wait times for killers

killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.

Comments

  • I have almost 20 consecutive losses as killer that disagree with you right now lol. Also the wait time is caused my low killer volume atm, not the other way around. Killer wait times are faster than SWF survivors atm.

  • 75% win rate, where are you pulling this from?

  • @dooces said:

    killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.

    Err where did you read they have a 75% win rate?

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    I have almost 20 consecutive losses as killer that disagree with you right now lol.

    sorry, but some people have to be below average, thats how we get averages.

  • I have instant killer queue times. idk what you talking about. clearly bait refering to those statistics you trying to base your argument of. Win is subjective btw. to farm a lot of BP you need bbq and hook every survivor, so you use a perk slot and still have to perform well. I dont see where the game is easy for killers. Super onesided thread

  • Whiney survivor main spotted. There is 0 wait time as a killer. There is 10-15 minute wait time as a survivor. Want to know why? Because killer is much harder and more stressful to play. Next thread.

  • @Apple2o said:

    Whiney survivor main spotted. There is 0 wait time as a killer. There is 10-15 minute wait time as a survivor. Want to know why? Because killer is much harder and more stressful to play. Next thread.

    i play killer a lot, queue times forbid me playing more. i win just by showing up. if you have a hard time playing killer, try not camping or tunneling.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922356#Comment_922356

    i play killer a lot, queue times forbid me playing more. i win just by showing up. if you have a hard time playing killer, try not camping or tunneling.

    i hope i used small enough words for apple, i can only assume english is his 2nd language or something.

    Well you are probably a bad killer then. Red rank killers have a Q time of about 10 seconds. Rank 20 killers have a Q time of like 20 minutes.

    Clearly I can see what level you are playing at.

  • Aye, for me killer queues are instant, survivor is a good few minutes. You're the only one with long kill queue times, what rank are you?

  • @Apple2o said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922367#Comment_922367

    Well you are probably a bad killer then. Red rank killers have a Q time of about 10 seconds. Rank 20 killers have a Q time of like 20 minutes.

    Clearly I can see what level you are playing at.

    if you think killers need any kind of buff, i can see what level you are playing at.

  • rank 3 with survivor. queue times are 1-2 mins. rank 9 killer after reset, queue times are 15-20 mins.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922334#Comment_922334

    sorry, but some people have to be below average, thats how we get averages.

    Then there is a serious problem with ranking, I am still getting brutal killer and staying at the same rank, against red SWF teams. (Which is actually not a defense, I am well aware I am bad at the game but ranking/matchmaker says I am otherwise)

    @dooces said:

    rank 3 with survivor. queue times are 1-2 mins. rank 9 killer after reset, queue times are 15-20 mins.

    I don't believe that, as survivor we were waiting at least 15 minutes, but as killer it's instant because it scales you up to people much higher rank because they can't find a game against a killer at their rank. I think there is some bias in your analysis.

    At your rank killer wait time should probably max out around 5 minutes, and that is at the second longest period, the first longest being 20 - 15 ranks.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    I have almost 20 consecutive losses as killer that disagree with you right now lol.

    I get lobbies near instantly.

    @dooces said:

    killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.

    Killers also have a harder time overall to earn BP it's just they get a superior amount and rightfully so. They dont get points sitting on the gen doing nothing. Also I dont know where you get the stats, but even the ones released by the Devs recently were mentioned to take with a grain of salt.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    "For this particular statistical data, Red Rank is defined as 'matches that consisted of Rank 1-4 Killers at the beginning of the match.' The ranking of survivors or the rank results after the match were not given consideration."

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/108370/fyi-stats-red-ranks-werent-really-red-rank-matches

    as most people will agree, rank means nothing. i dont bother instancing any discrepancy as i dont think there is one. if you play the game, you get rank 1, its not hard just putting time in. if you are still rank 10+ after 200 hours of game play, im sorry to say you are the outlier, and the stats dont reflect your games. edit nor should they.

  • @Liruliniel said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922334#Comment_922334

    I get lobbies near instantly.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/113148/wait-times-for-killers

    Killers also have a harder time overall to earn BP it's just they get a superior amount and rightfully so. They dont get points sitting on the gen doing nothing. Also I dont know where you get the stats, but even the ones released by the Devs recently were mentioned to take with a grain of salt.

    explain to me why they should be taken with a grain of salt other than being told to do so? how have i used the stats out of context or what contortions have i made? dismissing data outright because you were told by the devs as they dont want to explain is foolish, i unless you have reasons to adduce otherwise, i will interpret them at face value.

  • @dooces said:

    rank 3 with survivor. queue times are 1-2 mins. rank 9 killer after reset, queue times are 15-20 mins.

    Not for me, I am lurking around level 12 as killer right now and the queue is instant. Level 9 survivor takes 3-5 minutes.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922414#Comment_922414

    explain to me why they should be taken with a grain of salt other than being told to do so? how have i used the stats out of context or what contortions have i made? dismissing data outright because you were told by the devs as they dont want to explain is foolish, i unless you have reasons to adduce otherwise, i will interpret them at face value.

    because they leave out so many aspects of information, if you don't want to take the time to read the devs multiple comments and explanations on that, that's fine, but it's not on everyone else to do that for you. Go read some of their discussions on the topic first.

    @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922409#Comment_922409

    as most people will agree, rank means nothing. i dont bother instancing any discrepancy as i dont think there is one. if you play the game, you get rank 1, its not hard just putting time in. if you are still rank 10+ after 200 hours of game play, im sorry to say you are the outlier, and the stats dont reflect your games. edit nor should they.

    That's just picking and choosing what information you want to listen too; if you are going to be that bias then there is no point in really having a discussion; since you will only listen to anything that collaborates with your own thoughts, and dismissing anything else.

    That's like saying global warming isn't a thing because it's cold outside where you are, it's dismissing the entire actual topic without evidence.


  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922440#Comment_922440

    because they leave out so many aspects of information, if you don't want to take the time to read the devs multiple comments and explanations on that, that's fine, but it's not on everyone else to do that for you. Go read some of their discussions on the topic first.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922424#Comment_922424

    That's just picking and choosing what information you want to listen too; if you are going to be that bias then there is no point in really having a discussion; since you will only listen to anything that collaborates with your own thoughts, and dismissing anything else.

    That's like saying global warming isn't a thing because it's cold outside where you are, it's dismissing the entire actual topic without evidence.

    75% is 75%, you cant write off 100% of the games to someone dcing or giving up. even if you are so ignorant thats what you propose, that still leaves the 3 survivors stuck in the game with a 66% chance to lose. anyway you want to contort the numbers or justify that statistic, you wont get that 75% down to 70, let alone 50.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922414#Comment_922414

    explain to me why they should be taken with a grain of salt other than being told to do so? how have i used the stats out of context or what contortions have i made? dismissing data outright because you were told by the devs as they dont want to explain is foolish, i unless you have reasons to adduce otherwise, i will interpret them at face value.

    Because the Devs themselves have mentioned take it with a grain of salt. Someone had even quoted it before. I'm curious why they would release the stats while saying take it with a grain of salt. I just dismissed the whole chart afterwards.

    I also know I as survivor I get more then 25% escapes.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922424#Comment_922424

    If people actually believed rank meant nothing, we would have kept the bug showing people's ranks in lobbies for survivors, because people wouldn't have kept dodging, or wouldn't be demanding for it back so they can dodge.

    Actions speak louder than words. People will say rank doesn't matter, but when push comes to shove, they rather play with higher ranks on their team because again, low rank survivors generally don't play very well, and higher ranked survivors generally at least have common knowledge.

    For example, I a rank 5 survivor, got pushed down into a rank 15~17 game, where every one of my teammates kept going down from the mend timer. Despite the fact that they could stop it from going down by just sprinting.

    The Legion was rank 3 btw. I was solo. We all died. Horribly.

    Think that didn't help push the kill rates up a bit or do you think a Legion would be able to 4k so easily if it had been red rank survivors who at least had a generally good grasp of basic game mechanics?

    so you are saying survivors are subject to their teammates, killers are not.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922424#Comment_922424

    If people actually believed rank meant nothing, we would have kept the bug showing people's ranks in lobbies for survivors, because people wouldn't have kept dodging, or wouldn't be demanding for it back so they can dodge.

    Actions speak louder than words. People will say rank doesn't matter, but when push comes to shove, they rather play with higher ranks on their team because again, low rank survivors generally don't play very well, and higher ranked survivors generally at least have common knowledge.

    For example, I a rank 5 survivor, got pushed down into a rank 15~17 game, where every one of my teammates kept going down from the mend timer. Despite the fact that they could stop it from going down by just sprinting.

    The Legion was rank 3 btw. I was solo. We all died. Horribly.

    Think that didn't help push the kill rates up a bit or do you think a Legion would be able to 4k so easily if it had been red rank survivors who at least had a generally good grasp of basic game mechanics?

    Most people who say rank means nothing are implying the difference between really good 3-4k hour survivors and your typical red rank survivor. Or they are killers who are annoyed at the 4k depips that can happen.

    Yes, there is a difference between a rank 1 and a rank 20. But there is also a massive difference between a 3-4k hour survivor and a fresh rank 1 survivor. But they are both rank 1 and according to the game should be equal skill.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922449#Comment_922449

    75% is 75%, you cant write off 100% of the games to someone dcing or giving up. even if you are so ignorant thats what you propose, that still leaves the 3 survivors stuck in the game with a 66% chance to lose. anyway you want to contort the numbers or justify that statistic, you wont get that 75% down to 70, let alone 50.

    This is all very uninformed and mostly just misinformation; I strongly suggest you go read the actual discussions on the statistics with all the developer responses, rather than just try and dismiss everyone else who is actually up to date with all the correct information. If you want to add any merit to your opinion.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922464#Comment_922464

    This is all very uninformed and mostly just misinformation; I strongly suggest you go read the actual discussions on the statistics with all the developer responses, rather than just try and dismiss everyone else who is actually up to date with all the correct information. If you want to add any merit to your opinion.

    again, you say nothing except you were told otherwise. you give no argument but dismiss mine.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922474#Comment_922474

    again, you say nothing except you were told otherwise. you give no argument but dismiss mine.

    I have no need to, it's been done dozens of times already, which is my point.

    If you don't want to be taken seriously, that's up to you. I'll leave you to it. Good luck.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922472#Comment_922472

    No, what I'm saying is that if the stats were taking both the survivor and killer ranks into consideration like they should have, rather than just the killer's rank regardless of the context of the match, the kill rates would more than likely be much lower.

    Let's flip the context around from how they were gathered: What do you think the stats would be if the stats only considered if the survivor's were all red rank, and didn't care about what the killer rank was. Do you think the kill rates would stay at 75%?

    I am of the belief it would be considerably lower.

    yes, because you believe as rank 1-4 killer somehow you are faced against mostly rank 5+ survivors. this is not the case.

    and considerably lower, statistics wise, would be 10%. not 50%. idk why you think they cherry picked the worse case scenario to publish, i argue they didnt.

  • I got instant killer queues, but can ironically only enjoy nurse because every other killer is even more unfun.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922501#Comment_922501

    News to me, as a killer who was rank 4 before rank reset, I was getting a lot of green rank survivors.

    I'm not cherry picking. This is what BHVR's community manager has said. Unless stated otherwise, that's the facts. I already showed you the thread that provides all of the necessary information.

    As someone who said "stats are stats", you sure seem to be cherry picking the actual facts yourself in a way to try and weave a narrative that suits your view. Yet when the context of the stats themselves come to light, you seem more than happy to argue with cognitive dissonance and make excuses for them that they are the way you believe they are when BHVR employees themselves have revealed that is not the case.

    How about instead of "stats are stats" we change it to "facts are facts" and stop beating around the bush?

    You either can accept the fact that the stats were not gathered in an accurate manner which helped skew them as BHVR has revealed they were, or you can continue to pretend they weren't and play blissful arrogance. Your choice.

    you think they were skewed by 25% somehow? that they cherry picked the worst case scenerio?

    survivors are subject to their teammates, so however bad they might be, however much they dc, that effects all other survivors in the game. however inaccurate you claim, or anyone claims them to be, they're representative, and they reveal the general balance of the game. if you think statistics works in a way where a slightly different metric would reveal the inverse, you are sadly mistaken.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922521#Comment_922521

    you think they were skewed by 25% somehow? that they cherry picked the worst case scenerio?

    survivors are subject to their teammates, so however bad they might be, however much they dc, that effects all other survivors in the game. however inaccurate you claim, or anyone claims them to be, they're representative, and they reveal the general balance of the game. if you think statistics works in a way where a slightly different metric would reveal the inverse, you are sadly mistaken.

    Looks like someone doesn't know what an infinite loop is. Good. The game would be much worse if most survivors knew how to use them.

  • @Apple2o said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922545#Comment_922545

    Looks like someone doesn't know what an infinite loop is. Good. The game would be much worse if most survivors knew how to use them.

    i do just fine. sounds like you are mad that something isnt just given to you.

    75% killer win rate. rank 1 - 4 killers have a 75% chance of pipping. how is that not a gimmie to rank 1? unless you are garbage and complain its not "balanced" because you expect it to be higher.

  • I thought that wait times on both sides are long because...matchmaker is bugged just like the whole game?

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922548#Comment_922548

    i do just fine. sounds like you are mad that something isnt just given to you.

    75% killer win rate. rank 1 - 4 killers have a 75% chance of pipping. how is that not a gimmie to rank 1? unless you are garbage and complain its not "balanced" because you expect it to be higher.

    I would wager that your average rank 1 killer is going to be a far more competent player than your average rank 1 survivor, even if you transfer them over to the survivor side. As a killer, you either learn how to deal with everything the survivors throw at you, or you lose. As a survivor, you can not see the killer the entire game and still win just fine.

    I am sorry you are horrible and don't see how to abuse the game. Or maybe not, because it's the potatoes like you that get farmed for that 75% win rate.

  • what are u talking about killer ques are 10 secs while surv ques are minimum 5-10 mins, two days before I had a 40 min que time as surv then I just literally closed the game lol

  • @Apple2o said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922573#Comment_922573

    I would wager that your average rank 1 killer is going to be a far more competent player than your average rank 1 survivor, even if you transfer them over to the survivor side. As a killer, you either learn how to deal with everything the survivors throw at you, or you lose. As a survivor, you can not see the killer the entire game and still win just fine.

    I am sorry you are horrible and don't see how to abuse the game. Or maybe not, because it's the potatoes like you that get farmed for that 75% win rate.

    survivors are subject to their teammates, killers will get to rank 1 just by playing. i dont know how to use smaller words or if you would like me to google translate to your native language ill be happy to do so, as you are missing the obvious.

    but you think contorted logic makes it otherwise - it doesnt.

  • @dooces said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922578#Comment_922578

    survivors are subject to their teammates, killers will get to rank 1 just by playing. i dont know how to use smaller words or if you would like me to google translate to your native language ill be happy to do so, as you are missing the obvious.

    but you think contorted logic makes it otherwise - it doesnt.

    Survivors are not subject to their team as long as the hatch mechanic exists. The game is specifically marketed as one where you can play selfish and ignore your team. Anyways you are clearly a mad rank 15 survivor or something and it's not worth arguing with you, you can't comprehend high level play and the problems that exist there.

  • I don't think it's possible to decrease a killer wait time of 0-20 seconds, even at red ranks...

  • @dooces said:

    killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.

    Actually I have been having 20 second queue times as killer these past weeks so idk wym

  • @dooces said:

    killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.

    *laughs in ps4 killer wait time*