Damn playing a low tier killer is Horrible right now.
Comments
-
Survivors win by slamming gens and coordinating. Killers win by applying pressure. That’s not the same skill, so saying one side is just ‘better’ doesn’t really make sense.
Also your saying killers need a weak link to tunnel out to win, and that coordinated groups don’t have one. That sounds less like a matchmaking issue and more like coordination interacting very strongly with gen speed.
If a killer needs a weak link to remove to win, that points to a design interaction, not just a skill gap.
-5 -
You can only slam gens if someone on your team is holding the killers attention, that takes skill or they go down quickly and you get to say hello to whatever regression the killer brought. You could categorize both sides doing this under an umbrella of chase skills, they are not doing the same exact things but they are engaging in the same aspect of the game. If we wanted to measure this an easy way to so would be to capture an average for each killer and compare each chase to that average. If above the survivor has played better, if below the killer has played better.
Macro skills are largely the same for both sides, knowing where on the map needs their pressure and when. Those macro skills are more abstract and receive less attention than more mechanical skills but I think everyone ultimately still knows about them and would agree that they are important.
The killer doesn't need a weak link to win but you would likely agree that identifying a weak link and tunneling them out will typically result in victory, so long as they are weak enough that you actually get the tunnel out quick enough. Misidentifying this tunnel out will easily lead to defeat so I'm not calling it a surefire thing for the killer either. This doesn't have to be right off the bat, you can truly start looking to get someone out at 2 or 3 gens left and so long as you get it fast enough you likely win.
A well coordinated team can do a better job of protecting such a weak link or just a player on death hook and in a high mmr four man it is far less likely that such a link is truly weak enough to tunnel out effectively all the time. Obviously, it depends highly on what killer is being played, the skill of the specific killer, skill of the "weak link" survivor, and the skill of the rest of the survivor team but again we are talking about high mmr four mans so we can assume a decent level of skill from every member.
In a match without such a team, especially one with less or no comms between the survivors, a weak link is much more likely to be present, available for tunneling, and the survivor team will have a much harder time of protecting them. Even when all players are skilled it is still harder to hide and protect a survivor you cannot communicate with. This is where we get into the fact that avoiding/preventing a tunnel out takes much more skill and coordination from the survivor being tunneled and their team than is required to get a tunnel out as killer, the game is designed around the survivors eventually going down after all. If the game had in game comms and reasonable matchmaking (I doubt either will ever happen) we could chalk this up to skill issue alone but that isn't reality and its the one I face nearly every time I queue up for match.
Gen efficiency is basically table stakes for survivors, you are required to do so if you want to escape. Gen perks do not actually make you that much more gen efficient and the moment you lose a teammate all gen efficiency goes out the window. You better hope the match is already close to over. The only way out at that point is if every single remaining survivor is significantly better than the killer. I have had this happen in solo queue so it isn't impossible but it is incredibly rare.
5 -
You focused on the evidence I used instead of the point I was makingGood for me then.
Points require evidence, reasons why they should be believed. If the evidence falls, so does the argument.
reinterpreted what the devs actually said in the quote1: I think you are the one doing the reinterpretation and dropping context, I think some others explained it better than I did.
2: I don't think you connected with what people disagreed with you over.
then asked me to defend positions I never claimed.The only thing I can think of is the happy/unhappy argument, which, as I said above, if you don't think they were unhappy, the line of questioning toward me made no sense.
I’m not saying perks or items don’t factor in, but the SWF coordination is key to what I’m sayingI feel like you need an element of uniqueness. Many perks (maybe even all of them) work better with coordination. From something simple like having a dedicated unhooker with healing builds, to pallet saves, to sabo, to body blocks - coordination is always going to have the advantage. So yes, gen rush would be better in the hands of a SWF, but so would everything.
4 -
You’re framing this like gens only move fast if someone is looping out of their mind. My point is that in coordinated SWFs, gens move very fast even off completely normal chases because of how gen multipliers and comms stack efficiency. Thats not a chase skill issue or a tunneling issue, its how coordination interacts with the gen mechanics.
you can only slam gens if someone on your team is holding the killer’s attention
Im not saying chase doesnt matter. Im saying in swfs, normal chases translate into a lot more gen progress because of coordination.
you could categorize both sides doing this under an umbrella of chase skills
Their both in chase, but survivors get to multiply the value of that time through coordination. Killers dont get an equivalent multiplier from it
A well coordinated team can do a better job of protecting such a weak link
Right, and while their doing that, three coordinated survivors are working gens extremely efficiently. Thats the part Im pointing at
gen efficiency is basically table stakes for survivors
In solo queue maybe. In coordinated swfs, gen efficiency scales way beyond ‘table stakes’ because of comms, stacking, and coordination.
My point isnt that chase, tunneling, or perks dont matter. Its that in coordinated swfs, gen speed multipliers and comms make the value of any time bought in chase much higher than it is in solo q. That interaction is what makes gen speeds feel too fast, not just skill mismatches or tunneling dynamics.
-4 -
points require evidence, reasons why they should be believed. If the evidence falls, so does the argument
Reinterpreting the quote doesn't make the evidence fall. It just moves away from what it actually says
I think you are the one doing the reinterpretation and dropping context
The quote says the 60% killer KR “falls in line with our intended Killer balance.” That part isnt ambiguous.
many perks (maybe even all of them) work better with coordination… so yes, gen rush would be better in the hands of a SWF, but so would everything.
My point isnt that coordination makes everything better. It’s that gen speed multipliers scale unusually well with coordination compared to other mechanics, which is why gens feel especially fast in swfs.
the only thing I can think of is the happy/unhappy argument
Thats exactly what I meant. I never claimed they were unhappy with survivor ER, but you kept asking me to defend that.
which, as I said above, if you don't think they were unhappy, the line of questioning toward me made no sense.
That question came after you said they were happy with all the stats. I was asking where they actually said that.
-2 -
And you're framing it like gens can only move that fast in a coordinated SWF. I have absolutely moved gens that quickly in solo queue and have had full solo queue squads accused of being a SWF and of gen rushing. When I say table stakes I mean that if I don't see survivors split up and start on three or four gens relatively quickly after the start of the match I will immediately become concerned about the quality of my teammates. I won't double up on gens that early unless its one we obviously need to get out of the way. If they're doubling a gen in the corner of the map I stop expecting to escape (not that I give up).
The primary decider of how quickly the gens pop is always how long the chases are lasting with the first being the most important. If the first chase lasts two minutes it is incredibly likely that three gens will pop. That first chase is ridiculously important (too important honestly) but if the next chase lasts even half as long there is a chance the last gens pop as well. You don't actually need coordination to manage this, you just need every survivor to have a good understanding of the map layout and where generators are likely to spawn. If we are going to talk high mmr four man then the fair comparison must be to high mmr solo so even in the non-swf team we should assume a decent level of skill and understanding of the game. These players should be able to handle this without comms, I would honestly call not being able to do that without comms a skill issue. Obviously those chase times are a perfect scenario but in a mismatch situation this is what happens.
The game is balanced around there being one killer and four survivors, saying that the survivors in a swf multiply the value of a chase is just silly. There are still just four survivors total and if they understand the maps they will be on a gen regardless. Being in a swf does not actually make the gens shorter.
If three survivors are working gens no one is protecting the tunnel out. You have gotten the scenario mixed up. If you are leaving them on hook, you won't have three survivors on gens because at least one is going to be in chase unless we are assuming an incompetent killer and that would just be unfair to a properly balanced match.
Knowing exactly where the tunnel out target is and if the killer is nearby the hook and if the unhook is safe are all things you actually get from communication and that require communication (baring perks). It is a big part of why I never take bond off in solo queue, knowing where my teammates are is regularly paramount to success. It is entirely skill mismatches and tunneling dynamics that make solo queue high mmr have a 40% escape rate and four man high mmr have a 48% escape rate because a decent killer will still push you off those gens before you can complete them, down you quickly, and get those gens regressing.
I expect gen efficiency from my teammates, I don't expect them to know exactly where I am or be able to tell me that we need to stop a heal because the killer is on their way or be able to effectively setup a spot to body block the killer. These are the things that comms actually help with.
0 -
I have absolutely moved gens that quickly in solo queue
im not saying solos cant do gens quickly. Im saying swfs turn the same chase time into more consistent gen progress because no one wastes time or overlaps inefficiently.
the primary decider of how quickly the gens pop is always how long the chases are lasting
Chase time matters, but how efficiently that time gets used is what im talking about. Thats where comms make a difference.
being in a swf does not actually make the gens shorter.
It doesnt change the gen timer, it changes how efficiently survivors use their time while its running.
If three survivors are working gens no one is protecting the tunnel out.
Right, and swfs can swap roles instantly without hesitation because they know who needs to move and when.
you don't actually need coordination to manage this, you just need every survivor to have a good understanding of the map layout
Understanding the map helps, but coms remove the guesswork about who should be where and when
these players should be able to handle this without comms, I would honestly call not being able to do that without comms a skill issue
They can do it without coms, just not with the same consistency or efficiency that coms provide.
Again, im not arguing that chase or skill dont matter…. I’m saying SWFs convert the same chase time into more gen progress because of coordination, and thats the part you’re overlooking.
-2 -
Man this thread has made my night go by fast. Please dont stop responding @top500spiderman , seeing you flounder is extremely entertaining lol
3 -
-4 -
THIS is how you interpreted that? lol
And thus, everyone now knows you are merely here trolling. Credibility self destructed in a single instance.
Do another perfect gif plz!
7 -
I'll up the ante:
4 -
So true.
6 -
But they don't convert the same chase time into more gen progress. They only do if you are no longer talking about high MMR survivors and that isn't a fair comparison to a high MMR four man. We have to consider four solos that are all high MMR.
Take the best survivors, remove their comms, and place them against an equally skilled killer. They won't struggle with generator efficiency or chase times. It makes gen efficiency slightly harder but they won't actually struggle there. It's the rest that becomes significantly harder and that's what they will struggle with. (I would watch a dbdleague night of this).
I'm not even saying that absolutely none of the escape rate difference can be attributed to gens, just that the majority is much more likely attributable to the dynamics around getting someone out of the match. It practically requires comms in order to execute efficiently on the survivor side.
I again suggest the next time you are swfing to challenge yourself in some way. Try running those win streak builds instead and I bet your escape rate doesn't end up changing much. Then try the builds you normally do but without comms and see what actually becomes harder.
1 -
Reinterpreting the quote doesn't make the evidence fall.So there is an evidence argument and an argument about quotes.
Let's deal with the evidence argument first.
You say the following:
The devs themselves have said that they aim for a 60/40 for balance on both sides. This is what they said. 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.In this post you are appealing to knowledge that BHVR has that we don't (allllll the data).
I respond -
This goes both ways.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.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.Basically, if you're going to appeal to what BHVR must know, that must remain consistent. Nothing I said above is incorrect and the quotes you'll later provided about overall averages back me up.
You respond:
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.So what you are doing here is antithetical to a good discussion. Of course BHVR can make bad decisions, you're highly unlikely to find someone who disagrees with that notion here - but arguing that the decisions you like must be supported by data we don't have is a dishonest framing, it's creating a different standard for what you argue vs your opponents.
Which is what I said here in my next response to you:
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.All of this remains true on the evidence front. Which immediately leads to the happy/unhappy issue.
I'll go to my quote:
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.You will respond:
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….The issue here goes back to your original quotes about BHVR and all the data.
This is where the happy/unhappy argument comes from. If something is justified because BHVR says they are happy with it (60/40) because they have all the data, then that all the data point remains true for other arguments and there must be evidence that they are unhappy with the 48.3 for the argument to have any meaning. Your conclusion of 48.3 having any meaning in connection to BHVR is only backed up if they have a problem with it. It's your argument (to be clear: to rely on what data BHVR must have), not mine, thus the shifting the goal posts argument is on you because you aren't backing your own position anymore.
To put another way, there needs to be a logical flow from your evidence to your conclusions and there isn't.
However, if you aren't relying on BHVR to be evidence, then the whole issue is moot anyway which is why I say you concede the argument.
-
Now, onto the quotes and redefining words.
You first use the word balance in the section I quote above - as a single word, not part of the quote. Later you will argue about people trying to redefine words, but balance can mean different things.
So for example balance can be used to mean - a situation in which two opposing forces have or are given the same power (Cambridge).
Under this definition, BHVR is clearly out of balance, they have a 60/40 split. Think of this like scales, typically we expect them to be even, but in this case they are not.
Now balance can also be defined as: to bring into harmony or proportion (Merriam Webster)
Not under this definition, BHVR could be in balance, because we introduce the concept of proportion. Again to use scales, one side could be weighted to be heavier if there is a reason for the scales to be offset (note the use of offset, we don't presume scales are balanced offset, we say it). However, to use balance in this way, you need to clarify that (and if you want to go further, balance can has lots of subtle differences in meaning if you want to dive into dictionaries)
@Firellius, myself and I reiterate this point - Firellius has more on the topic but I'll focus on my quotes -
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.You respond to me:
Balance is subjective, 60/40 to the dev team is balanced. It was literally word for word stated.To which I respond:
This depends on what you mean by the word balance. Many people, most I think, use it in a non-subjective wayBalance 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'.Here I'm trying to see it from your point of view. You could be using the proportional definition, but like I say above, I don't think that's the way people generally use it (i.e. its an objective word, not subjective, but you're using it in the less common way of being subjective).
But also, as I said, no one disagrees that BHVR has a 60% KR (you mention this in your last reply, no one ever disagreed with this that I can find). Many disagree with the numbers they've set or that it's balanced in an even sense (i.e. why we get phrases like 'relatively even'), but everyone knows that's the target for BHVR. This goes back though to whether you want to tie your argument to BHVR's standards or not. If you don't, if you're not arguing that we should trust BHVR, then the whole point is irrelevant.
Anyway, that's my run through, with quotes, of what progressed. I think things break down entirely after your 'I fixed it' post where I believe your changing of the quote from Firellius is extremely dishonest and bad for the discussion.
-
My point isnt that coordination makes everything better. It’s that gen speed multipliers scale unusually well with coordination compared to other mechanics, which is why gens feel especially fast in swfs.I don't want to just repeat what @FerrousFacade is saying, but of all the strategies that SWFs can employ, gen rush seems the least unique. Compared to other mechanics, it seems to be one of the least improved by adding coordination.
5 -
In this post you are appealing to knowledge that BHVR has that we don't (allllll the data).
I wasnt appealing to BHVR as an authority, I was pointing out that they’ve consistently aimed for 60/40 for years, which explains why they consider that their intended balance target.
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
I never argued bhvr must be right because they have data. I said they have stuck with 60/40 for years, which is why they consider that number balanced. Not that all their decisions are correct.
to have a discussion, you don't get to be selective about that.
I wasnt being selective, you reframed my comment about why they chose 60/40 into an appeal to authority so you could argue I must accept all their balance decisions, which wasnt my position.
you are using these posts for them to say they are happy with the numbers.
I asked where they said they were happy with all the numbers after you claimed they were. That wasnt a random question, it was a direct response to what you said.
there needs to be a logical flow from your evidence to your conclusions and there isn't.
There is, the quote was supporting evidence for my point about sfw gen speeds. You treated the quote like it was the argument instead of the point it was supporting.
this depends on what you mean by the word balance.
The word isnt being used generically here, it’s being used in the dev quote where they say the 60% killer KR “falls in line with our intended Killer balance.” Changing the definition outside of that context doesn’t change what they meant in that statement.
if you don't, if you're not arguing that we should trust BHVR, then the whole point is irrelevant.
My point doesnt depend on trusting bhvr at all. It comes from how gen speed multipliers interact with coordination in actual games. The quote was context, not the basis of the argument.
gen rush seems the least unique. Compared to other mechanics, it seems to be one of the least improved by adding coordination.
Your looking at it wrong. Gen speed multipliers really benefit from coordination because survivors can stack efficiently, avoid wasted time, and turn the same chase time into more gen progress than youd get in a solo queue. Thats why its the bigger factor
-1 -
But they don't convert the same chase time into more gen progress.
They do. Thats the whole point. The timer doesnt change, how efficiently that time gets used does.
We have to consider four solos that are all high MMR
Even high mmr solos still have to guess what their teammates are doing. swfs dont.
They won't struggle with generator efficiency or chase times. It makes gen efficiency slightly harder but they won't actually struggle there.
That "slightly harder" is exactly what adds up over a match. Thats the difference your brushing off.
I'm not even saying that absolutely none of the escape rate difference can be attributed to gens, just that the majority is much more likely attributable to the dynamics around getting someone out of the match.
Your downplaying the gen side of it when thats what makes those tunnel dynamics matter so much in the first place.
It practically requires comms in order to execute efficiently on the survivor side.
Exactly, and that efficiency is what turns normal chase time into a lot of progress.
-1 -
Yo if we ever really, really disagree on something just tell me I'm wrong and I'll say "you right" and walk away. Challenging you is a fools errand.
5 -
I'm not even saying that absolutely none of the escape rate difference can be attributed to gens, just that the majority is much more likely attributable to the dynamics around getting someone out of the match. It practically requires comms in order to execute efficiently on the survivor side.
Exactly, and that efficiency is what turns normal chase time into a lot of progress.
Full context re-added because its kind of important. The last statement in that paragraph is quite obviously being applied to the tunnel out dynamics and nothing else, you should realize that is what I mean from the rest of the conversation we've been having. I have stayed out of the other conversation but this for sure feels like an intentional attempt to twist my words. I think we are at the agree to disagree point so here are my final thoughts.
Your looking at it wrong. Gen speed multipliers really benefit from coordination because survivors can stack efficiently, avoid wasted time, and turn the same chase time into more gen progress than youd get in a solo queue. Thats why its the bigger factor
I just can't see that being the case without a boat load of data we don't have access to. The thing we most agree on is that gen efficiency is important, and we also appear to agree that this efficiency is more important than chases but that is exactly why I think your strategy isn't as effective as you make out. Being gen efficient isn't just a requirement of being anything more than a mediocre survivor, it is the very first requirement. It is safe to assume a high mmr survivor will be gen efficient even when solo queuing for this reason.
Doubling or tripling up on gens to try and push that single one fast is just asking for the killer to push you off and waste all the time and resources you put into it and then the killer has eyes on multiple survivors. I would much rather have teammates that push three different gens and get progress on all three than have all three group on one gen to try and pop that single one. Maybe if we are pushing a three gen and a gen is close but even in a three gen its usually better to push multiple to split the killers attention. Someone is going to get pushed off, if everyone is on that one then its everyone putting the killer into a hugely advantageous position. Its a bad brittle strategy.
Even high mmr solos still have to guess what their teammates are doing. swfs dont.
I actually don't a lot of the time. Remember that I run bond almost religiously. I might not know their exact location but I last saw their aura running off in a direction and the HUD shows that they are on a gen or on a totem or in chase. This information becomes outdated but I still have some idea, its survivor game sense. If you've only ever swf'd or don't solo queue often I doubt you have ever needed to develop this and that lack of solo experience could also explain why you think your strategy is so much more effective than I do. The problem is pinpointing their exact location but that only really matters if you need something that requires direct contact. Bond still lets me find this but it takes a bit of extra time. If my goal is to double a gen with them close to the end we are talking a couple extra seconds of gen time and then typically only if its an indoor map. Those seconds matter a lot more if I am trying to go for a body block or a heal while the killer is searching for their tunnel out.
That "slightly harder" is exactly what adds up over a match. Thats the difference your brushing off.
Matches just aren't long enough time for slightly harder to add up in a meaningful way. Particularly not for a set of players that know every map inside and out.
Your downplaying the gen side of it when thats what makes those tunnel dynamics matter so much in the first place.
Killers will regularly tunnel from the very start of the match. Those tunnel dynamics always matter. Its a big part of why gen efficiency has become so necessary for survivors. We can't not be gen efficient, you just lose.
0 -
-5 -
On whom exactly? Cause you're getting steamrolled.
5 -
full context re-added because its kind of important… The last statement in that paragraph is quite obviously being applied to the tunnel out dynamics and nothing else"
I understand you were talking about tunnel efficiency their. I was pointing out that the same idea of efficiency also applies to gen progress.
I just cant see that being the case without a boat load of data we dont have access to
We dont need extra data for this, were talking about how coordination changes how time gets used in a match.
being gen efficient isn't just a requirement of being anything more than a mediocre survivor, it is the very first requirement
Gen efficient is not a yes or no thing. There are levels to it, and that difference is what I mean.
doubling or tripling up on gens to try and push that single one fast is just asking for the killer to push you off
Im not talking about stacking gens like that at all, so this doesnt really apply to what im saying.
I actually don't a lot of the time. Remember that I run bond almost religiously
Bond gives delayed information that you still have to interpret and act on. Coms gives immediate information with no guesswork. Those are not the same thing.
killers will regularly tunnel from the very start of the match. Those tunnel dynamics always matter
And thats why gen efficiency while all four survivors are alive matters so much, That part is what your downplaying
matches just aren't long enough time for slightly harder to add up in a meaningful way.
If small inefficiencies did not add up, their would be no noticeable difference between SWF and solo queue at high MMR, but there clearly is.
Your argument depends on the idea that small inefficiencies in solo play do not add up over the course of a match. Mine is that they do, and that is exactly why swfs feel noticeably different to face. You are treating gen efficiency like a yes or no requirement, while im talking about the difference between being efficient and being perfectly efficient. That difference is what changes how much progress comes from the same chase time.
-2 -
At this point you are literally arguing against yourself. First it was if you run these perks and if your teammates runs these perks you get gens done fast and then you concede that you don't actually run full gen builds and now your not even touching gens together? Your not popping a gen as fast as you claim if you are not stacking on a gen together and if you don't use that strategy then your whole argument around it falls apart.
It doesnt matter how fast you personally get gens done if someone is running
Full circuit
Hyperfocus
Built To Last
Deja Vu
Toolbox
with prove thyself + toolbox…The generator gets done approximately 24-26 seconds realistically. That's INSANE.
This is literally you and this is literally where the conversation started. Both Full Circuit and Prove Thyself do nothing if you don't stack and the same applies to Soft Spoken. If you're not doing this then what you are doing falls largely in line with exactly what I am saying and those gen perks are no longer relevant to the discussion at which point you are not coordinating gen perks to get the gens done faster with your swf and at that point you are not doing anything that good solo queue players cannot accomplish with good game sense alone and you are not gen rushing. As I said, your whole argument falls apart.
This is just not true, most swfs in high ELO gen rush. Ask any competitive killer or just go back and watch their streams.
Just because you goof off in SWFs doesnt mean thats what they do, the 48% in high ELO proves that.
being able to do a gen in 24 seconds from just synching a few perks, again shouldn't be possible.
This is the specific thing I responded to. You are literally claiming a 24 second gen time which REQUIRES stacking on gens and heavily coordinating your perks. You cannot be gen rushing if you are not doing these things since you are largely pushing gens at base speed or giving something else up to get gens done a bit faster but not at that speed.
You're also just wrong about Bond. It gives you immediate information and if you don't see anyone that in and of itself is good information to have. Ya, it isn't the same as actual comms but that is entirely my point as well. Comms won't help a decent survivor get on a gen faster or be more efficient on that generator if your intent isn't to stack, it only helps you find each other faster or call out where the killer is. That doesn't help gen efficiency much but it interacts directly with tunneling dynamics.
Data provides evidence and unless we have actual evidence we are all just speculating. Comms usage is reflected in the data we have but not directly. Unless they give us a lot more data about gen completion time and break that out for group sizes and mmr we are both just speculating about whether or not they actually go faster in a high mmr four man in the first place. Most people don't even know whether or not they faced a swf, they are speculating that they did, often in a vain attempt to explain their loses and blame it on anything other than themself.
2 -
Your arguing against a point im not making.
Im not saying swfs are strong because they specifically can stack full gen builds or pop 24 second gens. That example was just one way to show how gen speed multipliers can be taken advantage of when players are coordinated in swfs. It was just supporting evidence, not the core of what I am saying.
My point is that coordination changes how efficiently time gets used across the entire match. That same idea is why gen speed multipliers become more valuable in swfs than they are in solo queue, because survivors can stack efficiently, avoid overlap and use their time properly.
This isnt about extreme perk stacking. Its about how coordination lets survivors get more value out of the same mechanics, including gen speed then solos can.
Your bringing this back to perk stacking and extreme gen speeds, but thats not the core of my argument, im talking about how much progress comes from the same chase time when no one is wasting time figuring things out.
Bond does not change that. Bond gives you location information you still have to interpret. Coms give you live coordination with no guesswork.
The real disagreement here is simple. Im saying coordination changes how much value survivors get out of their time, and that is why gen speed multipliers hit harder in swfs. Your saying it does not. That is the part we disagree on.
This is from my first post regarding the gens about that specific scenario.
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.
I even said this in a previous post you responded to, this is why its important to read carefully, This was the same issue @ crogers271 was dealing with as well.
I may have given slight exaggerated build depictions but it was just to convey a point that gen multipliers need to be looked at.
This all boils down to my main argument.
-Gen multipliers should be nerfed, because their abused by swfs.
-6 -
This is the entirety of that post, not just your selections.
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.
But now
Im not talking about stacking gens like that at all, so this doesnt really apply to what im saying.
This isnt about extreme perk stacking. Its about how coordination lets survivors get more value out of the same mechanics, including gen speed then solos can.
But still say your core argument is
Gen multipliers should be nerfed, because their abused by swfs.
You make specific mention to gen perks being "dangerous," that no single perk is the problem and quote a very low gen time. You can't get that low of a gen speed without stacking and unless you want to place your cap at a level below the current gen speed addition of just a single one of these perks you must be talking about stacking them, either solo or as a squad. Now you are turning around and saying that isn't what you are arguing. If swf are not actually stacking these things then they cannot be claimed to be "abusing" these perks (or of gen rushing) some of which, including ones you specifically mention, require multiple survivors working on the same gen or they do nothing. If they are not already doing this then your theoretical cap would do nothing.
I am not against adjusting these perks, as I said before, my claim has been that stacking these things or using them in a swf is not the cause of the discrepancy between solo and four mans and that they are not as strong as you are claiming. I don't think they are actually unbalanced because stacking them in such a fashion is a brittle unreliable strategy. Go ahead and put a cap on them, it won't change anything because this isn't how a good swf actually plays.
Gen speed potential is the core reason why SWFs are so good
My entire argument is that this is not the case. Gens are easy, by far the easiest part of the game, but if the survivors are not efficient on gens they lose. I do treat this as a yes no question because, while there are degrees to efficiency, once you get to the point of enough efficiency to potentially win there isn't actually a lot of wiggle room beyond that so long as you are actually playing against a competent killer that is also trying to play efficiently and at that point you will get a lot more value out of chase and anti-tunnel perks than you will gen perks. If we are not talking about a killer on the same skill level then this discussion is meaningless because they will lose anyway, gen perks or not (edit: actually the killer might still win because that is how this game is balanced, better make sure your gen efficient). Your entire argument goes back to gen perks and the capability of a swf to stack them for added gen efficiency and everything I have said is to point out how easy it is to be gen efficient in solo queue and why a swf would choose to not run those perks. The only way we could truly prove if one of us is actually correct would be for BHVR to release data about gen completion times and perk usage with delineation between the times and usage rates based on different group sizes and mmr ranges.
Gen efficiency is easy, with or without comms. Preventing a tunnel out is difficult even with comms but extremely difficult without.
Post edited by FerrousFacade on1 -
Your treating “gen speed potential” and “coordination” like their two different arguments, but their not. Coordination is how that gen speed potential actually gets realized in a match.
When I said gen speed potential is why swfs are strong, I was not talking about perk stacking or 24 second gens as the core point. That was just an example. The actual point is that coordination lets survivors get more value out of gen mechanics and multipliers than solos can.
So when I explain how coordination boosts the value of multipliers, im not changing my argument. Im explaining how gen speed potential happens in practice.
Thats why it sounds like were talking past each other. Your treating gen speed potential as perk stacking, and im talking about how coordination amplifies the value of gen mechanics themselves.
-4 -
Whatever you two are arguing, I hope you continue. Night two at work and its just as wonderful.
4 -
I'm not talking past you. I am refuting the idea that swf coordination has a significant impact on gen speeds. Obviously it has an impact but not 8% higher escape rate impact.
I hit the perk side because even if it's not your core argument you clearly think they are a part of this (even if you sometimes call them multipliers). I have stated why I don't think that's likely based on the need of many of these perks for grouping up on a gen, how grouping up like that is dangerous, how picking those perks leaves your build lacking in other areas, and by showing that the best swfs don't pick those perks.
I've hit the non-perk side by emphasizing how gen efficiency is paramount in this game and this goes doubly for solo queue players. Good solo queue players are already gen efficient, being in a swf would not dramatically improve their performance in this regard. I could see how someone could become reliant on comms for some of their own gen efficiency but I wouldn't consider such a player a high MMR solo player, only within their swf would I consider them high MMR (not that MMR is remotely that subtle).
If survivors are not gen efficient, chase time doesn't matter. If chases are fast, the speed at which someone gets tunneled out doesn't matter. Gen efficiency, reasonable chase time, prevent a tunnel out. These are the things required to win as a survivor and in that order. If you can't do the one before the next one doesn't matter. Gen efficiency is so fundamental that it cannot be improved much by swfing, good survivors are already too efficient to improve that much.
That 40% for high MMR solo also doesn't specify if that's matches with just high MMR players or just the overall escape rate of high MMR solo in any match regardless of other players skill (I would bet any match). If all four are high MMR and solo I bet many killers would mistake them for a swf. They wouldn't struggle with gen efficiency and everyone's chases would at least be decent. The thing they would struggle with most is preventing a tunnel out. You can try this yourself like I suggested, challenge your swf to a no comms night where you can't coordinate perks.
3 -
Glad someone is being entertained but I must sleep now for I work in the morning (but can't sleep while crap is rattling in my brain and thus I must post and leave before I can see a response and I start thinking again)
3 -
Your saying good solos are already so gen efficient that coordination cannot noticeably improve how fast gens move. That makes zero sense to how the game actually plays.
Solo players no matter how good, still make decisions with incomplete information. They hesitate before rotating, double up without realizing it, path to the same objectives, or commit to the wrong play because they dont know what their teammates are doing. That is just the reality of not having coms.
swfs remove that entirely. They always know who is on what gen, when to split, when to stack, when to leave, and when to commit. That doesnt change the gen timer, but it absolutely changes how clean survivor time turns into gen progress across the match.
And thats exactly why gen speed multipliers become much stronger in swfs. Not because of perk stacking, but because coordination lets survivors fully capitalize on those multipliers in a way solos cant. If coordination truly did not have a significant impact on gen speeds, then gen multipliers would have the same effect in solo queue as they do in swfs, but they very clearly dont.
-4 -
If good solos were not gen efficient they would lose much more than they already do, they are playing against killers who are also trying to be kill efficient, it comes with the territory. I think you have become so accustomed to playing with comms that you don't understand what good solo survivors are capable of. You are one of those people that have been carried by a swf and have become reliant on them for your own gen efficiency and decision making.
Hesitation will account for seconds at best, doubling up on a gen stops being such a problem once a few gens have popped (the start of the match is the easiest time to know what your team is doing). If the objective is a gen then, once again, it doesn't matter much if it isn't the start of the match and keeping loose track of your team while tracking where gens have popped dramatically reduces the chance you do this. For a hook, the HUD is really all you need to know who should go for it. I assume that someone else is going for the hook if there is at least one healthy person not on something else (and go for the hook if that person is me), if everyone is occupied and I think I am the closest (loose team tracking again) I go for it but will stop if someone else stops what they are doing. If someone gets off a gen to go for it while they see me already off a gen and healthy they have made an obviously bad decision a good player wouldn't make (and is an incredibly common thing I see when an obvious duo is in the match and want to save each other).
Swf removes uncertainty but that doesn't mean you can't still make good decisions without comms. I am not saying they don't have an effect but this is the area of the game they have the least effect on when we are talking about good players. Comms have a much more significant role in chase, saves, generally wasting the killers time, and in preventing a death than they do on gen speeds. Just because you can't do this doesn't mean others can't, solo queue can be a nightmare because of how often you are paired with survivors that are not good but some of my best matches have been solo queue matches. Good players are good players whether on comms or not. Honestly, I don't think your swf even exists, I think you lost a few matches as killer and are blaming it on "swfs" that "gen rush" based on what "top killers" have told you to think.
3 -
This is starting to drift away from the actual point and into assumptions about how I play, which isnt really relevant to the discussion.
Im not saying solos cant make good decisions. Im saying coordination removes the small inefficiencies that solos still deal with, even when they are very good players. Thats the only point iv been making.
You keep describing how good solos can play efficiently, but that doesnt address the point that coordination changes how much progress survivors get out of their time. Thats what iv been talking about this whole time. This isnt about whether I can or cant play solo, or wether swfs exist. It’s about how coordination interacts with gen speed and multipliers in the game. If you want to keep it on that topic, I’m happy to. But the personal assumptions dont really move the discussion forward.
-4 -
I wasnt appealing to BHVR as an authority, I was pointing out that they’ve consistently aimed for 60/40 for years, which explains why they consider that their intended balance target.I never argued bhvr must be right because they have data. I said they have stuck with 60/40 for years, which is why they consider that number balanced. Not that all their decisions are correct.I wasnt being selective, you reframed my comment about why they chose 60/40 into an appeal to authority so you could argue I must accept all their balance decisions, which wasnt my position.Three points, and I'll provide the quotes again:
The devs themselves have said that they aim for a 60/40 for balance on both sides. This is what they said. 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 coms1: No one disagrees or is unaware that BHVR has a target of 60% KR. The way you are arguing it is self-fulfilling, whatever BHVR says is the balance target, is balance.
2: To say you're just pointing out the numbers is not backed up by how you worded this. Let me focus in -
Im pretty sure theirs a GOOD reason why they are saying 60/40 is balanced after reviewing ALLLLLL their data for YEARS.You even put good in all caps. This is clearly worded not as just a factual reiteration, but arguing that they have info we don't leading them to the correct decision
3: Okay, for sake of argument, let's say all of the was just to establish the 60/40. Then the following sentence has no backing -
What in the F*** are survivors doing to pull almost 10% past the intended escape %???So if everything you said in the prior paragraph was just saying 'hey, these are the numbers BHVR is going for', then this next sentence just happens to be there and it has no support. Intended escape within this sentence only has some meaning or purpose if it is connect to the prior paragraph's argument. Basically, without arguing that BHVR's 'intended' is good (or GOOD), then its just irrelevant.
Let's go to the argument that we're just establishing context, which takes us to the territory that high MMR SWFs perform better, which brings me to:
There is, the quote was supporting evidence for my point about sfw gen speeds. You treated the quote like itwasthe argument instead of the point it was supporting.Except it doesn't.
First, there's no connection at all. I could just as easily say - high MMR SWFs escape more, because they use Sprint Burst, Vigil and shift W gameplay. Or high MMR SWFs escape more, showing how powerful deliverance is. Or high MMR SWFs escape more, showing how powerful coordinated healing is. You're attaching your conclusion to an independent fact, that's not evidence.
Second, coordinated high MMR SWFs (a subset of a subset of the player base) have always escaped more. Through various metas they've always had the advantage, because they have access to things (coms, ensuring they don't have a weak member, pre-planned strategy, etc) that others don't.
—When this data came out, given all the advantages they have, what was surprising wasn't that they escaped more, but even with all of those advantages they still weren't even reaching 50%
The word isnt being used generically here, it’s being used in the dev quote where they say the 60% killer KR “falls in line with our intended Killer balance.” Changing the definition outside of that context doesn’t change what they meant in that statement.They have a balance target. A goal they are going for. No one disagrees. Calling it just 'balance' without being BHVR's intended balance though is not accurate (see above on how the way you are using it is self-fulfilling).
Your looking at it wrong. Gen speed multipliers really benefit from coordination because survivors can stack efficiently, avoid wasted time, and turn the same chase time into more gen progress than youd get in a solo queue. Thats why its the bigger factorI'm following the @FerrousFacade argument and I agree with him that I feel you're argument is changing on this issue as well, but I'll do my best to respond to this point.
What about gen speed multipliers are unique?
If survivors coordinate heals faster, they get back on gens more quickly.
If survivors bring perks for longer chases, it gives others times to be on gens.
If survivors know their teammates has deliverance, it gives them more times on gens.
Having gen focused perks still has the exact same weaknesses in a SWF than it does in soloq - you don't have any advantages if you get targeted by the killer or you need to heal/unhook someone.
So what can the gen focused build do in a SWF that they couldn't in a soloq? I guess they could crack a 3 gen right from the start, and that would be valuable. Though even without a full gen perk loadout they could still do that more easily than a soloq. And you could team up on the final gen more easily, but that's not too hard to coordinate in soloq, but it would be easier. The way DbD math works is that pairing up on gens is usually inferior to spreading out.
Could some of the perks be too strong? I guess, toolboxes currently seem the strongest item, and no one is arguing gen perks are bad. But what we have for evidence on full builds beyond a 'ask any':
1: SWFs I've seen trying escape streaks have not engaged in it, maybe there is one out there I'm unaware of
2: The community cup I mentioned with unrestricted survivors; increasing gen speed through items and perks was definitely part of the strategies, but not overwhelming (outside of toolboxes), and not nearly as important as anti-tunnel or exhaustion.
3: Even in this case we're limiting the argument to a small fraction of the player base, and its questionable how relevant that should be for a discussion of the overall game (or overall averages, to go back to a BHVR quote).
Post edited by crogers271 on8 -
The average gen completion time for all five gens in a match where all five are completed (49% of all matches, which also establishes a minimum overall win rate for killers of 51% of matches, as a fun aside) is about 8 minutes. This time frame may or may not go down for "high mmr" matches, we can't know for sure because BHVR hasn't released that stat. That simply doesn't leave enough wiggle room for small inefficiencies to add up in a meaningful way. Even if we say they add up to 20 seconds I would bet you could find 20 seconds of inefficiency in how the killer played that match and I bet you could still find another 20 seconds where the swf team was playing inefficiently.
How we play colors how we see the game, I mostly solo queue so I see how bad it can be and how good it can be. I play killer, I'm not great at the role but maybe I'm OK, when I lose I can typically point to something I did wrong and I regularly still win when I feel like I played terribly and when gens feel like they are flying. I swf rarely and only with more casual players (the less casual players I know are on the other side of the world and no level of skill is saving you on 170 ping), so not a great indicator of true swf performance, but I do still see what comms helps me with most and it isn't gen efficiency or gen speeds or the usage of any multipliers. Its coordinating plays against the killer in chase or around saves and tunneling. Telling them where to pressure gens helps them but it wouldn't be as necessary with better players. Highly coordinated swfs call out three gens but those players already know the maps well enough to have a decent idea based on the map alone or where they can currently see gens. They often have a death spot but I have figured those out solo as well, its easy when you already have an idea where the gens are, its literally just as far away as possible.
@crogers271 Covers it better than me I think, there just isn't anything unique about using gen perks or standard gen efficiency in a swf that it could explain the discrepancy in escape rate and its really not a huge difference, certainly not as massive as you would think from the way people talk about four mans. You're not gaining any real additional advantages that you can't already get as a solo that plays well. It other perks and other areas of the game that truly benefit from comms.
8 -
Your still treating the bhvr quotes like they were the foundation of my argument, when they never were.
They were context.
My actual point from the very first post has always been this
Gen speed multipliers scale unusually well with coordination, and that interaction is what makes gens feel especially fast in high mmr swfs.
That point doesnt depend on-
- trusting BHVR
- what they consider “intended balance”
- wether 60/40 is good or bad
- wether they are happy or unhappy with escape rates
That entire section of the discussion only happened because you reframed my comment about why BHVR uses 60/40 into an appeal to authority, and then built an argument around that reframing. From there we spent pages debating word usage instead of the mechanic I was talking about.
You keep saying there’s “no connection,” but there is, just not the one your trying to force.
The connection is this (read carefully lol)
bhvrs own data shows coordinated high MMR groups consistently outperform averages.
My point is explaining why that happens from a gameplay perspective.
Not because “swfs are better at everything,” but because gen speed specifically benefits from coordination in a way that other mechanics dont scale as hard with it.
you listed examples like-
- faster heals
- longer chases
- better unhooks
- better use of Deliverance
- etc.
Those all help. But their indirect.
Gen speed is direct.
It converts coordination into raw objective progress with almost no waste-
- less idle time
- fewer duplicated actions
- better gen spreading
- better timing of pressure vs repair
- turning the same chase time into more total gen progress than solo queue can
Thats the part iv been calling out since the start.
Not that gen perks are broken in isolation.
Not that bhvr is wrong.
Not that swfs are unfair.Just that-
Gen speed multipliers interact with coordination more efficiently than most other survivor mechanics, which is why gens feel disproportionately fast in high mmr swfs.
Everything else about quotes, definitions of “balance,” happy/unhappy, and bhvr's intent came from you trying to turn my context into the core of the argument.
If you want to discuss wether gen speed actually scales that way with coordination, we can. That’s the real discussion.
But if were still debating dictionary definitions and whether I “appealed to BHVR authority,” then we’re not actually talking about the game anymore.
And that was never what I was trying to do.
-6 -
Your saying their isnt enough time in a match for small inefficiencies to add up, but then you describe all the ways coms help with coordination, pressure, calling gens, saves, and general decision making. Those are the exact inefficiencies I’ve been talking about.
Your basically agreeing that coms remove uncertainty and wasted time, while also saying that removing that uncertainty does not change how much progress survivors get out of their time. That makes no sense.
This isnt about whether solos can play well. Its about wether coordination changes how much value survivors get from gen speed and multipliers. Your acknowledging that coms remove a lot of the friction in decision making, but then saying that friction never really mattered in the first place.
Really go back read what you said lol.
-4 -
I never claimed they don't help. They just don't help enough to add up to your claims and they help much more in other parts of the game that don't interact directly with generators. They primarily help you waste more of the killers time in ways solo can't easily accomplish, not get gens done faster.
My explicit mention to calling gens is how that isn't necessary for decent players (yet you say I need to read lol) and I directly go over how I make decisions, good decisions, without comms. If I can do that then so can others, meaning we can shave additional time off these minor inefficiencies. The people that I mention being helped by them for gen efficiency are my more casual friends, you're on this site so I doubt you are a casual. If you can't make those decisions and can't be gen efficient without comms you should play solo more to develop better game sense on the survivor side. It will help you win more killer matches too.
If this isn't about whether solos can play well, then who are we comparing to? What baseline are these swfs above? Who are they more efficient than? Your points are useless without a point of comparison, that makes how well solos can play paramount to this conversation.
What do you even mean by multipliers at this point? Because a moment ago you were saying perks weren't a core part of your argument and now there they are back again, unless you are referring to some uber secret mechanic no one else knows about you are talking about perks again.
3 -
Your asking what the baseline is and who swfs are more efficient then. The baseline is high MMR solo survivors. Thats the comparison bhvrs own data gives us with the 40% vs 48% escape rate.
That difference exists somewhere, and its not coming from thin air.
Youv spent this entire time explaining how comms remove uncertainty, improve coordination, help with decision making, and reduce wasted time, and then you turn around and say those things don’t add up enough to affect gen pace. Those are literally the exact things that affect how efficiently survivor time turns into gen progress.
You cant list all the ways coms remove inefficiency and then act like inefficiency never mattered in the first place.
When I say multipliers, im not talking about stacking full gen builds like you keep trying to drag this back to. I mean anything that increases how fast gens move beyond base speed. perks, toolboxes, addons, number of survivors on a gen. All of those get more value when players don’t waste time figuring out who should be where.
You keep trying to turn this into wether solos can play well, like that was ever the claim. It wasnt. The point is that solos, no matter how good, still operate with less information than swfs. That changes how efficiently time turns into progress whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Your saying that difference is too small to matter. Im saying thats exactly where the difference in escape rates comes from.
At this point your arguing that removing inefficiency somehow doesn’t change efficiency, which is a pretty strange hill to die on.
-4 -
If high MMR solo survivors are the baseline then what they can and cannot do without comms is the entire basis for the discussion and therefore how well they can play matters to this conversation. I am trying to explain what that baseline really is to you since it seems like you don't have a lot of solo queue experience. I can be gen efficient and make good decisions without comms, therefore others can as well and I don't even know with any certainty that I fall into this "high mmr" bracket that BHVR gives us no real information about.
That difference exists somewhere, and its not coming from thin air.
I agree with this statement, I never didn't.
Youv spent this entire time explaining how comms remove uncertainty, improve coordination, help with decision making, and reduce wasted time, and then you turn around and say those things don’t add up enough to affect gen pace. Those are literally the exact things that affect how efficiently survivor time turns into gen progress.
I have explained how I can do all of these things without comms. If high mmr solos are capable of this without comms then we must look elsewhere for our differences. That isn't to say it doesn't play any role, just that its role is incredibly minor compared to where comms can have a much more dramatic effect on the match. Once again, the players I find that get real help with gen efficiency specifically from comms are casual players, they do not fall into the high mmr solo camp.
When I say multipliers, im not talking about stacking full gen builds like you keep trying to drag this back to. I mean anything that increases how fast gens move beyond base speed. perks, toolboxes, addons, number of survivors on a gen. All of those get more value when players don’t waste time figuring out who should be where.
Again, I don't waste much time figuring out where I should be, it helps but not much. Running toolboxes means slower heals and heals that require two people, same for gen perks, you are trading out heal speed or chase time for gen speed, you are not treating these as the tradeoffs that they are. As I said before, go ahead and put a cap on max gen speed and it won't change anything because good swfs won't be hitting it and you will still complain about gen rushing.
You keep trying to turn this into wether solos can play well, like that was ever the claim. It wasnt. The point is that solos, no matter how good, still operate with less information than swfs. That changes how efficiently time turns into progress whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
But it is, the question we are ultimately discussing is WHY are four man high mmr swfs doing that amount better than solo. In order to figure that out we must establish how well high mmr solo players can play. If you try to claim that swf are doing it because of thing X, then we must look at how well high mmr solos are able to do thing X. If we find that there isn't actually that much of a difference between solo and four man for that thing then we need to throw that out as our reason for the difference. I really don't think these high mmr four mans are that much more gen efficient than high mmr solos that it explains a 40 → 48 jump.
I think this discussion is over, if you won't accept looking at how high mmr solos play we can't actually have any discussion. The last thoughts I will leave with are these:
Do you think that 40% escape rate for high mmr solos is only looking at matches where all four survivors are high mmr? I doubt it, its very likely just looking at just how often they died regardless of who they are playing with, just that they were solo queuing. Meaning that 40 isn't even our real baseline, we would need an escape rate of high mmr solos when the lobby consists solely of high mmr solos.
I really think you should play more solo queue survivor. You really don't seem to have a grasp on how these players play and how good they can be without comms. You get paired with bad players for sure but maybe even that will give you better insight into that 40%.
2 -
Your still treating the bhvr quotes like they were the foundation of my argument, when they never were.They were context.I split these up pretty clearly in the last post, but let's try a different approach.
Word argument
If you were just trying to establish context:
Why did you put GOOD in all caps before reason? Why did you put so many Ls in all before data?
The above writing makes no sense just to establish context. It's an attempt to establish evidence. Context isn't 'good', it's context. You don't need to say the have 'allllll' the data to establish context.
You just say BHVR has a 60/40 KR, which again, everyone knows.
Telling others to 'read' while trying to alter the meaning of that paragraph, or refusing to say 'I messed that up', undercuts the idea of anything else being an honest discussion.
Gen Speed
The connection is this (read carefully lol)bhvrs own data shows coordinated high MMR groups consistently outperform averages.Read carefully
Everyone knows and no one disagrees. High MMR coordinated SWFs have always outperformed every other group.
Those all help. But their indirect.Gen speed is direct.So what?
Gen speed is direct in soloq.
Again, if anything, the gen speed perks have less of an improvement on SWFs than they do soloq. Hyperfocus / deja vu really don't depend on it, prove definitely is, but is generally seen as a middling perk. Full circuit is basically a beginner perk outside of trying to set a record for fastest escape streaks.
-I also see in a reply after this you say to @FerrousFacade you aren't talking full gen builds, except that is something you brought up. Again, this feels like you are either changing your point or just really bad at communicating your thoughts.
Like everything, coordinated SWF will be better, but there's nothing unique about gen speed.
It converts coordination into raw objective progress with almost no waste-less idle timefewer duplicated actionsbetter gen spreadingbetter timing of pressure vs repairturning the same chase time into more total gen progress than solo queue can
That's all true with or without gen perks / items
Everything else about quotes, definitions of “balance,” happy/unhappy, and bhvr's intent came from you trying to turn my context into the core of the argument.If you don't think you were debating these things, even before I got in the argument, I don't think its an accurate take.
But as I've said from pretty early on, take those quotes, definitions, etc. out and you don't have an argument. There's no evidence or logical argument that you've provided connecting high MMR SWFs to what you say is the problem, and quite a bit provided by others showing the opposite.
6 -
Before the MMR system, solo survivors could go easy on the killer.
After the MMR system, solo survivors can no longer go easy on the killer.
Because your allies have turned into mysterious survivors.
For new players: 1. Playing solo as a survivor is hard.
2. Playing as a killer is hard.
3. Don't worry, everyone is the same.
I want you to feel that way.
The published statistics are what you want them to be.
Post edited by ONSAN on3 -
Let me respond to your post in the same structure your using, because the “Word argument / Actual argument” split is basically the entire problem here, at this point its starting to feel less like two arguments and more like one argument plus a very determined distraction.
1) “Word argument” (caps, emphasis, definitions, 60/40, what you think I implied)
This is still not the argument. Its you treating context like it was the claim, then arguing the context as if disproving it would somehow make the mechanic disappear.Iv already clarified this multiple times, BHVR/60/40 was background, not authority. Bringing it back every reply doesnt counter the mechanic, it just resets the conversation to the same semantic loop again. And when you say “if you don’t think you were debating wording,” your basically pointing at the existence of words in the thread and concluding that wording must therefore be the topic. Thats not how arguments work.
2) Actual claim (the part you keep restating and then denying)
You said-“There’s nothing unique about gen speed.”
But you also said:
“This is all true.”
—about coordination leading to better splitting, less overlap, higher repair uptime, and more total gen progress from the same chase time.
Thats a contradiction...
If “this is all true,” then coordination is clearly converting the same amount of survivor time into more objective completion. Denying that gen progress scales meaningfully with coordination while acknowledging the efficiency that produces it is basically writing out the answer and then pretending the last line doesnt count.
3) Why this keeps repeating (the pattern)
This is the loop:- Mechanics get explained
- You acknowledge them (“this is all true”)
- You deny what they imply (“nothing unique”)
- Then the reply jumps back to wording/definitions/60-40 again like a reset button got pressed
Thats why I said “read carefully.” Because at this point there are only two possibilities- either what’s being written isnt actually being followed, or the same points are being acknowledged and then dismissed anyway just to keep the side argument going, which starts to look more like trolling than genuine disagreement. Either way, the mechanic itself hasnt changed, coordination is being described as producing more objective progress, and then the conclusion of that description is being treated as if it somehow doesnt apply.
So Il keep it simple for ya
If the position is “coordination helps survivors,” we agree.
If the position is that coordination does not significantly accelerate gen completion, especially once repair multipliers stack on top of coordinated efficiency, then that’s what needs to be argued mechanically instead of another round of phrasing debates.
Because so far its mostly been, agree with the efficiency, then argue that acknowledging what it implies doesnt count.-5 -
“if high MMR solo survivors are the baseline then what they can and cannot do without comms is the entire basis for the discussion and therefore how well they can play matters to this conversation.”
How well solos can play matters, but the comparison is not “can solos play efficiently.” The comparison is whether coordinated teams convert the same survivor time into more gen progress than solos do. That difference becomes much more visible once repair multipliers are involved, because coordinated teams can apply those multipliers with far less wasted time. (read)
“I have explained how I can do all of these things without comms. If high mmr solos are capable of this without comms then we must look elsewhere for our differences.”
A solo player being capable of playing efficiently does not mean the level of efficiency is identical. Coordination removes uncertainty entirely, which makes it easier to consistently apply repair multipliers at the right times and avoid overlap or downtime, so the same multipliers produce more total progress in coordinated teams than in solo play.
“Again, I don't waste much time figuring out where I should be, it helps but not much.”
Even small differences in assignment timing, rotations, and decision speed are exactly what determine how effectively repair multipliers are used across the match. The argument isnt that solos waste large amounts of time, but that coordinated teams waste less, which means those multipliers are active more consistently and therefore have a larger overall impact.
“If we find that there isn't actually that much of a difference between solo and four man for that thing then we need to throw that out as our reason for the difference. I really don't think these high mmr four mans are that much more gen efficient than high mmr solos that it explains a 40 → 48 jump.”
The difference does not come from base efficiency alone, it comes from how coordination amplifies the value of repair speed multipliers over the course of the match. When teams consistently apply those bonuses with minimal downtime, the cumulative effect is large enough to contribute to the escape rate gap.
“I really think you should play more solo queue survivor. You really don't seem to have a grasp on how these players play and how good they can be without comms.”
This isnt really a question of how well solos can perform individually. The discussion is about how coordination changes how effectively teams use the same mechanics — particularly repair-speed bonuses — compared to players operating independently.
-3 -
How well solos can play matters, but the comparison is not “can solos play efficiently.”
Lol, it literally is. What you are describing is efficiency, "multipliers" or not its still just efficiency.
A solo player being capable of playing efficiently does not mean the level of efficiency is identical
Never said it wasn't different, just that the difference is much more minor than you think.
Even small differences in assignment timing, rotations, and decision speed are exactly what determine how effectively repair multipliers are used across the match.
Matches are not long enough for these to add up in a meaningful way, they might matter in the odd matches but not many.
The difference does not come from base efficiency alone, it comes from how coordination amplifies the value of repair speed multipliers over the course of the match.
If this were the case the best teams would run these perks, they don't, its not as significant as you think.
This has just been me re-iterating all the points I have made over this conversation. Its fine if you don't agree but:
This isnt really a question of how well solos can perform individually. The discussion is about how coordination changes how effectively teams use the same mechanics — particularly repair-speed bonuses — compared to players operating independently.
It is though, its about how a group of solos can perform together without comms which is composed of those players operating not actually independently (seriously have you never played a team game without comms before? the individuals are not as independent as you think at least not good ones), that is what we are comparing swf to, it matters. If you don't play solo queue, and since at no point have you retorted that you do solo that seems likely, you don't have any idea what this baseline actually look likes, you have no idea how efficient they can be, how coordinated they can be, and you have no idea where comms would help them the most. You have no experience in the area. You literally have no idea what you are talking about. If I never played killer and made claims about how killer was played you would rightfully take umbrage with it. You don't get to make claims about how solo survivors play when you don't play solo survivor.
4 -
Bringing it back every reply doesnt counter the mechanic, it just resets the conversation to the same semantic loop again. And when you say “if you don’t think you were debating wording,” your basically pointing at the existence of words in the thread and concluding that wording must therefore be the topic. Thats not how arguments work.Arguments rely on both people having a sense that the other person is discussing honestly.
There's been a pattern of your argument drifting, you changing others argument, and you accusing others of not understanding. If a person is not willing to explain why they said something a certain way, and instead tries to deflect from it, they aren't having an honest discussion.
Why was it a GOOD reason if it was just context? Why was allllll the data important, if it was just context?
If that's not your position, then it shouldn't be that hard to say you made a mistake.
This issue of misquoting then comes up immediately in what you say next.
You said-“There’s nothing unique about gen speed.”But you also said:“This is all true.”—about coordination leading to better splitting, less overlap, higher repair uptime, and more total gen progress from the same chase time.Thats a contradiction...I notice you typed out my statement instead of copy pasting it. I said That's all true - not 'this is all true', now that is a pretty minor change, but it led me to spot a bigger change - you put a period in as if I ended my sentence. Let's see what was in my quote after the period that you went and inserted.
That's all true with or without gen perks / itemsEvery thing that a soloq can do, a high MMR coordinated SWF can do just a little bit better (sometimes, like sabo and deliverance, a lot better). Even if we took players of the exact same skill; communication, planning, and playing together is always going to make them a little better. Healing, gens, body blocking, are all going to be improved by the benefits a highly coordinated SWF gets. Whatever build you gave the groups, all gen perks, no gen perks, no perks at all, the coordinated SWF would perform a little better than a soloq of the same skill with it because of their advantages.
There's nothing unique about gen perks or items over everything else.
This is the loop:Mechanics get explainedYou acknowledge them (“this is all true”)You deny what they imply (“nothing unique”)
When I deny what you say they imply, and then I say why your implication is wrong, that's the argument. You keep failing at that second step. At some point you have to actually try and turn 'context' into an argument.
Highly coordinated SWFs at high MMR do better. No one disagrees. You need to demonstrate why its your issue 'gen speed multipliers' instead of all of the other factors everyone else has mentioned that accounts for that difference (and we're not even to the point of whether your solution would actually improve it)
If the position is “coordination helps survivors,” we agree.Not a single person in this thread has ever disagreed with that idea. People have disagreed on scope, and on relevance, but no one disagrees with the fact that those things can be an advantage.
If the position is thatcoordination does not significantly accelerate gen completion, especially once repair multipliers stack on top of coordinated efficiency,then that’s what needs to be argued mechanically instead of another round of phrasing debates.Coordination helps with gen efficiency, through faster healing, the ability to use certain perks more effectively (deliverance), the ability to pre-run, knowing each others strengths and weaknesses, etc.
Gen perks and items have nothing unique about that and, if anything, less of a difference between soloq and SWFs.
Because so far its mostly been, agree with the efficiency, then argue that acknowledging what it implies doesnt count.Again, you have to explain how what you think it implies is true because I and others have explained how its not.
Additionally, the last five posts, not including this one, I've talked about this issue despite your claim that I keep trying to turn it in into a semantic debate, I've separated the two points pretty clearly.
5 -
“lol, it literally is. What you are describing is efficiency, "multipliers" or not its still just efficiency.”
Calling it “efficiency” is not an argument. The question is wether coordination raises that efficiency enough to change outcomes. Saying “it’s all efficiency” just sidesteps the whole point.
“never said it wasn't different, just that the difference is much more minor than you think.”
If its different, then its a question of degree. My point is that the degree stops being “minor” once repair speed bonuses are in play, because coordination lets teams apply them more consistently with less downtime.
“matches are not long enough for these to add up in a meaningful way, they might matter in the odd matches but not many.”
Thats exactly backwards for DBD. Matches are decided by small time margins. If small differences didnt add up, there wouldnt be a consistent performance gap between coordinated four mans and solo teams at similar skill levels.
“If this were the case the best teams would run these perks, they don't, its not as significant as you think.”
This assumes my claim is “the advantage requires stacking gen perks.” It doesnt. Coordination amplifies any repair speed bonus that exists, whether its perks, items, add ons, or simply timing when to stack. They dont need full gen builds for coordination to increase the value of the bonuses they do run.
“it is though, its about how a group of solos can perform together without comms which is composed of those players operating not actually independently,”
Sure solos aren’t “independent,” but they still have incomplete information compared to coms. Thats the entire difference. A good solo squad can make educated guesses, but swfs dont guess. Thats why coordination changes how reliably bonuses get applied and how little time gets wasted.
“if you don't play solo queue. you have no experience in the area. You literally have no idea what you are talking about.”
Thats just a personal attack and it doesnt answer the argument. Wether I personally solo queue does not change the mechanism being discussed coms remove uncertainty, and removing uncertainty increases how consistently teams convert time into gen progress, especially when repair speed bonuses are involved.
-4 -
-1
-
If the discussion has really reached the point where were litigating how many L’s were in “all,” that kind of proves what Iv been saying your treating presentation and wording like it changes the mechanic. It doesnt lol.
BHVR-60/40 was context for why the topic exists, not the foundation of the claim. You keep dragging it back in as if arguing context disproves the gameplay point then acting like im the one derailing things.
Highly coordinated SWFs at high MMR do better. No one disagrees.
Correct… That’s the starting point, not the finish line.
Coordination helps with gen efficiency, through faster healing, the ability to use certain perks more effectively (deliverance), the ability to pre-run, knowing each others strengths and weaknesses, etc.
Also correct. And heres where you keep doing the same move, you list a set of coordination benefits (many of them conditional), then jump to-
Gen perks and items have nothing unique about that and, if anything, less of a difference between soloq and SWFs.
Thats where the inconsistency is.
Your acknowledging that coordinated teams get more repair uptime, less overlap, better splitting, and more total progress from the same amount of time, and then declaring gen speed “not unique” as if the label cancels the effect you just agreed exists.
And when that gets pointed out, the discussion shifts to quote lawyering (whether something was “this” vs “that,” punctuation, emphasis, etc.) as if that changes the substance of what was conceded. Thats not a rebuttal, its an escape hatch.
Heres the actual distinction being discussed-
- heals / saves / perk value = event-dependent (injuries, hooks, triggers, killer decisions)
- gen progress = continuous objective accumulation whenever survivors are not being actively denied time
So yes, coordination improves everything, but not everything converts coordinated time into match-ending objective progress as directly and consistently as generators do, especially when repair multipliers stack on top of coordinated uptime.
This silly word argument has already been addressed multiple times, so Im not going to keep responding to the same semantic point. If theres a mechanical rebuttal to the coordination → efficiency → objective-progress interaction, thats worth discussing. Otherwise, at some point the ego has to be dropped so the conversation can actually move forward instead of looping back to phrasing again. So il no longer entertain it.
-4 -
Agree to disagree on the rest but you not playing solo queue isn't a personal attack. If you don't solo queue you are lacking skills a good solo will have and are therefore underestimating them and the entire baseline for your beliefs about gen speeds. You don't understand where comms would help them most.
4 -
-1
-
If the discussion has really reached the point where were litigating how many L’s were in “all,” that kind of proves what Iv been saying your treating presentation and wording like it changes the mechanic. It doesnt lol.I explained why the discussion was important in the last post.
Why did you use good reason, why did you say all the data, why did you emphasize those words?
At a certain point, you either need to answer it, or admit you made a mistake. If it's so unimportant to everything else, admitting the mistake doesn't seem to be a big issue (your argument about ego at the end).
Also correct. And heres where you keep doing the same move, you list a set of coordination benefits (many of them conditional), then jump to-Gen perks and items have nothing unique about that and, if anything, less of a difference between soloq and SWFs.Thats where the inconsistency is.Okay, let's see how you explain it -
Your acknowledging that coordinated teams get more repair uptime, less overlap, better splitting, and more total progress from the same amount of time, and then declaring gen speed “not unique” as if the label cancels the effect you just agreed exists.Alright, now would be the time where I think you'll explain how they are unique.
And when that gets pointed out, the discussion shifts to quote lawyeringYou're doing far more to try and shift the argument away from what you claim is the argument than I am.
Heres the actual distinction being discussed-heals / saves / perk value = event-dependent (injuries, hooks, triggers, killer decisions)gen progress = continuous objective accumulation whenever survivors are not being actively denied time
Again, you're saying things everyone already knows. But this is true for SWF and soloq. Gen perks have the same benefit here - you do gens a little faster, but the tradeoff is that you lack the ability to do something else.
So yes, coordination improves everything, but not everything converts coordinated time into match-ending objective progress as directly and consistently as generators doHow are directly and consistently relevant?
Directly - if perks heal quicker, make longer chases, etc. they either get survivors back on gens more quickly or let them stay on gens. This is true for both soloq and SWF.
Consistently - some perks provide consistent value in every match (Deja Vu), some provide occasional but large value (unbreakable). This is true for both soloq and SWF, if anything the latter type of perks are far easier to get value from in a SWF.
If theres a mechanical rebuttal to the coordination → efficiency → objective-progress interaction, thats worth discussing.A rebuttal to what? You've basically given up on everything that seemed to be an argument as just context.
6
