially when I’m stuck with a weak killer.
Like… Myeri is coming? Ye, sure, you can have your one shot. :D Let’s see what you can do with that super unsafe map edge pallet.
And why not greedy every pallet? Just… why not?I bet you’ll respect it anyway, because you’ve got your precious one-hit Shast and assume I’m gonna drop… xD
(As soon as it hits, well, I’m dead.)but.. come on, who cares, i have 100 second chances.
or why not be once into some roleplay and be the typical baby meghead? xD
I seriously thought this random Twitcher dodged me... but he just types NO. That was so good.
And then he even presses ready let it happen for me to do my baby Meg stuff that round xDAs a survivor, you’ve got so much space to mess around
:D
-6 -
You actually seem to be saying that BHVR has an amazing MMR system, it's just in a conspiracy to target you with the worst possible experience.
-3 -
I don't think either of those Killers were any good.
2 -
Sure, if I played like that against myself as killer, I’d be dead. But who cares?
You can mess around and try dumb stuff — especially if you’re not up against a strong killer.
You’ve got all the second chances in the world. And honestly, you usually know when it’s safe to go for the goofy plays.and.. When I leave my profile public, a bunch of killers dodge me. And if 2 or 3 killers DC or leave the lobby, you have this "backfill lobby" now and you pretty much know you’re gonna get "anything", and that’s the perfect time to go full meme mode.
The “comp meta” as survivor is just insanely boring. Early calls, early leave, early shift to the furthest tile you can still reach — and if needed, early drop. That’s it. Super boring.
-6 -
You're still missing what I'm saying. It's not you personally taking responsibility. It's the role itself from a game perspective. The point of equity in a game like this is that you have the (individually) stronger role overseeing the entire trial and managing resources while you have the (individually) weaker role working as a team to piece the puzzle together. In the end, they come together in the middle to be of equal strength.
The issue is that DBD has strayed from that formula entirely. Teamwork is weak unless it's coordinated outside of the trial or unless the players are lucky and have good synergy. The power role has catchup mechanics that can be utilized before the trial is even tilted out of their favor. The game is balanced via the end result and not what needs to change from moment to moment. And that's before you factor in the matchmaking that fails players more often than not.
If fairness were the objective, both sides would have strong enough catchups to make a dent; perks would act more like classes and/or passive buffs; objectives would require dynamic solutions; there would be multiple ways to progress the trial; teamwork would be a priority (including comms and ways to help the team while incapacitated); Killer and Survivor would interact in more interesting and fun ways; 2v8 might be the standard; and a rotating queue, where players are picked for Survivor or Killer on a roulette, would possibly have to be implemented.
But a game like that would unfortunately fail as long as players are unwilling to adjust along with it.
That might've been true once upon a time, but it isn't anymore. Survivor is objectively meant to have more breathing room than Killer. That is the point of how the game works as an equitable asymmetrical game. Take a look at Survivor objectives as well—they're meant to do other things than be in chases or work on gens. But the way the game has been balanced punishes them for not focusing almost exclusively on those two aspects of play. And even chases have been buffed for Killer to ensure that escaping them isn't much of a tossup anymore.
As long as Killer is willing to exert control very early on, they can get all of the room to breathe that they want or need. When you go up against a confident team that makes risky plays and actually succeeds? That is your 40% loss coming into play. Now imagine the opposite for Survivor. The Killer that slugs everyone at 4 gens and forces a Surrender is their 60%.
1 -
The math checks out when you factor in hatch. For a 50% win rate.
-4 -
My point was that it entirely depends on whom you are facing. If you face new Killers, obviously, yes you can get away with messing around. Much like if you play against new Survivors as Killer, you can get away with a lot of stuff.
You also know when it's safe to go for the goofy plays as Killer.
I am really not sure what your point is. All it seems like is you are trying to use personal anecdotal evidence to prove that Survivor is easy?
4 -
The obvious flaw there too is that if you're more biased in favor of one role, you will always assume the opposite is a cake walk without checking yourself. Balance discussions can't get anywhere if we're spending all of our time watching someone lick their wounds.
1 -
Uhh, what’s your point?
That one comment was just a reply to xGodSendDeath, saying that I’m always down for memes and “weird plays” as survivor — even though I play pretty sweaty when I’m killer.
It wasn’t some kind of proof that I always get easy escapes against strong killers. I don’t. And that’s how it should be.As survivor, the moment you play for the win (3 out), you have to "sweat" back. That’s just how it is.
There’s no room for goofy stuff — one mistake can sometimes cost even a strong survivor team the entire match.
And? It should be that way.Still, you often win even against strong killers —for me its not even "sweat." it is not hard to play the whole efficiency meta clean the moment you play surv. y still have a "chill and fun" time .. for me.
-4 -
Against strong killers, you have to play like that — early run, always head for the furthest tiles you can still reach, early drop, and if things get tight, use the stronger structures at the right moment. (and pre-dropping is suuper boring too yawn)
It’s always the same patterns. It’s not like, “let’s see what I can pull off with this super unsafe tile.”Good teamplay and good cover can be fun at that point, but the whole “efficiency core meta gameplay” is honestly kind of boring.
And 4-man SWF makes it even worse — you just have so many tools to still recover things.
But a strong SWF can take so much momentum away from the killer, deny so much.
It’s still way too easy to mess things up as survivor and still win.-2 -
But y, you got me. I’m a pure killer main and totally biased in favor of that role.
I only know the “evil evil OP side” — and yep, I’m over here licking my wounds.-7 -
You already responded to me?
You didn't even do anything super crazy, the mistakes you did make didn't get punished.
For example, that Myers popped Tier III from a mile away. Nobody does that when they are running basekit Myers.
2 -
Giving all survivors comms would kill the game, because a giant percentage of the killers wouldn't put up with that.
BHVR has to forbid the killer from seeing if they are playing against a SWF, because they know a lot of killers would dodge them. Likewise, giving all survivors basekit comms would do the same thing, where a lot of killers just wouldn't play.
-7 -
Where exactly did I say that the Myers played good — or that I wouldn’t have gone down against a good killer in that situation?
I literally said the opposite, multiple times. I still don’t understand your point. I already wrote this straight under the video, - i respond later already to this again to you .. and..to quote myself again:
Uhh, what’s your point?
That one comment was just a reply to xGodSendDeath, saying that I’m always down for memes and “weird plays”
as survivor— even though I play pretty sweaty when I’m killer.
It wasn’t some kind of proof that I always get easy escapes against strong killers. I don’t. And that’s how it should be.You’re confusing me by constantly assuming I’m trying to use a fun meme video as some kind of balance proof — even though I’ve said multiple times that it was just a reply to that one person who said they never get survivors who “give them anything.”
It was never about how well or badly anyone played.I’m still confused, honestly.
-5 -
Honestly, the only problem I have with the 60% kill rate is how the process was done.
Because the idea was to make killers more lethal, if memory serves me right, but by the time it happened there wasn't much being stacked against the killer role. Immediately before patch 6.1.0 the only genuinely overpowered thing survivors had was Dead Hard. The absolute strongest things survivors used to have had already been removed, changed or altered in some way.
They could have adjusted things differently, imho.
6 -
xGodSendDeath said he never runs into people who give him “free kills.”
And I simply replied that I am sometimes down for that — especially in those backfill lobbies where I know I’m probably not going up against a strong killer.So why are you twisting my reply to him and acting like I’m trying to use a fun meme video as some kind of balance proof?
I’m honestly just sooo confused.
I mean, I even wrote underneath that I would’ve been dead. .. I´m so confused. xD
-1 -
No progress for survivor, Idk who you play against but most of my games is just two hooks and 2-3 gens are done which is like 60% of survivors first objective second one is gate which takes 20 seconds to open, my chases arent terrible just gens go by fast if survivors know how to do them and my first kill is on 1-2 gens left which isnt nothing abnormal.
-2 -
I keep questioning you because you responded to me twice and I wanted to know why.
2 -
Because it was super important to me to clearly separate that (rather off-topic) reply to one person from the main content of this post.
yipp..
Sure, sure — old Dead Hard was boosted, no doubt.
But.., that’s nothing compared to what stacked groups can bring in today.
There’s a lot of insanely strong stuff now.
Why? Because they completely ruined a lot of the older maps and made them really rough for survivors.That said, the game is way more perk-dependent than it used to be.
A lot of trash maps nowadays are basically compensated for by strong perks.
I’m not sure if that’s a good thing — just because some . .idk for example.. Coldwind maps got gutted doesn’t mean we don’t still have a bunch of ridiculously sper super strong ones.so yes.. like u said:
"They could have adjusted things differently, imho."
-5 -
While I do agree that the game is more dependent on perks these days, I am not sure if there are many extremely-strong perks available right now.
The killer meta has been stale for a while now, especially due to the Pain Res + DMS combo being seen almost every game. As for survivors, before this patch we were supposed to be in a healing meta, but it was nowhere near as prominent as the actual healing meta from the CoH days.
The recent patch, however, introduced a lot of bugs that make perks like Streetwise, Blood Rush and Last Stand very strong, but these are all exploits, which will probably get fixed in the next patch.
6 -
It doesn't matter how much you level a Survivor. If you're more invested in Killer, then that's where your bias will lie. The only way to get through that is to look at the game objectively.
I don't think it would. We've convinced ourselves that comms would somehow be terrible for DBD, but it's the standard for any PVP game like this. It's an important part of teamwork that's missing and that's why players do it externally.
To be totally fair too, Killers are more fragile than Survivors. I don't mean that in a snotty way, but if I've noticed anything in the last 3 years, it's that Survivors will continue to queue up for the worst experiences while Killer won't. I'm not really sure how to make the game more balanced while avoiding that loss in the process.
And even with Dead Hard, they just pulled a 180. Survivors could use it to win a palette race, so they nerf it and make it so Killers can win the palette race instead with a lunge. It's like they're allergic to a 50/50 chance when it comes to changes.
3 -
"To be totally fair too, Killers are more fragile than Survivors. I don't mean that in a snotty way, but if I've noticed anything in the last 3 years, it's that Survivors will continue to queue up for the worst experiences while Killer won't. I'm not really sure how to make the game more balanced while avoiding that loss in the process."
How else is this not a snotty thing? Its pure us vs them.
Also survs never quit before!? Are we playing the same game? The dev had to put in a "go next" prevention system because they keep giving up.
"And even with Dead Hard, they just pulled a 180. Survivors could use it to win a palette race, so they nerf it and make it so Killers can win the palette race instead with a lunge. It's like they're allergic to a 50/50 chance when it comes to changes."
Old Dead Hard nearly killed the game as it made playing anything but blight and nurse painful as the dash was enough to get an extra run at a lot of loops the dev recognised this and did the 6.1 patch to make killer less miserable.
Old MFT nearly did the same as it meant you could extend chases with the 3% which gave the same value as old DH.
(This is an edit got the two mixed up the pallet race part made me think of MFT over DH)
Post edited by Ragna_Rock on0 -
Comms are a standard for symmetrical PvP games, where both sides of the game can get equal benefits from them.
Comms in asymmetrical PvP games, help create an environment that is so unfun for killers, that the survivor queue times get so long that the game dies.
Remember that VHS wanted to fix all of the survivor “unfairness”. And they did! But it turns out that if you make one side of the game “completely fair”, it’s so unfun for the other side of the game, that incredibly massive queue time problems happen. And whenever killers complained the game was unfun, the devs told them to “deal with it”, because survivor fairness was more important.
-5 -
I can get such BHVR reasoning in a such weird way, but what about players
I still play both Killer and Survivor, despite kinda bad state for killers after this patch. Yet I won’t say my friend is fragile because he quit DBD after this patch. I can “brag”, I never dced myself despite one case facing a blatant cheater on killer.
But I don’t even dare to call someone fragile, because, damn, they dced. Trying to blame sounds like a big attempt to feel superior somewhere
If a whole group commit to stop playing, while other not…. Maybe… just maybe, it’s not about sentiment or being weak, but that’s a direct message that survivors have fun despite having nerf on dh while killers don’t have fun. And nuh, not less killer played after SM nerf, or recent gen cick meta. Killers not quitting after being nerfed, they quitting when facing with something they can’t deal: survivor perk or bugs.
And if being honest… survivors in SM era, and while ghoul was released, massively DCed as soon as they see big problem against them. Or were giving up. Maybe both sides actually committing to being “fragile”? I don’t even want to call them like that. It’s a game, what’s a point trying to embarrass people when they clearly show moments when this game isn’t fun for them? On both sides2 -
I’m going to agree with @Pulsar . U can’t mess up or play silly when facing decent killer and actually trying to win. Same with killers. They don’t act goofy until feel high superiority against team they are facing.
If people are doing this. That doesn't mean that’s “fine”. I know u are a good killer, and I’m pretty sure u punished severe such cocky survivors many times yourself.
That’s simply how this game works.
1 -
Old MFT nearly killed the game as it made playing anything but blight and nurse painful as the 3% was enough to get an extra run at a lot of loops the dev recognised this and did the 6.1 patch to make killer less miserable.
MFT came well after 6.1. Did you mean something else?
4 -
I know where the survivor role struggles. I do.
DBD has changed a lot. The devs are pushing it hard into a direction where it’s actually a true 4v1.
No more 1v1s, no more “2 people carry and the rest do whatever.”
Sure, you still get those matches – bad MMR, new killers, killers playing super soft – but once the killer actually understands their role and plays somewhat seriously, DBD turns into a proper 4 vs 1 against a lot of killers.It’s 25 + 25 + 25 + 25 vs 100.And BHVR keeps balancing the game more and more to make that scale work.
and on the way to that goal, a lot of survivor groups fall apart.
Why? Because the killer just has the more stable position at that point.
Ye, it sucks being solo as killer sometimes – but at least you can fully control your own 100%.
As survivor, you only ever control your own 25%. And that’s where the problem lies.I’ve played since release, both sides, and .. um.. honestly – for me (only for me, only my option, only my pov) : I know why groups break.
I also know I’ve got a super high kill rate (way, way way above 60%, which ye, is kind of dumb),
but that’s exactly why I don’t really care about stats.
What matters is for me is what actually happens during the match.And most of the time, survivor teams don’t bring their full 100%.
Most groups have at least one person who’s already a -25 from the start.
Sometimes it’s two people, and the team is basically starting at -50%.
Like that one Huntress match I had where two survivors went for some random sabo plays right at the start – and they weren’t even good at it.
So I’m playing 100 vs 50 before I even get warmed up.And this happens a lot.
You bring Lethal as Billy or play Blight → someone in the group doesn’t expect it, is out of position, gives you a free down.
Suddenly it’s 75 vs 100, and yup – that sucks for the other survivors.But if that person recovers and still contributes from that point on, the match is still salvageable.
But this is where most groups fail:
They don’t have all four players consistently contributing while alive.
Just being alive isn’t enough – you have to do your part the whole time.That’s why I think people need to stop obsessing over stats or end results, and instead look at what actually happens during the match.
And..
Yes, I still think survivors are the stronger role – and they should be.Because when I play killer and aim for a clean 3v1 (75%), the survivor team still needs to have a fighting chance.
But that chance only exists if the team played the early game at full power.
That’s where the lead or buffer comes from — the reserve the team can draw on later in a 3v1.If that didn’t happen?
yipp,… it gets rough real fastAnd as a killer, once you start playing seriously, you face tons of groups who always bring around 100% each. Constantly.
You have to be allowed a chance against those teams, right?And still, with most killers, you usually need survivors to make mistakes or misplays
That’s why I think it’s super important—not just to look at kill rates—but to focus on matchmaking so that each individual survivor in the lobby is strong enough to handle the specific killer they’re up against and has a real chance to contribute their 25% in the match.
And that’s usually not the case.
And I know this from the survivor side myself. Then on top of that, you get gen reg hitting you…
The team starts to break down, and you can feel the pressure easing off your own side. People start playing worse than they should, hanging around gens longer than they need to — because you’re thinking, “I have to try to make up for what we lost. Everyone on my team is under pressure right now, so I need to pressure this gen.”
And slowly, the team falls apart. Because one person often can’t pull their 25%, the others start losing their “own strength” too, and suddenly everyone is just scraping by at like 10%.
It’s really hard in those situations where things are falling apart to still play “clean” as a survivor team. People start doing random stuff. And then emotions kick in — maybe some get triggered, whatever. I know all that.
Like… one player plays dumb because they think, “I gotta greed this gen, I’m the only one making progress right now… I have to keep pushing.”
Another messes up because they’re triggered that things are already spiraling, so they rush the unhook too openly and recklessly.
Then the next one’s like, “Yup, this round’s probably dead anyway, why bother trying? I’ll just do something random… no point stressing in the chase, let’s just try some funny play.
And suddenly, every single player in that situation and group no longer has their full strength.
That’s why I win so much as killer. Even with the ‘super weak killers.
So um, yes , I think it’s super important that BHVR makes sure every single survivor is matched in a way that they can pull their 25% against the killer they get. - and I’m totally fine with some adjustments for SoloQ too.
But overall, from my (trying to be objective) perspective, it’s currently not needed to give more "goodies".
There are situations where even strong groups have little to no chance… but those are really specific edge cases where something needs to be changed, reworked, or fixed. Like some Coldwin maps for example — few or unsafe pallets, hardly any filler pallets to chain loops together, basically just a guaranteed death sentence for the team. Same goes for Haddonfield.
Also, many new killers get “too much” for what they have to do, like Ghoul or the recent changes to The Clown.
Nurse is still (despite her bugs) lethal on most maps… y, I know if I pick Nurse and I don’t want these guys to get out, usually it’s like: this team is dead, no matter what. Nurse "this one" killer you can equip and normally win —even if the group doesn’t make mistakes.
On some maps, it’s way too easy for the killer to put survivors in situations where they just can’t do anything or recover. (Here, the survivor team really needs super solid macro gameplay.) But up… it is what it is. At that point, the killer is the stronger force.
But.. ehw.., it’s hard for me to agree with some changes and survivor requests as long as I keep seeing so many avoidable mistakes, dumb plays, and in a lot of rounds, it’s just not a true 100 vs 100. I’m often playing with 100% on my side against like 50% from the survivor side… I don’t know.
As long as this kind of discrepancy exists, it’s hard to “sign off” on stuff, because what about the groups that actually are at 100%? And there are so many of them…
(I mean, I’m a survivor too, and I’m often not able to keep my performance consistent either — I tend to do some nonsense once the round starts falling apart anyway. - even though with a lot of effort from everyone involved the round could often still be saved and winnable… butwith randoms, you know from experience: that just won’t happen.)
So even when I’m playing 100% as killer, as a survivor I often let my own performance drop below what I could bring — because you only ever really have control over your own quarter of the team.
I know all the problems.
But still, with a lot of the suggestions I see, I just don’t think it’s the right way. I can’t get behind a lot of things because I know no matter what you give a lot of groups, it won’t be enough—they’ll still die, while the strong groups will just keep squeezing out the maximum on the flipside.
Maybe I’m biased in your eyes… I don’t know. I guess I have to accept that — it’s like all the things you hear when you really start taking killer play seriously. And… I’m used to being left with this feeling that I’m just the “bad person.” I mean, that’s not new to me.
And yup… very often, I just think, I don’t care — especially when I read the changes some people want.
I play harder than I need to.
Do things I don’t have to.
But um.., I’m only human.
Some things just push you into a “whatever” mode.Post edited by oecrophy on1 -
Changed it.
1 -
A 60% kill rate means on average flipping between a 2k and a 3k. That maths out to having a 49% win rate on average (62.5k for an even 50% on average). Yes, 4ks can happen, and yes, 0ks can happen. We are talking about the average across multiple matches.
-1 -
Quit as in stop queuing up entirely. The only thing that has made Survivor do that in the last 3 years is the go next prevention, ironically. Unless you disagree that Killers were queuing much less in year 6, to the point devs had to intervene with the meta shakeup.
Dead Hard wasn't exactly free either, though. It was probably the most unfair against Trapper and it could've been tuned down to make pallets more of a toss-up. But that also would've required changes to how Killer works with pallets too. Instead, they just heavily nerfed it twice. The only reason we still see it, in my opinion, is because it's one of the very few skill expression perks for Survivor and players really take to that element of it. MFT I don't even wanna get into.
VHS is a bad example to be honest. The Teens were basically the exact same as DBD, just with more offensive capability, and the most popular Monster used an AOE that often undid the boring workbench system. Whoever was more determined made quick work of matches. A lot of hit and run on both sides as well, so not much interaction overall. That game didn't live or die on comms.
Other games in the genre implement comms so that the Killer role can either hear them or communicate with them as well. Friday The 13th is remembered fondly as one of the more entertaining of the bunch and it did that. I don't see why DBD couldn't do the same.
The alternative would be a voice wheel similar to what Resident Evil Outbreak or Left 4 Dead uses, which would take a ridiculous amount of time and resources to maintain.
See above. It's not a personal remark, it's just the truth. Killer has to be handled a specific way or else the queue falls apart. It's true across all asymmetrical horror games.
Maybe if you came at it with this attitude from the start, nobody would've assumed otherwise.
1 -
Friday the 13th was remembered for having massive queue time problems, server instability, ragequitters that instantly ended the game for everyone else, and trolls that would sabotage their own team.
-4 -
It should really be 50/50. Some players will have higher kill rates, and at 60%, that could easily be 80-100%. Drop it down to 50% should shave off 10%. Literally, a tie is 2 survivors killed so the game should be balanced around that.
Making it more killer sided and then you'd lose all survivors players because they'd never win.
-1
