When devs say survivor escape rate is under 50%
Where are they pulling the data from? The game as a whole, or are they looking just at certain ranks? Is the escape rate lower or higher at high ranks? Just curious, as I see that 'but survivors rate of escape is under 50%' thrown around left and right when it comes to perk balancing.
Comments
-
The game as a whole.
0 -
It’s as a whole. It starts to rise above 50% as you go up (although rank 1 was 43%). However it should be noted that this last data was taken when MoM was still usable and EGC wasn’t a thing. So there’s no way the numbers haven’t dropped across the board with the significant decrease in hatch escapes alone.
6 -
The devs own data said escape rates were way higher in high ranks than that so your being told some bs
2 -
Some months ago they released several different stats (most used perks, Killers with the most kills, death rate per map, etc). One of them was "Survival rate", which was a graph showing on average how much Survivors survived between each rank. Overall, it was mostly around 50%, or slightly below it. So, when people say "sURviVAl rATe iS lOWeR ThAN 50%!", they took it from there.
The problem with this is that its flawed. Until they release stats which dont count DCs as "kills", then... welp.
0 -
There ya go.
3 -
Isn’t that old? It’s definitely not the latest one that I believe has Doctor in the background.
0 -
Again these stats have to be taken with a grain of salt since they count DC's as kills in their stats.
8 -
Oops maybe it is. I thought the doctor background was for the SWF stats.
0 -
It was for a bunch of stuff including SWF as well as overall. Im too lazy to post images but if you look in the News category it’s a topic started by Peanits and has it all there. It’s titled Data sheets.
0 -
Im more curious if it was survival rate per survivor or per trial. Its a huge difference because per survivor is more accurate.
God i wish i remembered the correct calculations.
0 -
I think the devs’ stats count things like DCs and suicides as deaths, which messes with the stats. Farming games are probably taken into account as well.
0 -
You are correct. Here is that portion of the post :
Survival Rate by Rank
This graph shows the average rate of survival per Survivor at any given rank, per platform. Please note: The data collected is using your rank afterthe match, so players who depipped from rank 1 down to rank 2 would appear as rank 2 for our purposes. This is likely the reason why you'll notice a large gap between the survival rate of rank 1 and rank 2: Players who survived were more likely to pip and maintain their rank, while those who died were more likely to depip and lose their rank.
This data was also collected between April 1st and April 7th, after the pipping thresholds were originally changed but before they were later tweaked to be more forgiving for Survivors. Because of that, the statistics at this rank are from a small sample size consisting solely of the best players that could maintain rank 1 with the strict pipping conditions.
0 -
My previous post still applies. I would generally say the real stats if they counted only matches that were 'proper matches' Ie: 4man completed matches. Although, this would include farming games which with full matches are less often. It would be a more accurate representation. Then we can just assume real matches are slightly lower. I would generally say the survival rate is ~60-65% Another statistic that would be useful is average number of hooks in these games.
Consider the two matches:
I 4k with 4 hooks because I slug vs I 4k with 12 hooks hooking everyone 3 times. These are 2 vastly different games which the stats are not accounting how the kills are being achieved. If the survival rate is 50% with an average of 5/6 hooks we can see there is a problem that most of these games are slug related or had some form of suicide on hook in them.
1 -
↑This.
And with the current DC epidemic plaguing the game.. I'd downright say that they're false.
4 -
Would an early killer DC also count as 4 escapes?
Just for arguments sake though, if we were to use these numbers, what effect would you say EGC has had? I have to think the large amount of previous 3K/hatch escape games now having become 4K cause of hatch closing has to seriously add up. That’s got to take at least 10% off I would guess, could even be more.
0 -
these stats also include old MoM, you know that perk that killers complained about so much, hardly any dc's during that period because it was so easy to upset killers with the perk
1 -
Yep, I mentioned MoM in my first post. Death of MoM plus EGC would have a major impact on new numbers. That can’t be argued!
0 -
BuT tHe Dc’S 🥺
3 -
considering how much killers say survivor DC, can you imagine how screwed statistics would be if a large portion of the data was just removed to appease killers.
OMEGALUL
0 -
If you remove all games that count Disconnects you have 'proper' 4 man games.
Although, understanding we have then 4man farm games and suicides they kinda balance out. However, I play both sides fairly equally and will tell you I have seen more survivor disconnects in the last month at high red ranks than I have seen killer disconnects at high ranks in the last year.
2 -
Those were just happy little accidents anyway.
3 -
I would say possibly? However, a disconnect means the match is not a proper 4v1 not dependent on who screwed it up. I want stats based on real games that were played out by both teams. However, the skew here would be suicides and farms which you can't really weed out of the stats but it would be a hell of a lot more accurate than disconnects counting. A disconnect can screw over a 4k for a killer or cause an entire 4-man plow. Both not equally as weighted. 1 loss of a kill vs 3 extra kills. Again really skews data here saying survivors die more.
Removing these as stated several times keeps the games to being at least proper 4 man games. More accurate considering this is what matches are suppose to be. We shouldn't balance around disconnects. We should be balancing around real matches.
As far as EGC goes I would really need to play 100 games of both that made it to the end and record data to give you a justified opinion that is based on fact. However, as the EGC currently stands.
No Hatch Grab - I miss these it was neat mechanic RIP
The gates situation:
- Too Far Away - Survivor Sided
- Decent 90 degree corner door setup - 50/50 however, you do have the 30% gate strat which is kinda survivor biased. However, this is also dependent on map layout RNG.
- Same wall - Killer Sided
Keys seem to be more common from chests I find I lose randomly to hatches with no keys brought in more often. Even when nobody is running plunder's. However, RNG is RNG.
EGC Mori - I generally allow this to happen as survivor just to see the mori. Otherwise it simply doesn't occur most games it is a forced situation where you could have already hooked them anyway.
So my general thoughts is the EGC is somewhat balanced a few issues obviously:
99% gates, Distance of Gates problem on both sides, No Hatch Grabs :( I miss those. Having pressure during EGC actually hurts you as killer since time slows to a crawl. Door opening as killer has 0 worth-while pressure.
0 -
Wasnt this wrong because they made a mistake of calculating rank 1 survival?
0 -
Read the text, it explains why the number is so skewed.
0 -
The 80% survival rate at rank 1 is due to it being almost impossible to stay rank 1 and die. Since the stats were taken at the end of trials, this naturally inflated the survival rate at rank 1 and deflated the survival rate at rank 2.
However, if you take rank 2's survival rate into account, this is what the truly best of the best survivors can do - survive a lot more often than not. The average survival rate was only lowered because they purposefully relaxed the pipping requirements and flooded high ranks with the bad survivors from the lower ranks.
0 -
Edit.
1 Kill = 100 - 75%
2 Kills = 74 - 49%
3 Kills = 49 - 24%
4 Kills = 24 - 0%
Obviously the best range is between 74 & 24% because it means 3Ks are 50/50
2 -
Dude, other way around.
1 -
I edited it, I realised my mistake after hitting enter lmfao.
1 -
I think we need to wait until next year to get reliable data from BHVR. 13. Septemberish dedicated servers will go live and they can have 3 month to collect and analyze the data.
It would be cool if we get at the end of each week/month/chapter a statsheet.
I would love that.
1 -
That data is no good as it disregards any context of how it was obtained.
Other than in low ranks, I'd wager that many kills are obtained by the Survivor(s) screwing up and not because the Killer played better.
In terms of balancing, context is vastly more important than the plain percentage, and it seems the devs do not realise that too often.
2 -
Escape rates would be a good number if they didn't count DCs and more importantly, if DBD was a competitive game, which it's not.
The lack of division between ranked and normal queues (not that I think it should be divided, it's a whole other discussion) means that people meme around, deliberately die, deliberately don't play optimally as killer, etc.
Let's be real, when it's a Nurse or Spirit people try. When it's a Bubba or Trapper the chance they will meme around is absurdly bigger. No one wants to meme against a strong killer, everyone wants to meme against a Bubba because that's pretty much what he's for in this game.
As long as this game isn't to be taken seriously and DCs aren't punished, stats shouldn't be used for balance unless they're absurdly high or low.
EDIT: not everyone tries against strong killers obviously, some people DC. But my point still stands that people don't take this game seriously enough for stats to be reliable.
0 -
They're still below 50% even if you exclude DCs, for what it's worth. The average kill rate for- according to kill rates- the weakest killer on the worst map at rank 1 is only 54.90% (45.1% escape rate). That kill rate only goes up from there for stronger killers and more killer favored maps.
We typically include DCs because people typically disconnect when they're losing. If you exclude DCs, you're excluding the matches where someone is doing so poorly that they rage quit. Removing any data at all will always skew things.
Still, these numbers are not worth making assumptions on. They are vague and may not show the full picture (e.g. when keys are used, when moris are used, when ultra rare add-ons or instaheals are used).
16 -
With this said /\ the cream of the crop survives 81% of the time....... man the game gets easy AF
0 -
The data for rank one is completely incorrect, it is NOWHERE near 81%, see Peanits comment just before yours, and see here.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/456908/#Comment_456908
something... something... 2K/3Ks are the norm and escape is also the norm, go figure.
2 -
That's not right. The cream of the crop survives over 60% of the time and no more than 80% of the time. It was only after they flooded high ranks with bad survivors by making it easier to pip that the average survival rate dropped (for obvious reasons).
2 -
Think you might want to read this comment.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/621461/#Comment_621461
0 -
I did. How does that contradict what I said? The devs explicitly made it easier for survivors to pip and flooded the high ranks with worse survivors, which artificially brought down the survival rate.
1 -
Would you guys be able to get the average hook count from these matches? Not sure if that is tracked by the game or not.
0 -
Because you keep perpetuating that
"The cream of the crop survives over 60% of the time and no more than 80% of the time."
despite being told that
"the weakest killer on the worst map at rank 1 is only 54.90% (45.1% escape rate). That kill rate only goes up from there for stronger killers and more killer favored maps"
because you keep using the excuse that
"The devs explicitly made it easier for survivors to pip and flooded the high ranks with worse survivors, which artificially brought down the survival rate"
It's almost like anything they give us you'll some how find a way to skew results, like how you keep saying that 80% number despite being told multiple times it's nowhere near that high.
If you passed me a jar of beads and asked me how many beads I thought were in that jar and I said to you that I think there is 80 beads in a jar, and you kept telling me that there is "nowhere near 80 beads in that jar", I wouldn't continue to say there are 80 beads in a jar.
8 -
Honestly, he is right with the inflated R1's that are so garbage with like 200 hours it isn't even funny. Plus I don't see how removing all the games with Disconnects would only leave marginal changes.
@Peanits what is the timespan that you guys do these stats. Last month, Last week, Last Year? Like how long of a span of games do you include? Not sure if you seen my post above can we get average hooks for these games as well. Slugging for 4k vs getting 9+ hooks are vastly different games.
1 -
I was referring to the older statistic, which did indeed show that the best survivors (ranks 1 and 2) were surviving between 60% and 80% of the time. It's math.
Look up weighted average. I'd need a population count to be able to give an exact number. The only thing I can say for certain is that the average survival rate at ranks 1 and 2 before the devs relaxed the pipping requirement was between 60% and 80%.
If you don't think making it easier for players to pip means bad players will flood higher ranks, I don't know what to tell you.
1 -
Forum Members - "remove DC's from the stats"
Devs - "The dc's don't change anything"
Forum Members - "Well, that cant be true".
wtf, devs can't win, you guys find any reason to throw away stats if they don't push your narrative, it's happened every time despite multiple clarifications
6 -
Peanits makes a good argument that people only DC when games aren't going their way, so you'd mostly be left with only the trials where survivors were stomping. Furthermore, given the seemingly high percentage of trials where one or more players disconnect, you'd be left with a statistically insignificant sample.
0 -
I generally see dc's at early match when I play survivor/killer or dc for hatch which I guess you are right with it. It is more of the minor change that seems deceiving. Although, you do see high tier nurse/spirit/billy etc at high tier play so it is possible that is what brings it down. I am also curious about how many average hook actions happened as I mentioned earlier slugging vs 9 hooks is a vastly different game. Gives more reliability in judging where most games are situated.
0 -
Except you just assume that the survival rate goes up despite not even know, when on XBOX the survival rate drops between rank 1 - 2 on those old graphs.
We know that the 80% number is wrong
we also know that the 80% was taken between 1st of April & 7th of April
while the 43% was taken on the 11th
the patch to relax pipping was released on the 10th
So, within one day, and a singe pip going from 11 to 10 SUDDENLY filled the rank 1 with noobs? I highly doubt this.
4 -
The example I just gave was from the last week or so, well after the last rank reset so ranks aren't so much of a mixed bag.
2 -
I was only speaking of PC, yes, which is where the majority of the playerbase is. Furthermore, it doesn't matter if it goes up or down, the average can never be higher than the highest number nor lower than the lowest number. Again, it's math.
You do realize there are people who play this game for literally dozens of hours each day, right? Is it really that surprising they'd flood high ranks, given that reaching rank 1 is now just a matter of playing a lot?
Why do you think the devs lowered the requirement by exactly one point and not two or three? They have all the stats at hand, they knew it was the push most players needed.
1 -
As Peanits said though, excluding all DCs also skews the data ...as now you are likely favoring games where the survivors did well. You would be throwing out all games every time someone rage quits on death hook..which is extremely common. That would definitely mess the numbers up. In a perfect world, only games that had a DC VERY early on would be thrown out, as you definitely can’t just exclude all DCs.
Even if you think EGC is somewhat balanced, that doesn’t change the fact that killer is getting far more 4K games now than prior to EGC. There is absolutely no doubt that LESS survivors make it out through hatch now in a 1v1 than before. I don’t really see how that can be disputed at all. Remember all the killers complaining about hatch and how they felt helpless with survivor sided it was? Well now it’s the other way around with survivors complaining. How is killer not getting a lot more kills now in 1v1? It’s impossible for it not to be the case. If the killer couldn’t find the survivor first, all they could do was force a standoff. Now they kicking it shut and winning most of those games.
6 -
Well, the devs have all that data. It'd be a pain in the ass to create charts with every single possible variable, not to mention confusing as hell, and they have more important things to do.
0 -
yes yes, all the noob players who managed to rank up in one day just bested all the rank 1-4 killers bc pippin was changed by a margin of 1.
2
