EntityNea
EntityNea
About
- Username
- EntityNea
- Joined
- Visits
- 319
- Last Active
Comments
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2993375#Comment_2993375
Don't get me wrong , I am sure you are very good with Dredge, but you getting many grabs is a bit questionable on the survivors side. Dredge is not a stealthy killer, not even in Nightfall. He emits pretty loud noises, you can hear him from 16 meters away, if not more. You can also see him far beyond your visibility range, so I have no idea how survivors are letting themselves get grabbed from gens.
I can definitely see why the cooldown on his teleport might be a bit too short during Nightfall, but in normal his teleport is not that crazy, and it surely won't allow you to defend gens to a point where survivors can't progress them. The 12 second cooldown and slow teleport speed makes sure of that. Not to mention that his locker teleport, and his anti-loop, the remnant, share one cooldown. And again, even during Nightfall, you shouldn't be able to sneak up on survivors that easily because of the sound he makes, which is even directional.
I can see Dredge needing some very small nerfs in the future, especially if killers ever receive some baseline slowdown, but right now it's too early to tell in my opinion. One good thing about Dredge though is that there are numerous easy ways to nerf Dredge though. I could see the devs not wanting to nerf the cooldown of his teleport during Nightfall, because the idea that Dredge can be lurking everywhere at any time seems like one the design intentions of him. But they could make Nightfall take a bit longer to activate, so it happens less freqquently. Or decrease it's duration. Who knows.
I don't know what to tell you really, from my experience the cooldown is short enough to regress all remaining gens.
let's say there's 3 gens remaining, Gen A, B and C. What you do is stand at Gen A, you teleport to the locker closest to Gen C while making sure to pass through Gen B. This way you're putting pressure on all 3 gens simultaneously, because.. You have Gen A covered, and you hear if survivors are at Gen B, and you're about to be at Gen C. You never have to search for survivors to be at the correct place. And 12 second cooldown on a teleport is a joke. I didn't realize it was that low.
Imo the cooldown needs to be much higher to fix this issue. Something like 30 seconds. But in some situations this will be too much. It's only really needed to prevent the constant gen pressure
So here's my suggestion: You know how he has teleport charges? You usually use this to teleport additional times between lockers. Instead, allow Dredge to teleport with a very short cooldown for as long as he has charges, but each charge takes something like 30 seconds to recharge.
For example, if you then have 3 teleport charges, you can teleport 3 times on a short cooldown, but it'll take you 30 seconds to get each charge back. This way, you'd be more encourages to follow up on chases, and would make it harder to gen camp like i've been doing.
About me being good? I'm really not. I am pretty bad as killer, 90% of my playtime is as survivor but i try killer from time to time. Most of the gen grabs I've gotten happen when i teleport to an unlocked locker around a corner from the generator, during nightfall, and then i just go in for the grab. I have to admit that when I play as survivor, I can't always hear him during nightfall either, there's so many weird ambience noises and it's super dark, so i understand people messing up like that
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2991505#Comment_2991505
He can't. If he wants to down a survivor, he will have to commit to chasing one for at least a bit. And he does have 12 second cooldown on his teleport. His teleport is also not instant. Dredge is not at all generators at once, simply not.
To be fair, I do think the cooldown during Nightfall should be increased from 4 to 8 seconds, because 4 seconds is pretty much no cooldown at all, which is a bit much in my opinion. But it's still not that crazy, because again, its not like you are just teleporting to lockers and then injure survivors within 1 second. Good survivors will make you waste a bit of time. In most cases, lockers also don't spawn right on gens, but only very close to them.
I still think that certain killers are better at 3 genning than Dredge.
Who knows, maybe he will need a very small cooldown nerf. I wouldn't mind it being increased to 15 or 16 seconds foe example. Though anything above that would be too much in my opinion, because his anti-loop shares the same cooldown. Unless you add two different cooldowns to his remnant and locker teleport. But I think that will only be necessary if we actually do get some baseline slowdown for killers with a future update. Then I could see his map pressure being too good.
I think it's still bit early to say for sure. I am quite positive his map pressure isn't op, but who knows, maybe I am wrong. I do remember this exact concern being voiced by multiple people when Demogorgon released though, and in the end, he actually got buffed a little.
I have also had matches with other killers where I was able to win despite only having one or two hooks after 4 gens were done. One match in particular was with Ghost Face, who isn't even consider very strong at all.
In my opinion, Dredge could use some tiny nerfs, but map pressure is not one of them. I think toning down Nightfall is needed, as well as his tunneling potential. And before they nerf his map pressure, I would actually prefer them to nerf his anti-loop just slightly, by increasing the time it takes to teleport back to his remnant from 0,25 seconds to something like 0,6 seconds, so that survivors have a bit of mindgame potential when looping small to medium sized pallet loops.
You really don't have to commit to chasing. Nightfall makes him stealthy, and teleporting charges nightfall. So all you need to do with 1-2 gens left is to aggressively regress the generators and ignore chases, then once Nightfall triggers you have a good chance of creeping up close enough to a survivor to get a hit in without needing to commit to a long chase. After the hit, teleport back to the most active gen, sneak attack other survivors. Eventually you'll get a down.
Not to mention, you would be surprised how often I've managed to pull people straight off the gen with this tactic. i've pulled people off generators more than I have been able to with any other killer, and i'm not even particularly trying to do it.
This is my experience at least. So far I've had one loss (3 survivors escaped) out of however many matches I could have played the past 3 days, been playing for about 8 hours per day.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2990994#Comment_2990994
Can't really agree. He is powerful, but not S tier or anything. He definitely has great map control, but it's not insane or anything, to the point where survivors can't complete gens. Not even close. I would say it's pretty much on the level of Blights, maybe a tad weaker, but that's it.
His anti-loop is not bad, but in my opinion, Demogorgon's is probably a tad better. It moves survivors away from pallet loops but it doesn't have any range or can hit over pallets and windows. Plus he moves slower than survivors while his remnant is active.
Of course he does have Nightfall, which definitely makes his map pressure as good, if not a bit better than that of Blight's, on top of other advantages. But it's not too crazy either. I do think Nightfall needs to be toned down a bit though.
I definitely do not agree with Sadako or Freddy being solid. And most of the community agree with me on this it seems. Freddy isn't bad, to be fair. I think he is stronger than some other people think, but not quite viable. And Sadako is definitely not solid, which most people agree with.
Killers need to be strong to be viable, it's simply like that. And Dredge, in general, is really well balanced actually. Not to strong, but also not to weak. He might just need a few very small nerfs in certain areas, mainly Nightfall.
i am wondering if difference in opinion on balance may have to do with playstyle?
Different people think differently, so it's natural that different people naturally "click" with different killers.
perhaps a reason why some people don't see how strong his kit is yet is because he's so new, and those people haven't practiced enough yet.
Dredge immediately "clicked" with my way of thinking, and I went from being a mediocre skill level killer to not losing a single match with him since his realease. The only survivors that have escaped have been ones that I give the hatch at the end.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2989830#Comment_2989830
He really isn't that op. Many people haven't figued out too well how to play against him yet either. There are a few aspects that could be toned down, mainly his Nightfall darkness effect, but his map pressure is pretty damn fine actually. Killers need good map pressure like that. Not that a cooldown increase would ruin him or anything, if it's just a few seconds, but I don't think he needs it. Killers need good map pressure and decent anti-loop to be viable.
If anything, they should make looping against him a tad more viable by making it take a half a second or so to teleport back to your remnant, but even that is way too early to say, he does have a good amount of counterplay.
Maybe you also went against survivors that weren't too experienced? It also doesn't really make sense that one would only notice a killer being op when playing as him. If a killer is op, you would notice it, no matter which side you play.
I have a question then: How can survivors do generators if the killer is constantly at all of the remaining ones?
this isn't an issue early game, but when there's only 3 or 4 generators left on the map.
The only thing the survivors can do at this point is try try to make me get into a chase so the others can work on generators.
But here's the thing. I'm the killer, I choose when to chase. I know that if I spend time chasing, they spend time finishing the last generator.
The problem occurs when I can reach all 3 generators in 15-20 seconds repeatedly and regress any little progress that was done. All that I have to do is to teleport in this pattern: (K = killer, G = Generator, L = Locker, ---> teleport path)
K --- G --------- G ------> (L) .. G
When teleporting with Dredge, you HEAR everything happening during your movement. So I hear exactly which generator is being worked on, or where any injured survivors are. So I get to hear every location that matters during the last push for the survivors, hence I am always where i'm needed to stop any progress they made. If a chase lasts for more than 10 seconds, I stop. Go back to gen camping.
the teleport is much stronger than people give it credit, due to it serving as both information + quick movement, with short cooldown.
-
@Blazelski said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2989830#Comment_2989830
I haven't attempted to hold a 3-gen with them it yet, but I can see what you're saying possibly being true. He may be too good. But honestly, I'm biased right now because he's just so ######### fun and I don't have fun with killer much. I think it will take a little while for the community to discover just how much potential he has and how best to play against him.
i agree, super fun to play as. I'm trying to be objective with balance when reviewing him tho, and I can't deny how difficult it was for me to lose a single match, even in the matches where i was getting so wrecked that i was about to give up.. but then late game, it turned around from them finishing 3 gens before I even got my first hook, to me killing everyone because they couldn't do gens. My perks weren't even good either, I just leveled Dredge to around ~20 and used some random mediocre perks.
Regarding how to play against him? like, there really wasn't anything they could do, it was completely my choice to focus on regressing the generators. Survivors can't really force me to chase them, it was just a matter of patience on my end, which isn't something that can be affected by survivors in any way.
there was one match when there were 3 survivors left with 1 generators left to do. 2 of those generators had all 4 pistons moving and I thought "oh man, this is it". But nope, i managed to regress them all back to 0 progress and kill all 3 survivors.
-
@Blazelski said:
No suggestions (except to not nerf him), he's extremely fun to play, and no bad meme addons. He's got map presence, scare factor, anti-loop, and mindgames. And Nightfall is incredibly fun to play during. This killer is a resounding success to me so far. Great job on this one, BHVR!
I re-installed the game to play the new killer.
Are we playing the same game? The killer is TOO GOOD.
Like you're saying, he has map presence, scare factor (stealth), anti-loop, and mindgames. All in a single kit.
I played him for probably 8 hours total. First 3 hours, I even forgot he had the anti-loop, and even without using it, I was wrecking any survivor team i went up against. It just felt so unfair for the survivors I was going up against, they couldn't do ANYTHING against me after a few gens popped. And that should say something, I am generally bad at playing killer, and I was completely destroying the opponents even when going up against a full team of borrowed / decisive / dead hard meta slaves.
The teleporting alone can be used so frequently that the survivors have no chance of finishing the final generator. All I had to do was let the survivors finish the gens furthest from each other, deliberately letting some of them pop. After having the final 3-4 gens either in a straight line (no matter distance), or 3 gens relatively close to each other, it was a GG... no matter how poorly the match went for me earlier. Just had to teleport to the furthest gen from me - if passing the other gens during my teleport i could hear it's progress and if it was being worked on. Then just walk there, or if i dont hear anything just check the remaining gens and teleport back to the first one.
It's stupidly broken and he needs a nerf, imo a longer cooldown between teleports because that thing is avalable too often.
Edit: I first played 2 hours of survivor, and when going against him I didn't notice these things.I lost a majority of matches against him, but he was fun to play against. I just didn't understand that he was so broken until i played him myself, because as a survivor you don't really notice how often he can use his abilities.
-
@Lastchild said:
A balanced killer is a killer that is worth viable to play the player killer without requiring additional modules that must be really interesting and bonuses and not infernally hard to counter and stand by the survivors players.
So the trapper should be buff in this way to me :
Base Kit :
10 traps are placed in front of windows and pallets on the entire map.
The trapper always have these two basic traps.
All traps placed will reset every 25 seconds.
There.
That way you have a good viable and playable trapper without add-ons (it would rework based on the idea presented) and survivors can always counter it but feel pressure to survive and have fun all the same rather than stay chill on a generator.
Only 10 auto arming traps??
Auto put traps at every vault and pallet and if survivors disarm them their hand is cut off and they can't do generators anymore
-
Question to the killers here who say they want to see hook stages to prevent accidentally killing survivors during farming matches:
Do survivors, once they know it's a farming match, ever help you out by gesturing?
Me and my friends usually take turns walking up to the hook and point at it to show the killer who to hook. Or point at someone if they can be hooked again but they're not trying to communicate with the killer.
... Just ignore the matches where we point at that one friend when they're on death hook just to troll them :')
-
@Ryan489x said:
The real question is, why are killer perks still hidden until the end of a match?
I know why they did it don't get me wrong. However if I'm playing solo I'd like to see what I was up against when I get tunneled out of a game in less then 2 minutes and not have to wait till the end.
Also as a survivor I can call about 3 of the 4 perks in game anyway so I don't think it's really a big deal to keep them hidden anymore.
If you got tunneled out of the game in 2 minutes then it doesn't matter what perks you were going up against because you never really went up against it :)
Killer perks need to be hidden, if you really want to know what they had then you gotta wait until the end. The only way to change this would be for the game to save our match history and allow us to go back and see it after the match is fully over
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932383#Comment_2932383
Except it wasnt toxic. It was just facts.
Right. Your opinions are facts. And it's not toxic at all to spam crylaugh emojis and having overall bad manners. My bad, I forgot that there are people who think it's normal to throw in taunts and rudeness whenever they disagree with someone.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2929756#Comment_2929756
Yea ok "have good aim and trickster is OP !!!" 😂😂😂
Again...There's a reason the meme around the ######### killer that is trickster is "why would you not use huntress "
Oh let's see here. Ruin/undying nerfed in record time. Twins nerfed, slinger nerfed, Freddy nerfed. Broken boons added. I can go on.
You'll find that if you leave toxicity out of your messages, people will take you more seriosuly.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927387#Comment_2927387
You would have more credibility. If you didnt say trickster was good and can EZ 4k. And claim that devs favor killer mains 😂
There's a reason why the meme around trickster is "why would you not just play huntress"
The problem with Trickster is that a vast majority of DBD players probably aren't used to playing games where your aim means everything. On top of it we have console players who play him with a controller. So the popular opinion will be "Trickster sucks so badly!", while people who are skilled in competitive shooters will dominate with him.
So I don't blame you for saying Trickster sucks, because he does suck in the hands of most DBD players.
I'm not saying devs "favor" killer mains, just that there's a trend where killer complaints keep being listened to. Like, tell me the last time when survivors whined about something that got changed in the game for their benefit? Meanwhile, i've heard complaints of maps being too dark, hatch is unfair, Killer abilities need buffs, boons are too strong, etc. ... and what's happened? Maps were reworked to be so bright that it looks like daytime. Hatch was made completely useless. Killers getting buffs and reworks left and right. Boons getting nerfed.
I play both sides, and I can't deny that killers get through with their complaints a lot more than survivors do. Both sides complain, sure, but killers get to see their complaints change the game a lot more often.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927494#Comment_2927494
A perk “being used to help others escape” still presumably increases escape rates for the group if it’s a good perk. A perk that “prevents tunneling” likewise increases the group’s escape rates if its working properly. The difference with Dead Hard and the other popular perks is the degree to which it increases escape rates is much greater.
Plus you’re focussing on Borrowed Time and Decisive Strike but they’re not the only perks I mentioned that stats were posted for. There was also Iron Will and Unbreakable which fall in the same category, they’re popular and useful but don’t have the same statistical correlation with escapes.
The issue with your comparisons is that Dead Hard is the only one of those meta perks that is used primarily by skilled players.
Anyone can use the other perks with little-to-no-skill because they give good utility automatically. Dead Hard is the only one you need to be skilled at using, so lower-skill players may try it a few times but then decide it's not worth it.
do you see the difference?
-
@humanbeing1704 said:
I found it bizzare do people not learn how to read Roman numerals in school?
Well I read an article about how American kids didn't know how to read analog clocks, so instead of teaching them how to do it, the school removed all the analog clocks lol
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927461#Comment_2927461
But you’re missing my point - you were saying that Dead Hard is tied to high escape rates because high skill players use it. But high skill players also use other perks and those perks don’t have the same degree of ties to escape rates. If it were just that high skill players used Dead Hard being the only reason for the correlation then its impact on escapes would be more or less on par with those other meta perks. (And the ones that I saw tracked also included Iron Will, Unbreakable and Circle of Healing. I think Circle of Healing was strong with a single use but multiple people using it had diminishing returns.)
People use Dead Hard because they want to escape chases.
People use Borrowed Time to help other people not be tunneled.
People use Decisive Strike to prevent being tunneled themselves.
I can't speak for everyone, but I feel like Dead Hard is also used more by Try Hards who care more about "winning". Like, not everybody cares about escaping. I use both Borrowed and Decisive because I just care about having a fun match. I really don't care about dying, I already have every perk unlocked and I am maxed out on blood points. So I'll gladly die as long as the match itself was good.
-
@Canas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927444#Comment_2927444
This killer has been out since 3 months now, I've played her many times since then and even grinded her to prestige 3 level 50. She stands no chance against experienced players who actually have map awareness or a decent pair of headphones. She objectively needs buffs, her handicaps are far too numerous.
Still, wanted to ask. I've seen some Sadako players use her abilities in really clever ways. From my experience, she's at her strongest when playing in a devious way and putting pressure in multiple places at once. Have seen some skilled players predict where the chase is leading towards and teleported ahead to make the survivor run into them.
Like.. Another thing to remember is that due to killers having different abilities, everyone will have a certain killer they're better at. Trickster is a good example of a killer that had so many complaints about how much he sucked, and got buffed twice. Yet, he's extremely strong in the hands of someone with good aim, who is used to playing shooter games.
I feel like more often than not, killers get buffed to be good for an average player, which tends to turn them OP in the hands of a good player. They should balance a killer to be good for someone who those particular abilities just "click" for. That's why there's so many killers, there's something for everyone.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927413#Comment_2927413
If you’re talking about the Red Add-on Meyers that allows multiple kills in a single use Meyers only moves 105% speed while doing it. That’s a huge downside on top of the additional charge time at the start of the match and it’s a big reason why Meyers players seem to prefer the Purple Tombstone over the Red one.
And like I said, neither is even all that popular compared to all the other killers, and not just because they’re purple and red add-ons. Being a red-add on has never been a huge problem at high levels of play, just look at how popular Iridescent Head Huntress used to be back when that perk allowed her to have multiple hatchets for example.
Also yes, I am considering that there is a correlation between player time or skill and Dead Hard use. However, when you pivot out escape rates by number of survivors using Dead Hard versus escape rates against number of survivors using other popular meta perks like, say, Borrowed Time, Dead Hard still has a much larger correlation with escape rates than even those other popular high end meta perks. Lots of high end players use Borrowed Time or Decisive Strike or Iron Will but none of those perks seem to have the same level of correlation with escapes that Dead Hard does.
Yeah it's not strange pink tombstone myers isn't popular when there's so many easier builds to use. Pink tombstone requires a ton of skill to utilize properly so of course it won't be too popular. But boy when someone does use it... GG. Especially since the first survivor usually doesn't suspect it.
Obviously Borrowed Time wont affect a person's winrate. Dead Hard is a selfish perk to extend chases. Borrowed Time is a perk used on someone else that literally does nothing unless the killer is trying to tunnel them. Decisive Strike is also another perk that literally does nothing unless the killer is tunneling. Not to mention slugging is a thing even if the killer does decide to tunnel. I'd say decisive strike is a meta perk more because it's nice to counter these tunneling killers who try to prevent you from getting to even play the damn game, but when you're in those matches where the killer is tunneling you're probably gonna die anyways.
-
@Canas said:
I was quite disappointed when I read the latest patchnotes just to realize that Sadako had been neglected entirely. Currently she's the weakest licensed killer in the game, being an inferior copy of Wraith and Freddy in terms of gameplay.
Here are the issues which need to be addressed:
1) Get rid of global sound cues, survivors shouldn't be notified of her stealth usage at all. This was the first thing you actually got rid of when you buffed Ghostface, now do it for Sadako.
2) Remove the lullaby or at least drastically reduce her visibility while she's demanifested, too many survivors rush off before you can even get in your first hit. This completely invalidates her intended playstyle as a hit and run killer.
3) Consider this one an alternative to number 2. If you don't want to improve her stealth, give her a speedboost after decloaking to catch up to survivors. She doesn't have a speedboost while cloaked so this is the least you can do to make up for this.
4) Drastically increase the amount of condemnation survivors gain from various actions, turn the ability into a base-kit Rancor which enables her to instadown fully condemned targets. Right now her passive is an absolute joke.
5) Reduce the cooldown timer on her televisions, 100 seconds are far too much. Make it a minute instead.
I'd be happy to hear from others on how to properly fix this weak killer.
Every time a new killer is released, there's people who want them buffed.
Ask yourself these things first:
- How much have I played this killer?
- Is there anything about my play style I can improve?
- Would practicing more make me better?
- Does this killer's abilities "click" with me?
Like, all I'm saying is that I'd like to see people give killers more time before requesting buffs. When something is entirely new, it's going to be more difficult for a while when playing against people who's been using the same stuff for years (because survivor basic playstyle stays the same so they have already perfected how they play it).
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927400#Comment_2927400
If Tombstone Meyers were the most powerful killer build it would be one of the most popular ones but it barely gets any use compared to Blight or Nurse or even Huntress, etc, Not that you can’t win with Tombstone but the downside of how long it takes to charge it up shouldn’t be underestimated, it definitely hurts him.
Dead Hard is the most popular survivor perk. It also seems to be strongly correlated with escape rates based on a large data set posted a couple months ago by a forum user and the devs mentioning they weren’t happy with its stats. So I seriously doubt Tombstone is actually as effective overall as Dead Hard.
Tombstone is a pink addon, thus cannot be used every game. But you can't deny that it skips a good portion of the match for the killer, it takes +200% time to stalk but then you only have to catch everyone once. It lets you win the game in 4 successful chases instead of 12.
Have you considered that one reason why high win rate + dead hard is seen together because both requires a high skill level from survivors?
Skillful survivors already have a high chance of escaping, and due to Dead Hard being such a skill-dependent perk, it will be seen more on high-skill survivors.
-
@OpenX said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927200#Comment_2927200
What about how killers can run 4 automatic gen perks? Literally, no input required and you still get tons of artificial time injected into the game.
Killers have perks that extend gen times, survivors have perks that extend their life times. What is the issue here?
Killers just love complaining at the forums when they can't get kills, instead of finding a good setup that works for their personal play style.
I've faced killers that have made the matches so hopeless that I've ended up just standing there.
Faced a doctor who stacked up gen regression perks and brought an offering to The Game. After he got his first down, the game was over. Generators automatically exploded. He did his AoE shock in the middle of the map which reached everywhere. This forced everyone off the generators, which were then blocked by the entity while regressing automatically. Don't know exactly what perk combination he used but it bought him more time than Dead Hard times 5
-
@WesCravenFan said:
A good way to put the power of Dead Hard into perspective is this:
Make note of when you swing at a Survivor that 100% would have gone down if they did not Dead Hard.
NOW, start a timer. Use Alexa, have a clock next to you, or count out loud or in your head. See how many seconds it takes before that Survivor goes down again.
Got that number?
That is how much time Dead Hard bought the entire Survivor team that game.
Now do that again every single time Dead Hard is used in a match.
Absolutely no Killer perk in the game has that much power. None. Zero. It's asinine.
No killer perk has that much power?
What about... an addon that lets you immediately kill healthy survivors that haven't even been hooked yet.
Before you start arguing that "yeah it only works if it's used by a skilled Myers", same thing can be said about Dead Hard. I've seen too many team mates dead hard into walls and getting immediately downed.
-
I've uninstalled recently, with over 1500 hours played over the past 3-4 years. The main reason for me is due to technical issues with the game itself, and me having lost faith in the development team. They dont seem to understand their own game, thus rely on the feedback and complaints from the community to know what's wrong.
The devs also seem to love coddling killer mains. For example, there's been previous issues with hex totems in certain locations that couldn't be cleansed. That was around for quite a bit with the maps still active. But then when it was about killers being unable to kick boons, those maps were immediately disabled while a hotfix was worked on. Newly released killers also keep getting buffs before people get a chance to learn them. People play them once or twice, complain that the killer sucks, then devs buff them to the point where they're just not fun to play against.
Trickster for example, people complained immediately, he got buffed. People still complained, he got buffed again. Now he throws knives like a machine gun, so all you need is a decent aim and it's GG EZ. My friend who was new to the game at the time had no problem getting a 4K with trickster in a KYF against 4 dbd vetarans, and that was BEFORE Trickster's 2nd buff. Simply because he plays a lot of shooters and have good aim, so Trickster was easy for him.
Don't get me wrong, things can be unbalanced for both sides at times, but from my experience playing both sides, devs seem to hand hold killer mains a lot more, and care more about making it fun to play as killer and don't give a flying duck about whether or not the game is fun for survivors. And i get it... If killers stop playing, the game will die. Survivors are more likely to deal with in-game BS because at least they have friends to play with which can make it just enough fun to keep playing anyways.
Except that this game is no longer fun for survivors, which is one reason I think so many people have simply stopped playing. Hit recognition is complete BS and seems to be validated on the killer's side. (Which BTW is another proof that devs coddle killers. The moment they implemented hit validation server-side, killers complained and hit validation was removed almost immediately).
TL:DR;
- Devs don't understand how to fix their game.
- Hit validation sucks, you get hit when you shouldn't.
- Other technical issues, such as pallets sometimes not dropping even when spamming to drop them.
- Devs trying too hard to just make the game fun for killers, without caring how boring the abilities are for survivors to play against.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924282#Comment_2924282
Representation isn't a political statement.
correct, representation isn't a political statement on it's own. The way BHVR handled it, however, comes close.
I would love to see future DLCs have more diverse characters, so keep it up. Just stop taking advice from modern activist groups, and instead look back at old franchises that had representation done right. Absolutely loved how it was handled in Buffy, even tho that show is now super old.
The problem IMO is that sexuality is made into such a big deal, which makes people respond to it as if it's a big deal. But really, sexuality doesn't matter. That's why the best representation done is the ones where it's just naturally part of a character without the creators going "hey look! this character is XXX!". Just... make an original character, have their sexuality just be a natural part of them and their lore. Then you'll have your representation and people won't start an outrage.
-
@calem said:
Seems like the only people who have a problem with this are straight people
Maybe check yourself as to why it bothers you so much that David is gay
Wrong, my partner brought this to my attention and they're pansexual.
turning a character gay simply for gay representation isn't the way to go, and it shows that BHVR prioritizes making political statements over fixing their damn game.
-
@KeiOrtem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923356#Comment_2923356
Why do you assume that he wasnt gay to begin with? They kept the majority of the characters vague enough that they never confirmed they were gay or straight. Felix has a wife but that doesnt make him strictly straight. Why does david having a girlfriend in the past mean he cant come out as gay later? it isnt retconning, its exploring the previous characters that they have.
I much prefer them exploring the characters that they have rather than constantly adding new ones and not giving original the ones the love, attention, care, and stories that they deserve. If they just kept adding characters without enough story then we would end up in another overwatch situation where the lore is a mess.
"Why do you assume that he wasnt gay to begin with?"
Because the official DBD twitter account makes it clear they're only doing this to have LGBTQIA2+ representation to please that part of the community.
There's no need to try to make arguments that "maybe David was gay all along!", because they confirm that none of the already existing characters had any LGBTQIA2+ representation previously.
The developers simply took the easy way out, taking an already liked character and turning him gay, instead of creating a new original character for their next DLC.
I fully support people's sexual preferences. I am straight myself but the main friend group I hang out with is part of the LGBTQ+ spectrum. I am happy they accept me for being straight as much as I accept them. But that's the thing... When a company takes an old character and slap a gay tag on them just to have "representation", it's disrespectful to everyone. Only people who are true LGBTQIA2+ activists cheer over something like this. Nobody among my LGBTQ+ friends are happy about this. They're calling it lazy and stupid and I fully agree.
With this, I am uninstalling DBD - Not because of the new representation, but because the developers don't have their priorities straight.
Dead By Daylight has become a broken mess and the game has lost a huge amount of it's player base because of it. The game has some serious glitches, I don't have a single play session that doesn't have a moment where someone goes "What the heck was that??". The MMR system is a mess and devs don't know how to fix it... And while the game has turned into such a broken mess that fewer and fewer people can stand to even play it anymore... The devs priorities should be to fix these things and make the game more enjoyable, and NOT spend all that time worrying about making political statements.
TL;DR: I am leaving this game because I have no faith in BHVR anymore. I don't think they're capable of fixing the current issues DBD has.
-
@Rezblaze said:
No.
I think instead of skill checks, the game should just kill all the players if everyone is slugged, much like everyone dies on hooks when everyone is hooked.
It only deactivates if there's no dead hards in play.
There are so many ways to reset back up when all 4 players are slugged. The game isn't over when all 4 survivors are downed.
there's plenty of perks to reset a situation like this. But even without perks, if all 4 survivors crawl to the same area, there's no way there's hooks for everyone. Like, i'm not saying it's a great situation to be in, but enforcing death before the game is over is a big no from me. Me and my friends have come back from a 4-man slug several times because the killer gets cocky and try to taunt us, giving us time to plan our reset.
Force killing all players like that is already a terrible mechanic I hate when all of the last players are on the hook. It ruins perks like Deliverance, which could otherwise be used to get yourself off the hook. Combined with Decisive Strike, you could stun the killer and save other survivors off the hooks. But the game will instantly progress you to the 2nd hook state and kill you, without allowing you to use your perks.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2879132#Comment_2879132
Again, not my opinion. Someone above your message also outlined this, the game's win condition is not ambiguous and not up for debate.
So, I did a little googling and CSGO does seem to be an exception in this regard, though nobody seems to know how that game's MMR system works? So we clearly can't be looking to it for instruction, since there are no instructions to be found. My previous googling on the topic covered six other games (DOTA 2, Rocket League, League of Legends, Smite, Valorant, Rainbow Six Siege) and found that all six of them have an MMR system very similar to DBD, as well as TrueSkill being a system that's based entirely on wins and losses. I don't know exactly what games use TrueSkill, but Microsoft came up with it so I'm assuming at least Halo does? Either way, this does seem to be the norm for MMR systems, so your suggestion for a "proper" MMR system seems to be breaking the mould.
The only exception in my previous googling was Smite, but that was because it also used player level in the matching portion, the number seemed to be calculated the same way.
Regarding your suggestions for a moment... they still suffer both from attempting to change the game's win condition in a manner I'm not convinced it supports, and being far too hung up on expecting players to prove their skill with specific actions when that simply isn't always feasible and gets messy very quickly. This is how the emblem system works, and we saw how badly that turned out; better to just use the proxy for skill when looking at aggregate games, don't you think?
But to focus on your example again, we're outlining Steve's play in one game. One game is statistically irrelevant for any MMR system, we need to know how he plays overall; it could be that his escape this time was a fluke and he normally dies, or that his poor play in this match was an outlier and he's usually more of a team player. These are the questions that matter for a matchmaking system, not how he played in one single match.
for the love of chthulhu stop being so hung up on "win conditions". it has nothing to do with the MMR system.
my suggestion mentions amount of survivors escaping or dying as a condition to apply a multiplier to their personal performance during a match. Don't think of it as a "win condition" then, just a way to measure how well each side did during the match, and even then it's more important how each player did individually as my example showed. I'm not sure if you read my example properly since you're misunderstanding even the most basic of things, and unfortunately I can only explain things, but I cannot understand them for you.
I feel like you're either trolling me, why would you think this suggestion only outlines ONE game? OBVIOUSLY the outcome of each game will either raise or lower your OVERALL MMR, not just be like "oh hey last game you did well, now you get sweaty killers for ONE match!". Like bro, you still need to calculate performance during each match, and then use that calculation to adjust MMR. It doesn't mean that match is the only one that matters.
-
@JeanCharpentier said:
They cannot do it as they clearly do not know what is a good DbD player. Just look at their stream when devs are playing... they do not even know the basics of high skill play... on any sides.
Old rank system was working better giving funnier trials and a better mix between try hard and competitive matches. Moreover, you could not end up in a ELO hell.
MMR must be removed, it doesn't work and will never work if they don't hire someone that actually knows how to develop a good system.
100% agree. Having no MMR system would be better than having a bad one.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2878644#Comment_2878644
Of course, we can get back to the point.
So, the thing that you're still missing about the MMR system - or, I should clarify, about MMR systems, from my research they all seem to work like this - is that you take a broader view. Zoom out from a specific match, look at all the player's matches, and ask the following question: Are they winning more than they're losing?
If the answer is yes, it stands to reason that they're more skilled. If they're not, it's usually a balance issue.
It works like this for other games, why wouldn't it work here? DBD isn't more complicated than, say, Valorant or League of Legends. Why would it need a more complex system? What doesn't work about the logic I just outlined?
it baffles me that you agree to "get back to the point", yet you still use your opinion of a win condition as an argument to the MMR system. I've been trying to tell you that winrate has nothing to do with SKILL in this game, yet you keep going back to winrate.
and no, this is not how MMR systems work in every game. Games generally adapt their ranking system to judge what's "skillful" in that particular game.
In CSGO, you can win a match and still have your rank lowered because you did poorly. You can also lose a match with a great score and either rank up or not rank down as much (i forget which, either way the loss doesn't hurt your rank as much).
In CSGO, however, it's your amount of kills VS deaths that count for the most, but in those kind of games this makes sense as having a high K/D ratio shows you're more skillful than your opponents.
I feel like maybe the developers have looked at these kind of games and decided to use the same way to count a person's MMR, but DBD is a completely different kind of game. It's not a team VS team where both sides are equal in power. It's a 1v4 where the killer is much stronger than each individual survivor, which is meant to create a balance in a 1v4. Hence when it comes to escapes VS deaths, the side with 4 people needs to be counted as a team, because 4 people on that side is going against 1 person on the other side together.
On top of this, a person's individual skill needs to be counted, and a person's individual skill can be determined through direct interactions with the person on the other team. I'm NOT saying kills, deaths or escapes shouldn't count AT ALL... But it SHOULDN'T BE THE ONLY THING that's counted.
----------------------
Generally, how wins and losses (no matter your opinion on how they are counted) should work in an MMR system, is that they act as a multiplier to your overall match rating.
Let me make a proper example of how a proper MMR system should work. This has to work differently for killer and survivors, but for the sake of simplicity, this example is for survivors. For this system, a player's personal rating during a match is counted as a number between 0 - 100. If your number ends up below 50, your overall MMR goes down, if it's above 100 your MMR goes up. Your number starts at 50 when the match starts, and actions you do during the match either raises or lowers it. For example, chases could raise or lower your number depending on how long they last (but let's not get too much into the system itself, that's not the point of this).
Now, let's get to the part where KILLS, ESCAPES or DEATH come into play.
How you would generally develop this, is to apply a multiplier to the player's final score depending on whether the match was won or lost. This multiplier needs to take 6 different scenarios into mind for survivors:
- Match was won (3-4 survivors escaped), and you personally escaped too
- Match was won, but you died
- Match was a draw (2 survivors escaped), and you escaped
- draw, but you died
- match lost (0-1 survivors escaped), and you escaped
- match lost, and you died
(an advanced system would make special multiplier cases too for things like Myers Tombstone addon that can instantly kill a survivor right away, but ignore that for now)
All of these scenarios would have a different multiplier towards your personal score, and takes into account both team wins and personal deaths. Any examples of actual numbers are imaginary, as these numbers highly depend on the design of the base score system. Keep that in mind...
For example, if Steve does very poorly in the match, goes down almost immediately during chases and ends up dying, he might end up with a low base score of 20. His team, however, end up doing all 5 gens and escape! These 3 players will have the "match won, and you escaped" multiplier, boosting their personal match rating by for example 50%. So even if LAURIE did okay but not great, and had a rating of 40, her multiplier boosts it to 60, so her MMR goes up thanks to her escaping.. STEVE, however... He did so bad that his rating was at 20, and he also died. He then uses the "match won, but you died" multiplier, which in this case I'd put at a 0% change since it was a 1v1 with the killer and he lost, yet the team won. His rating is still 20, and his MMR goes down... Now rewind, imagine Steve survived! He still did poorly, got downed immediately during the chases, but his team mates came back and saved him at the end with Borrowed Time and took hits to get him out. Steve's rating is maybe ~26 because he "won the chase" at the end there. His rating of 26 is now multiplied by 50% because he survived, but this ends up as 38 which STILL ranks down his MMR due to how poorly he did. Similarly, if LAURIE had died at the end with a rating of 40, her escape wouldn't have boosted it past 50, and her MMR would have gone down.
TL;DR:
i apologize this message is long, but i ended up explaining how a proper MMR system is supposed to work, where it doesn't only care whether you lived or died, yet these things can make a big difference on whether or not you rank up or down. I am not going to have any further conversations on this unless it's clear that whoever responds to me has read the entirety of the 2nd part of this post (everything below the line of dashes). Sorry if this sounds rude, but it gets tiring when people completely ignore good arguments and points about things and then having to repeat myself, so i took the time to properly make an example of a proper MMR system in this post.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2878568#Comment_2878568
The win condition for playing survivor has always been to escape, and if your team gets out that's even better. We can argue back and forth about whether designing the game as a semi-team based one was a good idea, but that's the game that it is. It's not "my mindset", it's just what the game is.
That's not to say that team-based adjustments for the MMR system we have would be a bad idea, mind - I think it's unproven that it's necessary but if MMR needs more adjusting after its current flaws are fixed then that'd be a great first place to look - but the win condition doesn't actually have anything to do with the MMR, it's been the case forever.
Where does it state that you win when you escape? The game doesn't say "you win!", Hence this is an opinion that you're treating like a fact.
The reality is that this is a matter of opinion and I've met more people seeing it from the team point of view, yet both sides exist.
Because, counting it the way you do... How do you count a killer win/loss? Killer is on the opposite side, meaning that if his opponent loses then he wins, and if his opponent wins he loses. If you are counting survivors individually then you would have to count the killer as having won or loss against each survivors individually.
There are other games similar to DBD that also go for the team way of counting wins and losses.
Regardless of your opinion on this, it is completely unrelated to the bad MMR system.
As i have explained too many times now:
- MMR systems are meant to give you a score based on your SKILL AT PLAYING THE GAME
- The matchmaking then attempts to match you with players close to your score
- Whether or not you live or die has almost nothing to do with a player's skill at PLAYING THE GAME, hence it defeats the purpose an MMR system is supposed to serve.
I dont know what's hard to understand about this.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2878189#Comment_2878189
I mean, that's not up for debate? The win condition has been the same for the entirety of the game's existence, whether you personally care to fulfil it or not. I don't personally tie my enjoyment of a match to whether I won or not, but I also don't pretend that means it's up for discussion what a win is.
For the record, I do think a potential gap in the system is someone who can run the killer for five gens but dies in the endgame as the only kill, but that'd still have to be happening in more games than it doesn't for it to be statistically relevant for the MMR system, so all that really needs to change is to lower those players slightly less to compensate and it won't cause any issues. It's also not a gap because that player would be "punished" by being ranked down, MMR isn't a reward or punishment, but rather because lowering them to the point where they bully newer killers wouldn't be particularly fun for those killers.
But again: In order for a situation like that to matter in MMR, it has to happen repeatedly, more often than it doesn't.
Regarding your last point: That's true of any game that has an MMR system, though, and it clearly works okay for those games.
Wdym, I've met plenty of people saying that a survivor win is when 3 or more survivors escape.
Im not losing just because i die if i die getting everyone else out.
Just like how I dont lose a round of counter strike just because i die, if my team does well enough I still win.
In any team game, if you perform actions that cause your team to win and they do win, you also win regardless of whether you lived or not.
I feel like your mindset on this is very narrow
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2873898#Comment_2873898
I am perfectly content to stop using the term "throwing" if you like, that isn't really the important part; the important part is that you're choosing to lose at the last second. The choice is being made, and that choice will have ramifications.
You also don't have to ask yourself what a win is, since the win condition has been relatively clearly defined for a while. The only point of ambiguity that's ever existed is whether a 3k counts for a killer win or if it has to be a 4k, everything else has been established since the game's release.
But yes, talking about throwing wasn't really the point here, that's something you brought up and it confused me enough to derail the conversation. The bottom line is, the way the MMR number is calculated seems perfectly logical to me; if you're winning more matches than you're losing, you're doing something right. If you're not doing something right but still winning more than you're losing, then that's a balance issue, not a matchmaking issue.
I just dont agree with you with what a "win" is.
It's a team game for the survivors, and for me it's a win if i can help all other survivors escape by keeping the killer busy the whole match. Dying at the end really doesn't make a difference in this game, I just miss out on 5k bloodpointsz that's it. I reach rank 1 easily without needing to escape.
I dont always let the killer kill me, by the way.
I do however enjoy interacting with the killer more than i like doing gens, so i put myself in danger to keep others safe and we "win" a lot of matches with all of us escaping, but if someone dies it's usually me because killers get pissed after i distract them for 5 full gens and i often end up getting face camped.
This is another example of the MMR calculation being bad. If you can loop the killer for 5 gens, you basically won yhe match for your team. Yet you rank down in yhe MMR aystem because the killer got mad and face canped you.
Idk why anybody would think this is a good system. Clearly there's more to the game than whether or not you, personally, lived or died
-
@PlaysByShady said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2871890#Comment_2871890
What's so hard about it?
Are you having a laugh? I literally spelled it out. How do you compose a set of numbers, or any other objectively comparable criteria (objective being the operative word, being as the comparisons is done by a machine), that adequately encapsulates everything you guys want
"Dood doood.... did you see how I jumped through a window and tea-bagged the killer... I need that in my MMR!!!!!!!!"
Please.
What's so hard about it? You tell me... if it's not hard, then please design it for us. I've love to see what you can come up with. Just the composition of the ranking, not how it's reached, etc. I just want the data of what you would see if you wanted to see anyone's MMR, according to the imaginary way you guys think it ought to work.
It's not harder than designing any kind of point counting system. You just need to know what gameplay features are dependent on skill.
See, you say this... but don't actually offer anything by way of demonstration. I can just as easily make absurd statements too.
What's so hard about flying? Birds do it. Insects do it. Heck, even planes do it. So I don't see why people shouldn't be able too. It's not so hard. Just attach wings.
A big part of that is chase length. Short length means killer did good, survivor did bad. The game already keeps track of chase length so should not be hard to adapt. As mentioned earlier, percentage of missed skill checks could be used as well, since experienced players are less likely to miss them.
That's the easy stuff. You're just looking at what happened in ONE match. The system then needs to distil that down into what becomes your ranking at that point. And that's what I want to see. What is the format.
Just to save you the trouble of the wrong answer, you might say "the rank should just be a number, and it goes up by X, or down by Y, depending on what happened in each specific game". Great. Except with this arbitrary number, there's nothing to differentiate someone who escaped 20 matches by doing nothing (and their rank went up for the escapes), or someone who did a lot of chases and escaped once against a bad killer.
Do you see the problem now? Everything you want measured has to get abstracted away at some point.
These systems are not as hard to design as you seem to think. I am a programmer and could easily make a system based on gameplay actions. The problem here is that the first step is to have the right idea of what actions are considered skillful and what actions are considered less skillful, and it feels like the developers are stuck at the idea phase.
I'm gonna call BS... not least because, as a s/w developer of over 20 years myself I've not heard of anyone refer to themselves as a programmer (but hey, maybe it's a regional thing), but mainly because you literally talk what looks like the talk, but you don't walk at all. Some people, myself included, would call this sophistry.
So, as per the post of mine which you quoted, I specifically asked "How do you assign a value - however the value is composed - that accurately reflects all the nuances you want it to reflect. Please explain. I'll wait."
You've not answered this. You've just made vague statements like "it's easy", etc, without any explanation of how the data would even be composed, let alone compared.
I literally offered examples of multiple things that could be used to count MMr, yet you completely ignored all of it.
Tbh i didnt even read your entire message after it was apparent you didn't read mine.
-
Im a survigor main and i honestly dont care about NOED.
Like so what? If i notice there's NOED at the end i try to go find it, moat of the time me or another survivor does find it. If not.. well tough luck. It's just another expose perk in a game full of expose abilities across killer abilities and perks. No biggie.
The only perk in the game I have a problem with is Franklin's Demise. It is such a god damn douchebag perk, only exists to delete items that the survivors have paid bloodpoints to acquire. Imagine if there was a survivor perk where you deleted the killer's add-ons when you pallet stun them... How fair would that be? Not fair at all.
Whenever i see Franklin's i always assume whoever is behind the monitor is a massive... Something... Like there's so many better perks to use but you decided to delete people's items instead. Cool.
Like, i just want them to re-work this perk to disable items instead of dropping them. Because even a white ward wont save a dropped item
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2872929#Comment_2872929
"Throwing" just means "losing on purpose", you don't have to be playing intentionally garbage for the entire match to throw the game at the very end.
I'm not making a moral judgement here, that's just what it is that's being described- what's being described is intentionally subverting the win/loss condition of the game, if you're making the choice to do that then you should also be accepting that there are consequences for that decision. If you do it enough, you're going to end up in lower-MMR games, because you've intentionally been losing.
The only way to avoid that situation would be if the MMR system allowed players to rise in MMR if they lost the game, and that seems pretty obviously unintuitive.
That's your definition. In my experience throwing involves sabotaging matches in general. Talking about different games in general here, not just dbd... People who "throw matches" often sabotage their team mates too, or refuse to participate in normal gameplay or perform actions that lowers the chances of the team winning.
In DBD, you also have to ask yourself... What IS a win, really?
It's a team game, survivors VS killers. I consider it a win for the survivors if a majority escape. Killer wins if a majority dies. It's a draw if half escape and half die.
"Throwing" is short for "throwing the game". So if I make sure all the survivors escape and then I choose to die at the end, I am not throwing the game. I helped all the other team mates survive, and took one for the team. That's not throwing.
Throwing would be, if I got downed first, and then kill myself on the hook and leave the rest of the team to play the match on their own. Or, if I spend the whole match crouching around the edges and refusing to help the team or touch any generators. That's also throwing.
Either way, that's not what this topic was meant to be about. The point of this topic is that the purpose of MMR systems is to get decent matchmaking, and calculating MMR based on escapes and deaths is an awful way to determine skill level in order to find fair matches. It feels pointless to talk to you because you ignore all the points i make about the MMR system being bad, and just talk about the definition of throwing. So i'm gonna leave this here as I've already made my point in this thread, and I hope developers find this and read some of the points about the MMR system.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2872174#Comment_2872174
...What? The point of the MMR system is that you're not supposed to be getting games that wildly unbalanced to begin with, but even if you do get a game like that, the system doesn't say "you suck", the system puts one tally point in the loss column. One game doesn't swing your MMR all that much.
Even if you are getting matches like that all the time, you're still intentionally throwing, and it's a very strange take to say that the MMR system is bad because it can't account for bad actors purposefully losing their games. Any system is going to have that flaw.
i think your definition of "throwing" is different from mine.
I'm not throwing the game at all.
I am playing to the best of my ability, and making sure to help other survivors and playing like a good team mate.
Throwing implies playing like garbage on purpose, or sabotaging the game for others, or overall just not participating in normal gameplay.
Simply choosing to not walk out of a doorway at the end is not the same as throwing a game, at least not what i think most people would consider "throwing a game" means.
I feel like you have too much of a "win/lose" mindset to understand this issue. you've agreed that the point of an MMR system is to prevent people from getting wildly unbalanced games, yet you keep talking as if winning or losing is the only thing that matters. Winning or losing at the VERY END has nothing to do with how balanced or unbalanced the ENTIRETY of a match is.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2872104#Comment_2872104
...I'm not sure why you intentionally choosing to throw your games at the last minute translates to the MMR system being bad...?
another way to think about it is this:
Imagine an adult playing a game of chess against a kid. The adult plays real strategies until the kid only has a couple of chess pieces left, and then starts losing on purpose.
Now... Would you judge this adult as being bad at chess, and enter him into a chess contest for kids... oooor would you recognize that he's good at chess but chose to lose?
See, the MMR system does the former. It fails to recognize any skillful gameplay and just says the adult sucks because he lost.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2872104#Comment_2872104
...I'm not sure why you intentionally choosing to throw your games at the last minute translates to the MMR system being bad...?
They're 2 separate things, and I understand not everyone does this, but I've met a lot of people on both sides give away the "win" just as a way to be nice to other players after playing well. I'm good at the game, but I also want to be a good sport and not feel like a complete douchebag, and I want everyone to have a fun game, not just myself. That's why I do this, unrelated to the MMR system... Yet the MMR system sees this as my gameplay being weak and lowers my rating.
The reason why the MMR system is bad is because the purpose of MMR matchmaking is to take skill into account to match people into fair matches, yet people's MMR ratings have NOTHING to do will skill level.
The current system only works for players with the mindset that they always want to WIN, but a lot of experienced players keep their sanity by caring about more than just winning when playing this game. Having fun is more important than winning to a lot of us.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2871325#Comment_2871325
As I said above, it does measure individual skill in general. It isn't concerned with whether you played 'right' in one game, it's concerned about your overall winrate.
you're confusing "skill" with "winning".
My overall winrate is trash, because I have all the perks in the game and don't care about escaping for that extra 5k blood points.
So I usually let killers get those points at the very end, i by letting them kill me, even though I could have escaped.
This ends up being a downwards spiral where my matches are so easy because i get killed a lot, and then I feel bad for looping the killer the whole match so I feel even more inclined to give them the satisfaction of killing that annoying looper at the end.
Me dying while everyone else escapes doesn't make me lack skill, but the game registers my result as being bad at the game simply because I died.
the whole point of an MMR system is to match people with people in a similar skill level to keep matches fun and "fair" to a certain degree. So there's no point in having an MMR system at all if they're not properly trying to detect people's ability to play well in the game. Currently, I would have better matches if matchmaking was completely random.
-
@PlaysByShady said:
Honestly, this is getting so boring that people don't understand how algorithms work.
Do the devs understand that there's more to the game than living or dying?
Yes, the devs understand this. Do YOU understand that you can't put all that into a number (or numbers) that reflect your rating??
That's literally the core of the issue. How do you assign a value - however the value is composed - that accurately reflects all the nuances you want it to reflect. Please explain. I'll wait.
What's so hard about it?
It's not harder than designing any kind of point counting system. You just need to know what gameplay features are dependent on skill.
A big part of that is chase length. Short length means killer did good, survivor did bad. The game already keeps track of chase length so should not be hard to adapt. As mentioned earlier, percentage of missed skill checks could be used as well, since experienced players are less likely to miss them.
These systems are not as hard to design as you seem to think. I am a programmer and could easily make a system based on gameplay actions. The problem here is that the first step is to have the right idea of what actions are considered skillful and what actions are considered less skillful, and it feels like the developers are stuck at the idea phase.
-
@jesterkind said:
That is certainly a thing that a lot of people have said over the months that MMR has been active, but that doesn't actually make it true.
I've never heard a good argument for why the way the MMR is calculated is wrong, it usually seems to boil down to people misunderstanding what the system is for- a focus on measuring individual skill within a specific match, instead of sorting into general skill brackets.
The devs do understand that there's more to the game than living or dying, and their responses make sense overall. Those things matter in a single match, but if you're looking at aggregate data, winrate is a good proxy for also measuring not only what plays are being attempted, but also how many pay off.
"I've never heard a good argument for why the way the MMR is calculated is wrong, it usually seems to boil down to people misunderstanding what the system is for- a focus on measuring individual skill within a specific match, instead of sorting into general skill brackets."
I feel like I had a pretty good argument there. You can literally play like a god against people out of your league, giving them a miserable time, but then choose to lower your MMR just to give them the "win" at the end, even tho the match itself was terrible.
Having more variables doesn't "sort it into general skill brackets". You use all the different variables to calculate the player's overall skill. You don't go "oh this person is good at looping killers, match him with a killer who's good at catching survivors". But it's still a variable that determines skill. Living or dying or getting kills does not determine this at all, as skillful players can make the choice to avoid it.
-
@EntitySpawn said:
Can the devs just admit kills and escapes is not a SBMM?
I mean everyone in the community at the higher level knows it and you're just encouraging a bad playstyle which results in unhappy players for both sides.
Killers dont enjoy the way they are forced to play to "win" and survivors dont enjoy it either. Why not have a actual SBMM that shows skill it would actually make people happier with your game.
You even said kills and escapes dont work, why put it in? Dont treat this game like a balanced 4v4, and dont compare it sports... in sports you dont need to score 3 times for a single point.
I'm not trying to be harsh, I'm just being honest. It's quite clear its unhealthy for the game and no one is happy about it.
And before people say "its because you're losing" it's not, most games I escape or get multiple kills. But the way its achieved isnt exciting nor fun, just because you can win doesn't make it a fun experience for either side.
Wow your post enlightened me.
It made me google how SBMM worked, and i can't believe it only depends on whether or not you die or escape as a survivor, or how many kills you get as a killer.
It made me literally go "wow how did these people even manage to make a functional game to begin with?" ... But then I remembered it's not really functional, there's so many bugs and poor design decisions, this game is barely just fun enough to keep playing but it has so many problems.
But yeah, this explains why me and my friends keep getting a lot of new killers, despite us having so much experience. We just play for fun and we don't care if we die, so we prioritize messing around instead of gen rushing, and happily give our lives to the killer at the end. However... This means the new killers we get are still learning the game and struggle with catching us, and often I can tell that they're not having fun. ... Which, makes us feel bad and give them pity kills, and then our MMR apparently lowers even more.
They need to make SBMM based off more than just kills/escapes. What ultimately decides who "wins" in this game is how much time is spent in chases. A skilled survivor can loop a killer for longer, and a skilled killer can catch his prey faster.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2820700#Comment_2820700
Gens don't regress while blocked, and ruins won't stay more than 30 seconds into a match.
You are overestimating a value of slowdown perks.
Biggest complaint is the fact survivors DOES NOT need anything to be OP, they already have most broken thing in the game... aka palette and windows.
are you sure they don't regress? I've seen ruin activate on the gens while they're blocked by Dead Man's Switch, and saw a youtuber mention ruin regresses the gens while dead man's is active. Either way, even after Ruin is gone and doctor uses this setup, it's an extremely powerful build
-
I don't get the complaints.
Boons are a big time waste for survivors, you spend time finding totems, then spend time blessing the totem. Imo the only worthwhile boon is the healing one, but even then it's more efficient to just bring a medkit. I've seen some smart killers just leave a healing boon up because they know survivors will flock there when hurt, so you can easily track them there.
But disregarding whether you agree with this or not, why the complaints? Killers have tons of perk combinations (especially when combined with some killer powers) that make survivors feel completely helpless.
A recent killer build that's nearly unbeatable that i've seen lately is a combination of Pain Resonance, causing the gen with the most progression to blow up when you hook someone, then Dead Man's Switch, to also block this generator for 45 seconds. Add Hex: Ruin on top of that to regress the generator into hell while it's blocked by the entity. For a 4th perk you can choose whatever, Lethal Pursuers to make sure you find survivors instantly since you need that first hook to start blocking gens. Or if you don't need that there's other generator slowdown perks or whatever. Now... Do this on Doctor, bring an offering for a small map (like The Game), and survivors literally cannot win. Your AoE shock as doctor will hit basically the entire map, force people off the generators, trigger Dead Man's Switch, regress the generators for 45 seconds with Ruin boost, and you have all the time in the world to catch the survivors.
My point with this is that the side who wins the game is determined by whoever try-hards the most. This game simply isn't balanced -- For either side. So complaining about "survivors are OP" or "killers are OP" doesn't help, because both sides have OP setups if you combine the right things.
Whoever try-hards the most will "win" the match. But the real winners are those who just play for fun and bring perks that they enjoy using, rather than people who just care about winning. A lot of people forget that the main point of gaming is to have fun, not just whether you scored the highest.
-
@douggie123 said:
So today I'm playing plague and enter the match there are two no mithers, fair enough I assumed they were doing a challenge or do no mither repair build. However I find them both on a gen so I chase them and the one I'm chasing goes over to the far corner, i down them and pick them up and head over to hook them only for the other no mither to break a hook. So I go to the other hook and manage to get a hook. But then it gets worse I get chasing the other one and the previous one is saved and had breakdown. I down the other one and the previous one breaks the other closest hook by this time they have broke free and they continued doing it breaking hooks etc. I slug camped one of them and kept downing them over and over at this point I'm past caring about gens all I'm thinking is it's hard enough to get hooks and kills etc without two Comedians making it worse. I facecamp the other one and let the others escape. Now I don't facecamp and tunnel but these two thought they were so funny hook saboing and teabagging when they did etc. So I feel I was well within my rights to screw them over.
There build
Sabo toolbox and the Sabo addons
Saboteur
No mither
Breakdown
Flip flop I think
Sorry for the seemingly pathetic rant etc but just needed to express how much I hate toxicity like that. There is general toxicity which I understand and can usually manage and then that.
What are you guys thoughts did I do the right thing if not how would you have approached this. Oh by the way the other survivors weren't pissing about like this they were doing there task.
Sensible comments please and not toxic ones
Survivors like this usually just want to do a meme build "for fun". Often they care more about using their perks than they care about progressing the objective by doing gens, so the best thing you can do is to ignore them and go for the other 2 survivors who are more likely to get generators done.
Those 2 clowns with no mither would probably keep seeking you out even if you're chasing the other survivors, so you can slow down gens by trying to not play like they want you to.
Don't feel bad for face camping tho. I generally don't condone it, but if the survivors act in a way that makes you feel just done with the match, then it's their own fault.
-
They have definitely not fixed it.
Keeps happening WAY too often for it to be acceptable.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596280#Comment_2596280
Thank you for pointing that out.
I can't believe killers are still complaining. What we have here is a survivor, not doing the objective, but looking for a hard to find totem to give them ability to heal. That's too good to be true for killers.
Every time I use the boon, even if it is in an inconspicuous location, killers are drawn to it from their loud emitting sound. Hex perks should give off this sound to be fair.
I agreed with everything you said up until the point when you said hexes should also make a sound. That'd be a bit too survivor sided, we break that permanently after all.
Since we can re-bless totems, i think it's fair that killers can find and remove boons easily, and that survivors have to work harder to find and break a hex.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596328#Comment_2596328
Pretty conveniently ignoring that it takes one out of four survivors not progressing the match. The others are doing just fine.
The break action is fast, but finding and navigating to the thing are not necessarily so. If it takes five seconds to do so that's twenty survivor seconds. So the net total time loss comes out in the survivors favor.
When writing it, I was considering the time that one survivor is wasting. If killer puts pressure and hooks a survivor, you'll have 1 survivor doing boons, 1 survivor on the hook, 1 survivor going for the rescue and 1 survivor on a gen, who should be your next target.
I have had matches where people run around for minutes just looking for a dull totem, so the "navigating to the totem" part can be said for both sides. Survivors don't have any noise indicator where totem is either.
You seem to also conveniently ignore the counters i mentioned to prevent boons from being useful. It takes 24 seconds to bless a hex totem, and up to 36 seconds with Thrill of the Hunt active. And with undying, you'll see any survivor trying to bless a dull totem instead and you'll have 14 seconds to get there and hit them.
If boons are so good that you think it'll be the new meta, then you can change your perks to counter that. It can be annoying to have to change your perks just to counter other people sometimes, but it's something both sides have to deal with.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
They need some kind of limit, either a limited number of uses, or conditions-based recharge of use, or killer being notified when a blessing starts, or a time limit that the perk runs before needing to be reblessed. Something.
I also don't like that survivors get to have their cake and eat it to with hex totems, by getting to bless over it instead of having to chose between using their perk or getting rid of a hex.
Furthermore, they need to adjust all totem based perks and interactions, because there are still gray areas regarding points for blessing totems, ds not deactivating, etc. This is just evidence that boon totems were rushed in development and implemented poorly.
Finding and blessing a dull totem takes time but doesn't progress the match for survivors. Killer can break it fast, so breaking it makes the survivor waste even more time setting it up again.
Blessing a hex totem takes much longer than cleansing it (almost twice as long), so there's still a benefit from just cleansing it to get rid of it. If you're running Thrill of the Hunt you can make it even slower to bless it, and running Undying helps you catch any survivor who try to bless a dull totem.
-
I've never played Deathslinger, but playing against him felt fine before the nerf. Not sure why he got one.