Coffeecrashing
Coffeecrashing
About
- Username
- Coffeecrashing
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3658702#Comment_3658702
I think BHVR's intent is exactly what they said: to make the game feel like a horror game, while still keeping it relatively even. Sounds good in theory.
The problem is that in practice, I suspect it's not at all what happens in game. Possibly they accidentally broke MMR, as it still tries to achieve an illusory 50% killrate that is no longer possible due to game balance; I don't know exactly what's wrong, but having a 60% killrate while MMR still aims at 50% basically guarantees that something is wrong. It's like pushing both the pedal and brake at the same time and expecting the car to go at 50% speed. Maybe what happens, is that MMR works for some people and not for others, that would explain why some people claim to win all their games easily while others have to sweat to reach even 50%.
Additionally, killrate itself is a very questionable metric. It turns out that EVERY TIME that BHVR has shared stats about killrates in the past years, there was always at least one very ridiculous, counter-intuitive number. Just in this patch, we discovered that Sadako and Freddy have some of the best killrates, SWFs have almost the same escape rate as solos, and that lowering your MMR improves your chances of winning. Of course there are always ten logical explanations for why the chart is like it is, but there are also ten logical explanation for why it shouldn't be like that. In the end, if everybody has to interpret the chart their own way, you might as well ditch the chart.
Imagine going to the doctor to for an arm injury, and the only thing they do is monitor your temperature, then they tell you that your temperature is normal so you must be healthy: you probably would switch to a different doctor. Imagine that they attempt to fix your arm by giving you drugs that can only increase or decrease your temperature. This is what happens in DBD. People keep arguing whether the killrate should be 50% or 60% without realizing the massive elephant in the room, that almost nobody gets this killrate in practice. I don't play DBD nowadays, but I still watch streamers, and their match outcomes are always MUCH higher or MUCH lower than 60%, never close to 60%. Frequently what happens is that one day they win all their games, then the next day they go on losing streaks of 10+. Me, when I played killer back then, I would win almost every game, while I struggled to reach 30% on surv. Contrast this with almost every other game on the market, in Overwatch for example I played 1002 games and won 501, that's exactly 50% winrate, and the best players in the world have around ~62% winrate.
When did BHVR ever say that DBD's MMR tries to achieve a 50% killrate?
If BHVR has a goal of 60% kill rate, they can just adjust the MMR formulas to aim for a 60% kill rate.
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3658638#Comment_3658638
Winrate is practically the same as killrate, over a large amount of matches.
This winrate vs. killrate nonsense is just a forum thing to artificially make the statistic look lower, by counting 2K as a draw for the survivors but still a loss for the killer, then they say the killer winrate is lower than 60%. But this is flawed, a 2K should just be considered a draw for both sides.
Just out of curiosity, why do you think BHVR wants the kill rate to be 60%?
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3658571#Comment_3658571
I'm glad someone is here to provide a theoretical, hypothetical and completely unprovable explanation for the statistics: the thread was really lacking those. Furthermore, explaining statistics after they have been published is a notoriously hard thing to do as we all know. I'm sorry that you don't like my use of the word "contradictory", next time I'll rather say "contradictory for anyone but Seraphor", seeing that you would have definitely predicted this sort of outcome beforehand.
Regarding me "conveniently cutting the picture", what are you trying to imply, exactly? Do you think I'm an angry survivor main cutting the picture to hide the truth that the game is secretly survivor-sided at high MMR? Because here's the full picture:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/SHGT46K1BACK/image.png
So the top 4-man SWFs have only 48% escape rate, we're talking about the highest MMR and only at 4-man, but I thought the game was survivor-sided at high MMR as I have read many times on this forum, that sounds 'contradictory' again. Can you please provide us another theoretical explanation?
The actual solution would be for BHVR to release the WIN RATE stats for killers, so we can actually see how close the win rates are between survivors and killers.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3656321#Comment_3656321
You're prolly asking a lot from the janky coding of this game, especially using the older consoles and the Switch in particular. 🤪
Frame rate issues along with latency gobbles up many a hit!.
My current conspiracy theory is BHVR purposely keeps this broken mechanic in the game, to give survivors “exciting moments” where they honestly think they’ve outplayed the killer, when in reality the game stole the hit from the killer.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
I think you're referring to Aim Dressing, which in theory is there to clean up the visual on killer hits that look like misses and/or of impossible range but connect, again visually not the actual hit boxes.
In practice the combination of latency, lag, game performance, and the varying character model sizes all make this feature look and feel iffy. And when it gets confused, usually leads to killers missing when they're sure they should connect. That happens far too often in tight spots, and I've smacked so many trees & rocks & walls & blessed thin air because of it.
They claim it doesn't cost anyone actual registered hits, and that there's no Aim Assist in the game. You should be the judge on all that imo.
BHVR specifically said something like they “don’t claim it can’t ever steal hits”, which is a purposely vaguely worded statement, that I’m sure has confused many people.
Killers are forbidden to lunge if they are too close to a survivor. It doesn't matter if a killer is holding a direction and the M1 button at the same time, because the game will force a short M1 tap attack if the killer tries to attack while right next to a survivor.
The game validates lunges more than once. The first set of validations, is to check if the killer is allowed to lunge, or if a killer lunge needs to immediately turn into a forced short M1 attack.
There is a COMPELTELY SEPARATE hit validation for whether or not the M1 attack hits the survivor, and that is what causes the stolen hits. The game can forbid the killer from lunging, or forcibly end a lunge early, but then tell the killer the attack missed because the survivor was too far away to hit.
The game should only validate M1 attacks once. This means that if the game forbids a killer to lunge, or forcibly ends their lunge early, then the game should automatically give the killer the hit. There shouldn't be this multiple validation garbage, especially if the proximity validations are done on the killer side (instead of the server side), which means that latency would make it extra worse.
-
- "The Knight's Guards now correctly detect Survivor loud noises."
NEW IN PTB!!!
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3654359#Comment_3654359
I am sorry for expecting nerfs to S tier killer to get him a bit down. My bad. I trusted them too much i guess.
They just replaced his old busted add-ons with new versions. Now probably next update also will buff his base-kit.
The previous addons were way more powerful than the current addons.
For real, I don’t know how anyone can look at Blight’s iri one-shot addon, and think his reworked addon is anywhere near as good. And the same goes for his other addons. There are zero reworked addon that I like better than the previous addons.
And again, Blight isn’t S tier for the vast majority of public games. There has never been any official stats that have ever implied that was true. All the official stats have shown he’s performed within reason on average and at high MMR. And because we have an MMR soft cap, there’s zero reason to care about any small group of people that is above the soft cap.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3653528#Comment_3653528
I agree with your points but this is not excuse for terrible survivor perks.
And they are also ignoring killer-sided maps as well. Borgo is full with dead zones and they are doing nothing. Saloon and Midwich always got high kill-rates and super killer-side and they did nothing as well.
But then you are seeing they are giving buffs to Huntress and Blight, which never ever needed. Do we really needed to buff Huntress? Or give another op add-on to Blight?
Too many updates and we are barely getting anything for survivors. It feels like they just have nothing for survivors.
Blight overall got nerfed by the addon pass. Yes, they partially un-nerfed some of the nerfs, but overall he's been nerfed.
Also, they NEVER said the addon pass was going to be 100% nerfs. They even told us directly not to expect 100% nerfs. I don't know why you keep insisting that every change to Blight should 100% absolutely be a 100% nerf to the character. That's not how game balancing works.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
they said that Myer's is on list for changes however no plan rework has been finalized.
How on earth did BHVR manage to nerf Pig's trap lethality in 4 separate patches, but "needs more time" to figure out how to nerf Myers grab kills?
-
PTB mangled barely affects solo q, but greatly benefits SWFs with voice comms.
In solo q, there is a lot of pressure to heal soon after being unhooked. Maybe the person doing the unhook insists on following you around to heal you. Or maybe the person being unhooked feels pressure to get healed ASAP, because they aren't sure if they'll be able to easily find a teammate after the mangled timer runs out.
...Meanwhile, SWFs with voice comms can easily coordinate altruistic healing, after the mangled timer runs out.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3653494#Comment_3653494
This couldn't be any closer to the source material.
Jigsaw's traps were always fair and always had a chance to survive if you played by the rules. Unless you play like Amanda and screw yourself over.
Go out of your way to secure a kill with a trap and you screw yourself out of your own power.
If we really want to be picky, the source material shows that Amanda created unwinnable traps.
And even though it's fair to have unwinnable traps be DBD adapted to "threat of lethality", I think it's totally out of line to go from "un-winnable traps" to "un-loseable traps".
Also, Jigsaw's traps had a terrible escape rate, which is important to mention. And everyone's traps had people scared that they might die. But PTB Pig's traps don't really carry any threat or urgency, and they won't be scary, because they are so undertuned.
-
@Seraphor said:
Evidently most people don't understand how to play Pig.
Traps are not supposed to be a way to reliably kill survivors. Ideally they should only result in a kill when the survivor ######### up, not when the Pig stalks and harrasses the trapped survivor.
Traps are supposed to be slowdown. 12 box searches guaranteed, 12 seconds each, plus travel time. 144+ (typically double) seconds of guaranteed slowdown. One or more survivors at any given time that aren't doing gens. It's one of the best slowdown mechanics in the game. That's the value of RBTs, and that hasn't been changed one bit.
Increasing the time survivors have to remove their trap doesn't change how long it takes to remove the trap. Hiding auras of boxes doesn't change how long it takes to remove the trap.
If you're tunneling a trapped survivor you're shooting yourself in the foot.
It's genuinely hilarious how every time they buff the Pig (the last change to traps was a buff too, it made the slowdown more reliable), the playbase convince themselves it's a nerf.
Pig is based off of the Saw movies, which are filled with deadly traps, and filled with people being scared of possibly dying to these traps. This new level of non-lethal traps feels like it’s just too far away from the source material.
When Pig was first added to this game, the traps were absolutely supposed to carry the threat of lethality. It’s just that over time, BHVR has shifted the traps farther and farther from lethality. But it’s not how she was originally designed, and it’s absolutely not thematic at all with her movie character.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652727#Comment_3652727
why would it be? we have no idea what's the distribution on dbd's elo system.
until we get a graph or something showing it, I don't really see a reason to assume it's gonna be similar to chess
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652748#Comment_3652748
so, yes? nothing you said gives a number, just an expectation. but no way of knowing at what number we should expect it.
I never said DBD worked the same as chess. I was answering a question, on why we thought a certain percentage of people were in a specific elo bracket in chess.
DBD likely is similar, in the sense that the DBD MMR distribution is based on a formula, instead of having predetermined percentages of players that must be in each MMR bracket.
But we also know DBD’s MMR distribution is way less stable than chess’ elo distribution, because BHVR admitted to moving the soft cap semi recently. This implies that the soft cap itself is based on a predetermined percentage of players.
The actual important questions are “what percentage of players are at the soft cap”?, and “what percentage of players are considered high MMR”?
-
As a former Pig main, that still plays Pig sometimes, I will never play Pig again if the box auras get removed.
Pig already has a really low skill ceiling, and patrolling boxes gave her a side quest to micromanage. Removing box auras will just make this character painfully boring to play.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652700#Comment_3652700
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652701#Comment_3652701
so
"If their system is anything close to elo (in terms of statistics), based on where the soft cap is now, its likely <1% of players."
has absolutely no base beyond at most an educated guess?
http://www.uschess.org/archive/ratings/ratedist.php
The USCF released the data a long time ago (it’s in the above link).
I think it’s assumed the current distribution is still roughly the same.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652039#Comment_3652039
I'm asking how anyone calculates how many people or % of people are at any elo range.
For chess, they just take the full list of official members (they all have an elo score), and they just count how many people are in each elo range.
-
@TieBreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652097#Comment_3652097
Is having a 48% survival rate broken? To me, broken is something that is either unbeatable or almost impossible to beat. Infinite loops are broken. Boil Over on certain maps is broken. High MMR SWF having a 48% chance of surviving is about as balanced as you can get. BHVR wanting killers to win 60% of the time doesn't mean the game is balanced between killers and survivors, it just means that the outcome is what they want it to be.
I never said 48% is broken. I'm just saying BHVR's goal is 60/40, and 48% is far away from 40%
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652097#Comment_3652097
What does that have to do with what I said?
"Orrrrrrr we could fix the fundamental problems with solo queue so that there isn't a discrepancy between their power level and then balance the game around that."
The official stats show there isn't a fundamental problem between the power level of most solo q and most SWF. It's just a very small percentage of the 4-SWF players that have an imbalance. And the imbalance requires players to be in high MMR, and most survivors aren't high MMR, and most survivors could never be high MMR.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
Orrrrrrr we could fix the fundamental problems with solo queue so that there isn't a discrepancy between their power level and then balance the game around that.
I mean I get it. Playing against a 4 man who call out every trap you place as Trapper or Hag, or are constantly giving away your position as a stealth killer, etc. is frustrating. But punishing players for queuing with their friends is not the way to go about solving this problem.
...Or we could look at the official stats, and notice that solo q is extremely close to 2-SWF and 3-SWF... and it's really just 4-SWF at high MMR that is broken.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Kill Rates were released by BHVR for the month of December to January and I can firmly say that all of my stances on the game remained unchanged from it.
When the developers state the “Data does not paint the full picture” meanwhile I’ve seen people go and make extremely long threads about how the game is “X-sided” and “there are clear bias with BHVR” when in reality I think it’s furtherest from it.
Data can be helpful but it also ignores the bigger picture, like the developers said.
Skull Merchant has the highest Kill Rate in the game, but when you look at Skull Merchant’s design she isn’t as threatening compared to other Killers; Nurse and Blight are still insanely strong, even after being nerf, and realistically they should have the highest but they don’t.
So why is this?
The data is polluted. To put it bluntly, Skull Merchant has a Killer with generally unfun gameplay for both sides, which often results in Survivors offing themselves on hook as early as they can. Sometimes people DC, but offing yourself on hook does not inherently remove that match from the statistics.
I feel like something as simple as this shows that the data is far more nuanced than people give it credit for, which is why I stopped relying on Kill Rates and started just coming to my own conclusions based on experience and foresight.
The data isn't polluted. This game has completely useless tier lists, based off of 0.001% of the playerbase. The tier lists are only good for theory-crafting, and have zero relevance or usefulness in public games.
Even if Skull Merchant was deleted from the official stats, there are still a whole bunch of killers ahead of Nurse in kill rates. The actual problem with Skull Merchant is the same problem Sadako had before her recent rework, where survivors just aren't doing the counterplay. Many people claim Skull Merchant "gets random hits across the map", when in reality she's a trap killer, and the survivors are supposed to be at least attempting to avoid traps when they aren't in a chase. But survivors are still just running around everywhere, getting slapped by traps.
If anything, I'm surprised BHVR hasn't totally gotten rid of stealth mode drones, because there are too many people that just refuse to even try to avoid them.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651548#Comment_3651548
Huh? That's not at all what she said. She said the bulk of the playerbase is low to mid MMR, and a small percentage of players are above the soft cap i.e. high MMR.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651586#Comment_3651586
What does Nurse have to do with this? Is everyone ok? What is happening on the these forums?
It’s an example of people caring about a very small percentage of the playerbase.
You asked why we should care about a small percentage of the playerbase, so I reminded everyone that people do this often when complaining about killers that aren’t overperforming for any meaningful percentage of the players
-
@Zakon05 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651380#Comment_3651380
It's not about shaming killers, it's the total opposite of that, I'm asking the game to tell them they did a good job after 3 kills and the 4th one is bonus points. That's all I'm suggesting.
If a killer decides those bonus points are important to them and they're unsatisfied with anything less, that's fine, that's their decision and preference. But people shouldn't be under the impression they lost the game just because one survivor escapes.
I realize now that a better title for this thread should have been "The game should communicate that a 3k = NOT a loss" - I kinda got the random whim to make this suggestion after encountering someone trying to tell me that the game is survivor-sided because one survivor getting the hatch is a killer loss.
Than the game should also tell survivors they did a good job when they get a 1k. That's all I'm suggesting.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651455#Comment_3651455
And it is, except for maybe 5% of the playerbase, of that 5%, less than 20% of their total matches. It's such a minority of trials
Except that people constantly demand nerfs for Nurse, for much less than 5% of the playerbase, because the last official stats showed she wasn't overperforming on average, and wasn't overperforming at the top 5%... which means that it is truly the smallest of the small percentage of the Nurses that are "overperforming".
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I believe Mandy commented in another thread that "high MMR" in this instance means players above the matchmaking softcap.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651396#Comment_3651396
Why would they invest resources into nerfs to a 9% escape difference that still equates to a loss for one side at the end of the day?
Because BHVR directly told us the goal is a 40% escape rate.
-
If high MMR means the skill cap, and therefore the survivors are already maxed out on matchmaking, then the map generation needs to have special rules for these 4-SWF survivors, to make the maps more killer sided, to balance out the extra game advantages these survivors are getting from voice communications.
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650840#Comment_3650840
There is meaningful risk in getting a 0k, there is not meaningful risk in turning a guaranteed 3k into a 4k. (See CoconutRTS' Bloodwarden compilation) Survivors can lose more than they would stand to gain. Killers can only stand to gain by wasting everyone else's time.
Most 'slug for 4ks' involve 2 already dead, and the third being forced to wait 4 minutes because the Killer has an achievement or an ego trip they 'need' the 4k for. Survivors going for the 0k allows all 5 participants of the game to still play, and both sides can gain or lose more from where they started. Killers going for the 4k most often only has 2 participants of the game still playing, and 1-3 players are 'held hostage' until the match ends. (The 2 dead Survivors may be forced to wait for the match to end to see the Killer perks and add-ons, or wait for their friends to die/escape. The first could be solved by revealing perks/add-ons when you queue up as a solo once you die, or when all members of your SWF are dead in duo/trio queue.)
If you are saying Survivors should be able to contribute to matches while dead. Survivors can be revived through some secret ritual once the gens are completed so that way the game always has 5 players active. Killers could actually stand to lose more than they stand to gain, then all of that sounds interesting and I would agree with you and Killer should be able to go for the 4k and Survivors go for the 0k since both sides can always risk everything for a better or worse result.
Wow, there are so many double standards in this game. If we should remind killers that a 3k is a killer win, then we should also remind survivors that a 1k is a win for survivors.
It’s called treating both sides equally, instead of (once again) shaming killers for a certain behavior, and then saying it’s fine for survivors do their equivalent behavior.
-
@TieBreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650980#Comment_3650980
Invalidating matches with a DC likely brings kill rates down, as a killer can be wiping the floor with survivors, someone DC's part way through and that data gets discarded. We all know that most DC's don't happen at the start of a match. It's usually after someone gets tunneled and leaves before they get hooked a second or third time.
This is so true. Survivors are much more likely to DC in a game where they aren't winning, so throwing out the DC games can bring kill rates down.
And this is especially true, now that we have survivor bots, because if a survivor wants to ragequit, they'll either DC or purposely get hooked and will let go on hook.... and letting go on hook doesn't replace the survivor with a bot.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650963#Comment_3650963
Games with a dc are not counted in the stats
Does BHVR have stats that show if the DC rate went up or down, after survivor bots were released?
-
Clearly, this means we don’t need anymore solo q buffs, because BHVR already did a good job at bridging the gap between solo q and SWF.
Clearly, this means that is someone says “solo q is miserable”, that we can remind them solo q and SWFs have extremely similar escape rates, so solo q really isn’t bad at all.
-
@Zakon05 said:
A lot of people hold the opinion that the killer only wins on a 4k, despite the fact the killer's MMR goes up if they kill at least 3 survivors.
I've always been of the opinion that if you absolutely must regard this game in binary terms of wins and losses, regarding a 3k as a win is a healthier mindset than only thinking 4ks are a win. It's less stressful for the killer and less annoying for the survivors, who have to put up with killers slugging for the 4k and otherwise trying to circumvent the hatch mechanic.
I just think it's an unhealthy mindset that makes the game less pleasant for both sides.
With that in mind, I would suggest the following:
Remove the Cypress Memento Mori offering, make it basekit.
When the 3rd survivor has died on hook, give a message to the killer, something like "The Entity is sated. The last one is yours." to more correctly communicate that the 4th kill is bonus points for the killer, and reward them with getting to use their mori *if they choose.*
Allowing the killer the choice is important. Don't force them to initiate the mori. Let them end the match how they want, which could include just hooking or allowing the survivor to escape.
Edit: I originally suggested also adding a state between Brutal and Merciless but I actually forgot Ruthless existed. I haven't paid attention to those endgame messages in a while, I just thought it wouild help.
A killer trying to get a 4k is fine, because everyone seems ok with survivors trying to get a 0k.
If all the generators have been repaired, 3 survivors could easily escape out of a gate, and a killer hooks a 4th survivor, then the 3 survivors could easily just leave and take the 1k. But they often try to save the 4th person, even though a 1k is a loss for the killer.
-
@Nebula said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650643#Comment_3650643
This is an extremely contrived argument.
...official stats should basically be ignored because they are useless. I will however continue to use them to point out the obvious logical fallacy they create for people who believe that the game should be balanced around average players when i point out how ridiculously OP survivors are at the highest level such that tournaments..."
Yes, survivors at the literal highest level of the game (literally like .1% of the games population) are better than killers at the highest level. What even is this argument? How many people that play this game actually care about competitive DbD? Hint, the answers very, very little. This games not designed to be played like how competitive players do and it rightfully shouldn't be, competitive games are an absolute bore to watch and look even worse to play.
"To which i now get to point to these official stats and ask where my nurse buffs are, because official stats around the "Average level" players show that nurse is one of the worst killers in the game."
Okay, lets do exactly that. What would their process be for buffing nurse's kill rate? Butchering her skill ceiling so the average player can pick her up and win with her. Is that what you'd want? Because that's how you bring killers with high skill ceilings up in kill rates.
The actual answer is A LOT of people care about competitive DBD, which is why 99% of the killer tier lists are based off of 6,000+ hour competitive players.
-
@Mandy said:
I don't have the exact percentage to hand but it's a small percentage at the high MMR level - it's above the soft cap.
The bigger areas are at low MMR and at mid MMR - high MMR is really a very small percentage of players
Can we know what percentage of the players are at the soft cap?
Due to the fact that everyone at (or above) the soft cap is treated exactly the same for matchmaking, it’s the highest MMR bracket for public games.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649993#Comment_3649993
i think it is fair to say that her kill-rate is likely one of main reasons for her negative changes.
Yeah. Back in the PTB I had mentioned to everyone that I thought the whole point of the rework was to make it easier for lower MMR survivors to do the condemned counterplay, because I thought it was too difficult for them. And that the primary goal of the rework had absolutely nothing to do with Sadako mains.
And surprise, today we learned her kill rate was out of control, when we look at the full range of survivors......
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650099#Comment_3650099
Last time we got stats for high MMR nurse, she wasn’t even in the top 5 killrate. And that was before she was nerfed (again)
And I think High MMR is basically around the soft cap, which is the highest point people actually see in public games. High MMR is so very practical for tier lists, because it's what people are actually encountering in public games.
-
Can someone explain to me why the survivor stats include high MMR, but the killer stats don't include high MMR?
-
@DefJukies said:
THIS UPDATE IS FANTASTIC. I LOVE IT. The new curve window is SO NICE.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649428#Comment_3649428
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649551#Comment_3649551
But you guys are late to the party and barely figured it out. His cooldown walk speed was shadownerfed last hotfix last week. They just published the changes in this week's patch. And this week they brought back the ability to move after bumping into a wall. I'd say it's a great lateral move that evens the playing field between bumping and cooldown, making it so we're not so afraid to full send saws anymore.
Addons wise, cool down finally got a nerf to where it's not "insufferable" to most people and it doesn't stack anymore with the rest of his code. It's only dissipation that needs to be reworked. Which I'll keep saying:
BHVR can double the values of the idler screw, kickback chains, ragged engine, clogged intake, and off brand motor oil, and they'd be okay. Rework the lesser tiers of those add-ons and we're in business.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649756#Comment_3649756
The issue was that people were having difficulty making meaningful curves happen with such a small margin for error in overdrive or doom + overdrive. By adding an extra .25 seconds to the curve window, there is now a much more comfy curve frame for all speeds to hit. It's SO good. You just have to practice.
And if you're refusing to practice at this point, you're a being pretty petty about it. We got a massive buff to him with this latest patch, because his extra curve window allows for so much room to correct in overdrive. We now have a more level playing field with his kit to survivors having a louder saw (thankfully) and also an audio prompt as to when his cooldown is up.
All of these updates have made Billy far more viable across different maps, and BHVR is doing an excellent job tuning him down fairly while rewarding us who can adjust on the fly. Sorry that you can't adjust to new things.
I’m hoping someone makes a video montage, of hits they got because of the longer curve window, that wouldn’t have been possible with the previous curve window. Because I’m not super convinced the longer curve window will actually result in a lot more successful M2 hits.
Controlling Billy during the curve window is still massively clunky, and a relic of how badly some of the killer powers were coded long ago. Having a longer curve window might actually bring down Billy’s kill rate overall, as there are probably a lot of people that aren’t very good at controlling Billy during the curve window, and now the curve window is longer.
-
Billy really can't be expected to be able to M2 survivors outside of the curve range. So if he isn't allowed to zone survivors with his M2, then we're back to Billy only using his chainsaw at close range, unless Billy is trying to travel long distances.
I get why the changes were made, but Billy is boring now, because I would be spending most of the time just walking around in chases, unless I need to travel long distances. At this point, I'd rather just play Wraith instead, since Wraith can travel across indoor maps way easier than Billy can.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649268#Comment_3649268
Okay I'm gonna tackle these in the order you posted them, not by the associated number, just so you don't get confused by my answers here.
1: We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one, from my perspective it's pretty clear you can win while playing inefficiently. It doesn't become efficient just because you got the desired result, that's not what efficiency means. You don't actually have to care about playing efficiently, it's totally okay to just care about the end screen and not how efficiently you got there.
2: Nope, no double standard. I am expecting nothing of either side, as I've said. I'm honestly not sure where you're getting this from at this point, I've already point blank told you that's not what I expect. I acknowledge that skill expression exists, but can be circumvented, and that's... somehow a double standard where I expect killers to "make poor game decisions in the name of skill expression" (??? it's better game decisions if it's skill expression, my friend, this is a very strange thing to say), even though I say I straight up advocate taking shortcuts instead of doing the most difficult thing all the time?
This is the exact opposite of what I'm saying, at this point I genuinely don't know how to read this in good faith.
3: Alright, so now we're back to: When there is a clear problem, why is a bad thing to have a term that describes it? Forget how others use it, people misuse words all the time. IF the term "genrushing" describes ONLY the most extreme example, as I've said is my definition multiple times, is that not a term with both meaning and a reason to exist? Similarly, IF the definition of "tunnelling" describes ONLY the extreme example I laid out in my previous post, what's the issue with using it?
" it's better game decisions if it's skill expression"
Just no, Really.... no. The point of the game is to win. The point of the game isn't to "show skill expression", especially when only one side of the game is ever expected to do this.
Seriously, where is the list of "skill expressions" that survivors are supposed to show?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649161#Comment_3649161
1: What rules? That's not a rhetorical question. What rules are you referring to? I've mentioned what I think would be relevant to a standard, down-the-middle game of DBD for killer, sure, but those aren't rules. It's just the established norm that you can deviate from with specific tactics.
Oh, I should probably clarify this here, there's not really a better place for it: I don't expect players to change anything about their behaviour when it comes to problematic elements of the game. I expect the devs to make changes accordingly - like, for instance, ultra-fast self healing for the survivor side. I didn't expect survivor players not to use those busted tools, I expected the devs to change them, which is what ended up happening. Same for things on the killer side; I wouldn't have expected any Bubba player not to facecamp in the basement, I expected the devs to do something about it.
2: If efficiency is measured by anything, it is how much progress you're making towards your objective, right? The most progress you can achieve with minimal risk and minimal waste, that's efficiency in this game. Since tunnelling involves flat out ignoring three quarters of your objective, it is by its nature inefficient... until one survivor is dead, because then when you go chase + hook someone else, you can drag a larger percentage of the team off generators - 100% instead of 75%. You trade short term inefficiency for long term efficiency, that's tunnelling. That's why people do it, I'm not coming up with some off-the-wall alternate explanation here.
3: There is no force here. You'll note that I've not even implied I think tunnelling should be made impossible, I've only said I think it should have risk. When I talk about taking a shortcut on skill expression, that in itself is a value neutral statement. You don't have to do things the most skilful and difficult way every time, I advocate taking shortcuts in other areas; for example, information perks instead of tracking everyone through pure game sense and basekit tracking.
So, tunnelling obviously bypasses some skill expression. Obviously. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, it's just what it is. I also think it's strong enough that it deserves balancing, but that's a separate statement.
4: Is this your position, then? Because it's a different one to what you were saying a moment ago. But sure, here goes: Tunnelling is when a survivor is chased immediately after they are unhooked, typically but not exclusively repeated to make sure they die ASAP. That's tunnelling. Genrushing is when survivors bring stacked toolboxes and accompanying perk builds (or whatever the strongest tools would be, if those current options ever get nerfed) to get the gens done ASAP. That's genrushing.
Gen tunnelling would be a different thing if it existed (which is the entire point of this thread), as would "killrushing" (I guess would be the term) if it existed, but this definition of tunnelling and genrushing encompasses only the most extreme examples on both sides. You might notice this is also the definition for both I've been using this whole time, lol.
2) No. Efficiency is measured by how much it helps win games. The end game screen is the only thing that matters, and a win is a win. If I win a game, I don't care how I got there, as long as it's within the game rules.
1 and 3) You're still having a double standard, where killers are expected to make poor game decisions, in the name of skill expression, but survivors have absolute zero expectations for making any poor game decisions, in the name of skill expression.
4) No. My position has always been that tunneling and gen rushing are both meaningless terms. And the whole reason the terms "gen rushing" and "gen tunneling" were created, was to show how meaningless the definition of killer tunneling is.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649078#Comment_3649078
1: Correct. Are you going to argue that I was wrong to do this? When we're talking about base gameplay problems - and to pick one that has since been mostly fixed, let's say we're talking about facecamping with Bubba in the basement - we would be very well served by having some way of conceptualising a "normal" match of DBD played mostly as intended so we can contrast it against the problem. In other words, we know what we want the player not to do - Basement Bubba - so what is that we do want the player to do? What is a "standard" match of DBD that doesn't contain this problematic behaviour?
Do you contest that concept, or my suggestion for what that normal match should look like?
2: This is wrong, you haven't actually countered anything I said. You are being inefficient by leaving two to three survivors to do generators as they please, but the payoff is that you get more efficient afterwards. The actual act of attempting tunnelling is inefficient. To counter that second part, if survivors feel no urgency to save, they are in deep trouble if you start snowballing before they feel inclined to go rescue.
3: I laid out the avenues of skill expression being circumvented, and bringing up SWF is whataboutism. Do you have anything more concrete on this point? I'm not against a discussion, there's just nothing to say here.
4: You've agreed that survivors bringing stacked toolboxes with complimentary perks to do generators as quickly as possible is a problem, so why is it not appropriate to have language to describe that problem? You're also veering into whataboutism again by talking about how other people apply the terms. I could just as easily point out those on the other side claiming "genrushing" is just when survivors do generators at all, but that wouldn't be helpful or constructive. If the problems exist - and you've agreed they do on at least one side of the game - why shouldn't there be language used to refer to them? Isn't denying those terms just making the problem arbitrarily harder to talk about?
1) No. We can't agree on a "normal" match of DBD, because the game doesn't have an intended way of playing, beyond the "don't break the rules" thing. Why are all your rules anti-killer? Where is your list of problematic survivor behavior that should be fixed? Where is your list of things that survivors should do, for the sake of the killer side, that actively hurts the survivor side?
2) Tunneling is efficient because the end result is efficiency. And the act of tunneling is efficient, because the end goal is efficiency. It doesn't matter if tunneling isn't pressuring multiple survivors, because that's not the sole criteria of efficiency. Tunneling is long-term efficiency, which is the only thing that matters. The end game screen is the only thing that matters.
3) The concrete point is you're giving a double standard, where killers should be forced to follow this made up "skill expression" thing, but survivors don't ever need to worry about "skill expression". Where is you list of "skill expression" things that survivors should be following? Why are all your problems framed as 100% killer problems, that are 100% the responsibility of the killer to fix?
4) It's not constructive to have the killer definition of tunneling encompass the full range of tunneling, from casual/incidental tunneling, to hyper specific extreme tunneling... but then have the survivor definition of tunneling only be the very hyper specific extreme tunneling. Pick one: 1) survivor AND killer tunneling only involves hyper specific extreme scenarios, or 2) survivor AND killer tunneling encompasses a wide variety of tunneling scenarios.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648906#Comment_3648906
1: When I say "default skill expression", I'm mostly talking about the most by-the-books, straightforward game of Dead By Daylight possible. Nothing fancy, no particular tricks or shortcuts, just good straightforward killer play and good straightforward survivor play. Considering how overwhelmingly important macro gameplay is to killer, I think it's fair to say the default expectation is to occupy multiple survivors at once.
2: Correct! I don't disagree with that. However, the act of tunnelling is extremely inefficient. The end result working so much in your favour makes it an optimal strategy because there's very little to punish you for being so inefficient with your pressure while you're trying to get that survivor out. If anti-tunnel were stronger, for example, it would no longer be optimal because the inefficiency of it would be punishable.
3: Considering the point of tunnelling is to circumvent multiple avenues of skill expression (not needing to manage a fourth survivor once it's done, not needing to find a survivor to chase, starting the chase with the survivor already injured, starting the chase with the survivor out of position, and so on), how could it possibly be balanced if it wasn't risky? Obviously it's my opinion, but I think it has very solid backing.
4: I disagree with this, because if that's how we define genrushing, it's kind of a pointless term. If a survivor literally just playing the game with no active decisionmaking beyond starting to repair a generator is considered genrushing, how is that meaningfully the same as when the team brings the best possible tools to repair all of the gens as quickly as possible? Shouldn't we have a term that distinguishes between barebones survivor gameplay and an actual tactic being consciously used?
5: Wouldn't you also say that the most egregious form of tunnelling is also an issue, then? When someone is chased immediately after unhook with no breathing room at all, twice in a row to ensure they're sacrificed ASAP, is that not equivalent to when the most extreme version of genrushing is employed? And if so, see again, why shouldn't the terms just refer to the problem and not, as you're suggesting, the whole game and also the problem? If not, why not?
1) Your definition of "default skill expression" is still something you made up. There is zero default expectations from killers, except for "don't break any rules".
2) The act of tunneling is efficient because it leads to an efficient result. It actually creates more pressure to tunnel survivors, because it gives a sense of urgency earlier. If survivors know a killer is going to just rotate hooks among the survivors, there's zero urgency for a large part of the game, because the survivors know that none of them are actually in any danger for a long time.
3) No one is circumventing avenues of skill expression, because that's still not a real thing. If you really care about skill expression, you should complain about SWFs, and how voice comms circumvent avenues of skill expression.
4 and 5) Gen rushing is a pointless term, just like how tunneling is a pointless term. That's the entire point of the comparison. And no, we shouldn't have a special term for hyper specific survivor scenarios, because we don't have a special term for hyper specific killer scenarios. Many people are fine with tunneling applying, all the way, from casual (or incidental) tunneling, to hardcore hyper specific tunneling. There's zero difference in the terms used for killers. Likewise, Gen rushing should also be a pointless term that covers all the way from casual (or incidental) tunneling, to hardcore hyper specific tunneling.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648818#Comment_3648818
It isn't, it's actually the killer playing very inefficiently so they can capitalise on a boost in power after they're done. Occupying only one survivor for as long as it takes to kill them (minus occupying a second briefly for each unhook) is extremely inefficient, but because it's very hard to punish, it still works out in the killer's favour.
Regular gameplay outside of this one specific tactic involves occupying multiple survivors at once, that's the default skill expression for the killer role and it's what efficient killer play looks like. Tunnelling occupies an annoying space as a distinct tactic that should be risk/reward but has very little risk, but that part isn't relevant- what's relevant is that tunnelling is a tactic rather than default gameplay or efficient gameplay, however you'd prefer to label it.
Though, just to be clear: You would say that a coordinated survivor team that brings stacked toolboxes with all the accompanying perks (Streetwise, Built to Last, Hyperfocus, Stake Out, etcetera) to complete gens as aggressively as possible, that's also 100% regular and fine, just efficient gameplay that doesn't need changes?
1) There’s no such thing as “default skill expression”. That’s something you made up.
2) Tunneling is efficient because the end result is that it removes a survivor from the game sooner. It is therefore an efficient strategy overall.
3) There’s zero expectations that tunneling should have a risk/reward. That’s also something you made up.
4) Gen rushing encompasses any situation where a survivor is focusing on a single generator, regardless of it’s “normal gameplay”, or if it’s some extreme situation involving specific items and specific perks.
5) Survivors using a hyper specific extreme version of gen rushing is an issue. But that doesn’t mean it’s the only “real” version of gen rushing.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648798#Comment_3648798
At that point, surely neither genrushing or tunnelling are actually issues with the game?
Which means... won't we need new terms for problematic things that lay outside regular gameplay? For instance, a recently unhooked survivor being repeatedly targeted at the expense of any others until they're dead, or a survivor team bringing the strongest tools to complete the generators as quickly as possible to leave the killer with as little agency as the mechanics strictly allow?
Or are those not problems too? Genuine question.
“a recently unhooked survivor being repeatedly targeted at the expense of any others until they're dead” is part of regular gameplay. It’s just the killer playing efficiently.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648778#Comment_3648778
That is what genrushing is, though?
What else could genrushing be, that covers for doing generators as fast as possible but isn't just playing the game normally?
The definition for killer tunneling is “a killer focusing on one survivor at a time”. That’s it.
The definition of gen rushing is just “a survivor focusing on one generator at a time”. That’s it.
Yes, both definitions are basically just people playing the game normally.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648774#Comment_3648774
Not really what this post is about, but also... kinda?
I mean, the problematic survivor behaviour here is true genrushing, which is quite specific. You need at least most of the team to bring stacked toolboxes and specific perk builds. It's not really difficult after that point, but it is very specific. Whereas the problematic killer behaviour is just chasing someone immediately after unhook, it doesn't require specific perks or addons or anything.
I'm sure this was meant to be sarcastic in some way based on your post history but I also don't see how you could possibly argue it isn't true, lol.
Can we create a definition for “true tunneling” for killers, that’s hyper specific, and doesn’t apply to the vast majority of games? And then when people complain about tunneling, we can say “well, that’s not TRUE tunneling, because I’m using a hyper specific definition, with a whole mess of requirements and prerequisites”?
Would that be fair? Because that’s what you are doing with your definition of “TRUE genrushing”
-
The actual double standard is that the requirement for problematic killer behavior is so very low, and killers can easy do these things, with minimal effort, in every game…….
…But the requirement for problematic survivor behavior is super hyper specific, and can only be done under extremely specific conditions that survivors can’t possibly even attempt to do in every game.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
I really don't think her counter is that hard. All you need to do take tape from TV and be sure you are not next to active TVs. So she can't build stacks on you.
But somehow, people are still struggling against her. And i am not even talking about baby survivors. Most of them are +2k hours which means they have good knowledge of game.
When i play against her, she is not feeling like any threat to me but can't talk for my teammates. And i played her pretty often after rework and survivors really having hard time to deal with her.
Is she really that hard to counter?
It's like that for just about all the killers. It's just like how Blight has a lot of counterplay, but most survivors don't even bother to learn how his collision works, or what his limitations are on large angle turn rates, and therefore just assume he's overpowered.
For example, what percentage of survivors can look at a shack wall, and tell if it has broken collision? What percentage of survivors can look at a rock, and tell which angles have broken collision? What percentage of survivors can explain why the newer map designs were a big nerf for Blight?
The main problem with killers isn't whether or not they have counterplay. The main problem is whether or not survivors are even bothering to figure out the counterplay, because if there are enough survivors that (for whatever reason), just aren't understanding the counterplay, then the killer might be on the chopping block for nerfs. And that is what happened to Sadako.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648108#Comment_3648108
Huh i see a lot of back and forth opinions on this. Guess its in the eye of the beholder. A lot of people say they liked the older astetic. Personally i preferred not loading into coldwind and squinting to let my eyes adjust. Considering its so much brighter than any other map.
"A lot of people" aren't saying that. It's just a few people, that seems like more than it is because you're hyperfocusing on it.
And the farm maps have issues because they're basically the "new" version of monochromatic saturated garbage filters. Having bright yellow maps just makes it obnoxious to see white and yellow auras, just like how the new super saturated red maps have issues with seeing red auras and red scratchmarks. It's lazy map graphics, and it's just as bad as the multiple killer chase musics that sounds like broken washing machines.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648135#Comment_3648135
Which side is so much stronger?
S-tier killers are a class of their own. They are S-tier because they are so much stronger than the rest. I'd go as far to say, that a select few A-tier killers with specific sets of addons are pretty much on par with them. They are stronger than everything you can expect to encounter in public games, so they give you an advantage, that allows you to win even when you are playing worse.
The game is pretty balanced with the exception of a few killers (or adddons) that are too strong and some that are too weak. The scales are tipped slightly in favor of the killer as well, if we go by the last official kill rates and the kill rates we have on Nightlight (not the most reliable source but seeing as it's pretty constant slightly above 50% I think it counts).
Standard M1 killers in Dead By Daylight today feel so weak it's almost pitiful. They get bullied all the time by survivors and can barely get a few hooks per match.
Are M1 killers weak? Yes. Can you still perform well with them? Absolutely. The MMR prevents you from playing in leagues where you lose and get bullied all the time. You plateau at some point and from there on, you will win some and lose some (in somewhat equal measures). The exceptions to this rule are some maps that turn the favor so much in the survivors' favor, that you basically cannot win, if you don't play a lot better than them. Also, you don't have to choose between Blight (with Adrenaline Vial) and M1 killers. There are enough killers in between that you could choose and some of them are pretty damn powerful.
Killers should be powerful, not have survivors running circles around them like they do for so many characters.
Are you referring to looping or is that just an expression for survivors that have the power role? Looping is kind of the intended counterplay that survivors have in chase. That isn't really a problem. If you don't like that, then maybe this is simply not the game for you (or you should play a killer like Knight, Artist, Spirit, Nurse and Skull Merchant). It's an integral part of the survivor role and the only really interactive part between killer and survivor.
Outside of that, survivors typically only do that to get some kind of reaction out of you (mostly anger or annoyance). It's a sure sign, that they do not feel threatened. In which case, you don't apply enough pressure. If that is where you have issues, then I'm sure many of us would be happy to give you a few pointers on what you can do in different situations. You just need to ask. Even better, if you can provide some gameplay footage.
And this is why having one tier list is dangerous for the game.
No; S tier killers aren’t stronger than anything you can expect to encounter in public games, because the majority of players aren’t playing against killers that play at top 0.01% MMR S-tier level.
The strongest killers players can expect to encounter in public games, depends on their MMR level, as some killers are wildly stronger or weaker at different MMR levels.
-
@Krazzik said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3648164#Comment_3648164
True, and people are free to make tier lists for differing levels of skill. Most people focus on top level play and that's normal.
That’s not what is happening. I think most people actually think there’s only one tier list for the entire range of MMR, and that if Nurse is at the top, then she’s broken across the entire playerbase and therefor me should be nerfed.
When in reality, she’s not overperforming overall, and not overperforming at the top 5%.