Reinami
Reinami
About
- Username
- Reinami
- Joined
- Visits
- 6,317
- Last Active
Comments
-
@xEa said:
Its been ages since i created one and i thought why not redo it just for fun.
What would you change?
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/OYHFV0Z97A9T/my-image-2821-29.png
Nurse and spirit tournament viable. Everyone else D tier ordered by apparent power level.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332258#Comment_2332258
For the 101th time: game design flaws shouldn't be compensated with perks.
Killer crows would be a bandaid though, Really they should give solos a ping style system similar to what Scott Jund mentioned a while back. Where you ping like: "I'm on a generator", "I found a hex", "I'm going for the save", "The killer is near the hook"
-
@xEa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332197#Comment_2332197
In our case, it dose not really matter what devs think and do, because we are talking about "our" philosophy off this game and your statement. If we wanna bring this game to an average level, according to the stats, we would be forced to nerf the Nurse, and even more every other killer.
Last but not least i want to add that like i said, it would be much more healthy if hard killers like Nurse would be changed so average players could handle her better and then nerf her. Thats how good ballance work in my opinion - not relying that a killer is to difficult in general - IF we assume we want this game to be for average people.
My philosophy is that the game should be balanced around high level players in general i think what you say about nurse is true. I'm a nurse main, and i generally 4k more than 90% of may games. I think she needs a complete rework. But i also think that this game needs to be fixed such that survivors don't completely dominate (with the exception of nurse) at the highest level. My point of this thread is to point out the hypocrisy of the general people who think the game should be balanced around average players. Those same people, will claim that nurse and spirit need nerfs. When, if you follow their logic, nurse actually needs buffs.
-
@PigMainBigBrain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332215#Comment_2332215
The game should be balanced around high level play...point blank...period. Just for pure logical reasons you're dealing with human beings. Which in any GAME at high level WILL ABSOLUTELY without fail use every exploit and advantage to win the game. Developers can't make logical balance changes to MMOs or any other game if they only look at statistics and playstyles of people who've only reached level 10 and are still fighting Pigs in the starting area. Same applies to MOBA's, competative shooters, etc.
If your END GAME isn't balanced you effectively DON'T HAVE A GAME.
The amount of copium people discuss about balance changes runs completely contradictory to any other game they would usually play. And the only reason people bother running contradictions as such, is because the devs of this game have already let the window open to be swayed by bad balance threads and decisions. So you end up with a buncha dumb threads, with dumb takes from people who've played the game for a month or 2, and haven't thought any deeper into their own play habits or skill level. When I was new some of my takes were dumb as hell as well. Up until you get the experience and play the game at a high level a lot of what people say is pure garbage because they haven't sat down and thought about anything past the Queue button.
Tac on BHVR's garbage matchmaking and all these guys running tournaments have to adjust the rules to make up for how shoddy this games been thought out.
In the short run, the balance decisions are annoying. In the long run, the balance decisions are a retention killer. Seen it before with Evolve, Seen it before with DeathGarden, saw it with The Predator, Aliens vs game, the list goes on and those games are no longer around/dead.
Player vs player games should always be balanced around end game players...period. League, HoTS, Dota, CS-GO, Modern Warfare, WoW, etc etc etc. Those games PVP and communities didn't go anywhere and lasted as long as they did because devs were aware of how their game operated in the best of hands. And would even make nerfs based on those things. Even if they wanted this game to be casual, they would still have to balance around people who weren't casual who can abuse the methods of the game to pretty much break it.
I agree, my point of this thread is to point out the hypocrisy of people who say that it shouldn't be.
-
@Edgars_Raven said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332217#Comment_2332217
Anyone you ask is going to tell you a 3k and above is a win. Out of 8 games you only lost once and had a draw on 2. You averaged 2.8 kills per game. I understand you got none of your adepts but sheesh
Pipping system disagrees with you.
-
@Acromio said:
With Spirit. No, seriously.
I said without nurse/spirit/blight.
-
@PigMainBigBrain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332121#Comment_2332121
His post isn't rocket science....but you need to re-read it.
I also missed it, but after re-reading HIS post, it shows pretty heavily which direction his bias lies right? By saying that "Nurse and spirit are too strong for the average player" he is coming at it from the survivor perspective, and not thinking about "Nurse and spirit in the HANDS of the average player"
-
@Kira4Evr said:
Nurse doesn't need a nerf. Spirit however, oh boy...
Only good spirits can do well though. Thus the ultimate point of this thread.
-
@HaunterofShadows said:
I'm confused as to what the hell is supposed to be talked about in this thread
Read the post right above yours.
-
@xEa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332176#Comment_2332176
Well again... when she is to weak because she is so difficult, she needs to be changed so she is easier to play to fit for the average player.
Said that, 57% is still above average.
True that 57% is above 50% the average. But in that same chart, they buffed clown, wraith and demo. All 3 are killers who are above nurse in that kill rate. Logic would dictate that they felt those 3 killers were too weak and made changes to them. Thus logic would dictate every killer below wraith (the highest kill rate one that was buffed) must also be underpowered and need a buff.
-
@Shooby said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332176#Comment_2332176
I'm curious about your interpretation of game and character balance.
If Nurse has the lowest kill rate, but is the best killer when played at the highest level, is that balanced?
In her current state, going off of the statistics, is she balanced?
I believe the game should be balanced around the highest level players. So i think that in that mind that nurse and spirit are the only viable killers, and survivors as a whole probably need to be nerfed, while those 2 killers nerfed as well and then buff the worst killers as we move along.
The point i'm making is that, there are 2 philosophies at play here. Should the game be balanced around the highest level players or the average? If the average, then that logic demands that nurse be buffed. If the highest players, that logic demands that survivors be nerfed.
This post is about highlighting the hypocrisy people exhibit when talking about this. Whenever i bring up how insane survivors are at the highest level, i get told "the game shouldn't be balanced around them" but then those same people go and make threads and complain about spirit and to a lesser extend nurse. I'm merely pointing out, that by following their logic to it's ultimate conclusion, you must buff nurse.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332182#Comment_2332182
8th of December, I think maybe you should wear a watch or something.
The use of keys is heavily exaggerated on the forums though so.
Ah, my bad, only 7 months, that is so much better.....
Last time i post on this though. Please answer my question.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332178#Comment_2332178
Which will hopefully be a moot point once they actually rework keys, but changing franklins isn't a buff to survivors, lol.
Yeah, maybe like 5 years later. They nerfed moris like a year ago at this point?
Not that it matters, not gonna engage on this anymore, my main point is the logic train posted. Either the game should or should not be balanced around high level players. Which do you think it is?
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332086#Comment_2332086
No, nerf means nerf. If having it where there is an even chance to counter her is a nerf then she wasn't balanced properly to begin with.
Explain any type of counterplay you could possibly imagine you give spirit that does not make her inherently weaker. I'll wait.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332066#Comment_2332066
What survivor buffs have their been recently?
Most recently? Probably the franklin's nerf for keys.
-
@xEa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332161#Comment_2332161
Well, if this is statisticly the case, then there are 2 things to do: Nerf the Nurse but make her easier to play.
Incorrect. I'm following the logic here. Here are the stats as they released a while back:
Since these stats were released, the following major changes have happened: Freddy and Billy have been nerfed, Demo, Wraith and clown were buffed. It stands to reason that somewhere between billy and wraith is what they consider to be "balanced" But looking at this nurse is statistically BY FAR the worst killer.
If we are balancing the game around the average players, she needs to be buffed.
-
wrong thread.
-
@xEa said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/5NRMWLC4CL7R/tenor1.gif
If i have not totally missread your post, i dont get your logic at all.
If we want this game to be ballanced for the average player - then Nurse and Spirit have to get nerfed, since they are to strong for the average player. Top tier killer are ballanced for Top tier survivors. Average killer are ballanced for average survivor. Pretty simply, right?
A decent Spirit is still much stronger then a decent Doctor for example.
No, because in the hands of the average player, nurse is the worst killer in the game. The statistics show that. That is my point. So, by that logic, if we balance the game around the average player instead of the best, we need to buff nurse. If we balance around high level players, nurse is actually fine since her win rate in high levels is still very low. Tournament play shows only 1 or 2 killers are even viable, let alone overpowered.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
Not sure everyone knows it, I see tons of people here that think the game is rigged in favor of killers.
Literally every content creator says this is true. Even the ones people love.
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
I get it that the chase is a big part of the game, so I understand some people's frustrations at such a simple tactic.
But I find that hyperfocusing on this and not seeing the ways killers make up time with their powers does nothing for the conversation.
For example - I as a Doc main don't mind longer chases so much because I literally spend zero time trying to find somebody. So little of my time is wasted finding people, I can afford to spend a little more time in a chase.
But I think the problem many killers are having is that they aren't willing to give up a chase when they really should. I mean, if I actually get stopped at a pallet and the guy holds W, I take out the pallet then move on then pressure somebody else off a gen. There's always a weaker link I can find and down.
Frankly, I see the hold W thing that's been around since day 1 to be a non-issue. The problem is certain influencers who overestimate how much the top-tier balance actually matters in the context of the entire game.
The problem is time efficiency. If it takes me 30 seconds to land a hit, and survivors 16 seconds to heal that, it doesn't work when there are 4 of them.
-
@Squirrel_Thicc said:
No game should ever be balanced around high level gameplay. Most people who play video games are casual and doing that kills games so easily. That's exactly what they did with overwatch and now that game is dead as hell.
If we balanced around high level gameplay in dbd then nurse and blight would've been nerfed into the ground by now, and they'd be borderline impossible for anyone to learn if you didn't already play them.
Overwatch's problem is the exact opposite. High level play is extremely boring, you just dance around each other until everyone charges their ultimate, both teams blow all their ultimate's and whoever wins gets to gain ground. Rinse and repeat for 10 minutes. It's because they DIDN'T balance around high level play that it has a problem. High level play is boring. the same can be said with DBD where high level play is "hold w, drop pallets immediately" and killers just tunnel and camp.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
Nobody is asking for a Nurse nerf. She has counter play. Not so much against a God Nurse, but then you simply got out played.
As for Spirit, I'd say most people don't want a nerf. At least not exactly. Rather they want some indication she's phasing so she has meaningful counterplay.
Counterplay is just a thinly veiled way of saying "nerf"
-
@OldHunterLight said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2332044#Comment_2332044
Tru3talent's example of counterplay "good read, bad read" I too saw his video just saying that and never actually gave an example all he said was "good read, bad read"
You are probably just speaking of a video he played against one, he has several where he actually talks about the strategy of what you do, and then he has videos where he executes on that strategy.
-
@SleepyWillo said:
counterplay =/= nerf
Spirit does have counterplay, Tru3talent regularly posts videos of him winning against spirits and how to do it. The community's argument against that is always "that spirit was bad" But, if that is the case, then we should be nerfing survivors, because then we'd be balance around high level players and not average players, right? You can't have it both ways.
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331889#Comment_2331889
Yes, but if I had to answer the question of "If balance can't be perfect and had to lean a certain way" I would always prefer it slightly favor survivors as the game simply needs 4x as many Survivor players in order to not have horribly queue times that would kill the game.
Balance leaning the way it does currently already has horrible queue times for survivors. If killers don't want to play the game because it is unfair, they'll just stop playing. MMR will lead to that if they don't fix things.
-
Let me ask you this. If DbD's balance was flipped such that killers won overwhelmingly a large amount of time at the high level, but in "average" play, killers lost most of the time, would you still think that the game should only be balanced around those "average" level of players?
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331827#Comment_2331827
In literally none of these examples are the the 1v4 nature of DBD, which is why the comparisons make no sense. In CS, if one of your teammates gets AWP'd through the dust2 doors within the first 5 seconds of the match, your side can still easily win the round. In DBD, if one of your teammates dies with 5 gens up, you cannot win in any possible way. You keep ignoring the 1v4 aspect that separates DBD from every single thing you are talking about.
In CS:GO i'll give you that is true due to the very high TTK, but there are plenty of games where the snowball potential is massive that still hold some level of asymmetry. For example Starcraft has a massive snowball potential, so much so that if you have one bad fight, you often just surrender, because otherwise you'd spend 30 minutes of a slow drawn out game that you are "guaranteed" to lose. The same can be true for MobAs which, again, have some level (yes, not nearly as much as dbd, but it does exist) of asymmetry. If you have 1 player on your team dying a lot in a moba, you probably just lost your team the whole game.
However, it sounds like to me you are saying that the game can't be balanced because it is both a team game, that relies on the 1v4, but is also asymmetrical.
What is so different about asymmetrical games that you can't have balance? The cardgame Netrunner for example, is pretty damn balanced, even though both sides have completely different win conditions.
If your point is that it's hard, i'll agree with you there. The asymmetry aspect definitely makes it harder. but it doesn't make it impossible.
-
@zarr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331827#Comment_2331827
As someone who grew up playing CS, i can tell you that there is MASSIVE difference between the 2 sides. Attack vs defense in a game of slow paced, holding angles calculated play makes both sides play VASTLY differently within the context of that game.
Don't wanna intrude on your larger discussion with Scott Jund (though I do believe he has a point with DbD's asymmetrical nature posing unique problems for the balancing approach, as I've stated myself before), but this argument doesn't hold. In CS you change sides at the half-time point, both teams play both sides and have equal opportunities of performing on both sides. There is no asymmetry in the competitive premise (similar to how DbD tournaments do it, though obviously DbD has a bunch of RNG aspects CS has none of, so CS is definitely still more competitively viable).
Not exactly true, you do change sides but not necessarily at the "halfway point" of the match.
For example, a CS:GO game is played for 30 rounds, if a team wins 16 rounds, they win. you switch sides in the "halfway point" at 15 rounds played. But, the score isn't necessarily the same, and it carries over. If my team won 15 rounds, we only need to win the pistol round, so you just played the entire game without "really" switching sides that much. You don't equally get to play both sides in a single match of CS:GO.
In this case, let's say the game was balanced such that CTs won 90% of the time. You'd have matches where you go 13-2 in the first half, but then the second team has massive pressure, where a single round lost is far more punishing to them and they have a huge hill to climb. Psychologicallyit would be a problem.
Personally i'm not experienced enough in R6 to know if the same is true there as i haven't played it before, but i have watched it a bit, but definitely not qualified to really comment on it much other than the one liner i said.
But i do understand your point, but my entire argument is that EVERY game has levels of asymmetry and can be balanced, and just because there is asymmetry does not mean it can't be balanced.
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331832#Comment_2331832
Right but I've never said Nurse (other than Omegablink which was ridiculous) or Spirit need to be nerfed so I'm not sure what your point is.
You also create a false argument of "why its okay for survivors to be boring but not a killer." Its not. Its not okay survivors can just spam drop 20 safe pallets on the game either.
And yet i'm saying it should be fixed, and every time i do the response is always "that's only high level survivors and is so rare, we shouldn't balance around that" Do you see my point?
And you always are careful and say spirit needs "counterplay" which, let's be honest, that would be a nerf. You even admit it in your videos that adding counterplay to spirit would be nerfing her.
-
@zarr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331748#Comment_2331748
There are a few issues with the rhetoric of those questions as I see it. Again, high-level matches are almost non-existently rare in the current matchmaking environment, so much so that if you are looking for high-level play, you already have no real reason to be playing this game. Unless you are playing in tournaments, but then if you are playing in tournaments, the game is actually reasonably balanced: in tournaments, both teams play both sides, the asymmetrical format of the game is broken by a symmetrical tournament format, and therefore all balance concerns that stem from that asymmetrical game format are also irrelevant; if both teams have to play the same killer character, both sides suffer and benefit equally from how weak that killer is or isn't.
In general, the reason you would want to bother getting better at DbD is because it's fun and satisfying, and because being good at the game actually does reward you. Even at the very top level the game is not nearly a "95% to 5%" affair, 2-4ks happen in tournaments all the time (and this is ignoring the fact that again, in tournaments killer vs. survivor balance does not even matter as a competitive premise in and of itself), so becoming a better player allows you to perform more successfully even there. To take an example for this from a topic you brought up in a recent conversation with me: Dowsey played Spirit against Oracle and did not do too well, getting 1ks with 4-6 hook stages if I remember correctly. Yet Dowsey is a very experienced and solidly-skilled killer player, he is definitely a "1%" killer main. If you look at tournaments, there have been players that kinda demolished Oracle. At least, there have been instances of them getting 4k'd by Spirits, and getting 2-3k'd is not even all that rare. So you can see that even from a multiple-thousand hour veteran player that streams the game more or less as a job there is still quite a steep curve up to the "0.1%" of players. The vast majority of players will never reach those heights, even Dowsey himself said it takes a ton of consistent practice against those high-level teams to perform at that level, and that he is not in the mindset and practice and experience to do so. I'm not saying you will never reach those levels, but if you aren't already competing in tournaments on the regular, chances are you still have a pretty huge, rewarding room for improvement.
...And then in public matchmaking (read: 99% of the gameplay experiences being had in this game), becoming better actually allows you to do very well on a consistent basis. In fact, getting better is much, much more rewarding on the killer side in that environment. As a survivor you will always be at the mercy to a large extent of your fellow survivors' levels of skills, experience, knowledge and even their levels of trying to win the game to begin with. Whereas as a killer, your performance is fundamentally in your hands, you constitute 100% of the performance potential of the killer side, you can decide which killer you play with which loadout and the way in which you play, all of your skills and experience translate completely into your "side's" performance. That this is true is easy to demonstrate: the best survivor players in this game die all the time in public matchmaking; the best killer players almost never lose. Take Dowsey, who as mentioned is not even at the very very top. He has 4k streaks of hundreds of matches in a row. So do other players, with a variety of killers very much including the weaker ones. There are Nurse players with 500+ game 4k streaks. The consistency with which you can dominate as killer in public matchmaking if you are good at the game is impressive. If you like winning, becoming better in DbD should be really attractive to you, all the more so as a killer player.
This argument is also flawed about "high level matches are rare in matchmaking" for several reasons.
1) MMR is coming, whether you like it or not. If someone is high MMR, every match they play will be high-level. Even Scott admits he hates this and will be a problem. If balance between the 2 sides is not addressed, MMR will end this game one way or another.
2) Just because something is rare doesn't mean it isn't important. Let's imagine for a second we had a killer offering that existed in the game. It had a 0.1% chance to appear in the bloodweb and does the following:
- All survivors are permanently exposed.
- the aura of all survivors is permanent revealed to the killer.
- The killer automatically gets maximum point bonuses for bloodpoints and pips in all categories.
- The killer's movement speed is increased by 100%. (double)
Now, would such an offering be balanced, fair and undeserving of change? It's power would mean that it likely would be banned in tournament play, so we don't have to worry about that. And in average level of play, it would only appear 1 out of every 1000 games, so it should be fine right?
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331794#Comment_2331794
Oh please, don't even try to lump CS:GO and R6S in the same category of asymmetrical that Dead by Daylight is.
This brings me to my ultimate point though, you are very outspoken about how spirit needs nerfs or changes. Yet some content creators post videos about how you can counter spirit and yours, and the communities, argument is "those spirits are bad"
You can't fundamentally say: "the game should not be balanced around high level players" and also "nurse and spirit need nerfs" In fact, using your logic, the devs need to BUFF nurse because, by the stats, in the hands of the "average" player that you so desperately want to balance the game around, nurse is the worst kill in the game.
You also in one video, say "spirit's counterplay is boring, you just drop pallets and hope it works" and yet that is exactly what high level survivors do, hold w, and drop pallets. Why is it ok for survivors to be boring, but not a killer?
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331794#Comment_2331794
Oh please, don't even try to lump CS:GO and R6S in the same category of asymmetrical that Dead by Daylight is.
But that's the point. Every single game has some level of asymmetry. It just has varying degrees of it.
As someone who grew up playing CS, i can tell you that there is MASSIVE difference between the 2 sides. Attack vs defense in a game of slow paced, holding angles calculated play makes both sides play VASTLY differently within the context of that game.
Fighting games have asymmetry between different characters, even in mirror matches, you play on different sides. Character classes, abilities, skills, talents, levels, gear, different weapon choices all contribute to asymmetry.
Even CHESS has some level of asymmetry.
Eternal Return, is releasing a character soon that literally wins the game (a battle royal) by doing something entirely different than every other character in the game. And i don't mean like, different abilities, i mean that they literally have a different win condition.
Just because there is asymmetry does not mean you can't have balance.
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331741#Comment_2331741
Okay now name all the asymmetrical ones.
Natural Selection.
CS:GO (1 side defense and 1 side attacks, different weapons).
Rainbow 6: Siege.
-
@Yatol said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331741#Comment_2331741
League of legends
there hasn't been many competitive games that lasted more than 10 years, wich most where balanced around high level players
You are definitely wrong about that, and believe me i know.
-
@zarr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331609#Comment_2331609
It would indeed be impossible to go into all the different nuances of skill levels that go into chaseplay, that spectrum is pretty huge. Therefore I find it unreasonable to assume that it would be possible to make significant balancing changes that actually only really affect the highest level of that gameplay without having a big ripple through the other levels. In fact I even find the admittedly overly simplistic conception of that relationship more realistic still, i. e. that cutting the top performance ceiling in half would also halve the average performance expectation.
But like I said, there are definitely more targeted, specific, less global, more "surgical" balance changes that can be made that won't really be problematic for the average experience but solve problems at the upper end. Such as re-addressing the safety and spawn patterns of pallet-containing structures on Cowshed. The average survival rate on that map is not even all that different from a bunch of others, but it's definitely one of the most survivor-sided maps in the game. So it is reasonable to think that map can be tamed for the high level without affecting the average too much. And there are more specific examples like that. But the idea that "survivor gameplay at large" would have to be significantly limited so that the best players cannot reach the heights that they do now is just not realistic. But maybe you aren't even one of the people advocating for "survivor nerfs" without that caveat.
But if the game is not balanced at high level play, why would i bother playing it and getting better? Why bother learning new things or improving? Why bother even playing.
If chess at a high level was played such that white won 95% of the time and black won 5% of the time, do you think anyone would actually play chess?
-
@Yatol said:
Balancing a game around high level players is a bad idea and can be almost pointless.
Name a single competitive game that has lasted more than 10 years that isn't balanced for high level players.
-
I obviously hit a nerve.
-
@zarr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331517#Comment_2331517
This seems relatively obvious to me. That entire realm of those "varying degrees" between the two extremes of survivor skill levels would suffer a lot from changes aimed to decrease the overall survivor performance ceiling. Using your example, say you have a performance potential spectrum ranging from really bad players that last 10 seconds in chases to really good ones that last 2 minutes. The average performance that would make for the majority playing experience in that environment is survivors roughly lasting a minute. Now if you decrease the ceiling to 1 minute for the best players, average players will only be expected to last around 30 seconds. By limiting the spectrum you are hampering the average performance significantly. And in the current environment the average survivor performance is already not enough for them to survive 50% of the time.
To note: I'm not saying there aren't busted setups that can spawn, or maps that are busted altogether. Absolutely there are, not like I think Cowshed is totally fine, the "peak performance potential" of a highly-killed survivor on that map against much of the killer line-up is just oppressively high. Like I said, there are still absolutely balance-relevant changes left to ideally be made to the game, for both roles. I hope MMR will be enabled for good sooner rather than later - I believe it will highlight for the devs very clearly some of the glaring balance issues in the game. I mean, just look at the fact that in the current willy-nilly matchmaking system, even the least-deadly killer on the most survivor-favoured map still averages more than 2 kills per match, even in red ranks. Likewise the fact that Nurse has one of the lowest kill rates, also even in red ranks. This would change significantly in the statistics of an MMR environment. And BHVR really does look at stats a lot. So I think the eventual activation of MMR will be the first step to larger balance adjustments. Hopefully.
That's not actually true though, but admittedly i glanced over that due to time. Again, i can't possibly list of every level of skilled survivor, but let's look at that middle ground and break the game into 5 types of survivor players.
- Survivors who go down in 10 seconds because they don't know how to play the game (where we all started)
- Survivors who have an understanding of how the game works and go down in 20 seconds.
- Survivors who understand how basic tiles and pallets work and can win mindgames against the killer sometimes at certain tiles. These ones, when they win the mindgame, can last 60 seconds, but when they don't they go down in 30 seconds.
- Survivors who have a strong understanding of tiles and can win mindgames most of the time, so they go down in 60 seconds at a tile.
- Survivors who are tournament level players who can exploit tiles to, depending on RNG, be completely uncatchable, or waste several minutes of the killers time.
Again, if you fix the ones that can waste minutes of someone's time, it doesn't affect the others as harshly, but i do agree they aren't completely immune. But the difference between these isn't like, you fix high level survivors so now everyone else goes down in 10 seconds. That isn't how it will work out.
- The ones who go down in 10 seconds, still go down in 10 seconds
- The ones who go down in 20 seconds, still go down in 20 seconds.
- The ones who understand how tiles work and can mindgame the killers, initially will have to relearn the mindgames and would have a harder time if the tiles are changed significantly, but they have shown the capacity to learn these things and will continue to get better and learn.
- Survivors who heavily know the tiles will initially have to relearn tiles, but they have shown mastery over each individual tile and will easily get to that level again after only a few days really.
- Survivors at this level are the most affected.
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331033#Comment_2331033
You seem to not really have any knowledge on the subject despite being arrogant about it, so I'll explain why Evolve died:
1.) You couldn't always play the role you wanted to play. This created a huge issue immediately. Its like if you wanted to play killer but the game said no, you're playing Survivor now.
2.) Microtransactions that make Behavior look like saints.
3.) Ironically, they massively pushed e-sports for the game despite the fact it does not at all work in these types of games.
4.) The monster basically had no way to do anything until they hit Stage 3, which created an incredibly bland early game where the much stronger hunters would just beat the hell out of the monster until they got Stage 3 .
5.) Much like DBD, very high level coordinated teams would usually defeat the monster. This I agree with. And yet, Evolve died in less than a year and DBD is still going strong after 5 years, so obviously that's not a mitigating factor whatsoever.
I wonder if you will still hold your belief that the game should not be balanced around high level play when MMR happens and every single game you play will require you to play nurse. Because you will be one of those players. You are good at this game and you play it so much you are going to be high MMR. Maybe you can avoid it by playing "memey" on some killers but eventually it will catch up to you.
I know from your videos that you don't like the idea of MMR, but the devs are obviously pushing it. So it is going to happen.
-
@zarr said:
There are multiple issues with balancing approaches to DbD.
To start with, the game is asymmetrical, so balancing it for high-level play is difficult. "Balance" in symmetrical competitions actually scales with skill levels pretty linearly, but in an asymmetrical format what would be balanced in a high-skill setting might be completely skewed once you have varying levels of skills involved. Particularly, the killer side benefits much more from player skill because the skill of the player constitutes the entire killer side of the balance equation, whereas any single survivor player cannot possibly do everything alone, they constitute in theory only 25% of the survivors side of that equation. Simply put, if a survivor player is more skilled than a killer player, that does not necessarily put the survivor side at an advantage in the match; on the contrary, if a killer player is more skilled than a survivor player, that should usually have a lot more of an impact on the outcome of the round. Again, the impact the killer player's skill can have on a match is four-fold that of any individual survivor player's, in theory. I think this is a major reason why the game in its current and past state (that is, with a matchmaking system that throws players together more or less willy-nilly) is notably killer-sided, in the public game mode.
Then there is the fact that every single match has different competitive starting conditions: map, killer, items, add-ons, perks, offerings, they all affect balance in different significant ways, and you cannot achieve a global balance for all of these things. Clown is a relatively weak killer, but use Redhead's Pinky Finger and you are a much greater threat. In order to account for these things, a balance approach would end up getting impractically complicated, such as... different generator repair times based on which killers, add-ons, items and such are in play. It's just not feasible.
And then there is the fact that the performance potential differences between solo, duo, trio and quad SWF survivor groups are tremendous. Balancing for the "highest level" would mean balancing for the idea of a team of 4 highly-skilled survivors that know each other, play together frequently, therefore have natural and tactical teamwork, coordinate their loadouts and strategies down to a T and communicate constantly in practiced and efficient manners via voice chat. This is just factually a possibility of something that can happen in the game, it constitutes the highest level of performance a survivor side can reach. Yet in the actual game, we know that groups of 4 players queueing together only make up roughly 5% of the global player pool. Of those 5%, an even significantly smaller portion is comprised of 4 highly-skilled players. And of that tiny portion, even less are then also groups that play together all the time and have those coordinated loadouts, strategies and communication. It's simply vanishingly rare. You will basically never face a survivor team performing at the highest possible level in public matchmaking, even in years of gameplay.
This is not to say there isn't balancing possible in DbD. The game has of course become increasingly more balanced throughout the years, and there are still balance-relevant things left to be changed. For example, some killer characters are clearly weaker than others and there is no reason why they couldn't all be buffed to sit more toward the level of lethality that currently makes for the higher tier (with add-ons). But not Nurse or Spirit level. Basekit Blight level (or maybe Blight with Blighted Rat level, to be more precise). Other killers (such as Nurse and Spirit) and/or add-ons (such as Alchemist's Ring and Mother-Daughter Ring) could be adjusted downward to fit in with that level of lethality. Not only are there no issues associated with all killers being more equal in strength, but once they are, balancing base-game mechanics and specifics becomes much easier since you don't have to account for such a wide variety of killer performance potentials. For instance, I believe that basekit versions of Ruin and even NOED could be feasible for some killers... but that would obviously be insane to consider that for a killer like Nurse.
Other balancing that is possible is closing the performance potential gap between solo and SWF groups. The easiest way to get a good chunk of the way there would be to give survivors in-game voice communcation. Everything else is a much more complicated and convoluted undertaking, though I do believe that limiting SWF performance potential is much easier than improving that of solo groups, not least because killers would not have to be buffed to compensate. Things like limiting perks and items or decreasing generator repair speeds based on the number of players in an SWF group would be simple and effective ways to get more level playing fields.
And for something that BHVR is thankfully working on already (even though it took and still takes way too long to actually be implemented): The matchmaking system is one of the main leverage points to achieve a better live experience balancing. In the current rank-based matchmaking system, the skill disparity at any rank can be and regularly is huge. Players with 100 hours are treated no differently from players with 4000 hours. A "skill-based" matchmaking system that actually more consistently matches players with similar levels of skill, experience and success will make for a much more balanced global game experience, and also one that provides much better statistics for BHVR to then use in further balancing decisions.
Everyone always says this type of thing. Let me ask you, if you balance for high level players what changes? You have a few sets of survivors
- Ones who go down in 10 seconds because they don't understand the game
- Ones who go down in several minutes due abusing mechanics and being able to abuse broken RNG loops.
And you have players to varying degrees in between those 2.
Let's say you nerf the loops, or mechanics that make it so those survivors who waste minutes of a killers time can no longer do that, now they go down in 60 seconds. What happens to the other survivors?
The ones who go down in 10 seconds, are still going to go down in 10 seconds. You didn't make the game worse for them, but you made it better for the high level players.
-
@Luciferr_2nd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331481#Comment_2331481
Technically it would be a nerf, but the point isn't to make her weaker, but to make her more fun.
Also, spirit is strong in the hands of "average" killers, it doesnt take the top 0.01% of players to get a 4k with spirit.
We should be buffing nurse then right? https://static1.thegamerimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DBD-Red-ranks.jpg?q=50&fit=crop&w=740&dpr=1.5
My point is, you cannot hold both of these beliefs at the same time, they conflict with each other. You can't have it both ways. https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/263289/you-cannot-want-spirit-nursed-nerfed-but-not-survivors/p1?new=1
-
@TheStripyCat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2329567#Comment_2329567
I don't need you math, I have game experience and most survivors go down in 10-15 seconds. You describe an ideal situation when a survivor can run in opposite direction from the killer in a straight line for 44 seconds, that doesn't happen in game. We most often are on a gen in the corner or in the middle of one side of the map. It means we have to turn. And the killer will see the turn and cut the angle. Killers always catch up with me and my friend real fast. Especially if the killer has ranged attack and I have to zigzag to dodge. Besides, it's not that easy to understand where terrror radius originates. It seems easy in theory, but for casual gamers it's not. They just panic and run whichever way comes to mind. Often they run towards the killer. Even premonition doesn't help 100% because it's a cone and sometimes you are in a corner, the killer just crosses the cone from right to left, you think they are to the right of you, start running left and there they are meeting you with open arms.
That is my entire point. Most survivors go down in 10-15 seconds.
So let's imagine this scenario. We have 2 sets of survivors.
- The ones who go down in 10-15 seconds
- The ones who can abuse Shift + w to waste a killers time such that they lose 3 gens for the down.
Let's say they nerf or otherwise fix "hold w, drop pallets" What happens?
The survivors who abuse this mechanic no longer are able to abuse it, or when they do they get punished for it. The survivors who go down in 10-15 seconds, what happens to them? They continue to go down in 10-15 seconds. They aren't abusing these types of things to begin with, so nerfing or changing them doesn't affect them.
-
@Luciferr_2nd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2331447#Comment_2331447
Spirit - Mostly QoL changes, giving the survivors information and meaningful counterplay, wouldn't necessarily be a nerf but more just increasing the fun factor
Because i play more casually and for fun.
Nurse - I have no idea, i feel like she is really outdated so i guess a full rework? But i have no suggestions, and im not that passionate about the nurse topic.
Overall its fine to have strong killers in the game, i just want them to be fun to play as and against.
Saying spirit needs "counterplay" or "fun factor" added, is just a nerf.
You cannot fundamentally hold the idea that the game cannot be balanced around high level players, but then want spirit changed when she isn't that strong in the hands of "average" killers. If you do, you show your survivor bias.
-
Do you think nurse and spirit should be nerfed?
-
@Lumionesty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2329975#Comment_2329975
I believe there should be more counter play against a really good Spirit or Nurse. Blight for example is extremely powerful however even a really good Blight has a lot of counter play interaction between the survivor and the killer. I think Nurse and Spirit should be about the same.
But you see, you can't fundamentally hold these 2 beliefs at the same time. You say, the game should not be balanced around high level players, yet at the same time you say that nurse and spirit need
more counterplayto be nerfed. But, nurse and spirit are really only a problem in the hands of "high level players" Hell the statistics, for nurse HEAVILY show that nurse is the worst killer in the game by far. but this is due to average players bringing down her kill rate. Yet we all know that nurse is easily the best killer in the game.My point is, you can't have it both ways.
Either the game SHOULD be balanced around high level play, and we need to nerf survivors and nerf nurse/spirit/blight, or buff every other killer to be on part with nurse/spirit/blight.
OR.
The game SHOULD NOT be balanced around high level play, and we should leave nurse and spirit alone.
-
@NMCKE said:
Okay, just to make things super simple.
Dead by Daylight can never be balanced
This is because we have Solo Queue and SWF, which play completely different. You cannot accommodate the differences between the two of them, it's just impossible.
Even if you balance around the average between the two, you're still going to leave solo queue behind while SWF thrives. You cannot balance this game accurately until we close the communication gap that they have.
Before we choose how to balance the game, we need a foundation first.
Perfectly balanced? No i don't think its possible. No game is, unless you take that game and strip it down to basically having no differences between any perk/ability. But we can certainly get much closer than we are now i think.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
I'd like something where he forces a survivor to wear a mask that allows him to switch places with them wherever they are on the map. When the switch is done, he looks like the survivor and can attack their teammate.
I know this is asking a lot and isn't going to happen, but it would be nice.
It's a cool idea, but practically SWF completely ruins it.
-
@Jarol said:
How would you make Legion Tier-S?
First part:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/260944/how-would-you-make-the-clown-tier-s
2 things:
- Substantially increase the duration or movement speed of frenzy. As it stands now, if a survivor is 16 meters away and holds w, they can outrun the duration of the power. That is half a terror radius.
- Every time you hit a survivor in feral frenzy, reduce the cooldown time period (the 5 second "stun" at the end of the power) by 1 second. This would mean that if you can feral frenzy the entire team, you basically get a down.
-
@Lumionesty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2329672#Comment_2329672
Yeah but high level dbd constitutes like 0.01% of the whole player base. DBD is not trying to be some really competitive game built for esports like League or Counter strike. Therefore I believe it's far better to find balance for your average red rank game which constitutes a large portion of the active community rather than the 0.01% right at the top. If bhvr can find balance in high level dbd while also finding balance for your average lobby that would be great but I find that to be highly unlikely and I would rather have bhvr prioritize on your average lobby.
So let me ask you a question. Do you think nurse and spirit need to be nerfed?
-
@WexlerWendigo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2329629#Comment_2329629
He used a comp player as an example for how she has counterplay, but the same person said she has none in regular gameplay
You still aren't answering my question.
Should the game be balanced around high level players, yes or no? If yes, then only nurse and spirit and MAYBE blight are viable and every single other killer needs to be massively buffed or survivors heavily nerfed, additionally spirit is pretty balanced. If no, then why does spirit need a nerf when only high level spirits are actually a problem? Have you SEEN what an "average" spirit player does?