Map Compatibility
The variety of map design is good to have however I feel the layouts have a huge impact on gameplay balance. There are combinations of maps and killers that either hamstring the killer to a severe level or essentially enhance the killers' abilities.
A great example is a map such as Midwich. This is a stacked map which means it has a smaller total footprint causing objects to be closer together. It is also an indoor map which means a more linear chase but severely hampered sight lines. On the side of hindering the killer, let's pick a ranged killer such as Huntress. You may discover a survivor via perks or sound cues only to realize that you are going to have to walk halfway across the map to stairs then back again even though they were directly above you. Once you cross this distance which is made slower by a lower base move speed, they can easily duck into side rooms and prevent you from getting much of a shot if any. This puts the killer at more of a disadvantage than most maps. Flipping that around, a teleport killer like the Nurse becomes very powerful. She has a reduced speed as well but can blink through walls and more importantly floors. This allows you to quickly jump up to the higher floor at will. Because the overall footprint is smaller, it effectively enhances the mobility of that killer to a high level giving them a distinct advantage versus other map layouts.
I have a few options to suggest for improvement.
- Display the map prior to locking in killer selection. This not only allows you to pick a killer than isn't hindered by the map and all players to apply perks that are more appropriate (such as the survivor perk balanced landing which is reduced in utility on maps with few drops).
- Restrict map selection by killer. Assigning "hunting grounds" to each killer would allow you to prevent the OP/Lame killer based solely on map.
- Allow a killer to ban certain maps during the lobby to prevent especially bad match ups such as the hillbilly in the hospital where the power becomes almost completely pointless.
Comments
I would only go with the 3rd, at a rate of 1/5 round down. So with our current 38 available maps Killers could ban 7.
Personally I would also have map offerings be changed with this as well.
First off, all map offerings are rolled into 1 offering. When you pick the map offering you get a sub menu to pick the specific map. This also helps with inventory bloat.
With 7 bans there are 31 maps to be 'rolled' from. Survivor map offerings add 3 extra 'rolls' for a specific map. Killer map offerings add the 31-38 rolls (depending on number of bans used) for the map they want. This way they can avoid banning certain maps to raise their odds of a map being rolled against offerings.
In a circumstance where a survivor brings an offering for a map that is banned, they still add 3 'rolls' to the map pool subtracted by 1 for the ban, for a total of 2 rolls out of the new total, 33 if all 7 bans are used, and only 1 map offering being made.
Finally, the Sacrificial Ward is buffed to prevent the maps being offered from showing up, instead of only preventing the bonus chance. This still can be negated by 4 identical map offerings, but those would lock in the realm now instead of the map.
One positive aspect of this is if some maps are universally banned at a disproportionate rate, then BHVR can see which maps are the problem children and might need altering in some way.
One neutral aspect of this is Kill rates will likely go up, resulting in some form of Survivor compensatory buff later down the line. Since BHVR wants 60% kill rates we can expect Survivor's would get something to counterbalance this. Hence why this is in Neutral.
Another neutral aspect is neither side can as easily force maps. Since both sides can do this, both for good and for ill, I place this here in the middle. I thoroughly enjoy Lery's Scratched Mirror Myers matches as both sides, but despise Midwich matches against Nurse.
A negative aspect is Killers won't learn how to play on their bad maps as much, so they will be all the more annoyed when a map offering rolls the map. This can also lead to Survivors having a worse experience as the Killer could be aggravated enough to play in a manner the Survivor's don't enjoy, in an attempt to 'equalize' the suffering.
Oh there is nothing more that killer can do to make the experience worse. People like the one who created this thread https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/352131/there-should-be-an-option-to-play-vs-solo-survivors-only-as-a-killer are rather common. There will not be anything more they can do. There is already way too many blights that send you to mcmillan with C33 and alchemist ring. Also I still can't fathom why making the game balance for 3 out of 5 wins for killer a good idea. I find it inherently unfair. But it explains all the new tiles and everything that has been happening lately with the game
To be fair the kill rate number is inflated due to being able to largely facecamp a free kill at endgame, so the minimum is somewhere between 0 and 25%, and the max is partially gated by whether the Killer slugs for 4k or not. If we were to assume Hatch was strictly a 50/50*, and no Killers Slug for 4k, the max is an average of 87.5%. The average of 25% and 87.5% is 56.25%. If we were to assume Killers kill the last survivor 4/5 times$, then this would reach the 60% total average. I do think a solid percentage of players slug for 4k (minimum 1/3), and after that quite a decent number of Killers still win hatch race.
*(even though I think it is closer to a 60/40 to 70/30 in the Killer's favor with the normal 4.6, not even including Mobility Killers)
$(by winning Hatch race or slugging for 4k, for a total of 95% Kills [or 75%+20% out of max 25%])
Also this kill rate is deflated by 'farming' Killers and Killers who don't care about kills. Before MMR I would play 'the 2 hook tango'. I would get 2 hooks on each Survivor, and let them escape (if they didn't hook suicide a state), capping my BP categories on Brutality/Deviousness/Hunter. I never intentionally farmed, as I didn't really care if Survs capped their categories, I just sought to cap my own. Before I could stay in 'Red Ranks' with that strategy, and 'win' my matches by getting 2 hooks each and never be forced to Kill. I would get challenging matches against enjoyable opponents. I much preferred giving 5k BP per Surv, as I know the grind is disgusting, and I would do my best to fix the problem. Now however, I more or less am forced to Kill people if I don't want to play against Baby Survs. It is quite frustrating, since even with consistently getting 3/4ks (since I don't slug for 4k/hatch race), I still go against too many Baby Survs. I would honestly rate my Killer 'win' rate at 90%-95%, and Kill rate at ~65-75% post-MMR*. On occasion I let people go cause I feel like it (hatch or 4 man), but I know I am punished by the system for having more net fun (both for myself and most Survs) in that match by doing so.
*(I'm not trying to say I'm godlike here, just saying soloq and matchmaking is a joke)
This 60% expected kill rate could be expected to be lower if the design flaws (imo) of facecamping (and to a lesser extent 16m proxy camping), and hard tunneling off of hook are fixed. Then you could reasonably expect a 50% Kill/Escape Rate.
I do agree with the sentiment that 'top tier' mains are a blight (no pun intended) on the game. I think they want easy wins and want to pretend they reached that conclusion from skill. To be fair however, I think the Survivors sending Killers to Macmillan/Autohaven are just as sweaty and undesirable of players as the 'top tier' Killer mains.