is BHVR actually survivor sided?
I know this title seems like "one of those" but my intention is actually to gather info what anyone really thinks. One siders will ofc say "yes" or "vice versa" but my interest is the ones that play both sides, now i cant control that people can state being not biased towards one side so we have to go with a rough measurement here.
thats why i dont make a poll out of it. It will turn out 50/50 anyway so im giving the option to reason your answer and share your thoughts, maybe this thread will even proof me wrong. I would perfer that tbh.
But knight makes me really question things, his power is ridicilously easy outplayable. yes he CAN win. Like any killer CAN win. But it just feels so much work and pressure on yourself, as if you are an M1 without special abillity because as to what ive seen myself and read from others experience, his guards are well... a joke.
and i dont believe it was intended to have another campy killer, not when you read the descriptions of all 3.
there are other things that make me question it; looking at DH and nurse but the 6.0.1 imho is a counter argument. So i dont jump on this only because of knight. I just find some... decisions very weird. also the whole UB basekit/mori system rework while yes not being sure to release at all, the whole idea of it after the 6.0.1 seems to me like a complete diffrent direction, and this being definitly a slap to both sides.
lets have a serious and none heated convo for once all though it actively is themed around our great polarization we have in this gaming community right here.
And if a dev/mod happens to stumble uppon this post im very interested in officcial answer over this. Im sure im not the first one asking something like this.
Comments
ngl i always avoid the whole survivor/killer sided but tbh it is feeling like BHVR is back to being a little survivor sided again
BHVR is making money sided and most of their customers are obviously survivors and casual survivors at that. So it makes sense the game will generally be balanced more towards the casual majority...
Sure
^^this
Everyone complains about the game balance but I'd imagine nost of the ppl on the forum are fairly dedicated, hardcore players.
And you can't balance a game to please just them. As someone who started in august and has racked up 18 solid days playtime since then, I keenly remember how ######### this game was for me as surv when i started out. Newer/worse players are at a huge disadvantage, there's no reason to tip that balance further. Otherwise it drives a LOT of players away from the game.
I usually go very hard on games I enjoy, but i struggled to maintain motivation for dbd early on. And i know a fair few players who've either quit early on or who won't try dbd at because they know how bad the skill curve is for beginners.
DbD is SWF sided
They are money sided. They see a way to make money, they want to do that. They notice a way they will lose money, they don't want to do that. They accidentally do something that causes them to lose money, they want to fix that. The same is true if they accidentally do something that is too popular, because that must mean it is too good and will eventually cause them to lose money, right?
To say they are survivor sided is to be completely and utterly blind to the facts. Any nerf to survivor is a nerf to ALL survivors. It isn't the same with killers, who, when nerfed, will either play with the nerf, play a different killer, or quit. Survivors only have two choices if they want to play survivor when a survivor nerf happens, continue playing despite the nerf, or quit. There is no third option.
That being noted, here is a list of survivor related things that haven't been nerfed in some way since I started playing several years ago.
SWF.
That was a pretty short list, huh? It was easier to list the things that haven't been nerfed than it was to list the nerfed things, because literally every single aspect of playing survivor has been nerfed other than that. EVEN THE COSMETICS!
So, when you ask yourself if the devs are survivor sided and you start leaning toward yes, smack yourself upside the head and return to reality. Every single aspect of survivor gameplay has seen a nerf. Every single too good or too used perk gets nerfed. They don't always go as far as balance would warrant but too often they overstep the necessary and break what they are nerfing into uselessness. It's very similar for killers except when the OP killer gets nerfed because too many people are exploiting the OPness most of those players just go to the next best killer and exploit it's OPness. BHVR have learned a bit from experience when they released Legion and have since released most killers slightly underpowered and buff them a little bit after the fact if they decide it is necessary. They are doing the same with survivor perks. If they want to make an obviously good perk, they first nerf something so that the obviously good perk won't be OP. Hyperfocus came out the update AFTER they added 10 seconds to the gen timer. Think about that. They are planning things that intricately and you think they care about one side more than the other. They just want to entice new players and keep the interest of the old players as long as possible.
The reason for the higher percentage of solos in Survivor is that Killer is a solo.
If I switch to survivor after a killer play, it's not because my friend suddenly spawns.
They use to be ,I think the game is balanced for both sides now.Some killers are weak some killers are strong.You don't main a killer because their strong imo ,you should main a killer or survivor because you like them.
But I'm definitely if we ever get that killer you know that killer 😏 I'm definitely bandwagoning
thisss
Are the devs survivor sided? Probably not.
Are the devs survivor mains...most probably yes
I've recently moved from pure killer main to playing both sides and i can honestly say for 90% of my matches i'm really enjoying survivor. However after playing both sides its clear to see how much easier survivor is these days to playing killer and with the proposed changes how it will be even easier for survivor.
As i said i don't think the devs are survivor sided but i do think that they give survivors more because as someone else pointed out they are "Noob sided".
The base kit BT was a classic example of that. Good players wouldn't need to rely on base kit BT but because a lot of the survivor playerbase arn't that good at the game (and there is nothing wrong with that) it came across that tunneling needed to be addressed in a big way and thus base kit BT was born. Now don't get me wrong killers do tunnel, heck even i have on occasion just not at 5 gens like some idiots do. but alowing every survivor to gain a huge buff just for being unhooked didnt seem like the most balanced way to do it. Would have been fairer to have the endurance but not the haste (and not have it even more buffed by someone running BT which inadvertadly got a massive buff by adding haste to the perk)
Now yeah on the flip side killers got a base kit buff to kicking gens but unless your running a gen kicking build who actually kicks them.
I think what makes it seem like the devs favour survivors more than killers is because the changes to survivors are free where as the changes to killers requires the killers to actively do something in order to benifit from it (i.e just getting unhooked as apposed to kicking gens)
With the proposed changes aswell its very survivor biast. Base kit unbreakable is again a free buff that doesnt require survivors to do anything to gain that buff. where as the end game mori actually nerfs a fair few perks to the point where they are pointless to run (rancor for example and to a certain extent devour hope as it would require you to pick up and hook rather than mori on the ground).
So in summery no the devs arn't survivor sided but they are biast to making the game more noob friendly on the survivor side. Regardless of it though we just have to make the best out of what we have and enjoy the game how we want. and if your not enjoying the game there is always another game you can play :)
Sure they are
Yes. I think I understand. You were speaking of 5% of players being SWF4, not of lobbies.
That's not really something that can be measured isn't it? I mean, I play in various groups : mostly solo but also SWF2, 3 and 4.
A more interesting, and quantifiable, number is the percentage of lobbies. After all, the players in these groups do not really matter.
When a statistic says that "50% of players in matches are solo", it doesn't say if they are the same players. One could imagine many things. e.g. Maybe pure most solo don't stay. Maybe SWFs have a bigger "life expectancy" in the game?
As for what's the actual "bias" situation, I believe Ryuhi and tippy2k2 gave a perfect answer.
Pioneers, and I think they are doing a great job no matter what anyone thinks. A perfectly balanced game is a BORING game. Things have to be strong on both sides but there isn't anything so oppressive that either side can't win. They have done so much over the years and I feel a lot users on here don't even know the struggles for both sides dating back to like 2017-18...they would have a heart attack if they had to deal with the old balance and maps lol.