New Matchmaking Should Give Killers Handicap if Outmatched
When the new matchmaking has trouble finding a Killer with the same skill level as the Survivors, it will have no choice but to match them with weaker Killers. In those cases they should consider giving the Killer a handicap based on rating disparity (the gap between the Killer's skill and the average skill of all the Survivors in the lobby).
- The Killer is allowed to equip 4 additional perks.
- If the Survivors' rating is equivalent to the Killer's, the Killer gets no buff and only plays with the 4 default perk slots.
- If the Survivors' rating is slightly greater than the Killer's, the Killer gets buffed by playing with 1 additional perk unlocked.
- If the rating is moderately greater then the Killer gets 2 additional perks unlocked.
- Considerably greater and the Killer gets 3 unlocked.
- Tremendously and the Killer gets all 4.
- All players in the lobby will be notified of the increased Killer perks.
----
"Wouldn't this be a nightmare to balance around? How do you account for the possible overpowered synergies that the Killer would get?"
- Voice chat does the same thing. It allows synergies and strategies from Survivors that make it extremely hard for the devs to balance around, and not just in regards to Survivor perks, but for all aspects of gameplay (including Killer perks) too. I'm not implying that the workload needs to be doubled for the devs. My point is: Why is it fair for Survivors to have the advantage, but not Killers; especially when the Killer is the power role? Tip the scales in the Killer's favor if the Survivor team is that good. If Survivors are allowed to have fun bullying the Killer, let the Killer have fun combining 8 perks to combat them.
- Perhaps the additional perks that the Killer can equip are limited to a pool of select perks (e.g. only Hex perks, or only perks that interrupt/slow gen progression).
- The devs can also increase or decrease the disparity thresholds if need be.
"What if a Survivor is also mismatched? Wouldn't they be penalized for being in a match with Survivors who are more skilled?"
- Yes, this Survivor would most likely be impacted. However, this Survivor with their lower rating would also lower the average of the group and may even bring them below a disparity threshold.
- This player could also receive a less harsh penalty to their rating for defeat given the increased difficulty they are effectively playing at.
Comments
Why should only solo queue be allowed to take advantage of bad matchmaking? Or did I misread your post?
For this to work, I think that the Survivors would need two score rating categories: their solo rating and their SWF rating. The devs need only balance the game between solo Survivors and the Killer. They can use solo player performance as their baseline. Survivors who constantly win while in a SWF will have their SWF rating go up and will pass the score/rating thresholds mentioned in the original post.
Killers could have a rating for each of their killers as well, so that if they perform well with Hillbilly they aren't outmatched when switching to a killer they have less experience with. Though, this could cause longer queues (initially) for skilled Survivors when new killers are released as there will be a lack of skilled killers.
So would your idea punish people who don't like playing solo?
8 perks is an insane concept to propose. I'd say 5 max, so one extra if there's an imbalance, but even then I'm hesitant. Killers are supposed to be OP, they already are OP. That's their gimmick. Adding four extra perks would just make things over the top.
Survivor comms are just a side effect of being an online game. If voice comms didn't exist we'd be calling each other or using Xbox Live just to talk. But survivors on their own don't get much in terms of "fighting back" against the killer. Most of it just delays the inevitable.
It depends. If you don't like playing solo then you're free to party up. If your team wins and loses then nothing changes. If your team is wrecking then the killer obviously needs the help.
I think at most killers should receive slightly less penalty to their mmr if they lose against swf, and perhaps slightly more bonus. Borked matchmaking could also be handled similarly, players who face players with higher mmr could get considerably less penalty and more bonus. Using mmr to change game mechanics like perk slots just doesn't make that much sense to me.
So your idea is that mmr is a set score that increases and decreases based on the outcome of trials? So skilled players whose mmr would naturally average higher would be punished for playing in an swf whether or not the killer is as good as or even better than them?
If you feel that Killers are already OP when playing in SWF then that means you likely won't face any extra perks, as this is not meant for your team's performance. The extra perks are meant for the Seal Team Six who find the killer to be a joke and just play to bully or be toxic.
Because it's not about ranking or score or winning or losing. It's about fun. It's not fun for the killer when survivors use voice chat to shut down the killer in ways that normal solo players cannot. This is about giving fun back to the killer. If the team they are facing is stupid good and is likely to make the match very unfun, let the killer have fun with more perks.
The score/rating is only used to determine how much better the members, on average, are compared to the killer.
Why only swf specifically? Why perk slots? Everything here seems to be dripping in bias and I don't want to touch it anymore. It's clear to me that your idea is meant to be a straight up swf nerf, so I won't bother responding any more because that just isn't a possibility nor would it fix any issues people have with the game.
Edit: Thanks for cleaning up the idea and putting thought into it. I really think this could help ease the frustrations the new mmr system might bring and I commend your creativity in coming up with this. Hopefully this or similar compensation is given to killers at least during the early days of mmr's implementation because otherwise things could be chaotic.
Let's say that a team is doing so good that they cannot be matched against any killer because the killers that have the same skill as them are not online or don't exist. THEN they will have to be matched against a weaker killer, and depending on how much weaker the killer is, the more perks the killer will get.
That could be an interesting idea. It could allow matchmaking to match high rank survivors faster without them being at a huge advantage. Extra perk slots would be a fun way to go about this, but I think just 2 extra would suffice.
The Killer is allowed to equip 4 additional perks . So i'm using 4 perks + 4 perks. ^..^ ######### ???? 😀
Are you serious or it is a prank ? It's a software. To run 8 perks it means you must add complexity to your software and there are a ton of new variables. Do you know there are perks that do the opposite of something else or perks that do the opposite and .... ecc. ecc.. ?
I follow your idea, not bad if the killer has 1 additional perks if he is vs a SWF. But 4 additional perks ???? ^..^ Do you hate SWF so much ? 😂
I've edited the original post to remove the SWF conditions. It would apply to all matchmaking.
If the devs set the disparity thresholds high enough then the only time the Killer would have all 8 perks would be in the rare circumstance that Seal Team Six is somehow matched against a Killer with only 20 hours.
If Seal Team Six comes in then likely the Killer was matched up poorly, end-game stats will likely show it's some baby rank 20 killer facing off against all rank 1's for some ungodly under/overflow error reason. I've definitely experienced that as a Killer, and I can tell you it wouldn't have mattered how many perks I could equip, the end result would have been the same.
Just give killers in that situation devour in there base kit. You still have to earn everything, but would balance it a lil better. Something needs to change because killers are becoming an endangered species and will soon go extinct if they abuse doesn't stop. Lmao..