Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
Get all the details on our forums: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/436478/sign-up-now-to-receive-a-recap-of-your-2024-dead-by-daylight-stats/p1?new=1
More evidence that this game is extremely Killer biased
Evidence just keeps piling up and I don’t see how people can keep denying it. First there was the devs own data that showed 75-80% kill rates. Unfortunately the devs also toss in the “dont draw conclusions” so all the killer mains say it means the data is worthless. Completely wrong but yeah... ok. I stayed away from the forums after that. Then today I read the thread about wraith and notice Tru3tal3nt and Otzdarva tracking their win rates. Whaddya know? They were like 90%. This with wraith and trapper. Along with that are the other people in the thread noting their 3k averages, etc. (Though anecdotal it supports the data).
So.... what is everybody seeing that shows killers being at a disadvantage aside from the occasional beating by high level 4 man swf teams?
I’ll tell you what they’re seeing: nothing. Everyone who complains on here about survivors being entitled and owning the game gives anecdotal, subjective information about their games. All the data and facts continue to show that most games will end with a 3-4k. Thus killers are almost always “winning” whether judging by pipping or in-game experience of kills, and survivors are almost always dying. In this case, since we know survivor pipping is fairly easy, survivors are often winning by pipping but losing by dying.
IMO what these high kill rate data show, and which matches my own experience in game at green thru red ranks, is that survivor game experience is suffering, even though we pip. The exception being those red rank swf squads.
This is also what is pushing me away from the game. It seems killers must have 3k to “win” but survivors can die all day long and “win”. Playability as solo survivor sucks. All day long at all levels you get bad teammates, dcs (which will become suicides on hook), killers with Ultrarare addons, proxy camping, tunnelling, and a multitude of little mechanics that make survivor life suck, like being downed during a pallet stun, getting hit 6 ft thru a window, slow and medium vaults that make no sense...
How about redefining killer wins away from 3ks? Tweak the “win” conditions and balance so that survivors can escape more, more like 50% kill rates, and killers can still “win” via pipping. Right now it seems like pipping is balanced but game experience is very killer sided.
Comments
-
The Game is killer sided if the survivors are bad. If the survivors have the skill to be good, the game is entirely in their hands.
43 -
If the devs didn't want survivors to escape a lot of their choices would make sense. Especially for the ranking system. As survivor you must learn over time to not care about escaping. This is parallel to the in game lore that survivors slowly lose hope as they escape only to die 3 times before escaping again only to die more. Killers have more power than they give themselves credit for.
7 -
Survivors are skins silly
3 -
Got me there
0 -
Fallacy. Solo survivor at red ranks is still a crap shoot since you get red rank survivors on your team that suck because pipping is easy. The only way to ensure a decent game is with a 4 man swf and most people don’t have that luxury. Again, aside from 4 man swf, this game is killer biased.
3 -
i already had enough reading the titel. guess its another bait thread.
3 -
If you can’t argue the facts, snipe.
4 -
I'm a red rank solo surv and do well consistently unless there's a mori. Maybe you're not as good as you think you are?
16 -
The data cannot be taken at face value. That's a mistake to make.
But I do find the people trying to swipe it all under the rug and claim Killers are still drastically under powered quite humorous as you know if the data showed a 80% escape rate... just think about the Rank 1 data that indicated a super high escape rate not long ago... we'd have about 50x the topics declaring for Survivor nerfs.
Both sides have issues, they always will.
7 -
The game is almost perfectly balanced... As long as you play 4 man SWF.
So the devs just need to buff solo survivors to 4 man SWF level.
1 -
So for OTZ and Tru, their kill rates mean nothing. Both have thousands of hours in the game, and are both skilled to boot. They will both naturally do well, and get a high kill percentage of they try to win.
I will agree that dedicated servers have made a lot of little things very annoying as a survivor. Dead hard becoming exhausted on the ground, and the aforementioned window and pallet hits. I don’t feel this is a particular side bias though, just bad programming/coding/design that hopefully gets ironed out in the future.
5 -
I'm a red rank survivor and I use windows of opportunity and alert because I have no game sense and am beyond terrible.
I don't even teabag at the exit gate.
4 -
Isn't it weird though that these guys almost constantly 4K stomp, but they often find themselves complaining how OP the Survivors are almost constantly? I just find it weird to watch them win without much effort and then turn around and cry when a Survivor briefly uses something (like Dead Hard) to get away and suddenly they are complaining. Then they 4K anyway.
:I
5 -
So you are saying that we should balance the game for bananas that just hold W and hope to evade the killer forever so that even in teams like that 2 of them escape.
You can't balance for equal outcome.
2 -
*laughs in first-hook suicides and purposeful deranking*
To put much faith in the data they've chosen to release is folly. It's basically inconclusive on the many variables concerning "why," which is the key component in determining if that data is even worth discussing.
3 -
Lol THIS.
1 -
Dedicated servers screw killers just as much. Stalking with Mikey and Ghostface is better than what it was when the servers were introduced, but still dodgy. Huntress' hatchets are a total crapshoot, clown's bottles often break in place, despite visually seeing the projectile move. The dedicated servers are honestly awful for killers who don't just smack survivors.
2 -
Try this: play killer and survivor at a red rank level for a while ajd draw your own conclusion. As far as Otz and Tru3 go, they literally play the game for a living. I wouldn't cite a pro basketball player's shooting percentage as a reasonable metric for the average hobbyist to attain.
15 -
Yep it is awful for both sides
0 -
Overall, until survivors are as skilled as they can possibly be the killers have the advantage. Then when they are killers have disadvantage, unless they are as skilled as they can possibly be then they are never at a disadvantage ever. Sounds super survivor sided.
1 -
"Winning" is inherently subjective in this game. The ranking system & emblems give somewhat of a structure, but that's it.
Sure you can call a 4k a win for killer. You can call surviving a win for that survivor, or a 0k a win for the survivors. But it doesn't matter. All that matters is if you enjoyed playing the match. Stats mean nothing about the experience I have when playing either role.
I know when I'm having fun when playing the game, and when I'm not. I can die and still have fun. I can 4k and feel like a scumbag. This is not a competitive game. I think too many people have the mindset that they need to win. If you arent having fun, play differently or play a different game.
I think the game is more balanced now than it's ever been, and I have fun in both roles. It seems to me that more than 80% of the community has more fun playing survivor rather than killer, though. Otherwise there wouldnt be 15 minute survivor queue times, right?
5 -
Finally someone gets it :)
0 -
I personally have to disagree. I think this game is in a good spot balance wise. I don't think this game is killer biased at all, however, I also don't think it's survivors biased, as some people still seem to believe.
What does hurt solo survivors is the matchmaking, and especially the pipping system, which allows survivors of very different skill levels to climb up to red ranks. The new changes to rank reset will make things worse. They really need to improve on the pipping system, since that's very important in a game where 1 bad survivor can screw up three other good survivors. Which is probably also one reason as to why kill rates are probably so high, and why these statistics are not fully representative of this game's balance.
They also really need to start buffing solo survivors more to close the gap between solo and swf survivors, which would also then allow them to be able to balance killers better.
4 -
That’s the beauty of data analysis. I don’t have to smoke cigarettes for 20 years to see for myself that they cause cancer. And it isn’t just Otz and Tru3... the data shows all red rank killers in that range. Again...FACTS.
3 -
People deny facts when they don't support their view. If stats said 80% escape rate guess who would be invoking the stats in every post.
1 -
Just to emphasize again that Red Rank stats weren't really from Red Rank matches...
2 -
I guess that's what "Assymetrical horror game" means
1 -
Exactly my point. The game should be killer sided and that shouldn't be a bad thing.
5 -
Obviously, it's a 1vs 4, the sole player needs more power than the other team members to win
0 -
Something that does surprise me. Not too long ago, killer queue times were longer than survivor queue times in general. I get that Nurse and Spirit were nerfed, but both of these killers are still really strong.
I'm still enjoying killer as much as survivor personally. Maybe it's the bugged sound that is driving some killer players away from the game. I do really hope this gets fixed as soon as possible now.
0 -
And they'd be wrong to use these stats as a full representation of the game's balance as well.
Also, many people say that these stats simply don't represent the game's balance perfectly, since there are factors that influence these stats. Of course they can't be ignored and need to be considered as well when balancing the game.
1 -
I never said using stats as a full representation of the game's balance was a good thing. In fact, that's one of many problems I have with OP but that doesn't discredit what they're trying to say.
0 -
I read your post. That’s good clarification to know. But as a data analyst for the past 15 years or so I am comfortable that the red rank killers (at the start of the match) were in matches with red and purple rank survivors most of the time. I don’t believe that some small amount of lower ranks would skew the data enough to make an impact.
Bear in mind the clarification means there are also times when a rank 4 killer was going against rank 1 survivors. The exceptions wouldn’t all be ones that make getting a high kill rate easier.
And honestly, come on... the “all ranks” data was basically the same. We all see the same numbers and we all play this game and know the data is true. 3k average.
My main point is you can’t just jack up ease of pipping for survivors and say “hey. It’s asymmetrical horror. You’ll just die every game but you’ll rank up”. A 4 man team should have the same chance of all escaping as the killer has to 4k. Thus it should average out at an appx 50% kill rate. And killer perception of win and pipping should adjust accordingly.
2 -
Ah this nonsense again. Thing is though 4 survivors can have 4 different experiences in the same game, where as the killer has one.
Some may escape and some may die, some consider pipping and dying a win while some consider escaping and safety pipping a loss.
The data doesn’t really give convincing evidence that killers are ‘winning’ 76% of their matches.
1 -
I didn't mean to accuse you, I just wanted to point out high escape rates also wouldn't be representative of the game's balance. Since OP who you responded to seems to think these stats are facts for killers being op, if only from a gameplay aspect.
1 -
The problem is that survivors depend on each other, while killers don't have to depend on anyone. One bad survivor can screw over three good survivors sometimes. That's why these kill rates stats aren't a full representation of the game's balance, and why these stats don't prove that this game is in any way killer biased.
Especially since people of different skill levels can get to red ranks because it's not only about skill, but about how much you play the game with the current pipping system.
1 -
I think it is mainly just due to the swf matchmaking changes they made a little while back. I'm certain the longest queue time you can face in the game currently is killer queue at rank 20. I've seen a couple streamers go for it, and it's anywhere from 15-30 minutes.
I believe the highest ranked survivor you can normally go against would be rank 14. So any swf groups with a person rank 13 or above will get a higher ranked killer. I know when I got the game I only wanted to play killer, so i'm also guessing the rank 20 survivor to rank 20 killer ratio is definitely not 4:1.
Weird thing happened yesterday: I'm red ranks survivor, and I went against a rank 16 killer yesterday with 3 other solo queue red rank survivors after waiting about 10 minutes in queue. I'm assuming that this killer spent so much time in the queue, the matchmaking system just took off the rank limits and threw us all into a really unbalanced match
2 -
your not considering the fact that that data also counted DC, mori's, all ranks, and wither or not it was a swf. True and ozt play this game for a living and are very skilled, more so than the majority of the killer player base and it shows. What do you think happens when a extremely skilled killer goes up against only averaged red rank players? They get destroyed because the killer isn't making mistakes, however put them against 4 extremely skilled survivors and the tables turn and the killer is only getting 1 and if luck 2 kills.
2 -
I read your post. That’s good clarification to know. But as a data analyst for the past 15 years or so I am comfortable that the red rank killers (at the start of the match) were in matches with red and purple rank survivors most of the time. I don’t believe that some small amount of lower ranks would skew the data enough to make an impact.
Can you prove that? As in, can you prove that the majority of the matches consisted of ONLY Red/Purple Rank survivors (and not, for example, majority consisting of SWF groups with SOME Green/Yellow/Grey survivors?)
Bear in mind the clarification means there are also times when a rank 4 killer was going against rank 1 survivors. The exceptions wouldn’t all be ones that make getting a high kill rate easier.
That's true. Like you say, the highest ranked survivors that a Rank 4 Killer can go up against are 4 Rank 1 Survivors. But the lowest ranked survivors that the same Rank 4 Killer can go up against are 4 Rank 10 Survivors (in all solo group.) If it is a SWF, the lowest ranked survivors that a Rank 4 Killer can go up against are 1 Rank 10 Survivor and 3 Rank 20 Survivors. So even looking at simply the variety of "exceptions" that are possible, it seems to much more favor higher kill rates than if it is simply a statistical data set of "real" Red Rank Matches, in which all 5 players are in the red ranks.
And honestly, come on... the “all ranks” data was basically the same. We all see the same numbers and we all play this game and know the data is true. 3k average.
Yeah, I really have no interest in the "all ranks" data. My only concern was in finding even a semblance of what the skill ceilings are on both sides. After all, that is how most games are generally balanced - at the top first, then down. So, to me personally, it was disappointing that BHVR couldn't provide even the idea of that - and even more disappointing that they weren't more honest and clear in how they gathered their data.
My main point is you can’t just jack up ease of pipping for survivors and say “hey. It’s asymmetrical horror. You’ll just die every game but you’ll rank up”.
You're absolutely right. In fact, I'd argue that pipping and ranking should be much more difficult on both sides. There is too much skill disparity even among the red ranks for both killers and survivors - where I'd argue that most people in red ranks currently probably shouldn't be in the red ranks. It's as if the 'time-played' dictates more about the rank than the actual skill of the players. As a casual, averaged-skill player, I should never be in the Red Ranks, but there I am. This does indeed make data-gathering for "best players" even more difficult.
A 4 man team should have the same chance of all escaping as the killer has to 4k. Thus it should average out at an appx 50% kill rate. And killer perception of win and pipping should adjust accordingly.
Again, you are right that a 4 man survivor team and its killer opponent should both have an average of 2 Kill/2 Escape rate if they are of the same skill level. In order to do that, BHVR should look closely at the very top skill level on both sides (for survivors and each of the killers) and make sure that on average, 2 Kill/2 Escape Ratio is maintained. If a perfect, gen-rushing, voice com 4-SWF survivors have more than a 2 Escape average against a perfect kill-focused Trapper, then Trapper should be buffed. If a perfect, gen-rushing, voice com 4-SWF survivors have less than a 2 Escape average against a perfect kill-focused Nurse, then the Nurse needs to be nerfed. From that point on, BHVR should balance the game downwards so that similarly skilled survivors can be matched together.
0 -
Actually I believe Peanits said that matches in which any player DC'd were disregarded. I'm guessing that's not the case with matches where survivors suicide on hook, but still. Just wanted to point it out.
2 -
That kind of balancing can't fully work in a game like DBD. Especially because of the gap between solo and swf survivors. You can't try and balance the game around the absolute optimal 4 man swf groups, at least not until solo survivors receive buffs to close the gap between solo and swf survivors.
But even then, survivors depend on each other, while a killer doesn't have to depend on anyone. Just one survivors who is not up to par with the other survivors and the killer can really screw the other survivors up. So it makes sense to me if the absolute best of the best survivor teams have a bigger chance of winning than a killer who is equally skilled. Just because it takes four people to play optimal on the survivor team, but only one player on the killer side.
Also, in games like Overwatch that are balanced in particular around the best players, both sides have always access to the same characters and the same potential team play. If some character in a game like Overwatch is balanced at high ranks but is op at lower ranks, that's not as bad since both sides still have access to that character. This is not the case in DBD. An overpowered killer at lower ranks is therefore a bigger problem.
2 -
This is absolutely bait. You are trying to incite chaos, but I'll humor you about Otz and Tru3.
Simply put, Otz and Tru3 are the best of the best. There are not many players that can rival them in skill nor talent. When using great add-ons that fix the basic problems of the Wraith, yeah, they will do well.
3 -
aside from maybe a couple little things I agree.
2 -
4k under 3min is the desired balance standard
0 -
Obviously if this is what you've seen watching otz and tru3's stream then you were not paying attention or watching a different stream of some other affliction.
1 -
That kind of balancing can't fully work in a game like DBD. Especially because of the gap between solo and swf survivors. You can't try and balance the game around the absolute optimal 4 man swf groups, at least not until solo survivors receive buffs to close the gap between solo and swf survivors.
But even then, survivors depend on each other, while a killer doesn't have to depend on anyone. Just one survivors who is not up to par with the other survivors and the killer can really screw the other survivors up. So it makes sense to me if the absolute best of the best survivor teams have a bigger chance of winning than a killer who is equally skilled. Just because it takes four people to play optimal on the survivor team, but only one player on the killer side.
Trust me, there is no one on this forum who advocates for the Solo/SWF gap to be eradicated moreso than myself, as you can read in this thread:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/79245/behaviour-not-reducing-solo-swf-gap
As long as solos are mixed in with SWF in the same game mode, it is absolutely necessary for solo to have the same advantages as any SWF - or at least to the point where a group of best solo survivors in the game has the same survival rate average as the best 4-Man SWFs (ideally 2 Kill/2 Escape) can have at all times.
What I don't agree with your point is the idea that 'because survivor side has to depend on one another, they deserve more than 2 Escapes against an equally skilled opponent.' What your idea essentially boils down to is that if both sides (survivors and killers) are equally skilled, 1. 4-Man SWF, who is easily able to depend on each other due to their very nature, should have an advantage over their opponent (unless they choose not to) and 2. 4 Solo Survivors, who must rely only on luck and good guesses to depend on each other (due to their very nature) to have the same outcome as a 4-Man SWF - should NOT have that same advantage over their opponent. S why should SWF have an advantage over both killers and solos of the same skill level just because they are able to "depend on each other" more consistently?
Also, in games like Overwatch that are balanced in particular around the best players, both sides have always access to the same characters and the same potential team play. If some character in a game like Overwatch is balanced at high ranks but is op at lower ranks, that's not as bad since both sides still have access to that character. This is not the case in DBD. An overpowered killer at lower ranks is therefore a bigger problem.
For me, 'the lack of access to the same characters' that you are mentioning is the exact reason why the game should be balanced at the top. If everyone has access to the same characters, it wouldn't matter if different characters were not adequately balanced, because at least everyone would have access to the 'best' character. They can all play that 'best' character so that no one has any advantage over others. The same is not true for this type of asymmetrical game in which there are specific roles and functions.
However, what you seem to be alluding to is the problem of different characters having different learning curves, and thereby causing players of specific play-times and similar game experiences to have uneven matches. If that's the case, that's usually more of a problem with the ranking system - in which the characters with easier learning curve (and therefore faster progression in the players' skill level) should ideally be ranking up faster to face more difficult opponents, compared to characters with more difficult learning curve (and therefore slower progression in the players' skill level) should continue to face other more novice players until they are able to learn the character well to the same degree.
0 -
It’s absolutely NOT bait. I feel strongly about pointing out the facts about what’s really going on in this game. The solo survivor experience often stinks and even good solos will get destroyed because of bad teammates. That is a part of game balance. If the reality is that very good solo players will lose most of the time because there aren’t enough other good solos it’s not fair to balance to the rare events of 4 strong groups. IOW, what was said about balancing the best killer to the best 4 man team is meaningless if the frequency of facing the best 4 man team is 1 in 100. If there are 10000 great killers and 10000 great survivors but those great survivors are in teams with merely good or average survivors most of the time then you don’t balance to the 1 in 100 times when the very good players land together. You balance to the average team that gets created at those levels.
1 -
I would like Solo's buffed to SWF levels, then Killers adjusted appropriately, does that sound fair?
2 -
Yep. I completely agree with knell about the solo/swf issue. It’s probably the first thing I ever argued about on the forums. Solos get reamed because of balancing to swf. So they either need to be made equal or separate.
1 -
Sleephartha, you won't find any truth here. I'm a gamedev myself (not DBD of course), I work on balance and AI and I know from my own experience how difficult it is to prove anything to certain vocal but ... not very smart querulants in the community. People ignore facts or find excuses in their heads to go around the facts if they don't suit them.
When someone starts a thread on this forum and asks to shut up about mentioning stats, but keeps expressing his own subjective opinion which contradicts stats and Peanits is the first one to reply with "Amen!" in the thread supporting it, what do you expect? No one cares about facts and balance. Since people keep playing the game nothing will change. A vocal and more egocentric minority will get what it wants.
0
