This is why killers call the game survivor sided!
This type of play shouldn't be possible in the game. It doesn't matter that "not every swf is like this". If you pay 10 games and 2 of those matches are like this, you're probably done with the game for the day, which is why survivor queue times are horrendous these days.
No counter play at all. Over use of the "tactical" flashlight macro spam, "non-game changing" boons, loops that are too strong, etc.
I can't imagine new players sticking with the game if this type of play is allowed to persist.
https://youtu.be/8TJSvaDTrWA
Comments
I have no idea why such a simple question is so hard to answer. Sometimes matchmaking screws up. Sometimes people don't bring a perk. Sometimes, the need to bring the perk isn't obvious because it's a last second swap. Whatever the case is, games do sometimes get in a position where the Killer isn't going to get any kills. And on its own, that's fine, losing is part of the game.
But there's the question: is it fine if the Survivors then choose to not do a gen and drag the game out until they get bored of their superior position?
I wish I had survivors in my games who didnt do gens.
And I'm gonna be honest, I don't even know which "simple question" that is because at this point I'm just bored and not reading the novels people right that at the end of the day the TLTR is just "survivor op"
I mean I've stated it twice on this page alone: if the survivors are, for whatever reason, much better than the killer, should they be able to spend 10 minutes not doing the last gen even though they're not getting hooked or slugged either?
Doesn't require survivors to be OP in the general sense, just in an individual game. Like times a team has been waiting too long and you get 10k hours matched up against new players, or someone's playing an objectively terrible build on a bad killer.
It's against the rules to hold any game hostage, whether it be killer or survivor.
It would be great if there was a way to concede, but there isn't a way to do that. If I find myself in this situation where I'm matched against a squad that's just trying to make the game as annoying as possible or where they're all god loopers with 5k+ hours, I just go AFK and stare at the wall. They get bored quickly and go back to their 10 minute queue.
So I presume you want Nurse and Trickster buffed and all other Killers nerfed?
What they were doing, as annoying as it is, isn't holding the game hostage. The killer could still move and hit them and hook them. Do these easily? No, but it wasn't impossible.
But what some people are trying to say is that with the constant flashlight saves they were keeping the killer hostage, which is ridiculous.
I agree with you, I don't think this is a situation where the game was held hostage. There are times when you get bad games, either a 4 man slug on 5 gens with a Nurse or a flash-light survivor deathsquad. It sucks but it happens.
That's the question, isn't it? If a Killer wants to mess with weaker players, the game WILL end. Either they'll bleed out or refusing to down them will get the gens done and they can leave--maybe an extremely strange build with Surge would keep it from ever happening?
We should really have something that works in the other direction. No pseudo-hostage situations where someone is that outclassed but the game won't end because people are being jerks. It can already be forced if the gens are done.
Maybe start a timer to count how long since anyone worked on a gen? If the team is alive.
It's still not pseudo hostage. That's like saying impossible skill check Doctor having a 3 gen and survivors not being able to do gens because the killer just stays in the middle and doesn't let them get to one is the game being held hostage. It's not.
But the difference is one of these games is still winable it's like I told you before
If I wanna dick around with my mates and head stun and flash bang and flashy save a killer to death then they aren't gonna kill us I'm sorry but your not we are 2 coordinated and we all have many many hours in this game
How is that fair? That you have to be the best of the best killer player
To even stand a chance vs a average swf dicking around
If the Survivors literally can't do gens in that situation and the Killer is refusing to even hit them when they're stood in his face, it's the same problem. Winning side isn't letting the game end, it's not TECHNICALLY against the rules because it is theoretically possible they might slip up before they get bored.
So what you're saying is that if 2 of my team mates dc at 5 gens, and the game is unwinnable to me, it's the same as holding the game hostage?
If the Killer keeps you off gens but makes no attempt to down you.
No because again technically you can actually still win that and even if you don't you just hide in a locker till the other guy dies then you get hatch
What I'm telling you is that against 95% of killers going against a team as good as mine although you technically could kill any one of us you are never going to ever
Doesn't matter if you got tinker, one shots, undying, ruin, none of that matters
Vs a very well coordinated swf you aren't winning unless your a top 5% killer player
Is that fair?
You can also win against flashlights. Their batteries end, then what?
Sure, when you like to ignore context, I can do it too, right? Have you ever heard about team Oracle?
So 1 hook total here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f4GXiJPYmkAnother 1 hook game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou8eqghyNik0 hooks:
https://youtu.be/m3sO-BAgom80 hooks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3J-WImbQIsYou use Big data, which was always terrible to prove anything -> Nurse sucks so much, right? So, I can use tournament level team records to prove that this game is survivor sided.
Big data is super boosted, it just mean absolutely nothing without MMR, number of hooks and pick rate (sample size).
Everyone with some hours know that this game is simple:
Low MMR: Killer sided.
Medium MMR: kinda balanced, depends on killer.
High MMR: survivor sided, except top 3 killers.
Tournament level: survivor sided no matter what.
Well if you call people using stretched res "tournament level" whatever that means.
Lol, this is team Oracle. They actually played a lot of tournaments and they are really good. So yeah, I am going to call a team that actually played tournaments "tournament level" :D
Totally off topic but who does these "tournaments"?
Head on doesn't run out, flash bangs don't run out, if I bring a team with windows and any means necessary pallets don't run out none of that is a counter to the fact that 95% of killers can't beat my team
And we aren't even tournament level players
If asked you three times now and you've dodged it all 3 times
HOW IS THAT FAIR?
Sorry for the caps I figured It would help you see the question better
Depends, they are usually just public open tournaments with some limitations for both sides, where everyone can play for prize money.
Hexy with Dowsey have done some in past. It's often hosted by streamers, because they can easily get money to "donate" and stream them to gain money back.
Not long time ago there was no limits tournament, that was interesting.
EDIT: here are results of no limits tournament
Sadly Zarr tracked only hook stages instead of hooks...
But yeah, kinda top 3 killers only with some other killers that got destroyed.
So yeah, you can say this game is balanced for 3 killers out of 26.
If the survivors were doing a flashlight strat, they do the last gen and skedaddle in like 2 minutes, as they could have done at any point but weren't because "flashlight stun the killer who isn't doing anything" is apparently fun for them.
MMR + boons have just made killer completely unfun, its not worth the stress
I am a huge sucker for xmas events, I cant wait for this one to be over, even its survivor sided
You can go to lockers all you want, like someone said, you will go down if you need to mend, which tru3 could have applied easily with frenzy.
for any means necessary to work, the killer cant break pallets, and if the killer isn't breaking most pallets, it seems like you really aren't going against a good killer to begin with, since there's a lot of safe pallets that need to be broken.
Edit: Flashbangs are also not infinite, since gens are not infinite.
I don't think your quite understanding my example at all and yet you somehow still didn't answer the question :/
In my example it could be any killer I'm not talking specifically about trues stupid clip he just played that bad
Let me make it clear for you if I have a 4 man and I'm playing against you or 95% of the killer population and we want to ######### around and troll you we can as much as we want and you can't force us to do gens and you won't kill us we can effectively hold the game hostage for as long as we want or until we run out of resources whichever comes first
Does that make it more clear for you?
Ok, show me a video of you holding a game hostage while using flashbangs and headons against a top tier nurse/blight with 4 good perks.
What about anybody that doesn't wanna play those 2 killers?
I mean if I also only want to play with no mither in solo q, should I be upset and say "killers op" if I lose? No.
Right now those are 2 viable killers against coordinated swf. Nobody is forcing anyone to play them, but if you play a weak killer and lose against a good swf, you shouldnt be surprised.
But for the forth time I'll ask you it and see if you have a answer
Is that fair?
I never said it is fair. But it is what it is.
Believe it or not but some of us killers don't complain about everything we just want the game to be fair
Not it is what it is
So you think 5 or so Cherry-Picked games is more valid than the data from the Developers. I can get 5 Cherry-Picked games and show the EXACT opposite of what you showed. That makes me as right as you are, which is not at all.
But here, let's ignore the most valid set of data anyone has, which is the data from the developers and use data from a more recent tournament, that Scott Jund has actually done for you on a youtube video. The tournament was entirely unrestricted, it was recent, and it very closely followed the stats shown by the Developers.
Tournament Indicates DBD is Actually Decently Balanced at Highest Level - Dead by Daylight - YouTube
Now you may said it only is valid for certain Killers, except if you look right below that video, then you will see another tournament that Scott Jund did a spreadsheet on and it too was very close to what the Developers are showing, data-wise, also. Except it didn't have the 3 killers you are talking about in it. It had Pyramid Head, Freddy, Michael Myers, Nemesis, Demogorgon all Killers that aren't considered that good. Except they were getting around a 2.3 kill rate in those tournament.s
all hallows eve data - Google Sheets
I think the devs data is largely worthless until they hire a statistician to go over them. There's a reason statisticians exist, are hired, and require a degree. Because the average person can't read statistics at all. They just jump to conclusions.
Yes, that is tournament I was talking about with no limits:
but tournament from that google and Scott's video are not same...
Tournament from that video is hosted by wwispy1 and data from it are here:
About second tournament that it is balanced for weaker killers. It's funny how little you know about it, when you decided to use it as an argument.
First: they had to play those killers. It's not like they chose them, for each round there were chosen killer and map for both teams.
Second: if you actually did some research, then you would find out that items and perks were limited hard for survivors.
For example rules for Ghostface round:
BANNED PERKS for a killer:
- Deadlock
- Forced Penance
- No Way Out
- Save the Best for Last
Some decent, but not that bad... now survivors:
BANNED PERKS:
- Alert
- Botany Knowledge
- Dark Sense
- Dead Hard
- Deja Vu
- Deliverence
- Desperate Measures
- Guardian
- Inner Healing
- Kindred
- Leader
- Premonition
- Renewal
- Self Care
- Solidarity
- Spine Chill
- Visionary
ALLOWED ITEMS: 1 x Firecracker 1 x Uncommon Flashlight
0 medkits, 0 toolboxes...
Those games wasn't balanced normally, they were limited by rules a lot...
About big data:
Why is it not valid?
We can use tournament data, it's just rare to see 0 kills unless killer gave up. You usually get at least 1 kill by camping in end-game. So 50% is not really balanced, because result is not between 0-4, it's between 1-4. That's why that data is kinda boosted.
We don't know how many games it is (sample size), we don't know MMR (new survivors die more), we don't know hooks (1 kill with 3 hooks is not same as 1 kill with 1 hook).
You can see biggest flaw with big data in few seconds. Is Nurse worst killer in the game? No, she is best killer. It kinda looks like there is more to it than just big data...
Big data from each game was always bad, many games failed when tried to balance using it. It's just bad. It doesn't reflect actual balance at all.
So I looked even more to your tournament that "proved" other killers are valid, their rules are actually interesting.
Only killers that allowed any perk are Blight, Nurse. Survivors got banned perks against Spirit.
But even against those killers, survivors were limited hard on items. Usually 1 for each and only common with common addons.
Against any other killer, survivor had many perks banned and items were limited super hard.
It's actually interesting going through it and watching what perks are considered as counters to those killers.
For example Leader was banned against Plague...
Overall, Dead Hard and healing perks were banned a lot.
So yeah, I think I can safely say that this game is balanced only for 3 killers. Well, 2 now, Spirit will get destroyed with Iron Wills allowed...
Lol, you also have permanently banned perks for each game.
KILLER - BANNED PERKS:SURVIVOR - BANNED PERKS:Does this look like balanced game ban list?
And it's still better data than anything you have provided or anyone else has on this 7 page long one-side vs the other-side rant.
The difference between you and I is I'll admit the developers data isn't very good and you really can't base much on this data. Your problem is your data is much-much worse than the statistics the developers gave us, yet you want to draw conclusions from your highly-biased bottom-of-the-trashcan cherry-picking and hear-say.
If you want to draw conclusions from something, then the best thing you have is the developers data, which is mostly meaningless. But at least base your opinion on something that kind-of holds some water.
I don't think anything should be based on this and I have never said it.
I just wanted to call you out on using Big data as an "evidence", because it's stupid.
And using that DBDLeague tournament to "prove" there are other viable killers was even more stupid. You clearly had no idea about tournament rules.
If I want to draw conclusions from something, it's gonna be based on opinions of actually good players and data analysts. That's how IceFrog is balancing + tournament data and Dota is probably game with best balance... So yeah, I will stick with that.
What conclusions did I make?
There is only few viable killers? Nothing new. I am pretty confident about that and you can easily prove that with tournament data. Those killers might be viable against average players and you can get some wins with them, but they are just not viable for tournament level.
Bad data can be worse than no data. And quantitative data which is only provided in summarised form, with no statistical analysis, is very bad to try and use--it's already been selected out of the raw information to try and demonstrate a point
Qualitative data, in the form of detailed verbal accounts from a small number of sources, can actually be more useful if those sources are a representative sample of a population. The general question is, though, are they; and what population? The entire DBD community? High MMR? Hard to say.
Anyhow, "I have numerical data" doesn't add any validity unless the data itself is good.
They should rename the video to “How to not play killer”
You have to take into consideration that a lot of players play on console and are unable to play killers such as Blight or Nurse very effectively simply because these killers require optimal speed and precision which is near impossible for most controller players to achieve in this game.
I have never been scared of a console Nurse or Blight, they usually put in good effort but you can clearly see they are limited in their plays.
I believe the console population of this game is the larger counterpart to PC or at least it would make sense that it is. It saddens me that a lot of people forget about console killer players entirely.
So really I think it's just ignorant of you to say "just play a stronger killer". This is neither going to contribute to the game's health or advice that most DBD players can use.
You being limited on your killers because you choose to get the game on console is not really anyone else's problem.
That's like saying Dead Hard is bad on console so it should be buffed.
? you can very well keep track of totems yourself.
Your response doesn't make any sense, dead hard is the same as PC on console and I'm assuming you are thinking I'm asking for a buff to the already strong killers?. I'm not asking for any buffs or anything and I never said that me buying this game on console is your or anyone else's problem, I'm just saying you're ignorant and your advice is useless so keep it to yourself next time.
There is one simple fix to the issue regarding the potential of some of the killers on console. M&K support could be added, not instantly of course but if they so chose they could do it and there you go new gen consoles are now almost identical to the PC version minus all the cheating.