Hopes for MMR changes?
Curious what people would like to see with MMR changes.
Personally, I'd love to see it shift more towards being team based, and not so much each individual survivor. If one person is tunneled out but the other 3 get the gens done and escape, the game should absolutely recognize that as a win for survivors and an increase in MMR for all FOUR of them, not just the escapees.
Afterall, it's a 1v4. Not a 1v1v1v1v1.
Also, we need a solid ruling as for what is a win, what is a tie, and what is a loss for each side. I get it, some people think "oh ho ho, I got 3 flash bangs so I don't care that the survivors died, I won" or "ooh yeah I killed the one survivor who was tbagging me and BMing, so I don't care that the other 3 escaped, I won" and that's fine. But the game as a whole needs a genuine decision MMR wise, who won and who lost.
Comments
-
I hope it'd make it a slightly more even playing field without being a total sweatfest 24/7.
0 -
I definitely want the survivor wincon changed to matches won rather than personal ER. We've all had matches where the person who did the most was the only death. They deserve a win, just as the hatch rat who took no aggro all match deserves the loss.
7 -
I hope they stop tracking just kills and escapes and start tracking the quality of a match.
I'd argue a match where the killer gets 9 hooks but 3 survivors escape is a win for the killer.
Likewise, if 1 survivor loops a killer for 5 gens and dies, but the other 3 escape, that 1 survivor should also get a win.
Post edited by Reinami on2 -
In the end, not being able to see your MMR makes it meaningless.
That’s because no one can tell if the matchmaking is working correctly.
At the very least, each player should be able to see their own MMR.
3 -
I would leave the MMR calculation as it is and tweak the matchmaking instead.
Kills and escapes are a fine measuring stick. MMR is relative performance over time. It's not meant to measure you strictly on the 1 game where you looped a killer for 100 gens and died.
I've personally played close to 10k trials combined. The handful of trials where I personally played well and lost aren't even a blip on the radar. Over the course of thousands of trials, is a better player going to escape more than a less skilled player against a common opponent? Is a better killer going to have more kills? Again, those outlier games where someone hid in a bush and made it out, or you got 400 hooks but somehow didn't kill anyone don't matter in the grand scheme of things. Your MMR isn't cartoonishly rubber banding from game to game.
Post edited by edgarpoop on2 -
vote up
-1 -
To me it Should be based on chase time + escapes. Hatch escapes worth less than gate escapes. These are two universally good measures of skill. If someone has a long chase time against say a killer with a low chase time (which is better for that killer player), this means that this survivor is better and probably good at the game, so they should have their Mmr go up more, and if they die, it should factor this in to reduce mmr loss. I also agree with your idea of rewarding the tunneled survivor.
1 -
They messed around with stricter MMR brackets a couple of years ago.
It resulted in somewhat fairer trails for the newbies, who got thrown in with the veterans way less often. The middle skilled players ended up with slightly better quality allies & opponents too.
But among the higher brackets it harmed queue times, with the waiting becoming quite bad. And it also turns out the super sweats actually don't like going up against other super sweats every match back to back to back. Since many of these players were also content creators they broadcasted their burnout, so they reverted MMR back.
I also believe they need to further address lobby dodging and shopping around. Many of the game's evils spring from backfilling lobbies. How could any system have a decent shot when players can yeet themselves repeatedly?
-1 -
Team based on the results (or at a minimum 50/50, 50% you, 50% overall team). I don't think it will make a significant difference, but a small one that better reflects the game.
Agree with @edgarpoop on the idea of keeping it to kills/escapes - in the long run tracking anything else would be statistically insignificant.
Conceptually I'd like them to tighten higher MMR, but I'd need more information to make a decision like that.
0 -
That it's actually matchmaking changes in disguise, as long as matchmaking remains lobotomized and terrified that if someone has to wait even 1 minute more than they would otherwise they'll hop off and go play Minecraft instead it really doesn't matter what they change about mmr itself.
0 -
I'd be wary that making it a 1v4 will lead to more DCing from survivors. Relying on team mates to not repeatedly drag you into low MMR hell is just gonna annoy alot of stronger players.
1 -
The emblem system would be far better than the insane system we have now. Just use the scores in the four categories and base their MMR increase or decrease on that. BHVR literally has a better system staring them right in the face, yet they refuse to use it. It would take BHVR almost no additional work to make this change. Unbelievably frustrating
Post edited by Classic_Rando on1 -
The issue with making MMR teambased would - or could - cause trouble for solo queue.
On the other hand the sole factor of escaping should not be the thing that counts.
In conclusion, the only valuable solution probably would be a completely reworked point system. Or take the current point system and make people rise in MMR when they cross 20k or 25k.
You need to somehow reward the one guy who keeps the killer busy the whole trial, does 1.8 gens on top, unhooks thrice, gets off 4 full heals, but gets left to die in endgame as well as the person who does 3 gens by themselves and does not get injured once.
But to not make it too frustrating you need some kind of safety net for being hard tunneled out and finishing a game with 5k points (according to the current system).
Killer seems much easier to regulate. Count hooks, count kills, count hits, sum it up in a final score at the end. You don't even need kills to reach a certain score (let us say we take the 20k). This might even help with the slugging/tunneling issue.
So overall: It is not that easy to establish a new and fair system which pays attention to all aspects of the trials. But especially for survivor, it cannot stay the way it is right now.
1 -
I don't know if it's possible, but I wish MMR used an algorithm that looks at your recent matches, your perk choices, and how you interact with each survivor, and chase time. Then it could match you with players who show the same patterns. It could group players with similar playstyles, like meta perks, players who go for hatch, or the more casual ones.
I'd be curious to see how this kind of matchmaking would actually feel in practice.0 -
Personally, I'd love to see it shift more towards being team based, and not so much each individual survivor. If one person is tunneled out but the other 3 get the gens done and escape, the game should absolutely recognize that as a win for survivors and an increase in MMR for all FOUR of them, not just the escapees.
That was already something people were asking for, and is already somehow implemented (unless they took it out again without notice), if you get tunneled out and everyone else makes it out, you lose pretty much no MMR.
This was another change that made solo queue even more miserable, it's an excellent example of people not knowing what they're asking for, and if your proposal is to change this further so that the one one died will not just be MMR-neutral but gain as much MMR as the others who survived, then your proposal will hurt solo queue even more.
That's because they made it so that this works also if you're the only one escaping through the gate and everyone else is dead, you get pretty much no MMR (or more precisely, the less teammates escape, the less MMR you gain). As you can't control how good others play unless you're in SWF, I constantly feel punished for not having friends to play with as low MMR is really hell and I finally wanted out but could never made it.
Back to your proposal as I understood it, then the result will be that solo queue players will sink into the depths of the MMR pit faster even if they escape when they couldn't manage the feat of both bodyguarding their extremely mediocre teammates who can't stand on their feet for longer than five seconds after the killer spotted them, and repairing five gens at the same time, because even if you escape but your teammates could not be saved, you'll lose as much MMR as the dead ones.
0 -
If Only there was Skilled based match making.
This game was built around a Competitive mindset
Tunneling is only been so high because of Gen Speeds and how most survivors dont even know how to counter it.
They show Tunneling as a strategy in Comp game on there twitch channel. They say they want put Anti Tunneling, Slugging and camping in the game but allowing it in Comp games its all disabled.
Like why disable it when these strategies are bad. Doesn't that sound miss leading on how the game plays. It is a cover up of how bad the game really is outside there World.
It proves they truly don't care about the state of the game.
The MMR is one of the reasons new players struggle. There shoved into games that there with Killers or survivors that are way better then them.
It proves they don't play there own game.
-6 -
This is what I want for MMR improvements
- MMR is a visible stat after the match. Each players MMR is visible only to themselves.
- MMR is awarded or lost based solely on the team that won not on individual survivors.
- Most MMR awarded to survivor team would be 5 gens completed with 0 hooks to the least MMR awarded to the survivor team at 0 Gens completed all survivors dead. With a hatch escape only counting less if other team members died.
- Awarded MMR would also scale based on the difference in strength between survivor side and killer side.
- Train an AI to estimate the outcome of a match based on player loadouts. If the AI forecasts the match to be too onesided, handicap the game slightly. I'm thinking if the killer is forecast to be 90% chance of victory, reduce generator 1 by 5 seconds, and the remaining generators by 3 seconds. Similaryly, add these times if killer is forecasted to lose. This would also reduce MMR lost or gained for the match. This would also be done to keep the queues moving with imperfect matchups.
- Use the distribution of MMR across killers and perks to SERIOUSLY rebalance the game. The AI match predictor might be useful here too.
- Try to group survivors and killers of similar MMR. Sort the queues and if no good matches exist just build the best survivor team against the best killer and apply handicap as described above (item 5)
- Tell everyone exactly what the method of match making is and the values used. 100% transparency. No one is served by bad data inferred or datamined.
-1 -
Kills and escapes are a fine measuring stick
BHVR managed to realize how asinine of a measure this was but you somehow can't? Grim.
-1 -
MMR worked really well when the limits were tightened up. Matchmaking time suffered is all. They've opened the limits so wide now, MMR is kind of irrelevant. I wouldn't draw to many conclusions from the method based on its current performance.
7 -
Basically this. Once you reach the Soft Cap (which isnt even that high), you are at random Matchmaking because you get matched with people who are way above said Soft Cap in the top .01% or so and with people who barely reached the Soft Cap. Which is also why people who claim that they only go against very good players are straight up lying, since this would mean they would be on some kind of special Server where only good players exist. If someone says that they only face good players, you know that their takes are made-up.
Like, I can go from Killers and Survivors who dont know if they are playing DBD or Minecraft to extremely good players on both sides, simply because the MMR is random after a certain point.
@Topic:
I think they either should stick with Kills and Escapes and make it tighter and especially fairer AND punish lobbydodging OR they should bring back the Emblem-System but tweak this. Because realistically everything people can contribute to the game has some value. If I die, but did three Gens on my own, I had a significant part on my team escaping. And for Killer it should be based on Hooks - if I proxycamp one Survivor and kill another one with NOED, I am worse than the guy who got 8 Hooks and 0 Kills.
But I think that they dont really want a more complicated system, so they will most likely stick with Kills and Escapes because it is indeed true that a Killer who overall kills more Survivors is better than a Killer who overall kills less Survivors. And a Survivor who escapes more often is most likely better than a Survivor who dies often. And while people bring up Rat-Builds all the time, I almost never see those and the people who only play to escape via Hatch are really rare.
However, as I said before, there needs to be a punishment for lobbydodging or the Pregame-Lobby should be removed completely. Because lets be real, Survivors dont talk before the game and Killers dont prepare for the game. People check profiles and then decide to dodge or not. And since then the Matchmaker decides that having someone join faster than someone who would actually fit is better, all the matchmaking which happened before is thrown away. So either people should be punished by a longer queuetime if they decide to dodge a Lobby OR we remove the pregame Lobby completely and once 5 players with suitable matchmaking are found, they load into a Match.
Would personally prefer the second one.
4 -
The brutally honest answer? I'd rather they not bother. They'll only have to scrap all their hard work as soon as their biggest content creators actually have to work hard for their kills and escapes. The moment anyone starts to take winning and losing seriously in this game, any semblance of balance that ever existed instantly crumbles to dust. It's just not a very well balanced game at any level of skill, to be honest.
And since we're not actually doing anything about the cheesy strategies on both sides that can win you trials, I'm not sure any MMR system worth a damn could be created in such an environment anyway. Because there isn't a good foundation in place to build one on top of.
The Survivor experience is so much worse following the "QoL" patches then when they started. I've accepted that the game we have is what we have and nothing beyond rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic is possible without another major outcry from the community. So please BHVR, I'm begging you. Forget about this and use the time more wisely to fix bugs and create new content.
With all that said:
Split the queues less often
This might be controversial, but I think having split queues was a mistake. It's failed to do what it was meant to do, which is to encourage players to queue only if they want to interact with the event mechanics. But players keep queuing up in the event queue to ignore the event stuff anyway, so we may as well all queue together and give the match-making system a shot at working properly instead. I get that 2V8 and Chaos Shuffle need to be separate since they differ from the main mode, but the Anniversary, Halloween and Winter events should not be split. Maybe it doesn't matter so much if you live in a more populous region, but I play on the UK and Ireland servers, so frequently splitting the queues makes a big difference to the quality of my games.
Attempt to match play styles
They could use the emblem system to match up different play styles. Active Survivors should match with other active Survivors, stealthy gamers with other stealthy gamers (that said, without info perks, playing against lobbies like this as Killer would be miserable). Meme build enjoyers with other meme build enjoyers, etc. Not sure exactly how this could be done, but maybe there is a way.
No more instantaneous matches
I know that if I get instant matches on either side, the skill levels are going to be wildly different. The system hasn't been given enough time to work and is just grabbing anyone to fill a spot and make the queues faster. But I'd rather not be playing the game if there's nobody queuing around my skill level to play with. This is probably the biggest issue I have with match-making right now and the biggest cause of frustration. This leads on to my next point...
More MMR bands
I don't know for certain, but I strongly suspect that there are really only two MMR bands: total beginners and everyone else. The everyone else band might include players at 100 hours just about understanding the fundamentals of the game to 10,000 hour demons who know how to play every loop and checkspot in the game. Obviously this makes for some very wild match-making. MMR should have more bands and they should be somewhat tighter than they currently are.
Implement platform specific MMR
This possibly only affects a small number of players, so perhaps this should not be a priority, but I think my Switch and PC MMR should be tracked separately. Simply put, the technical gulf between the two platforms is so great that I can't play as well on the Switch as I do on PC. I tend to have much more fun over on Switch when we get cut off from the rest of the player base. So I think platforms should have their own MMR.
Killer specific MMR should start lower
Sometimes when I play a new Killer, I get much harder lobbies than I do with my mains. I'm guessing this is because my MMR is much less stable on the Killers I don't use very often. But I think there's no reason to expect me to do as well with The Ghoul as I might with Billy, despite them both being considered very strong by the community. The idea that if you're good with a few other Killers then you should be decent with every Killer only really applies to the very experienced players, imo (e.g. 10,000 hour streamers).
MMR should be more dynamic
In other online games I can feel the MMR system working. In Fortnite, if I eliminate 10 to 15 other players and win a Victory crown, my opposition gets stronger in my next few games. If I'm eliminated early because I can't maintain that level, I get easier opponents in my following matches. This doesn't happen in DBD. You can go on a 10 match losing streak as Killer but nothing changes. And it really doesn't work at all for the Survivor side. The more you lose as Survivor, the harder your games become because the teams get much weaker and you need your other teammates to pull their weight if you are to Survive. It's a difficult puzzle to solve, but the emblem system should at least be used to put active low MMR Survivors together with one another so they have a shot at getting out. It might be controversial to say, but I think MMR should "rubber band" a bit more freely than it currently does, so players don't get too frustrated to be stuck on a losing streak.
No more lobby dodging
Once you're at the campfire with 4 other players, you should be locked in. Keep the 1 minute timer for pre-game chat and for the Killer to make build adjustments, but once you've been matched there should be no backing out.
Ditch MMR altogether and embrace the chaos
They'll never do it, but maybe they should just forget about the MMR system completely and just match everyone at random. At the very least, we can then stop thinking and complaining about it never working properly.
I don't know where I'll land in terms of my MMR, but I'm not looking forward to being dropped into low MMR hell where nobody touches a gen all trial or into high MMR hell where every game ever is a zero chill quad slowdown Blight/Ghoul/Krasue trying to make the trial a 3v1 at the earliest opportunity. At this point, I have very little faith in BHVR not to mess things up more than they were before.
Post edited by tjt85 on1 -
i just want it to be visible to the player, as well as something letting them know that matchmaking expanded their MMR range due to waiting times
-3 -
Imagine having four rats creeping around edgemap in the same match though lol
But hey, if it would get them out of my matches then I'm on board.
2 -
Your joke actually reminded me of those end-of-match highlights in shooters that show the longest kill streak. I'm imagining a DBD version that spotlights the last survivor hiding for hatch. It would be hilarious to watch. I'd love to read more of your ideas, I genuinely enjoy your comments.
1 -
"They'll only have to scrap all their hard work as soon as their biggest content creators actually have to work hard for their kills and escapes"
Sadly, this is what happened last time they tightened matchmaking (after Chucky). Common complaint was that more difficult opponents makes it harder for them to engage with their chat because all their attention needs to be on the game then.
3 -
Thing is something like that is a double-edged sword. It would be nice to see MMR, simply because then you know that it is working. And it would pull the plug of some people who act as if they are in the Top 0.1% of players when they see that this is not really the case.
But on the other hand it would lead to more lobbydodging (if you show it beforehand), but at the very least it would make discussions really annoying. Because when your MMR is only 1589 and not 1610, your opinion is suddenly invalid. We had this with rank-based Matchmaking where having a different take must mean that you were not at Rank 1 for some people.
3 -
If we can’t see MMR, it’s completely meaningless.
Otherwise, as always, “reverse MMR harassment” will just start popping up in various threads.
Some people will insist they have high MMR (even though we have no way of knowing if that’s true), while others say things like, “That streamer went down quickly, so they must be low MMR” (when in reality it might just be a high-MMR lobby with a very skilled killer).
There’s no way to tell who’s actually a good player.
0 -
If two players play the same set of opponents 100 times, will the better of the two players win more? We can put an even more realistic number on that. There are ~50k players on Steam alone at any given time of day. If those players played thousands of times, is the better player going to win more?
1
