For those who claim that winning is defined as pipping
I do admit there is some gray area with what counts as a win (it says the killers wincon is to sacrifice the survivors, but what about moris? Bleed outs? And how many?) . But it very obviously isn't defined in terms of pipping. And dying as a survivor is obviously never a win while escaping through the gate obviously always is one (hatch is another gray area because it specifically mentions powering all 5 generators)
Comments
Winning or having fun? There is a difference. And again. If I gave you a list of games containing all of the outcomes and events of each game could you take that definition of "pushing the goal post forward, despite the odds" and use it to give the different roles a win loss ratio?
How much do you have to push the goal posts forward? What goals could you possibly be pushing if you have no win condition beyond that? Is it a win if you all escape against a ######### killer or if you 4k against potato survivors easily?
I thought a troll was a person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online post.
Which I'm pretty sure is none of the people who have replied to this thread so far. And even if everyone else here besides me was a troll I should still have to address their arguments because anything else is adhominim fallacy
Actually removing the pipping already exists in KYF. By those who think pipping means "Win/Lose", it would mean that any KYF would be a match with no win/lose....
If you would shrink DbD down to the basics of the game, getting rid of all the stuff which only "adds" to the core experience, then you wouldn't have any BP or Pips. It would be only four survivors and a killer, spawning on a map with objectives to survive. For each survivor it would only matter if they live or die. For the killer it would only matter how many survivor escape/get killed. For me that's a definitiv win condition for the game.
The thing about it: The win condition of a game isn't everything. DbD has all this stuff, which "adds" to the game like BP, grind, a rank system and pipping as incentive for people to define personal goals and to cultivate a community. A community which plays and enjoys a game. Because like said. a "win" can be very cheap. In my opinion it's not healthy for the community to discuss about some kind of win condition. The question is: "How can we make the game enjoyable" And just looking at the win condition isn't the way to achieve that.
Of course. Win conditions don't inherently make the game fun. They do however act as a metric for balance, and since balance IS important for fun that means it is very important that everyone is on the same page there
When I'm a Survivor I see pipping as a Win, when I'm Killer my Win is determined by how well I play against the Survivors. Even if I get 2 Kills I can still judge it as a loss depending on how I got those kills, it could've been luck and not skill.
I had a match as Pig today and almost got 1 Kill but then a silly Claudette decided to attemtp to get her trap off instead of going for the hatch so I got 2 kills. Despite the 2 kills I still felt it was a loss because I missing my attacks and having trouble catching Survivors so those 2 kills were not really skill based since my first kill was a No Mither...no skill required for them.
The thing is, survivor isn't supposed to have a 100% escape rate or even a high one and to make up for that, there's other ways to win, too. I think it's fair to use emblems to measure how you do. If they weren't intended for such things, they wouldn't exist. They wouldn't be present to take up space or raise someone up the ranks, regardless of if they escaped or not. They're supposed to represent a win state of sorts, there's just many ways to approach that "win" goal.
Why would they have a 100% win rate? They would have a 50% winrate max and realistically lower than that, which makes sense considering the current WR for survivors is 40%
It's also fair to remember that survivors only work as a unit with SWF. You get a group of solo players and half of the team is doing nothing, the few who are actually trying to push objectives are doing what the game is asking of them and therefore actually trying to approach the end game. That's why a person's performance isn't limited to whether they live or die. Like I said before, pips are meant to work as a win state of sorts so that you can get into games with other people who play competently. If it wasn't meant for such things, it wouldn't have been implemented, right? Killers can get a technical win without killing everyone depending on how well they pressure the gens. The only thing being alive changes is that 5k points, gold/iridescent pip, and the possibility of leaving with an item. In the greater scheme of the game, it's very small; it's just one aspect.
The thing is the devs can only balanced for one of these metrics. Bloodpoints was the old metric, and people abused it. Kills was a metric for killer and it wasn't very balanced. Emblems so far has been the best metric we've had so far, and is the current one used by the game to determine a win.
This is why I keep saying if you want to play for whatever, fine, but don't be mad at the game when things don't go your way. The game is not meant to be balanced for that so you will have games where it doesn't work in your favor. Hatch games are part of that equation. SOMETIMES you have just accept that survivors escape. Too many killers refuse to just accept that and draw out the game (re: slugging thread) to get a 4k, just like some people will do nothing and sit and wait for hatch every game. And those are both stupid goalposts to set TBH, because it just means that you will get salty when the game doesn't go in that way. Same goes for survivors too on whatever thing they be doing.
Then at most you should be trying to prove that you should be balancing around pips instead of wins. You should not be trying to change the definition from what a win is defined as in game just to force a point.
Bloodpoints was abusable because you don't balance around things that aren't the wincon and expect it to work. Because guess what, pips are abusable too (hence why you can pip without actually accomplishing anything). Escaping and Killing however are mutually exclusive. This at the very least means that survivors and killers cannot possibly coordinate to maximize their odds of winning because the killer winning is defined as the survivors losing. Pips however only have that as a tendency without any actual guarantee.
Kills as a metric being unbalanced just means the game is unbalanced. The solution is to balance your game not to change your metric, that's just lazy.
Right now the game just doesn't work if people aren't trying to escape and Killers aren't trying to sacrafice, you can take away pips without breaking the game, you can't take away escaping and sacrificing to the same effect. (I realize that is an unfair comparison. But my point is that if every played tried their best to maximize their chances of escaping/4king then that would be perfectly fine, but if everyone got together and maximized their emblem progress then that would break the game simply because maximizing pips can be done in a way that involves both sides cooperating since everyone can 2 pip in a single game and they can do it faster than it takes to escape on average)
It is not an opinion. This is so sad that it must be explained.
When do you WIN or LOSE? When the game is OVER This in itself is proof pipping does NOT depict if you win or lose.
Anyone who puts together winning/losing and pipping is clueless and they are beyond help as common sense escapes their comprehension.
This thread "FOR THOSE WHO CLAIM THAT WINNING IS DEFINED AS PIPPING" is answered simply in that pipping is not a win condition. It is a function within rank. Any other crap you can fabricate to make it sound otherwise is just that.
Take away RANK and you don't PIP what now genius? I guess no one can win or lose by YOUR opinion of winning.
Give yourself a good pat on the back for not having a clue what's fact and opinion.
"FOR THOSE WHO CLAIM THAT WINNING IS DEFINED AS PIPPING"
Shame people cannot stay on topic, they get lost in wonderland with other aspects of the game which have nothing at all to do with the topic.
Pipping is a rank mechanic. Take that away and you don't have pipping. Which means anyone linking pipping to winning or losing could never figure out if they win or lose.
It's amazing how so many write a wall of text to such a simple thread topic. It's not complicated.
You win/lose when a game is OVER.
It is literally that simple. Anyone's feelings or opinions to the contrary adds up to a wall of text which is not factual in any sense nor does it stay on topic.
"FOR THOSE WHO CLAIM THAT WINNING IS DEFINED AS PIPPING"
Shame people cannot stay on topic, they get lost in wonderland with other aspects of the game which have nothing at all to do with the topic.
Pipping is a rank mechanic. Take that away and you don't have pipping. Which means anyone linking pipping to winning or losing could never figure out if they win or lose.
It's amazing how so many write a wall of text to such a simple thread topic. It's not complicated.
You win/lose when a game is OVER.
It is literally that simple. Anyone's feelings or opinions to the contrary adds up to a wall of text which is not factual in any sense nor does it stay on topic.
You believe a win for you is a 4K
other’s believe it’s pips.
Why do you care? You play to your winning conditions and they can play to theirs.
Its not really a good idea to site the in game pages that state nothing at all about 4ks being the grounds of a win, it simply lists all the realivant ways you can earn BPs and achieve the emblems which link to the pips.
Its not not hard to understand why people see this as the games mechanics of awarding players.
At at the end game survivors are clearly listed in order of points gained, not in revere order of survival.
If people want to go into the game and say I got the most BPs I won, then let them, if they take a personal win from pips, let them, and you can have your win conditions. It’s so pointless trying to make this an argument.
The way you conduct yourself in most threads I see you post in very self centered and anything contradictory to your feelings or opinions are quickly dismissed based on thin air because you can't back anything you say with fact or common sense.
You complicate everything to the point you need to convince yourself you are still correct. I keep things simple and to the point.
Not even a year since you have been a member on these forums and already 6,000+ You live on the forums instead of playing the game you claim to know so much about. I bring fact to my posts, not feelings or opinions unless stated otherwise.
People can't handle the truth (apparently not), so bring on the trolls.
You are correct. I misread what was posted. I apologize.
Perhaps the thread is unnecessary. People are entitled to their opinion, but I don't fault the OP for seeking out an answer based on fact instead of opinion.
Many post to the forums hoping to find like minded individuals who can help make sense of the game/balance what have you, but end up having long winded, opinionated people that bring no resolve or enlightenment only annoyance and frustration.
What's more is that people can't even stay on topic, bringing up things outside the scope of the OP only to compound the annoyance of more opinion. Which is only an attempt to fabricate fact from opinion.
That breaks down the second we then go and try to balance the game. Because balance is when both sides have the same odds of winning before taking into account skill, however if we don't have a consistent definition of what a win is in the first place then balancing the game is impossible.
Truth is backed up with facts. Opinions that generate a wall of text only at an attempt to fabricate fact is an annoyance that does not lead to any type of resolve or enlightenment. And to continue to pile on with even more opinionated unsubstantiated replies is very troll like behavior.
There has not been any word written with intent to insult. If one finds the truth insulting than the problem lies within the one insulted. They should probably seek help and I hope they do.
I obviously agree with your conclusion (of the win condition) but you really sound like a conspiracy theorist and that really doesn't help
Nah, just blowing things outta proportion as others have.
Balance isn’t just about evening the “win” ratio, and it’s also irrelevant what is classed as a win, because you get nothing for it, the only thing useful after a match is the BPs, rank and emblems mean nothing.
I don’t believe 1 of the objectives should be the focus of balance to declare winning, the real argument you have is you want the game to be balanced around the 4K.
@TrAiNwReCk
The mistake you are making is that your win condition is just like any other game that is not asymmetrical.
There is a huge problem with 4k=win, not 4k=loss condition for this game.
Any sane person would say that the balance will be achieved when each side has 50% win rate. As a killer, if you have better win rate, you also rank up and considered to be a good killer just like LoL. If you can win more than half of your matches, you are good. Then what happens if you don't win as a killer?
You get 3k for example.
If in 50 matches you get 4k and in another 50 matches you get 3k, you have 50% winrate according to your logic. Good, seems balanced but then you take a look at the survivor side, out of 400 survivors that played against you, only 50 of them won the match. Their win rate is something like 12.5%. Where is the balance for survivors?
Your logic applies to deathgarden. If the killer can stop runners and kill them, he wins but if he can't, even if some of the survivors die, he loses. For this reason, it is easier to achieve balance in that game than in DbD.
You act like your opinion is a fact but it really isn't. There is a reason why survivors have a free escape mechanic that robs killers' 4k easily.
What is the win condition then? I really don't know.
A win condition isn't variable, either you do or you don't. That is fact unless their is an ability to come out to a draw. Which this game clearly doesn't have unless a timer was implemented perhaps.
Because many don't want to accept what a win is doesn't make it less factual. If someone 'feels' like they won because they only got 2-3 kills or pipped that's fine. The point, and the OP can correct me if I am wrong, was to figure out why so many consider pipping a win when it clearly is not even related to winning or losing.
People are welcome to feel a certain way or have opinions, but when others are flaming someone for having the right mind of stating pipping is not winning, and they claim the contrary because they feel a certain way about it.
Again, it doesn't change the facts.
I might have missed it. Where did Nuclear state anything about balance? If they did I am interested in reading it. The only argument I see Nuclear trying to make is that claims of pipping decides if someone won or lost is false, unless it is an opinion which everyone is entitled too.
nonononononononono
Balance is when there is an EQUAL winrate. That does NOT mean that it is a 50/50 winrate.
Remember a balanced battle royal with 100 players and no teams has a winrate of 1% per players. (so solo que in fortnite)
In any game where you have more than 2 sides you will not be expecting a 50/50 winrate and since each survivor wins and loses separately from each other that means they are not a team and need to be counted separately.
In throne of lies for example the average winrate is 33%, this is recognized by the community and encouraged because people understand that the lower winrate makes the game more fair and interesting.
There is no particular reason why you can't have winrates below 50% when you have more than 2 win combinations (not counting draws which don't exist in this game anyways) If all survivors won and lost together then yes you would want a 50/50 winrate. However since that isn't the case you would expect a winrate of more like 30-40%ish instead with 20% being the lowest
Really the entirety of the social deduction genre is made up of asymetrical games with sub 50% winrates in most matches.
That or unbalanced messes cough Town of Salem cough
I already said he can have that oppinion, not sure what you are getting at replying to me, they on the other hand are telling people their oppinions are wrong, because this is fundamentally a post wanting balance on a 4K win, there is no other reason to be so defensive or concerned about this condition otherwise.
@NuclearBurrito
It seems to me that you are making a mistake but I am not stubborn and can change my mind. If you can give a good reason, I will admit it because you have a point right now.
In those games, everybody is on the equal grounds. Battle royales have 60 people in them and everybody has the same chance to win the game. I don't know about throne of lies but it seems to me that everybody has 33.3% chance to win.
In dbd, with this scenario, one side has much, much higher win rate than the other. Is there a game like this that is considered to be balanced but one side has significantly more winrate than the other?
What I AM trying to prove is that in the event that you DO 4k you have definitely always won, that if you 0k you have definitely always lost. Somewhere above 0k is a threshold to get past to win which the tutorial didn't specify.
And a survivors wincon is unequivocally to escape
Basically pick a number between 20 and 50. Set 4k rate to the number you chose. Set the average kills per game such that escape rate = 4k rate. Check to see if the numbers seem to produce interesting results. If so you're done. If not repeat with a new number.
For example a 30% Killer winrate would allow for the hatch to have a winrate of exactly 50% making it fair at all points in the game (meaning killer winrate remains the same as the winrate of living survivors as they die) that would be an average of 2.8 kills per game btw
Problem is like I said you’d have to balance on 1v1 so you’d never balance on a 4K as a win.
Lets say killing and surviving was the declared win factor, the game wouldn’t as you’ve said be a 4V1 because survivors have an individual win not a team win, so then the killer is actually playing 4 1v1 games. At least that’s how I would see it if winning was live or die
I already do see it as 4 1v1's. And as I established above and showed mathematically in a different thread a 30% winrate per person is balanced for that since if you set the hatch winrate to 50% and work backwards it ends up working out to everyone's winrate being 30%
I personally consider 2 kills a win as Killer and escaping as Survivor
Ah. It's different depending on perspective. For each survivor it is them vs the killer or a 1v1. However for the killer he is VSing all 4 survivors as a whole so for him it is a 4v1. So any survivor win effects the killer but not other survivor's. Or in otherwords the killer cares about every survivor while the survivors only care about themselves
Deceit uses the same system
That's interesting. I never thought of it like that. I didn't know you were involving win rates in your OP. I'm out of the loop when it comes to win rates. I remember the devs mentioning win/escape % on certain maps which I thought was interesting. Anything other than that I haven't heard about.
Trying to figure out why you were saying what you were saying is all. People can have opinions, there's nothing wrong with that. Opinions then cannot be considered truth as it relates to being a fact however, so telling someone their opinion is wrong when facts prove otherwise is justified.
"there is no other reason to be so defensive or concerned about this condition otherwise"
No one posts about something unless something within the post is concerning to them. And one can become defensive about something if they are trolled with repetitive responses of opinionated fabrications that are indeed not true at all when someone is wanting to have a legit conversation about something.
@Delfador
You don't have to respond, but was curious if anything in my reply makes any difference? We can agree to disagree. Hoping for further feedback.
_Again, my only stance is on the OP "FOR THOSE WHO CLAIM THAT WINNING IS DEFINED AS PIPPING". Anything involving win rate% or beyond relating to the simple correlation between winning and pipping isn't what I am addressing. _
Technically the exact winrates aren't part of the OP. However they are very important and a big part of why this matters in the first place.
Also I'm just into the math behind this, it's very interesting.
If someone managed to escape and depip, I would personally count that as a loss, yes. But that's just my opinion.
Some Killers play rather harshly SO, gaining a pip when someone has been sweating on you would seem like an achievement to me.
What about a killer 4king but still depiping? Did they lose?
And in both cases why does the tutorial say otherwise? (both cases assuming that you consider the killer example a loss)
Right on, I will follow the conversation, but can't add anything too it (might be a good thing rofl). Maybe I'll learn a little something. The numbers are a bit beyond me.
Thanks for including me in the post!
No arguing pipping is definitely a feature that can feel rewarding after a tough game either side.
"Can't Believe I pipped" or "At Least I pipped" for me, are common after such games.
Oh I definitely agree with you on that pipping is not a win.
For me, as a killer, these are the wins. From best to worst.
4k, preventing survivors powering the exit gates.
3k, 1 escape with hatch, preventing survivors powering the exit gates.
4k, when survivors power the exit gate but they were too alturistic, and got themselves killed.
As a killer, these are the only conditions I consider myself as winner.
That's where we branch. You think that I lost when somebody escapes via hatch but I don't think in that way. Hatch is a pity escape for the sake of the game balance, giving survivors a not so free but close to a free escape.
You can also see that I value 3k more than 4k that happened after exit gates got powered. The most difficult job in this game is to prevent gen rush as a killer. 3k before letting them power exit gates are far more difficult and valuable than getting 4k because of the mistakes survivor did at the end of the match.
Pipping is not really a win imo though. It doesn't mean anything.
And the winrate thing?
You were saying something about how you MUST have 50% winrates and bla bla bla you know what you said