"Was it really a skilled play to begin with?"

image.png

what a good determiner of skill

Comments

  • @Azshhh said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812132#Comment_2812132

    His point is this is a game with multiple metrics besides just killing or surviving, any players that ignore those metrics and do the bare minimum are not skilled compared to other players who do that & MORE to contribute to a successful match. And any ranking system that ignores all other contributing factors and focuses just on the end result is garbage.

    The survivor who survives because they hid and maybe did a gen or 2 is not more skilled than the survivor who did gens, cleansed totems, unhooked others and won chases, but died.

    And killers who ignore everything & everyone in a match to run down a single survivor or two then stare at them til their dead is not more skilled than a killer actively participating in a match, getting multiple hooks and achieving a nearly comparable result to the former

    I'm well aware what his point is. Are you aware of my point? That at the end of the day, the outcome that you expect makes no sense from an algorithmic perspective. And I'm saying this as a professional in the industry for 20+ years.

    If you think it makes sense, then please explain it. As yet, no-one has, and I daresay it's because you cannot explain it, and therein is the problem.

    To boil it down into logic terms, he's saying X1. I'm saying X->Y (i.e. X leads to Y) and Y is undesireable. He then clarifies with X2. It's the same thing, X->Y. Y is undesireable, and X leads to Y, so how can you advocate for any flavour of X when it leads to Y which you don't want.

    You can step to me with any flavour of X, but if it all leads to Y, and you don't want Y, then it's the same problem which you guys are failing to see (whilst at the same time so sure of yourselves that you see everything clearly despite clearly not being able to understand it).


    @Brokenbones said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812177#Comment_2812177

    When I read your post, all I could hear in my mind was the quote from Patrick where he was like

    "Man i did 80 gens, did 6 totems, looped the killer for ages but died... wouldn't it be cool to be able to do all that and escape too?" That's not 100% the quote but that's basically the gist and man what a quote

    not a great way for him to approach the subject of MMR/SBMM

    If you understood what he said, then it makes sense. His point was that if you are that skilled, you'd be escaping more often and thus your ratings would rise. There's always be anomalous games for whatever reason, but for skilled players that won't buck the trend.


    What an insightful observation. Did it take both of your brain cells to work that out?


    @AJStyIez said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812115#Comment_2812115

    Logic does not work with people deeply indulged in shilling or being overly-positive. This person clearly believes SBMM is a healthy system that accurately portrays skill and doesn't seem to notice the glaring holes in their own logic and how a binary system is incapable of providing good results in a game where multiple metrics are manipulated by RNG.

    There are just people out there that will call you crazy and say that the system is amazing despite the vast majority using statistics and evidence to prove why it doesn't work, the Devs themselves in their own quotes over the past 2 years don't even believe that it works but they invested into it so they have to play along to save face. I just had somebody tell me earlier that Legion is just as strong as any of the "A-Tier" killers and that the characters matter less than the player. Some people just don't get it

    The devs don't believe it works? Interesting... because the last update from the devs that I recall was that it works exactly as designed. The escape/death ratio is 50/50 which is exactly the outcome the system was designed to produce.

    So please enlighten us to how this isn't working when the numbers demonstrate that it very definitely is?

    @GoodBoyKaru said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812132#Comment_2812132

    "I could respond to you, but won't."

    Right well thanks for letting me know I don't have to continue this conversation anymore, bye x

    aka "I can't answer your simple question because my own logic makes no sense to me, so I'll look for the first excuse to escape from having to explain myself"

    Yup... common trait of the ignorant.


    @ukenicky said:

    What I don't understand is how mmr and pips aren't like, related. One would think that doing well in all categories and trying to do everything to win/contribute towards winning would be comparable to the mmr but no.

    That one devs opinion comparing dbd to hockey still just makes no sense because dbd is an asymmetrical 4 v 1 and hockey is literally a team vs team game like child.. I just don't understand it at all 😭

    Killers should be incentivized to go and do everything for maximum mmr / pip gains not just farm for hook states/kills to guarantee mmr. Survivors should be incentivized to do a little bit of everything for maximum mmr/pip gains so that everyone is encouraged to be a team player and help each other survive instead of play overly selfish and go for hatch escape at the end. But yeah, here we are in a bad place with current mmr. Just face camp with dead lock and an end game build and you can do well with any killer 🤓

    The pips only rank how you did in terms of objectives in the game, and has nothing to do with your correlation with your opponent, hence it makes little sense to use them to determine who your opponent should be. Should a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to escape from the same as a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to die to be considered the same?

  • @Tsulan said:

    I said it before, and i´ll say it again: the current mmr is like the old VC. Which was a terrible system to evaluate "skill".

    On top of that, in an older stream about sbmmr, they explicitly said, that they tested an early version of the mmr with only kills vs escapes in mind and that it was terrible.

    Seem like they went back on it and decided it work.

  • That was a funny comparison, because we do base hockey players on individual skill to determine their worth. You can find game statistics determining NHL stat leaders, with all contributing factors (points, goals, power play percentage, penalty minutes, ETC, and whole other factors for goal tenders).

  • The community is so happy about that!


    Oh wait...

  • @Veinslay said:

    Is running a killer for 2 gens on Badham Preschool REALLY skilled? You have to be bad to go down early on Badham with all the busted structures, pallets, and the ol' Dead Hard

    Killer is practically guaranteed to lose 2 gens at the first hook in this game

    A killer who's power revolves around chasing, catching a survivor off guard, after they were sandbagged? After not being injured at all until Claudette had been hooked, farmed, and rehooked after having been flashlight saved too? Yeah forgive me for daring to go down at some point within a game.

    This Nemesis was definitely the more skilled player.

    (no exhaustion perks equipped, btw)

  • I’m dead over you calling Jeff Steve 😭

  • @PlaysByShady said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812115#Comment_2812115

    I don't need to disprove a point you've not made with any coherence. I've literally exposed the flaw in your logic in the most basic form possible, and asked for your clarification on the matter. Thus far you've refused to provide anything of the sort and have just resorted to a variety of logical fallacies that only highlight your ignorance on such matters.

    It's a simple enough question... do you believe that a killer who achieved their objective (in your case) should face easier survivors so they can continue killing them (and thus go against easier opponents again), whilst you - even though you died and failed as a survivor (in a clinical sense) - should go against more adept killers, where you'd likely continue to die? Make that make sense. That's literally what you're arguing for, and if you can't make it make sense, then that should be cause for reflection.

    "get off of my thread"

    Last I checked, you don't own threads, nor have any authority to dictate who may or may not engage. It's a public forum. If you don't like it, or you don't like your opinion being challenged, don't post.

    You cannot argue from a base position that flagrantly refuses your opposition's argument.

    Karu is saying that the system is an inadequate measurer of skill.

    Your counterargument is the following:

    It's a simple enough question... do you believe that a killer who achieved their objective (in your case) should face easier survivors so they can continue killing them (and thus go against easier opponents again), whilst you - even though you died and failed as a survivor (in a clinical sense) - should go against more adept killers, where you'd likely continue to die?

    Your argument survives only on the presupposition that the system's assessment of skill is correct. However, take this specific match into account and invert your question:

    Should this Nemesis, who struggled to get 4 hooks out over the course of the entire match, despite help from a Steve and a Claudette, be made to face more challenging opponents?

    Should Karu, who ran the killer for a 2 gen sprint -after- the team had been substantially slowed down, go up against easier killers?

    Your argument isn't logical. It hinges on the exact point that Karu is trying to argue: The skill assessment in this system does not serve its intended purpose.

    IF you go off the assumption that 'kill = good' and 'die = bad', and that that is all the nuance this game possesses, then yes, your argument holds water. But that's exactly the assumption that Karu is pulling into question here. And I think that the majority of players will side with Karu on this matter.

  • @hex_uwu said:

    I’m dead over you calling Jeff Steve 😭

    IN MY DEFENCE I'd played for a bit and it was like half 1 in the morning my brain was mush + I'd been sandbagged by a Steve in an earlier game so I got confused 😭💅

  • @PlaysByShady said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812177#Comment_2812177

    I'm well aware what his point is. Are you aware of my point? That at the end of the day, the outcome that you expect makes no sense from an algorithmic perspective. And I'm saying this as a professional in the industry for 20+ years.

    If you think it makes sense, then please explain it. As yet, no-one has, and I daresay it's because you cannot explain it, and therein is the problem.

    To boil it down into logic terms, he's saying X1. I'm saying X->Y (i.e. X leads to Y) and Y is undesireable. He then clarifies with X2. It's the same thing, X->Y. Y is undesireable, and X leads to Y, so how can you advocate for any flavour of X when it leads to Y which you don't want.

    You can step to me with any flavour of X, but if it all leads to Y, and you don't want Y, then it's the same problem which you guys are failing to see (whilst at the same time so sure of yourselves that you see everything clearly despite clearly not being able to understand it).

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812193#Comment_2812193

    If you understood what he said, then it makes sense. His point was that if you are that skilled, you'd be escaping more often and thus your ratings would rise. There's always be anomalous games for whatever reason, but for skilled players that won't buck the trend.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    What an insightful observation. Did it take both of your brain cells to work that out?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812533#Comment_2812533

    The devs don't believe it works? Interesting... because the last update from the devs that I recall was that it works exactly as designed. The escape/death ratio is 50/50 which is exactly the outcome the system was designed to produce.

    So please enlighten us to how this isn't working when the numbers demonstrate that it very definitely is?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812554#Comment_2812554

    aka "I can't answer your simple question because my own logic makes no sense to me, so I'll look for the first excuse to escape from having to explain myself"

    Yup... common trait of the ignorant.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812321#Comment_2812321

    The pips only rank how you did in terms of objectives in the game, and has nothing to do with your correlation with your opponent, hence it makes little sense to use them to determine who your opponent should be. Should a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to escape from the same as a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to die to be considered the same?

    "Common trait of the ignorant" you're yet to make a proper point about the topic or disprove any of mine my guy I'd be very careful who you're calling ignorant. @Firellius put it very well so do us all a favour and read that since you cba to read mine 🏃

  • Imagine a system that really meassured skill. Since roughly downing someone at end game and killing them by facecamping doesn't take much skill, that nemmy would next be faced against worse players who are less likely to survive so it would actually reward Nemesis with an easier facecamp game.

    I get karu's point and I never liked the sbmm system, but that Killer did get a 2 kills and should face survivors that make it harder the next time, something like a swf.

    What really sucks is the fact that you are getting behind. Some would think that if you dealt with the killer pretty well until you died, you can do it again in the next match and survive since the killer will have lower mmr. Problem is, your teammates will have lower mmr too.

    I think the old ranking system was better, it was terrible, but it was better.

  • When I first entered the post I thought they were making fun of the nemesis because he was "hiding" behind the tree. I thought it hilarious.

    Then I realized they weren't even making fun of nemesis but of the definition of skill on this game.

    But for some reason a lot of responses still seem to be fixated on whether the nemesis is right or not for camping.

    It was funnier when I thought it was about the stealthy nemesis xD

  • They really, *really* shouldn't have used the word "skill" at any point during their MMR shenanigans...

    As for the discussion, I can see both points. The current system lacks nuance and thus many skillful plays (for both killer and survivor) aren't directly taken into consideration. It's very frustrating to know that all of your effort in a game can be reduced to nothing if you don't meet the final objective (this feels worse as a survivor, to me and I think many others but it still can apply to killer too).

    On the flip side, maybe looking at MMR as a win or lose isn't the right way to go about it. The way it's designed (when it works and isn't being stretched thin because of queue times) would allow you to play the way you want and eventually you'll reach a place where the odds of a "victory" are about even. The people who make risky plays should reach a level where they can make those plays and escape whereas those who play extremely safe should reach a point where they can't keep getting away with it.

    Honestly I don't really know how I sit with the system anymore. I just play trials and try not to care about whether I get many kills or get through an exit gate.

  • @PlaysByShady said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812177#Comment_2812177

    I'm well aware what his point is. Are you aware of my point? That at the end of the day, the outcome that you expect makes no sense from an algorithmic perspective. And I'm saying this as a professional in the industry for 20+ years.

    If you think it makes sense, then please explain it. As yet, no-one has, and I daresay it's because you cannot explain it, and therein is the problem.

    To boil it down into logic terms, he's saying X1. I'm saying X->Y (i.e. X leads to Y) and Y is undesireable. He then clarifies with X2. It's the same thing, X->Y. Y is undesireable, and X leads to Y, so how can you advocate for any flavour of X when it leads to Y which you don't want.

    You can step to me with any flavour of X, but if it all leads to Y, and you don't want Y, then it's the same problem which you guys are failing to see (whilst at the same time so sure of yourselves that you see everything clearly despite clearly not being able to understand it).

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812193#Comment_2812193

    If you understood what he said, then it makes sense. His point was that if you are that skilled, you'd be escaping more often and thus your ratings would rise. There's always be anomalous games for whatever reason, but for skilled players that won't buck the trend.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    What an insightful observation. Did it take both of your brain cells to work that out?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812533#Comment_2812533

    The devs don't believe it works? Interesting... because the last update from the devs that I recall was that it works exactly as designed. The escape/death ratio is 50/50 which is exactly the outcome the system was designed to produce.

    So please enlighten us to how this isn't working when the numbers demonstrate that it very definitely is?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812554#Comment_2812554

    aka "I can't answer your simple question because my own logic makes no sense to me, so I'll look for the first excuse to escape from having to explain myself"

    Yup... common trait of the ignorant.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812321#Comment_2812321

    The pips only rank how you did in terms of objectives in the game, and has nothing to do with your correlation with your opponent, hence it makes little sense to use them to determine who your opponent should be. Should a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to escape from the same as a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to die to be considered the same?

    I completely understood what Patrick said

    I just don't think he's right

  • @PlaysByShady said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812177#Comment_2812177

    I'm well aware what his point is. Are you aware of my point? That at the end of the day, the outcome that you expect makes no sense from an algorithmic perspective. And I'm saying this as a professional in the industry for 20+ years.

    If you think it makes sense, then please explain it. As yet, no-one has, and I daresay it's because you cannot explain it, and therein is the problem.

    To boil it down into logic terms, he's saying X1. I'm saying X->Y (i.e. X leads to Y) and Y is undesireable. He then clarifies with X2. It's the same thing, X->Y. Y is undesireable, and X leads to Y, so how can you advocate for any flavour of X when it leads to Y which you don't want.

    You can step to me with any flavour of X, but if it all leads to Y, and you don't want Y, then it's the same problem which you guys are failing to see (whilst at the same time so sure of yourselves that you see everything clearly despite clearly not being able to understand it).

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812193#Comment_2812193

    If you understood what he said, then it makes sense. His point was that if you are that skilled, you'd be escaping more often and thus your ratings would rise. There's always be anomalous games for whatever reason, but for skilled players that won't buck the trend.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812288#Comment_2812288

    What an insightful observation. Did it take both of your brain cells to work that out?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812533#Comment_2812533

    The devs don't believe it works? Interesting... because the last update from the devs that I recall was that it works exactly as designed. The escape/death ratio is 50/50 which is exactly the outcome the system was designed to produce.

    So please enlighten us to how this isn't working when the numbers demonstrate that it very definitely is?

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812554#Comment_2812554

    aka "I can't answer your simple question because my own logic makes no sense to me, so I'll look for the first excuse to escape from having to explain myself"

    Yup... common trait of the ignorant.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812321#Comment_2812321

    The pips only rank how you did in terms of objectives in the game, and has nothing to do with your correlation with your opponent, hence it makes little sense to use them to determine who your opponent should be. Should a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to escape from the same as a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to die to be considered the same?

    "the Devs themselves in their own quotes over the past 2 years don't even believe that it works but they invested into it so they have to play along to save face."

    My guy either you're either being willfully ignorant or you're just that blind to the facts. You guys constantly try to pass this off as people 'not understanding' the formula when the formula has never been the focal point. People aren't upset because they don't understand how it works, they're upset because they waited two years for a 'complex system that will vastly improve everybody's game experience and provide more accurate results than the past prototype' yet we're literally dealing with the same exact matches we already dealt with before. If they were just going to use the SAME exact system they scrapped (Kills/Escapes) after publicly admitting that they scrapped that for being a bad idea then there shouldn't be the world Skill in the name since that's clearly not the metric being tracked.

    X1 = Y is not a viable long-term system and by all means continue to justify it despite the majority not supporting what you say. No it objectively doesn't work, check the dwindling player base on steam-charts in the middle of content drops, the thousands of negative messages that pop up in Discord if you search the #gamediscussion channel for SBMM, the hundreds of comments on Facebook and these forums that don't enjoy it, the biggest content creators that don't support the system which includes players sponsored by BHVR themselves..... The title is named SKILL BASED match making and yet the majority of the player base is constantly uploading photo/video/anecdotal evidence to show how people near or at the MMR cap are not as skilled as the rest of the lobby. I guess you also missed the time BHVR was quoted directly saying right here on these very forums that the reason the system was taking long to implement is because they're working hard to make sure it uses multiple metrics unlike their previous prototype. "We had a prototype we used in the past that we didn't feel was accurate. After extensive testing we came to the realization that using Kills and Escapes to rate players led to bad results so we scrapped it". We were told to be patient as the testing day for this new system was coming soon. This was the time period where for the 3 day testing period nobody could see ranks at the end of a lobby, ques were longer than normal and each Killer started with separate values. They're using that same exact system they scrapped right now, so exactly like I said they're doubling back on their own word to save face because they've invested a lot already

    If the system isn't leading to an increase in fun, population or overall positive content in the community then no, it objectively doesn't work. Its not hard to make a system that at the minimum accounts for time spent in chase, hooks obtained, downs and gens/totems completed as opposed to just X and Y. These are professionals that get paid very well to do this, perhaps if the work is 'too hard' to pull off then maybe next time don't go public talking about a grand system coming soon that'll fix the issue everybody has. We're in 2022 and I'm still here having to explain to a 'professional' of 20 years that context matters in DBD, a game dominated by RNG... The looper that mind-games tiles accurately for extended durations, gets flashlight saves, unhooks and multiple gens should be rewarded more than the Locker-hugging Dwight that did half a gen and 1 totem. You guys keep arguing this point then act surprised that people are quitting left and right over it

  • Careful BHVR might just take all your Quiten skins away

  • @Via said:

    Careful BHVR might just take all your Quiten skins away

    Oh no my 0 Quentin skins whatever will I do.

    (ik this is a reference to that one content creator who I can't mention, but if they actually took away paid content I'd be pretty upset lol)

  • You have clearly been outskilled here, sir!

  • @GoodBoyKaru said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2812910#Comment_2812910

    Thank you! They're the Toon Perk pack- I'd link them but I'm not allowed sadly lmao

    Me and I have the exact same build just removed iron will for provethyself😎

  • Clearly in your hockey match you missed out on the shootouts (or whatever they are called, Idk hockey enough) you needed to throw your hockey stick and beat him up.

    Jokes aside, I see that what the nemesis is doing is just plain old outskill playstyle, clearly you should play with worse teammates because he facecamping you to death = you are bad, MMR working as intended...... In a horrible way.

1 2 ›