Balancing DBD to high MMR is possible, but I'm afraid the developers don't want that

hello,

I expect this topic will upset many here, but I just want to be honest and say what I think.

"Why does BHVR listen to the casuals rather than the high MMR players when it comes to balancing? Simple: the casuals, or at least the majority of the playerbase, are the majority, right?

That's a question I've heard a lot. It's understandable why they would think that. They are the largest part, so of course they should be more important. Anything else would be unfair, in the BHVR's view.

At the end of the day, the majority of the casual community is not good enough for this game. Let's not kid ourselves. We know this to be true. I can give so many different examples of why it's a bad idea for BHVR to strike a balance based on casual games.

In my opinion, most of the community is extremely divided. It often can't really agree on anything unless it's something they hate, and even then the decision on what exactly they hate is split.

Back to the topic

A streamer once gave a good example with a perk: Take Overcharge. The skill check is not really a problem for experienced players and is easy to do. We all know that, but for players with low MMR it looks different. So when balancing, you would have to work on the respective perks as well, right? This means that if the developers made the skill check even harder, it would be more frustration than joy for the majority of players.

That's one of the reasons why developers focus on balancing the majority of the community. That's how I see it, too. What do you guys think? Do you think it's better to balance the game based on feedback from players with high MMR?


Let's discuss

Comments

  • Low to mid MMR - 99% players

    High MMR: 1% Players

  • @DrDeepwound said:

    Low to mid MMR - 99% players

    High MMR: 1% Players

    i see it a bit differently. High MMR 10%

  • At the end of the day, the majority of the casual community is not good enough for this game.

    I don't really like the wording of that. Maybe "They aren't skilled enough to play the game to its full extent and potential".

    In any case, the game SHOULD be balanced for high MMR. For most games, balancing is primarily geared towards the high end, and the meta and strats of that high end trickle down to the more casual players. DbD isn't really that much different. It may take a bit longer in DbD, but it happens. Not too long ago, Nurse was considered fine because she has a steep learning curve. Now everyone (anecdotally) goes up against a god Nurse every game that may or may not have kissed their dad without anyones express permission.

    When you balance for the casual audience, things get overlooked and abused by the top end of players. Those abuses trickle down to the casual audience, and you end up with a mechanic that was fine when people didn't know how to abuse it, but now everyone does.

  • @PNgamer said:

    hello,

    I expect this topic will upset many here, but I just want to be honest and say what I think.

    "Why does BHVR listen to the casuals rather than the high MMR players when it comes to balancing? Simple: the casuals, or at least the majority of the playerbase, are the majority, right?

    That's a question I've heard a lot. It's understandable why they would think that. They are the largest part, so of course they should be more important. Anything else would be unfair, in the BHVR's view.

    At the end of the day, the majority of the casual community is not good enough for this game. Let's not kid ourselves. We know this to be true. I can give so many different examples of why it's a bad idea for BHVR to strike a balance based on casual games.

    In my opinion, most of the community is extremely divided. It often can't really agree on anything unless it's something they hate, and even then the decision on what exactly they hate is split.

    Back to the topic

    A streamer once gave a good example with a perk: Take Overcharge. The skill check is not really a problem for experienced players and is easy to do. We all know that, but for players with low MMR it looks different. So when balancing, you would have to work on the respective perks as well, right? This means that if the developers made the skill check even harder, it would be more frustration than joy for the majority of players.

    That's one of the reasons why developers focus on balancing the majority of the community. That's how I see it, too. What do you guys think? Do you think it's better to balance the game based on feedback from players with high MMR?

    Let's discuss

    No harder skill check I already broke my controller because of that so I don't want to break another and also I want to play mindlessly not really focus when I play survivor and do something else at the same time. Killer is when I try hard and survivor is for relaxing.

  • They don't want a balanced DbD alltogether, because they know that a balanced DbD is an unfun DbD.

    I've made a very lengthy post about this some time ago, I'll link it to you in case you want to get more insight on why I feel this way:

    @Mister_xD said:

    Prologue

    Hello everyone,

    First of all, this is not actually a post that I really wanted to make. As some of you will probaply know, I no longer play this game, so my enthusiasm for it has dwindled too. I have just not been having the motivation to make a long post like this one for a long while now, though I did write down the thoughts from this post in earlier comments already, just in a less detailed form.

    Ever since i quit DbD in August 2021, I have been reflecting on why I quit and after discovering the reasons, decided to dig a bit deeper and find the reasons for those reasons. And I do think that I managed to figure out an issue this game has that I barely see anyone talk about, yet sooo many things people do talk about and discuss end up being direct consequences of this one, bigger thing.

    So I did decide to make this post eventually, simply to shed some light onto what I believe to be, by far, Dead by Daylights biggest problem right now. The "root of all evil", if you will.

    Also I am not saying this was DbD's only issue, there are some others that are very much seperated from this one that are important too (e.g. the discrepancy in strength between solo Survivors and SWF groups), but I believe this one to have the biggest impact on the game as of right now. And do keep in mind that this is my opinion, it is very possible that some of you might view other things as more important issues than this one.

    The Issue

    I'll be straight forward and tell you the problem right away:

    The Survivors objective is unfun and boring.

    Now before you go in the comments and start calling me crazy, please read my reasoning for this being DbDs biggest issue first. It is a lot more complicated than this one sentence might make it look like.

    How to balance an asymmetrical game

    I know this might seem off topic, but trust me, this is very important for later.

    Dead by Daylight can be split into two seperate "games":

    1. The "Macrogame" (referring to the overall trial and its progression)
    2. The "Microgame" (referring to interactions between both sides)

    The way we can create a balanced experience for both sides is, by making each side dominate on of those two cathegories, but as a result of that be weak in the other.

    Essentially, this game boils down to both sides racing each other by pushing their strong suit and hoping that they can finish their objective before the other side has been able to finish theirs.

    Due to this being an asymmetrical game, the side that has less players in one round (Killers) needs to be the dominant side in the Microgame, while the opposing side (Survivors) gets to dominate the Macrogame.

    This makes sense, given the Survivors superior numbers that allow them to apply pressure on the Killer in multiple different locations, which the Killer can not contest due to them only being able to be in one place at a time.

    To make this fair for the Killer, they need to have the upper hand in this 1v1 interaction, so that they don't waste much time on this one Survivor and can instead go and pressure the team after dealing with them quickly. This is also why they are referred to as "the powerrole", even though they themselves arent any more powerful than the Survivor side is, but they feel very powerful due to the fact that they heavily outclass an individual Survivor.

    In other words, a balanced Dead by Daylight would be a game where Killers dominate in chases, whereas Survivors dominate in generator progression, with the deciding factor being who can be more efficient in "their game" of DbD and outperform the other side.

    How the Issue affects DbD's balance

    In a balanced Dead by Daylight, as discussed above, long chases do not exist. Killers dominate in this aspect, so Survivors will want to avoid chases altogether, focussing their gameplay on generators.

    But generators are no fun. No one wants to focus their entire gameplay on holding M1 and occasionally hitting space bar - understandably so.

    If this game were to ever be in a balanced state, Survivors would be the ones quitting out of boredom. And since Survivors are just as essential to this game as Killers are, while also making a majority of its playerbase simply because of the 4v1 nature of this game, this would be very bad news.

    This is also something that I believe the Devs are very aware of. They have stated multiple times in the past now that they have no intention of balancing Dead by Daylight to make it fair, but to make it "fun".

    But what does that mean exactly?

    What is the one thing you think of when you talk about "fun" in Dead by Daylight? - It's chases.

    Chases are a fast and easy way of bringing action into this, otherwise very boring, game. They are full of fast paced interactions between both sides and you need to think on the run to make the right call in order to avoid certain death at the Killers hands.

    As a result the Devs have started balancing DbD around chases - some people might even refer to chases as Dead by Daylight in its entirety, completely forgetting that there is more to it outside of them.

    While this is a very understandable decision made by the Devs, it is also one that brings major imbalances with it.

    The result(s)

    Due to the Devs focussing their resources on making chases a fair, interactive and balanced encounter for both sides, Killers feel very weak to play.

    Remember what I said earlier about how to balance an asymmetrical game - Survivors need to dominate in the Macrogame, while Killers need to dominate in the Microgame.

    But this is no longer the case. The reality of DbD is, that Survivors dominate the Killer in the Macrogame, as they were designed to, and are equal to them in the Microgame, while on the flip side Killers get dominated in the Macrogame, as they should, but are only equal to Survivors in the Microgame.

    By balancing this game around the 1v1 aspect of it, the Devs took away the Killers strongsuit. Killers now struggle immensly to compete with Survivors, especially since those Survivors can hardly be nerfed in their strongsuit, due to that being a direct result of their superior numbers. Simply put Killers can not end their chases quick enough to properly race Survivors who focus on generatos, meaning any time the Survivor team is working on generators efficiently the Killer will most likely lose.

    As a result the game becomes frustrating to its Killer playerbase, because any time they go up against a team of Survivors with an equal skilllevel to theirs, they are heavily outclassed simply due to this game being tilted in the Survivors favor as much as it is.

    For Killers to be able to win, they need to be on a higher skilllevel than the Survivors are, so that the Killer makes less mistakes than the Survivors and can punish their mistakes more efficiently.

    And this leads us to a very modern problem, namely that this essentially rules out the existance of MMR systems in a game like this - at least functional ones.

    There are two possible outcomes with an MMR system in DbD right now:

    1. The system works and puts players of equal skill against each other. In this case Killers are heavily outmatched and will lose a majority of their games (unless Survivors make a huge, game losing, mistake, but for the sake of the argument we have to assume both sides play equally well), which feels unfair and bad for the Killers. Additionally, the high end Survivors would have no opponents, because Killers can not compete at this stage, which results in very long lobby queue times for them.
    2. The system doesnt work and puts players of varying skill against one another. In this case Killers would get to fight lesser experienced players as well, which allows them to win those games, which feels unfair and bad for those Survivors, as they feel outmatched.

    This means no matter what happens, this is a lose-lose scenario. This is also why I keep saying that the most basic requirement for a functional MMR system is a balanced game, which DbD can not (and will probaply never) offer.

    Another very common complaint by the Killerplayerbase today is, that gens are completed too fast. That however is not actually the case, it's that they are too slow at killing the Survivors.

    And as I explained above, this is essentially an unfixable problem. There are two possible solutions to it, which equally don't work:

    1. Make Killers the strong chasers they are supposed to be to be able to rival the gen speeds - this one turns Survivor gameplay into a hold M1 simulator, making it extremely unfun for them to play.
    2. Make gens take longer to complete - this one makes Survivors sit on gens, holding down M1, even longer than they already have to, at which point no one is having fun anymore because of how sluggish the game has become.

    Both of these fail entirely at the non interactive nature of generators.

    And there are more, but we would still be here tomorrow if I went into detail on all of them, so I'll make it short. Here is a list of other issues that are directly linked to this one with a brief explanation:

    • Maps having too many timewasters for Killers on them or generally not allowing for much map pressure (Pallets and Windows are what Survivors have to have fun in chases, to maximise fun and fairness in chases we need a bunch of them and make it so whoever mindgames who wins)
    • A vast majority of the Killer roster being unviable in high level play (only viable options are Killers with strong chase related abilities to at least sometimes put Survivors in a lose-lose situation they can profit from, who also have good map pressure to fight generator speeds - e.g. Nurse and Blight)
    • Killers getting nerfed who did not need a nerf (strong chase ability = unfun match for Survivors, therefore they get nerfed. This is what happened to Deathslinger or the Twins Toy Sword Add On)
    • Killers being forced to run a bunch of slowdown Perks (essentially a futile attempt to force solution 2. from gens being done too fast. As explained above it makes the game miserably boring for Survivors, but is a necessary evil currently)
    • Camping & Tunneling being such popular strategies (eliminating one player early on makes the Survivor teams overall map pressure take a huge hit, which can allow the Killer to relax a bit more. Not doing this is pretty much a lost trial. This is a result of gen speeds, which are a result of their unfun nature)
    • Playing Killer being significantly more stressful than playing Survivor (you essentially have to play perfect to beat even just a mediocre team. The smallest mistake can cost you the entire game, due to a chase being extended too long and you therefore getting crushed in the Macrogame)

    While not all of those might be a direct result of generators being boring, they are all linked to it in some way. Basically, the boring nature of gens caused the Devs flawed balance philosophy, which is what stops us from properly addressing those issues.

    If we ever want to properly fix those problems, we need to address generators first. If we don't, all we achieve is trading one problematic thing for another.

    What is the Solution?

    A complete rework of the Survivors main objective.

    We need to get rid of the excruciatingly boring gameplay that is holding down M1 while waiting for a progress bar to fill up - and this is not exclusive to generators by the way, all of the Survivors objectives are this boring, whether that be exit gate switches, totems (cleansing and blessing), healing, chest searching - they are all the same.

    Of course these progress bars serve a purpose. These objectives are meant to be timewasters first and foremost, it is necessary that the Survivors spend a good amount of their time on doing them to allow the Killer to find and hunt them down.

    So a reworked Survivor objective would need to be both time consuming and interactive for them at the same time.

    It is not until this is achieved that we can properly address so many of the other, much more noticeable, issues that plague this game today.

    This being said, personally I don't think this is a realistic demand to make.

    Generators are one of the most fundamental mechanics in this game and they have existed for almost 6 years at this point without any major changes to them and with a total of 27 DLCs (some bigger than others ofc) that further change the game and, in many cases, directly rely on this mechanic or further add to it.

    There are Perks on both sides directly tied to generator progress bars and there are some Killer powers that also rely on Survivors being on gens (such as Freddies teleport or the Doctors Madness Skill Checks) that would need to be addressed if gens were to be fundamentally reworked.

    This absolutely does not mean it was impossible to address, however it would require a huge amount of time, ressources and effort from BHVRs side.

    And I mean this when I say it, but I definitely think that at this point it would be easier for them to just work on a Dead by Daylight 2 and redesign it from the ground up with this in mind, rather than to try and somehow fix the current game (also due to spaghetti code that further hinders this).

    However, I would definitely not mind being proven wrong on this. Though it would be a long and tedious process, I believe the game would greatly benefit from it in the long run.

    And they can start small, not tackle the whole thing at once, but maybe start by doing one thing and see how it plays out. For example, rework the Exit Gates to no longer require you to hold M1 next to the switch until a progress bar is filled, but make it require fuses that the Survivors need to collect and insert - each fuse lights up one bulb and 3 fuses open the gate up. It would be significantly more interactive for both sides and it would get rid of people 99%ing the gates (another common complaint you hear a lot). You can also do something entirely different, the most important thing is that something is done.

    Afterword

    Thanks for reading this, admittedly very long, post. Might be my longest one yet, its definitely the one I put the most work into.

    What do you think of this? Do you think I'm right? Or do you think I'm entirely wrong? Did i miss anything crucial? Please tell me down below!

    Also please keep in mind this post is not meant to give solutions to this issue, but soley to highlight it - though if you think you got a good sulution to it you can share it down below too / make your own post about it! The more ideas we can give the Devs on this the better. I also deliberately did not post it in the Feedback subforum, as it is not meant to be feedback to the Devs, but as a bit of an explanation to where I believe the game stands right now and why certain things are happening to it for the community - as stated above, I do believe the Devs are very keenly aware of this issue already (and have been for a long time now).

    Have a nice day / night and I'll see you next time!

    also revert the Slinger nerfs, k thx bye.

    (its just too long to write out again, sorry)


    So instead of balancing the game and reworking the problematic parts, they chose the path with the least resistance and just went with whatever makes the most people happy, accepting the collateral damage that would cause (which is the higher skilled players suffering).

  • @Wondertainment said:

    The DEV aren't interested in balancing the game for any group in particular. Their goal is the overall health of the game, that is to say what keeps the game in good metrics. I suspect any changes they make are course corrections driven entirely by dips and gains in numbers on a chart. What is a game to us is a job to them, and balancing the game isn't as important as keeping the game in the black. Do you follow?

    I know I sound jaded and cold, but I think this is entirely reasonable on their part. There are lots of great games that were perfectly balanced. Most died. There is a reason that game designers have, over time, embraced imbalance in their designs rather than continuing to seek the utopian goal of the perfectly fair game. People like to speculate (and the DEV like to let us speculate) about who they are balancing the game around, but that is all illusory.

    If they ever managed to achieve perfect balance, or as close as they can manage, they would be disrupting and changing it soon enough as if they hadn't. They will continue to shake up the game in the same manner they have always done. The stated reason will always be to achieve better balance, but the real goal is simply to shake up the game. It has to stay new and vital to a degree. Consistency is equal to stagnation when it comes to video games.

    I follow you completely, but the game of survivors has changed over the years. Today, after all, everything revolves around: make the generators as fast as possible and escape. Unfortunately, that's all it is anymore

  • Games should be balanced with all their players in mind, not just the top few percent. This goes for any game, not just DBD.

  • Even the high mmr players miss ds sometimes. I hit it 95% of the time but that 5% is still annoying and usually because lag.

  • @Deathstroke said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/331234/balancing-dbd-to-high-mmr-is-possible-but-im-afraid-the-developers-dont-want-that

    No harder skill check I already broke my controller because of that so I don't want to break another and also I want to play mindlessly not really focus when I play survivor and do something else at the same time. Killer is when I try hard and survivor is for relaxing.

    "Killer is when I'm exerting myself, and Survivor is for relaxing." It should be the other way around

  • We do not balance for any group of players in particular. The game's for everyone, not just the top 1%. If doing something to make the game more enjoyable for the 1% at the top would make it less enjoyable for the other 99% of players, it's probably doing more harm than good.

    I'll share this graph that we've had floating around recently again, but have a look at the width of the lines:

    perkusagebymmr-killers.jpg

    The width shows the number of matches. You'll notice that the vast, vast majority of them are in the middle of the pack. Meanwhile on the top ends, that decreases dramatically (4,227 times less). While these are for perks, the actual distribution of players in terms of matchmaking ratings are very similar. You see a lot of people in the middle, but very few at the ends.

    (Prefacing this by saying that this is by no means to call anyone in particular out:) Realistically, a lot of people place themselves higher than they really are. Loads of people claim to be at the top, but there's no way that everyone claiming to be up there actually is. And that's okay! It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else.

  • Truth is, no changes matter for REAL casuals which consists of majority in this game, really.

    They might win more, lose more, or doesn't change at all, but none of casual players care.

    That's true reason why catering to them is just wrong, they'll stick here no matter what, what's the point in balancing for those kind of people?

  • @StibbityStabbity said:

    At the end of the day, the majority of the casual community is not good enough for this game.

    I don't really like the wording of that. Maybe "They aren't skilled enough to play the game to its full extent and potential".

    In any case, the game SHOULD be balanced for high MMR. For most games, balancing is primarily geared towards the high end, and the meta and strats of that high end trickle down to the more casual players. DbD isn't really that much different. It may take a bit longer in DbD, but it happens. Not too long ago, Nurse was considered fine because she has a steep learning curve. Now everyone (anecdotally) goes up against a god Nurse every game that may or may not have kissed their dad without anyones express permission.

    When you balance for the casual audience, things get overlooked and abused by the top end of players. Those abuses trickle down to the casual audience, and you end up with a mechanic that was fine when people didn't know how to abuse it, but now everyone does.

    What does "abused" mean? The only reason the survivors are currently so pissed at the nurse is because the killers are fed up and have found something that makes it difficult for the survivors to escape. It's just not a killer you can turn over 100 times. As long as the survivors are having fun, everything is fine, but when the killer is having fun, it's a different story, isn't it? Unfortunately, this has become a reality.

  • I understand, but even the devs use the term 1% to represent the high MMR, majority of all players are nowhere near it, seems it is actually less than 1%


  • @Peanits said:

    We do not balance for any group of players in particular. The game's for everyone, not just the top 1%. If doing something to make the game more enjoyable for the 1% at the top would make it less enjoyable for the other 99% of players, it's probably doing more harm than good.

    I'll share this graph that we've had floating around recently again, but have a look at the width of the lines:

    https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V6HP4SZ9BFVK/perkusagebymmr-killers.jpg

    The width shows the number of matches. You'll notice that the vast, vast majority of them are in the middle of the pack. Meanwhile on the top ends, that decreases dramatically (4,227 times less). While these are for perks, the actual distribution of players in terms of matchmaking ratings are very similar. You see a lot of people in the middle, but very few at the ends.

    (Prefacing this by saying that this is by no means to call anyone in particular out:) Realistically, a lot of people place themselves higher than they really are. Loads of people claim to be at the top, but there's no way that everyone claiming to be up there actually is. And that's okay! It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else.

    "It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else."

    This is a beautiful sentence with which I fully agree

  • @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029300#Comment_3029300

    "Killer is when I'm exerting myself, and Survivor is for relaxing." It should be the other way around

    Sometimes it is when you completely dominate like agains't potato survivors. But as survivor I don't care if I die or not that much as lot debends on your team but as killer you're alone and you have to make your own success.

  • @Wondertainment said:

    The DEV aren't interested in balancing the game for any group in particular. Their goal is the overall health of the game, that is to say what keeps the game in good metrics. I suspect any changes they make are course corrections driven entirely by dips and gains in numbers on a chart. What is a game to us is a job to them, and balancing the game isn't as important as keeping the game in the black. Do you follow?

    I know I sound jaded and cold, but I think this is entirely reasonable on their part. There are lots of great games that were perfectly balanced. Most died. There is a reason that game designers have, over time, embraced imbalance in their designs rather than continuing to seek the utopian goal of the perfectly fair game. People like to speculate (and the DEV like to let us speculate) about who they are balancing the game around, but that is all illusory.

    If they ever managed to achieve perfect balance, or as close as they can manage, they would be disrupting and changing it soon enough as if they hadn't. They will continue to shake up the game in the same manner they have always done. The stated reason will always be to achieve better balance, but the real goal is simply to shake up the game. It has to stay new and vital to a degree. Consistency is equal to stagnation when it comes to video games.

    "The DEV aren't interested in balancing the game for any group in particular."

    This is not true. The devs want the game to be balanced for low and middle tier skill players.


    The problem is that this lack of balance at high MMR creates the problem of tunneling/camping/slugging. Go against a strong team and you lose if you don't "behave badly" as a survivor main would say.


    This creates a scenario where killers learn : if I don't camp/tunnel/slug -then I will be punished.

    @Peanits said:

    We do not balance for any group of players in particular. The game's for everyone, not just the top 1%. If doing something to make the game more enjoyable for the 1% at the top would make it less enjoyable for the other 99% of players, it's probably doing more harm than good.

    I'll share this graph that we've had floating around recently again, but have a look at the width of the lines:

    https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V6HP4SZ9BFVK/perkusagebymmr-killers.jpg

    The width shows the number of matches. You'll notice that the vast, vast majority of them are in the middle of the pack. Meanwhile on the top ends, that decreases dramatically (4,227 times less). While these are for perks, the actual distribution of players in terms of matchmaking ratings are very similar. You see a lot of people in the middle, but very few at the ends.

    (Prefacing this by saying that this is by no means to call anyone in particular out:) Realistically, a lot of people place themselves higher than they really are. Loads of people claim to be at the top, but there's no way that everyone claiming to be up there actually is. And that's okay! It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else.

    You do extremely little that balances the game for the people that are regularly playing against high MMR survivors. Do I claim to be the top 1%? I do not. Do I play against the top 20% of players as killer? Yes I do - I see tournament players regularly.


    There are almost zero balance measures against High MMR play. You ONLY balance the game for low/middle rank players because that's the majority of the player base. The goal should be to nerf high MMR play where survivors escape way too often without affecting low/mid tier players.


    There's an extremely easy fix for this: Make killers and survivors have the same size collision box. This would make looping essentially identical for low level players because they aren't doing it well anyway. It would make looping inefficient at high levels of play so that even the best players only get 10-20 seconds extra in a chase instead of 30-60 extra seconds. Middle tier players would still get a few loops before they need to throw the pallet.

  • @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029295#Comment_3029295

    What does "abused" mean? The only reason the survivors are currently so pissed at the nurse is because the killers are fed up and have found something that makes it difficult for the survivors to escape. It's just not a killer you can turn over 100 times. As long as the survivors are having fun, everything is fine, but when the killer is having fun, it's a different story, isn't it? Unfortunately, this has become a reality.

    "Abused" means using a Perk or mechanic in a way that likely wasn't intentional in order to get a greater advantage from it. A simply example would be when Survivors used to tap the hook in order to force the Killer to hit instead of grab, which would ensure they could get the unhook.

    I was using Nurse as an example of how issues with the high end eventually became a casual problem. The insane speed of heal builds can also go into here. Camping, while always an issue, essentially exploded after a few tourneys showed that it was the tourney method of securing kills. It went from 1 in every 10-15 matches to 1-5, sometimes higher. Even Survivors scattering to each solo a gen was originally more of a high end strat that has now become common practice in the casual bracket on account of Depip Squad videos showing how well it worked. Killers are lucky that casual players still don't think Lucky Break is very good, despite how you can bring a medkit and just heal to turn it off after completely losing the Killer and getting free chase wins in nearly every scenario.

    There are a myriad of common strats and unintended Perk usages that started in the higher end of players that made their way down. They are now problems for everyone. If the game had been more balanced towards the high end, these problems would have been addressed much sooner.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029312#Comment_3029312

    You need 4 times more survivors than killers if you want this game to live. Making survivor the stressful role would just kill this game because you would have no reason at all to play the role, considering killers have more variety (each killer is unique, while survivors are just skins) and the role is way more interactive (killers never have to stay still and hold M1 for 90 seconds for example).

    Wait a minute, who has to survive? The survivor or the killer? If I'm being hunted, it should be more stressful for me, not the other way around, sry.

  • @PNgamer said:

    hello,

    I expect this topic will upset many here, but I just want to be honest and say what I think.

    "Why does BHVR listen to the casuals rather than the high MMR players when it comes to balancing? Simple: the casuals, or at least the majority of the playerbase, are the majority, right?

    That's a question I've heard a lot. It's understandable why they would think that. They are the largest part, so of course they should be more important. Anything else would be unfair, in the BHVR's view.

    At the end of the day, the majority of the casual community is not good enough for this game. Let's not kid ourselves. We know this to be true. I can give so many different examples of why it's a bad idea for BHVR to strike a balance based on casual games.

    In my opinion, most of the community is extremely divided. It often can't really agree on anything unless it's something they hate, and even then the decision on what exactly they hate is split.

    Back to the topic

    A streamer once gave a good example with a perk: Take Overcharge. The skill check is not really a problem for experienced players and is easy to do. We all know that, but for players with low MMR it looks different. So when balancing, you would have to work on the respective perks as well, right? This means that if the developers made the skill check even harder, it would be more frustration than joy for the majority of players.

    That's one of the reasons why developers focus on balancing the majority of the community. That's how I see it, too. What do you guys think? Do you think it's better to balance the game based on feedback from players with high MMR?

    Let's discuss

    The problem is that there is almost no balance measures at high MMR. Look at high level play and you see:


    1) gens done in 3-5 minutes with almost no variation

    2) pixel perfect looping. This is a problem for every killer that isn't nurse /blight

    3) most of the hook states are completed after all the gens are completed. If survivors played like Marh's team in his experiments they could achieve a 75% escape rate nearly 100% of the time.


    @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029300#Comment_3029300

    "Killer is when I'm exerting myself, and Survivor is for relaxing." It should be the other way around

    That's the cosmic joke. Survivor is both the more numerous player and the power player. Survivors became "entitled" when they became accustomed to easy wins during the infinite window loop era.


    DBD needs to get to a point where someone says : Oh no it's Doctor, Clown, Trapper, Michael Myers - with the same gravity they would say Blight/Nurse.


    @jesterkind said:

    Games should be balanced with all their players in mind, not just the top few percent. This goes for any game, not just DBD.

    DBD has a problem retaining killers. It happens likely as a result of the fact that killer becomes unplayable at a certain point unless you are playing the top killers. What happens if Superman dies? Batman has to take his place. Batman can do a lot but he isn't superman. Whenever a high rank killer quits it makes someone not ready for the role have to carry the weight of playing with high MMR survivors.

    It's extremely not fun. In times past you could just load into a game press escape and quit. Do that enough times and you were back to "0 MMR". Or you could let everyone bleed out - and the game said you lost because during that time non hook kills did not "count".


    Almost all of the killers in DBD are completely unplayable at high MMR (there are exceptions like when you are playing aimbot huntress because your name is CoconutRTS). That sucks. All of your killers are linked to your best killer's MMR. So what happens is that eventually you can only play 2-4 killers and everyone else may as well not exist.

    @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029295#Comment_3029295

    What does "abused" mean? The only reason the survivors are currently so pissed at the nurse is because the killers are fed up and have found something that makes it difficult for the survivors to escape. It's just not a killer you can turn over 100 times. As long as the survivors are having fun, everything is fine, but when the killer is having fun, it's a different story, isn't it? Unfortunately, this has become a reality.

    "As long as the survivors are having fun, everything is fine, but when the killer is having fun, it's a different story, isn't it?"


    DBD is a problematic game because when side A completes their goals it means side B gets fewer points and they just lost a goal. Survivors get mad that they generally only see two killers at high MMR. But they already had their fun getting to that point and are now not willing to "face the music."


    Nurse and Blight are the fair killers. All of the cast needs to be upped to their level. Killer needs to be the power role in chases.

  • @DBDVulture said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/331234/balancing-dbd-to-high-mmr-is-possible-but-im-afraid-the-developers-dont-want-that

    The problem is that there is almost no balance measures at high MMR. Look at high level play and you see:

    1) gens done in 3-5 minutes with almost no variation

    2) pixel perfect looping. This is a problem for every killer that isn't nurse /blight

    3) most of the hook states are completed after all the gens are completed. If survivors played like Marh's team in his experiments they could achieve a 75% escape rate nearly 100% of the time.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029312#Comment_3029312

    That's the cosmic joke. Survivor is both the more numerous player and the power player. Survivors became "entitled" when they became accustomed to easy wins during the infinite window loop era.

    DBD needs to get to a point where someone says : Oh no it's Doctor, Clown, Trapper, Michael Myers - with the same gravity they would say Blight/Nurse.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029307#Comment_3029307

    DBD has a problem retaining killers. It happens likely as a result of the fact that killer becomes unplayable at a certain point unless you are playing the top killers. What happens if Superman dies? Batman has to take his place. Batman can do a lot but he isn't superman. Whenever a high rank killer quits it makes someone not ready for the role have to carry the weight of playing with high MMR survivors.

    It's extremely not fun. In times past you could just load into a game press escape and quit. Do that enough times and you were back to "0 MMR". Or you could let everyone bleed out - and the game said you lost because during that time non hook kills did not "count".

    Almost all of the killers in DBD are completely unplayable at high MMR (there are exceptions like when you are playing aimbot huntress because your name is CoconutRTS). That sucks. All of your killers are linked to your best killer's MMR. So what happens is that eventually you can only play 2-4 killers and everyone else may as well not exist.

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029321#Comment_3029321

    "As long as the survivors are having fun, everything is fine, but when the killer is having fun, it's a different story, isn't it?"

    DBD is a problematic game because when side A completes their goals it means side B gets fewer points and they just lost a goal. Survivors get mad that they generally only see two killers at high MMR. But they already had their fun getting to that point and are now not willing to "face the music."

    Nurse and Blight are the fair killers. All of the cast needs to be upped to their level. Killer needs to be the power role in chases.

    ...Wait, what does any of that have to do with my statement?

  • @jesterkind said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029393#Comment_3029393

    ...Wait, what does any of that have to do with my statement?

    "Games should be balanced with all their players in mind"

    That means games should be balanced with high/mid/low players - not just low/mid.


    DBD only balances killer for low/mid tier experiences. So you either quit or change to Nurse/Blight.

  • @DBDVulture said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029400#Comment_3029400

    "Games should be balanced with all their players in mind"

    That means games should be balanced with high/mid/low players - not just low/mid.

    DBD only balances killer for low/mid tier experiences. So you either quit or change to Nurse/Blight.

    DBD currently balances for all players, as far as I can see; it just hasn't done enough recently to tackle problems in the mid tier.

    Which, ftr, is probably where you and the vast majority of other posters are. That's not an insult, we just know there are very few people at the MMR cap and it's not exactly hard to just say "oh yeah I'm at high MMR and it's miserable".

    Anyway, if your take is that high MMR should be kept in mind too, given exactly equal weight to all other players, I agree. After all, that was the point I was making!

  • @jesterkind said:

    Games should be balanced with all their players in mind, not just the top few percent. This goes for any game, not just DBD.

    Most games balance around the high end because, more often than not, changes for better balance towards them brings more balance towards the audience at large. Especially in games that center around a competitive game mode. Changes made on account of what is going on in high tier play tend to be beneficial for all tiers of play. High tier is simply where any problematic mechanics are most likely to be noticed and abused/suffered, so it acts as a sort of megaphone.

  • @Peanits said:

    We do not balance for any group of players in particular. The game's for everyone, not just the top 1%. If doing something to make the game more enjoyable for the 1% at the top would make it less enjoyable for the other 99% of players, it's probably doing more harm than good.

    I'll share this graph that we've had floating around recently again, but have a look at the width of the lines:

    https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V6HP4SZ9BFVK/perkusagebymmr-killers.jpg

    The width shows the number of matches. You'll notice that the vast, vast majority of them are in the middle of the pack. Meanwhile on the top ends, that decreases dramatically (4,227 times less). While these are for perks, the actual distribution of players in terms of matchmaking ratings are very similar. You see a lot of people in the middle, but very few at the ends.

    (Prefacing this by saying that this is by no means to call anyone in particular out:) Realistically, a lot of people place themselves higher than they really are. Loads of people claim to be at the top, but there's no way that everyone claiming to be up there actually is. And that's okay! It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else.

    Why do the first sentances cancel each other out?

  • @jesterkind said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029405#Comment_3029405

    DBD currently balances for all players, as far as I can see; it just hasn't done enough recently to tackle problems in the mid tier.

    Which, ftr, is probably where you and the vast majority of other posters are. That's not an insult, we just know there are very few people at the MMR cap and it's not exactly hard to just say "oh yeah I'm at high MMR and it's miserable".

    Anyway, if your take is that high MMR should be kept in mind too, given exactly equal weight to all other players, I agree. After all, that was the point I was making!

    Most of the people I play against are in the 2,000 to 5,000 hour range. I regularly play against DBD tournament team players.


    "if your take is that high MMR should be kept in mind too, given exactly equal weight to all other players, I agree"


    That is not the sentiment I took from your message.

  • @DBDVulture said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029408#Comment_3029408

    Most of the people I play against are in the 2,000 to 5,000 hour range. I regularly play against DBD tournament team players.

    "if your take is that high MMR should be kept in mind too, given exactly equal weight to all other players, I agree"

    That is not the sentiment I took from your message.

    I'm not sure how I could've been more clear- I responded to the statement that DBD should be balanced for its highest players with the statement that it should be balanced for all players. That includes the highest tiers, it just doesn't favour them over anyone else.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029378#Comment_3029378

    Nobody has to survive, it's a PvP game. You're someone on a PC/console playing against another person on a PC/console. Stop taking this game like it's real life and it will make sense for you why killer has to be harder.

    a little reality would not hurt you

  • @DrDeepwound said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029290#Comment_3029290

    I understand, but even the devs use the term 1% to represent the high MMR, majority of all players are nowhere near it, seems it is actually less than 1%

    allright

  • @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029318#Comment_3029318

    "It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else."

    This is a beautiful sentence with which I fully agree

    How? Someone who doesn’t play much/ is just beginning doesn’t know what’s going on. Would you listen to someone’s opinion on architecture just because they started taking a basic class? Everyone’s word does not carry equal weight. That’s the reality. A survivor who plays 1-2 hours after work twice a week doesn’t know how to exploit jungle gyms or break free of pinhead chains; that doesn’t mean that these things are balanced or imbalanced. It means the survivor has no clue what’s going on. The game should not be balanced around players like that. Experienced players shouldn’t be punished for others.

  • @woundcowboy said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029340#Comment_3029340

    How? Someone who doesn’t play much/ is just beginning doesn’t know what’s going on. Would you listen to someone’s opinion on architecture just because they started taking a basic class? Everyone’s word does not carry equal weight. That’s the reality. A survivor who plays 1-2 hours after work twice a week doesn’t know how to exploit jungle gyms or break free of pinhead chains; that doesn’t mean that these things are balanced or imbalanced. It means the survivor has no clue what’s going on. The game should not be balanced around players like that. Experienced players shouldn’t be punished for others.

    Everyone was new once, even if you're an absolute legend now. Ignoring the problems that new players face is the fastest way to make them quit the game out of frustration before they can build up some experience. That's not to say we should balance solely around new players, but often times their feedback can highlight where the onboarding (teaching a new player the game) could be better. More often than not, this comes down to improving the feedback while playing against something rather than balance changes.

    But ignoring anyone's opinions just because they're not as good as you is never the answer. Elitism doesn't help anyone. The game's for everyone, not just the top X%.

  • Personally I don't want balancing around the high people

    Rainbow six siege does it and results In boring balancing

  • I just don't want to play bully simulator as killer nor be punish for my teams actions because MMR match me with them who just hid in corner an self care. High or low is pain regardless of sides.

  • @DrDeepwound said:

    Low to mid MMR - 99% players

    High MMR: 1% Players

    Forum members who think they are in High MMR - 97%

    Forum members who actually are in High MMR - 61.5%


    - data based on nothing at all but gut

    feeling

  • How about a little consideration for us low to mid MMR killers that are routinely getting matched up against multi thousand hour SWFs? Make those teams wait for Nurse and Blight because they're the only ones that can deal with it. Stop matching me against them when I'm playing console Trickster. Thanks.

  • who cares if youre good at DBD??


    like literally no one cares, just have fun.

  • @DeadByCommunity said:

    I just don't want to play bully simulator as killer nor be punish for my teams actions because MMR match me with them who just hid in corner an self care. High or low is pain regardless of sides.

    I can understand your sentiment, but it's an online pvp multiplayer game. You're always going to be punished by both your teammates and the opposition is always going to punish you for any mistakes you make.

    Take for example, League of Legends, one of the most successful online competitive games in history. You're constantly put with people that you don't feel are good enough to play on your level, and your opponents almost always feel like pros that punish your every mistake, kill you 10 times and hit you with CY@ or spam mastery emote after every one of your deaths. Heck Halo was built on 12 year olds that teabag and tell you random odd facts about your mother.

    It's the nature of online games. It sucks every time. And as much as a developer tries to mitigate that unfun aspect of it, it's still going to be there.

    @Veinslay said:

    How about a little consideration for us low to mid MMR killers that are routinely getting matched up against multi thousand hour SWFs? Make those teams wait for Nurse and Blight because they're the only ones that can deal with it. Stop matching me against them when I'm playing console Trickster. Thanks.

    They're trying to. They stated that in the patch notes and live stream. The imbalance of players can cause matchmaking to be a bit imbalanced as it tries to both balance matches but also keep queue times healthy. Which is why they're giving incentives to players for queue up for a role that is in need of players at certain times, to help take some of the load off the system.

    Because of you just narrow the brackets for MMR more regardless of queue times, you end up with situations like other online multiplayer games for instance, League of legends. If you've never been master-grandmaster tier in that game and tried to queue up, it's horrendous. 30-40 sometimes even 60 minute waits times to queue for a match. Just for someone to back out before the game starts and you end up going back to waiting. No thank you! Lol

  • In my experience, balance changes made around the highest tier results in overly technical, impenetrable, and generally anti-fun gameplay. The practice killed Overwatch and the entire RTS genre - both things that were at high points during the era of "big boom kaboom shooty" spectacle and memes and entered lowpoints when it started to try and focus on appeasing people who play professionally.

  • Definitely even more than that. It's too easy to reach high MMR in this game, especially on killer.

  • @Norhc said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029290#Comment_3029290

    Definitely even more than that. It's too easy to reach high MMR in this game, especially on killer.

    The devs have stated numerous times that very few are at "high MMR". Losing games or encountering better players does not mean someone has reached high MMR.

  • The truth of the matter is the top tier players, not those who think they are, but those who really are, cannot support this game. That's right, there are not enough of them, period.

    It somewhat amazes me how this elitist movement in video games has really spread over the past 30 years. 99% of the online games out there are vastly supported financially by the casual fan and middle of the road performer. If a company caters to the top 1 to 3%, they lose in most cases.

    DbD is a casual party game. It is not a competitive esport style game. (Don't try selling me a pile of rocks by describing the competition aspects of the game, Go Fish has competitive aspects but I don't see million dollar tournaments and ESPN 8 covering it.) There is zero reason to cater to the top 1%.

    Oh, and what is up with the person who claimed that casual players in this game don't have the skills to play this game? Talk about the most bloated statement I may have ever heard on this site, that may be it. Do you go to the beach and judge whether children's sand castles are up to par as well? Maybe go knock over a backgammon table at the nursing home as well for their lack of skills. Seriously, this is a joke game meant for jump scares and fun. Take a breathe, your elite status is recognized by nobody who cares. lol

  • It'd still be better to just go back to ranks/grades cause everyone could play and enjoy and most people didn't care from what I saw anyway.

  • I've never played Dead by Daylight at a party

  • @Peanits said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029905#Comment_3029905

    Everyone was new once, even if you're an absolute legend now. Ignoring the problems that new players face is the fastest way to make them quit the game out of frustration before they can build up some experience. That's not to say we should balance solely around new players, but often times their feedback can highlight where the onboarding (teaching a new player the game) could be better. More often than not, this comes down to improving the feedback while playing against something rather than balance changes.

    But ignoring anyone's opinions just because they're not as good as you is never the answer. Elitism doesn't help anyone. The game's for everyone, not just the top X%.

    Except that most major developers do balance around top level of play. They do just fine and the games are better balanced

  • @Khelendrose2020 said:

    The truth of the matter is the top tier players, not those who think they are, but those who really are, cannot support this game. That's right, there are not enough of them, period.

    It somewhat amazes me how this elitist movement in video games has really spread over the past 30 years. 99% of the online games out there are vastly supported financially by the casual fan and middle of the road performer. If a company caters to the top 1 to 3%, they lose in most cases.

    DbD is a casual party game. It is not a competitive esport style game. (Don't try selling me a pile of rocks by describing the competition aspects of the game, Go Fish has competitive aspects but I don't see million dollar tournaments and ESPN 8 covering it.) There is zero reason to cater to the top 1%.

    Oh, and what is up with the person who claimed that casual players in this game don't have the skills to play this game? Talk about the most bloated statement I may have ever heard on this site, that may be it. Do you go to the beach and judge whether children's sand castles are up to par as well? Maybe go knock over a backgammon table at the nursing home as well for their lack of skills. Seriously, this is a joke game meant for jump scares and fun. Take a breathe, your elite status is recognized by nobody who cares. lol

    I love your entire comment, but in particular the imagery of flipping a backgammon table because the older folk aren't skilled enough lol

  • @Khelendrose2020 said:

    The truth of the matter is the top tier players, not those who think they are, but those who really are, cannot support this game. That's right, there are not enough of them, period.

    It somewhat amazes me how this elitist movement in video games has really spread over the past 30 years. 99% of the online games out there are vastly supported financially by the casual fan and middle of the road performer. If a company caters to the top 1 to 3%, they lose in most cases.

    DbD is a casual party game. It is not a competitive esport style game. (Don't try selling me a pile of rocks by describing the competition aspects of the game, Go Fish has competitive aspects but I don't see million dollar tournaments and ESPN 8 covering it.) There is zero reason to cater to the top 1%.

    Oh, and what is up with the person who claimed that casual players in this game don't have the skills to play this game? Talk about the most bloated statement I may have ever heard on this site, that may be it. Do you go to the beach and judge whether children's sand castles are up to par as well? Maybe go knock over a backgammon table at the nursing home as well for their lack of skills. Seriously, this is a joke game meant for jump scares and fun. Take a breathe, your elite status is recognized by nobody who cares. lol

    Again, if none of this matters, then why nerf any killer or survivor tactic? The pure and simple truth is that people want to win and feel badass without having to try. To which i’d say, play a single player game. You’re not entitled to win against someone who has been playing longer.

  • @woundcowboy said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3030405#Comment_3030405

    Again, if none of this matters, then why nerf any killer or survivor tactic? The pure and simple truth is that people want to win and feel badass without having to try. To which i’d say, play a single player game. You’re not entitled to win against someone who has been playing longer.

    The hard point to balance in this game is "fun". Thus why they struggle with the camping and tunneling. The killer often finds themselves needing to tunnel the first person out to slow things down. That person does not really get a chance to play or do much. So, they are trying to adjust things so the killer does not need to do that to slow things down and the player can stand a better chance if they are tunneled.

    There is a logic there, but not an easy thing to balance.

  • @woundcowboy said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3030085#Comment_3030085

    Except that most major developers do balance around top level of play. They do just fine and the games are better balanced

    Those are the exception not the rule. The games that do that tend to be the ones on the competitive scene with a lot of money riding on top tier players. Less than .1% of games fall under that category. Those games are also not asymmetrical.

  • This comes down to a completely different issue then balancing for a certain skill bracket of players. It’s not even relevant to argue about the skill brackets of players that previous or upcoming changes are targeted at.

    The point should be that they focus on a lot of the wrong things while ignoring a lot of the bad things for various reasons.

    Often the decisions they make aim to do one thing but end up encouraging exactly that issue.

    As mere players we can’t really tell why this weird way of working happens so regularly, but there’s clearly a dissonance between some departments of the dev team and how changes get communicated to the players.

    This often creates an environment where we players don’t feel seen and the developers probably like their work isn’t appreciated.


    They finally need to change up some of the fundamental flaws of the game like map tile rng, information discrepancy between solo and swf, unevenly balanced killers before doing more of these minor gameplay changes.

    We’re just constantly going down a spiral of changes that don’t take on the core issues. The game will always stay unfun for certain groups of players if the foundation never gets fixed.


    Absolutely pointless to argue about what kind of skill the game should be balanced around if there’s no common ground they even could do that balancing around.

    Btw you should never balance around competitive play in a game that’s not supposed to be played evenly, which asymmetrical games aren’t by design.

    Competitive play for asymmetrical games is flawed by default. There’s a reason we don’t do asymmetrical sports either.

  • @Peanits said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029905#Comment_3029905

    Everyone was new once, even if you're an absolute legend now. Ignoring the problems that new players face is the fastest way to make them quit the game out of frustration before they can build up some experience. That's not to say we should balance solely around new players, but often times their feedback can highlight where the onboarding (teaching a new player the game) could be better. More often than not, this comes down to improving the feedback while playing against something rather than balance changes.

    But ignoring anyone's opinions just because they're not as good as you is never the answer. Elitism doesn't help anyone. The game's for everyone, not just the top X%.

    Quoting statistics doesn't suddenly make nerfing things or buffing the right decision nor does it mean anything is weak. Nurse has terrible stats, picks, kill rates yet is literally the most busted killer in the game and no one is disillusioned to that. The only defense around her is ya'll not knowing that statistics are meaningless without -context- and that the initial hurdle of wheezing deters people because a lot of people want instant gratification. Some of the changes are great but ya'll are incredibly short sighted and ignore things that the playerbase says for years. So that'll be really fun to see even more exploited than before. You don't have to balance around the top whatever percent. You do however have to actually take into account things that are absolutely detrimental to balance design for the game overall and then take into account how things can be -abused-. It only seems like that is done after the fact and seldom is that after the fact immediate. Several of these changes were suggested years ago.


    And daily reminder: There's still a chat filter on the game that makes it impossible to have a conversation. Another great testament to the quality standard and completely missing the point of what players actually were after when they simply wanted people that were racist/giving death threats in end game chat to get punished. Instead, a lazy filter that is put to shame by ones in browser games and has been that way for what, like two years now?

  • @PNgamer said:

    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3029318#Comment_3029318

    "It doesn't matter if you're at the top or in the middle, or even low. Your opinion still matters as much as anyone else."

    This is a beautiful sentence with which I fully agree

    And this is the problem... Despite you can hear everyone's thoughts on the game, you shouldn't take decisions based on what inexperienced people will say... For example a newcomer to the game will easily tell you that every killer in dbd is overpowered due to the fact that he doesn't have the needed knowledge to play somewhat efficiently (they even found unfair that the default killer has 4.6 of movement speed) ... You can't clearly balance to the opposite direction of veteran tryharders either since everyone who isn't at their level will suffer greatly for the things that they can suggest... The best idea would be to take a middle ground between those groups, where you can find people that aren't clueless about the gameplay mechanics and know how to play with randoms but that aren't gods at the game...

‹ 1 2