Damn playing a low tier killer is Horrible right now.
Comments
-
I've been using 11s psychic build (OoO, We See You) man, these poor killers are getting annihilated. Showing all 4 survivors where Trappers placing his traps in real time is huge. others like Nemmy get ran to oblivion.
0 -
Gen speeds are fine, it’s when you stack a bunch of perks is the issue. For example hyper focused, stake out, dejavu, with resilience or prove thyself. Gens gonna fly! Especially with big maps that have strong loops and pallets.
Total nightmare for any low mobility killer.
0 -
Because blight is very popular from survivors too he is very deffended killer which is pretty strange because I saw and even disscused with some mainly survivor players that blight is busted beyond and they still were chill about him compare to killers like springtrap which got more hate.It's almost like the survivors care more about fun gameplay than they do just winning. I know that probably comes up as an impossibility to many.
The thing about Blight - is he too strong? Yes, but he's also enjoyable to face. That's the difference from something like Nurse, who is too strong and not particularly engaging to play against. Balance is important of course, but not nearly as much as having an engaging killer design.
6 -
If you're going to believe BHVR must be right on these decisions because they have the data we don't, then their decision not to nerf perks and/or SWF must also be because they have all the data.
them nerfing perks and swfs directly is clearly not their approach to address them. They release killers like vecna instead, also i never said they were right about all there decisions because they have all the data. I said I'm pretty sure theirs a good reason they decide to balance the game around 60/40, since they have for years that doesn't mean they cant make a bad decision.
They also never have said that the 60/40 is a rate that applies to every single scenario, but an overall target, and its not their only game balancing metric.
they said that killers having 60% kr across all MMR largely falls within their "killer balance" so 40% should be applied to all MMRs and group sizes.
They never say '60% is a balanced rate'. It's relatively balanced (not absurdly broken like a 70 to 80 would be, while still keeping the killer a 'force to be reckoned with') and its their intended balance - not a normal balance metric, but what they go for.
Balance is subjective, 60/40 to the dev team is balanced. It was literally word for word stated.
Looking at the bigger picture, there was an average kill rate of 60% across all MMR... This largely falls in line with ourintended Killer balanceThis is literally stating 60% kill rate across all mmrs is what they deem the killer role to be balanced.
We try to keep Killers near a60% kill rateon average to keep matches relatively even and support the horror theme of the game, where the Killer is a force to be reckoned with and the survival is not guaranteed.There's no point in being delusional about words this is literally stating 60% KR is intended for in other words "close to equal but not identical" games. Which is why they said 60% largely falls within there intended "killer balance"
You're framing it in the best possible scenario for the survivors and worst for the killer. The survivor has no exhaustion to help escape, no anti-tunnel, no healing to help recover, etc. That's the thing about all out builds (on either side, really), under a perfect scenario they seem extremely powerful, but if another scenario occurs they can become very weak, very fast.
Which is why these builds are broken in the hands of SWFs, having coms, changes the game. Communication in Dbd against a killer opens up so many doors and opportunities.
It's possible that build is broken. BHVR has the data and would know for certain, but there's lots of reasons why the build might not succeed.
The reasons for it working and not working well, is not balanced.
0 -
This is literally stating 60% kill rate across all mmrs is what they deem the killer role to be balanced.
No, it isn't.
It's stating it's their intended balance, not that it's 'balanced'.
Their intent is for the killer to be overbearing to some extent, without outright pushing survivors out the door.
3 -
There's nothing you can do to hurt specifically high-performing SWF that won't also hurt soloq and average-performing SWF. And again, gen multipliers are not the issue with thise players anyway. They coordinate Endurance perks like WGLF and MfT. Funny enough the people I usually see use perks like Prove Thyself are soloqers. People not on coms can just say "I have Prove Thyself" in pre game chat if they felt so inclined.
All survivors need is hyperfocus and 1 survivor running prove thyself and those 2 survivors are popping gens every 20 sum seconds with toolboxes. Swfs in high ELO are coordinated teams. They plan, they actually talk lmao.
There are many people in this forum that do say it, that upper MMR soloqers often get there by riding the backs of SWF.
This is just wishful thinking
It's like this for both sides. I don't stand a chance against a good Nurse or Blight. It's an auto lose in the lobby.
Swfs in high elo beat them with coms and coordination. Its not easy no matter what killer your playing when your facing a good swf. Playing against a good nurse and blight while Solo Qing is probably a stomp though.
I've met people with 90% KRs. That means they're basically winning all their matches and are certainly in upper MMR, and they're winning against those 4mans. You can beat those teams if you're good enough. If you're new to upper MMR or relied on cheese to get there then yeah, you're going to lose. As you should. The top players should really only be playing against one another but matchmaking and there only being so many of those people on each server makes that impossible, so you get stomped by the better players when you meet them.
That player with the 90% KR is a outlier in the data. The data in his mmr suggest he is among the top of the top amongst great players. He cant be brought up in a conversation about balance when we know nothing about him while hes sitting at the top 0.5%. Data suggest amongst the entirety of high mmr Swfs have a major advantage.
-6 -
They release killers like vecna instead, also i never said they were right about all there decisions because they have all the data.To have a discussion, you don't get to be selective about that. If you're going to argue that BHVR reached a decision based on data or their experience than that has to apply to discussion of all game elements, not just the ones where you happen to agree with them.
they said that killers having 60% kr across all MMR largely falls within their "killer balance" so 40% should be applied to all MMRs and group sizes.Those last two words 'group sizes' are something you just tacked on. You can believe that, I don't think its feasible, but its not something BHVR has ever said.
Balance is subjective, 60/40 to the dev team is balanced. It was literally word for word stated.This depends on what you mean by the word balance. Many people, most I think, use it in a non-subjective way
Balance can also be used with attached conditions, such as BHVR does, but that does not mean the game is balanced in the sense of being 'even'.
There's no point in being delusional about words this is literally stating 60% KR is intendedIt's not news to anyone that 60% KR is what they go for.
Which is why these builds are broken in the hands of SWFs, having coms, changes the game. Communication in Dbd against a killer opens up so many doors and opportunities.SWFs having the possibility of being stronger is again not news to anyone.
Whether they were coordinating quick heals, deliverance plays, pick ups, background player, sabo, etc. all of those are going to be stronger in the hands of a high MMR SWF with good coordination. It doesn't however address any of the points about the downsides of going all out on gen rush in comparison to the alternatives.
6 -
No, they said that 60% is where they want it to be, while specifically saying that it is only 'relatively even', and that it serves the horror theme.
"relatively even" means close to equal bro but not identical but if you want them literally flat out saying it here you go.
Looking at the bigger picture, there was an average kill rate of 60% across all MMR, while that average kill rate increased to 63% for high MMR. This largely falls in line with our intended Killer balance.
-5 -
Again, they're saying that it's at the intended point, but they're not saying it's balanced.
6 -
"This largely falls in line with our killer balance"
read it one more time "our killer balance", 60% falls within THEIR killer "Balance". There saying in exact words that 60% is what they deem to be balanced for killer.
Are you trolling?
Again, they're saying that it's at the intended point
You made this up lmao, nowhere did they just say it was just at a certain "point" they liked.
They outright LITERALLY said its at there intended balance for killer.
"our killer balance"
Weather if its balanced to you or not doesn't matter to them, its what they feel like its balanced for their game, and they've held that belief for years.
-7 -
This largely falls in line with our intended Killer balance.
You keep omitting this specific word.
This isn't them saying it's balanced, it's saying that it's at the point where they want it to be. A point they previously clarified as 'relatively even', where the killer is a real threat and survival is not guaranteed.
It's not balanced, it's slanted in the killers' favour to serve the horror theme.
8 -
I've been playing recently Vecna2 and Dracula and then playing lower tier killers like Knight, Unknown and Legion… and the difference is astonishing. Dracula can receive a pallet/flashlight save and still catch up and have a chance to win the chase; Legion otherwise, taking a pallet save can end the match for you.
They really should look into to how the lower tier killers are and what could be done to change them.
0 -
Vecna is one of the most skill expressive killers in the game maybe the most tbh. The player can make him S tier or C tier.
1 -
This isn't them saying it's balanced, it's saying that it's at the point where they want it to be. A point they previously clarified as 'relatively even', where the killer is a real threat and survival is not guaranteed.
This is what they think is balanced, it's saying that it's at the point where they want it to be. A point they previously clarified as 'balanced', where the killer is a real threat and survival is not guaranteed.
I fixed it for you.
This is weird rage bait, "Our intended killer balance" there calling the point which is 60% for killer to be balanced, LITTERALLY. What you think is balanced in a video game doesn't matter its subjective.
what agenda are you trying to push on here to be in such denial over the english language?
I guess your rage bait was pretty good because I fell for it lol
-5 -
And yet all of that takes much more time, coordination, game sense, and skill than camping/tunneling/slugging and it's still not as strong.
3 -
That player with the 90% KR is a outlier in the data. The data in his mmr suggest he is among the top of the top amongst great players. He cant be brought up in a conversation about balance when we know nothing about him while hes sitting at the top 0.5%. Data suggest amongst the entirety of high mmr Swfs have a major advantage.
I said "people," not just one. There are people in this forum with 80-90% KRs.
But you can make this exact same argument for upper MMR survivors. BHVR never said how many people are included in that particular stat. The numbers are probably so different because the group is no where near as large as the others. Whenever they've shown the size of 4mans it's always miniscule compared to everyone else. Both 85%+ KR killers and high ER upper MMR 4mans are going to be a tiny slice of the playerbase and nothing should fully revolve around either of these groups. If the perks aren't performing crazy in every bracket then they're not an issue. Otherwise you'd also have to look at the perks those 90% KR killers are using and nerf them too. It's no different.
7 -
You have no data to prove how many players have insane KRs like that, even when you look at individual killers KR in high MMR none of them come close to 90%. Which proves these are a very very very small percentage of people, the top amongst the top, we know nothing about them. They stand out, outside of great players statistically. For all we know majority of these anomalies could be cheaters. Your just saying they exist which proves nothing. These are individual players.
But what we do know is that amongst the entirety of high ELO 4 mans perform nearly 10% above their targeted %.
You cant compare the ER of the all SWFs in high elo to a single killers KR, because they play everybody.
If 4 mans have a 48% ER in high mmr, and a single killer like blight has a 69% KR in high mmr, and blight plays against solos, duos, trios along with swfs. If that blight gets to go against those lower performing groups aside from the swfs, why are 4 mans in high elo boosted by 8%? and blight only 9%? If blights are stomping in high mmr against solos why isnt it much higher?
So if blights only went against swfs, what would that do to his KR? hmmmmm. I wonder.
-9 -
Ifixed it for you.You changed quoted words from relatively even to balanced. That's not fixing, that's a different meaning.
"Our intended killer balance"Other thing I'll point out - when they give the following quote
"We try to keep Killers near a 60% kill rate on average to keep matches relatively even and support the horror theme of the game, where the Killer is a force to be reckoned with and the survival is not guaranteed."
it comes from the same place that they give the image with 48.3% escape rate.
At no point do they say they are unhappy with the 48.3 or its outside that there norm. In fact, you are relying on that post for BHVR saying they are overall happy with the numbers. Much like the quotes, you are only using part of it.
8 -
You also have no idea how many people are in that 48% bracket. There could be 50,000 in a lower one and 1,000 in the upper. That number is important.
4 -
I just fixed it to make it say what they actually said, not some made up crap to rage bait.
Of course, there’s more to a Trial than just Killers. Let’s take a look at how Survivors have fared!
Overall escape rates tended to be quite close across MMR brackets, with all MMR seeing a 41% escape rate and high MMR landing at 42%. Digging into specific party sizes is where the results differed.
Unsurprisingly, coordinated groups playing at high MMR performed best, resulting in the highest escape rate. Interestingly, however, solo queue players in the wider MMR bracket proved to be particularly hardy, falling above the overall escape rate.
But with that, we’ll see you again in July to share the next 3 months of Killer and Survivor stats.
Until next time…
Where did they say they were happy about the difference in group sizes in high elo or it fell in line with their balance?
All they said was they weren't surprised that 4 mans in high mmr performed better because even they know good players + teamwork = strong asf. They never said they were happy about the differences.
They specifically said that killers KR being at 63% in high mmr largely falls within there killer balance. Is that a surprise when they said 60% is what they strive for?
-4 -
Thats true, but its clearly enough players for the data to matter to them.
They dgaf about a few sus players running around with a 90% KR.
-5 -
You don't know what data matters to them. This is just what they show us, and it's cherry picked. Knowing percentages without knowing the size of the brackets is borderline useless. Most likely the players in the 30s are so much bigger than the one in the 48 that it evens out to 40.
1 -
I dont think they would cherry pick data and wright a observation about it on there stats page if it didn't matter to them, lets be realistic here. Although i do agree that not knowing how many players in the brackets cripples what we know. We can be realistic and assume that the data being presented and the constant games against Swfs in high mmr points to there being a decent amount of Swfs in high mmr
-4 -
Why are you playing then? It feels like dbd gives you anger and resentment of other players. Its really not that deep, and the overall health of an individual (us players) is more important than serving the Entity tea and crumpets.
-1 -
In all honesty, as a solo'Q primarily, I loved Blight from day 1. I've never played him, but going against him gives me the biggest rush (haha!) this game has to offer.
Hug tech going bye bye hurt him a bit but, he's still deadly. I would rather hug tech come back and instead give my Trapper hug tech as well. Yup.
-2 -
Where did they say they were happy about the difference in group sizes in high elo or it fell in line with their balance?Where did they say they weren't?
Here's the quote, bolding is in the original.
"Looking at the bigger picture, there was an average kill rate of 60% across all MMR, while that average kill rate increased to 63% for high MMR. This largely falls in line with our intended Killer balance."
They're clearly looking at overall average numbers. They even bolded it. They have ample opportunity to say something like 'we're considering ways to address the SWF disparity', but they don't, they say the numbers fall in line with their balance targets.
6 -
We can be realistic and assume that the data being presented and the constant games against Swfs in high mmr points to there being a decent amount of Swfs in high mmr
This is realistic to some, but most of them are killer mains. It makes absolutely no sense to assume 'decent amount of swfs.' when that size is very small. Are you finding these seal team 6 swf's constantly? Genuine question.
3 -
The reason why "opponent" cares about solo or SWF: You either have had a bad experience playing as a survivor, don't play as a survivor at all, or can't play as a team. It's hard to believe that this game is almost 10 years old and we still make the distinction between "solo" and "SWF."
0 -
They are very selective with what they show. The personal stats on their stat page are totally incorrect if you use the abandon option. They also don't include any match with a DC in it in the official stats they show us, and those are pretty much all going to be killer wins. So the data should be taken with a pound of salt. Only they know the numbers for everything.
The last time they showed us party size percentages it looked like this:
You can see how small the amount of 4mans is and that's including all brackets. Uppers who regularly play in 4mans would be the smallest, probably no more than 3% of the playerbase. The game doesn't need to be balanced around them anymore than it does the top 3% of killer players.
Also, when you see the data as whole like this, survival rates are under 40% globally.
8 -
This is weird rage bait, "Our intended killer balance" there calling the point which is 60% for killer to be balanced, LITTERALLY.
Let me ask you: Why would they say 'our intended balance' instead of 'balanced' when those two are, according to you, one and the same?
Doesn't it go without saying that the proprietors of a competitive pvp game intend for their balance to be immaculately evened out?
So why do they draw this distinction between 'balanced' and 'intended balance'?
6 -
huh?
Didn't you just say this in your last post?
At no point do they say they are unhappy with the 48.3 or its outside that there norm. In fact, you are relying on that post for BHVR saying they are overall happy with the numbers.
Your saying here that they were happy with the survivor numbers in that post, i told you and proved to you they didnt now your asking me..?
Where did they say they weren't?
They're clearly looking at overall average numbers. They even bolded it. They have ample opportunity to say something like 'we're considering ways to address the SWF disparity', but they don't, they say the numbers fall in line with their balance targets.
I dont think you really read what they said, they were specifically talking about the killers KR overall and in high mmr. It says right there "killer balance" lmao.
You right, they did bolden it, They mentioned the overall KR of killers and the KR of killers in high mmr. Which they both said falls within their balance for killers. They didn't just mention the overall KR of killers they commented on both global and high elo numbers. read.
They have ample opportunity to say something like 'we're considering ways to address the SWF disparity', but they don't, they say the numbers fall in line with their balance targets.
Lol quote to me in that post where they said the survivors ER data all fell within their intended balance? They said that about killer.
Why would they say there considering ways to address swfs when we dont know if they even know how? We see the killers they release and keep strong and its pretty obvious how they try to handle it.
-4 -
It's got very little to do with the devs, since their 40/60 goal involves aspects of the game that they have direct control over. One thing that this community widely agrees upon is that voice comms are what give high performing swfs their leg up (and i guarantee all high MMR 4mans use voice comms), but this is done via third party communication systems. BHVR have no control over that, despite its influence undoubtedly being reflected in their stats. They can't distinguish who is using a third party system when it comes to breaking down escape rates.
The only feasible way they could balance around this would be to implement their own in-game voice communication system (which is a very unpopular option among the playerbase) and from there make changes as needed. Only then could we look at swf escape rates and say, 'hey, so, these swfs are (x) over the escape rate goal. The devs might need to look into this.'
3 -
Its gonna stay like that until they do something about that top 3% because apparently theirs enough of swfs in high mmr for them to release these bloated killers that's clearly intended to go against a strong team. Like with vecna its so obvious.
So its either nerf the killers and make Swfs unstoppable to help the majority of players. Or nerf swfs then nerf the killers in 1 update. I dont see no other option with the direction this game is heading in. Unless you have any ideas.
-6 -
He lost hug tech and his best addon effects like og alchemy ring or compound 33 and still was second best killer (considered second best and this changed now but nothing changed the fact he is top tier and s-tier).
I just find it sick how can somdone hate other killers but than says blight is fine.Trapper will have rework this year and I hope it will be good one but at worst he will be atleast more playable than he is now.
0 -
His addons needed to go, come on… lol. Even with all the nerfs, he is still a beast, and this is what I'd like bhvr to take note of. His core design is STRONG.
If trapper ever becomes a tier god, I'll be quite unhappy lol. I like my underdog. Annnnnd I dont think he's as weak as everyone says. low-mid B imo
2 -
Problem with trappers power or killers like ghostface is in their core, they arent as good as blights or ghouls and need solid buffs or reworks (trapper) to compleatly change theif power of add something new to thdir power so they arent bad.
-1 -
So, if I said to you… a 10k hour trapper can be more lethal than a 10k hour any other killer. Would you entertain that discussion, or just pass? You have the positive energy I think would help this discussion, so if you're interested, give me your thoughts!
2 -
You quoted yourself to respond to me.
Your saying here that they were happy with the survivor numbers in that postI'm not pretending to know what goes inside BHVR's heads. You are using these posts for them to say they are happy with the numbers. At no point do they make an exception to that statement.
i told you and proved to you they didnt now your asking me..?All you've proved is an ability to ignore words that don't fit your conclusions.
You asked me where they said they were happy with the numbers, I'm asking you where they said they weren't. Your own evidence disproves your arguments - they said the numbers fell within their intended targets for overall averages, at no point did they make any exceptions to that statement.
You right, they did bolden it, They mentioned the overall KR of killers and the KR of killers in high mmr. Which they both said falls within their balance for killers. They didn't just mention the overall KR of killers they commented on both global and high elo numbers. read.None of that makes sense.
Why would they say there considering ways to address swfs when we dont know if they even know how?You're backing up my argument that they aren't unhappy about the numbers. Now you're just quibbling about possible whys.
-
Let me sum up the problems with your argument
1: You're trying to supersede the argument about KR by relying upon BHVR's statements about where they want the intended KR to be. If you are going to use them as your evidence as being the standard we all need to use to guide us, you don't get to be selective.
2: Even in relying on BHVR, you're ignoring key words they've said. 'Relatively', 'intended', 'average', while substituting different words into those quotes - you then accuse others of having trouble understanding English.
3: Even past all of that, at no point have you proven or shown your original argument about the gen speed perks being the issue and not a coordinated SWF in general just being stronger.
9 -
Nerfing killers and nerfing survivors are two really different things. Killers all have individual aspects to be taken separately; changes to survivor are global. I don't care at all about Prove Thyself or similar perks. They could delete them for all I care. But nerfs to the survivor role will almost certainly always affect the 95% way more the the 5% whereas nerfing, say, Nurse so she can't aura read while blinking, woud affect a drastically smaller amount of people. You can't really compare the two.
There's really no easy fix unless you have different mechanics in place for different MMR groups, like you have anti-tunnel protections that fall of once you hit upper MMR, or certain perks that disable at those levels.
8 -
Thats experience something we can as some shooter game has single shot pistol that does small damage and is only good for headshot kills and than some beast weapon like ak 47 and when someone is very good he can dominate with that garbage pistol that ak guy and same goes in DBD so thats experience and skill which isnt what I meant.
What I meant is his core power is weak, how? He needs to spend his time which is the most rarest thing killer can have and go from gens to around loops and set his power even it can newr work or get zero vaule and other traps are around the map and he has no mobility or timed pick up across the map to get them just has to walk slow m1 speed, when wraith who isnt best killer has mobility that helps him to get around map and preasure survivors or huntress has ability that with good skill and precission can be very strong but this is something trapper lacks in both exsamples you can have very good skill but his skill expression with his power is super hard to gain from compare it to very good huntress or bubba and the difference is huge without question. Second is his power in core isnt that good its slowing you more as the killer, thats why the record in kill streak on trapper is with endgame build that can use any m1 killer with slugging to get win instead of using his traps and just regular gen deffence build he just sucks and needs rework.
Comparing 10k hour trapper main against 10 hours survivor isnt that small difference like its mma pro against two years old boy in the ring especialy in DBD settings.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
i'll use this build
0 -
Alot of this post is just deflecting and you changing your original points to find a "gotcha". Are you even trying to debate your own personal point or are you just trying to win a argument, because the more you respond I'm struggling to make sense of it.
You did make me chuckle though when you pointed out that I responded to myself to respond to you lol that was just human error ill go back and fix it.
I'm not pretending to know what goes inside BHVR's heads. You are using these posts for them to say they are happy with the numbers. At no point do they make an exception to that statement.
In the post on the stats page, they talked about the killers separately based off what was being shown in the data. again.
"Looking at the bigger picture, there was an average kill rate of 60% across all MMR, while that average kill rate increased to 63% for high MMR. (
This largely falls in line with our intended Killer balance.)"They specifically said killers, nobody is picking and choosing this is what the devs said. I'm just using the basic understanding of the English language.
You asked me where they said they were happy with the numbers, I'm asking you where they said they weren't.
I asked you because you said that they stated they were happy with all the numbers, this came straight from your mouth…
At no point do they say they are unhappy with the 48.3 or its outside that there norm. (In fact, you are relying on that post for BHVR saying they are overall happy with the numbers).
This is why i asked you where did they say they were happy with all of the numbers? You couldn't quote it because it wasn't there so you move the goal post and ask me….
Where did they say they weren't?
So you assume something they never said, then when i ask you to quote it your response is asking me where they didn't say it? LOL what? What's even more confusing is this part
At no point do they say they are unhappy with the 48.3 or its outside that there norm.
I never said that they said they were unhappy with the 48.3 on that page, if i did please quote it. Or are you just gonna deflect this to?
None of that makes sense.
more deflecting lol.
you're backing up my argument that they aren't unhappy about the numbers. Now you're just quibbling about possible whys.
I Never said they said they were unhappy about them on that stats page, quote it or you can just deflect this to if you want, but Regarding your "argument".
In fact, you are relying on that post for BHVR saying they are overall happy with the numbers.
If that was your argument why did you say this?
2: Even in relying on BHVR, you're ignoring key words they've said. 'Relatively', 'intended', 'average', while substituting different words into those quotes - you then accuse others of having trouble understanding English.
I mean not to be rude, but it does come down to the basic understanding of the English language. "Our intended killer balance"
Lets have a quick English lesson really quick. Google says the definition of intended - "something happened exactly as it was planned, designed, or meant to, aligning with the original purpose or goal". So with that said what does "Intended killer balance" mean? lol
-5 -
if you dont care if they deleted prove
If you could give a damn if they delete prove thyself or similar perks, How does putting a cap on gen multipliers gonna affect the 95% When it only can really be abused by a team with good synergy? How does that effect the 95%
-6 -
Alot of this post is just deflecting and you changing your original points to find a "gotcha"What do you think my original point is?
This is why i asked you where did they say they were happy with all of the numbers? You couldn't quote it because it wasn't there so you move the goal post and ask me….Evidence demands go both ways, you don't get to demand one side of the argument. They said they were happy with the numbers, they never made an exception to that statement.
Which is the overall point. You're relying on BHVR standards for your arguments, the burden is on you to provide the evidence. What about the 48.3% rate is outside their intended targets given that they say, in the quotes you provide, that they are looking at an average?
I never said that they said they were unhappy with the 48.3 on that page, if i did please quote it. Or are you just gonna deflect this to?You're evading the argument (or being deflective if you prefer). I never said, that you said, they were unhappy, that's trying to shift the argument by demanding I provide evidence of something I never stated. Basically you are trying to set this up that I have to prove something while you don't have to take any side at all.
What you did ask was - "Where did they say they were happy about the difference in group sizes in high elo or it fell in line with their balance?"
Demanding that one side prove they are happy about something requires an equal burden that the other side to show they are unhappy. Arguing that only one side has to provide evidence is actual deflection from a lack of evidence.
The whole premise of your argument though relies on the presumption of the 60/40 split as laid out by BHVR, throw that out and you have no argument.
more deflecting lol.No, that paragraph you wrote that I quoted was just gibberish.
So with that said what does "Intended killer balance" mean? lolThe numbers that they go for. No one has ever denied that. They have an overall target of 60%. You're trying to distract with arguments over things no one disagrees about to avoid the actual substantive issues.
This is one of the other issues with your argument - you don't seem to really have a grasp over what people are even disagreeing with you over.
1 -
I don't think it's going to affect anyone honestly because it's such a mediocre perk. Prove Thyself saves between 6 to 12 seconds per gen. The person running it isn't likely to sit on more than two gens, and that's also if they're not alone, which is circumstantial. The only time perks like this are good is when you need to pressure a key gen. I'm just telling you this isn't what's winning people matches, nor will it hurt good, coordinated players to lose it. A commodious toolbox with swivel socket and wire spool does more than this perk. Deleting it isn't going to touch the people you want to touch.
6 -
lol ok lets wrap this up.
At no point do they say they are unhappy with the 48.3 or its outside that there norm
You’re responding to a claim I never made. I pointed out that the devs explicitly said killer KR is in line with their intended balance. I didn’t say they were unhappy with survivor ER. I’m pointing out what they did say, not inventing what they didn’t.
You made this statement and now your trying to make me defend it when i never said it.
This is a perfect analogy of what your doing
Chef: "The burger patty came out exactly how we want it. This matches our intended recipe."
Me : "He specifically said the patty is how he wants it. He didn’t say that about the fries."
You: "Where did he say the fries are bad? Show me"
When i never said he said the fries were bad lol
This is obvious rage bait.
-9 -
On one hand it's Survivor Players getting better at the game
On the other hand the game is handing them "wins"
Players of this game get better… either in gamesense or mechanics (sometimes both)
Yes there does need changes for low-tier Killers but how far they go is up to them
1 -
Gen speed potential is the core reason why SWFs are so good, They maximize there perks slots with consideration of their coms and coordination. Which means they dont need to run a all-out survival build because they have coms. They can get absolute PEAK value out of certain perks and strats, that a solo player could only dream of no mater how good he is.
Prove thyself isnt the problem, no singular gen perk in the game is the problem. The problem is how a swf can generate numerous strategies around their perks as a team. The most dangerous of perks that makes this so strong are gen perks because thats the objective. Coms itself is the ultimate defense to any killer in the game, especially with a team of experienced quality players.
The thing is Swfs will always be strong, and i feel like to place limitations on them through certain perks and such. Just seems silly because not all Swfs will play on the level of players in high mmr as the data has shown. but what we can do is cap multipliers for gen speeds, to limit how fast gens CAN fly.
So swfs cant abuse them with coms. In no circumstance should a gen get done by 2 people in 24 seconds. Thats absurd.
-6 -
I’m pointing out what theydidsay, not inventing what they didn’t.Except I'm not inventing what they didn't say. They literally never said those things.
Chef: "The burger patty came out exactly how we want it. This matches our intended recipe."Me : "He specifically said the patty is how he wants it. He didn’t say that about the fries."You: "Where did he say the fries are bad? Show me"This has been a somewhat hilarious turn around. Anyway, here's what you said that I first replied to:
"Theyve aimed for 60/40 for YEARS these are the people who have alllllll the data, and they've been sticking to their guns for YEARS. Im pretty sure theirs a GOOD reason why they are saying 60/40 is balanced after reviewing ALLLLLL their data for YEARS.What in the F*** are survivors doing to pull almost 10% past the intended escape %??? the swfs in high lobbies are popping gens like popcorn. No way in the world should you be able to pop a gen in 24-26 seconds with 2 people AND have coms."Anyway, if you now want to act like there isn't a problem, great. If you want to pretend like you didn't base your argument around BHVR's KR, well that's silly based on what you said. Either way, glad to have convinced you.
4
