Seraphor
Seraphor
About
- Username
- Seraphor
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,011
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2476815#Comment_2476815
Thank you. I only watched the part where he used Stretched Resolution, this was already enough for me so I did not watch further.
But still I think that this is blown out of proportion by now. Nobody will ever know if someone is using stretched resolution or not, unless they are streaming. And I am quite sure that we will reach a point where Killers will start to blame Survivors for stretched resolution because they think it is the only way why they lost.
(Sure, it should be fixed, but I dont really give that much of a ######### about it, as I said, I will never know if someone is using stretched resotution... But there are also other things, like using Filters to make the game super-bright or just playing on low graphics to have an advantage... All this should not be possible, but it is whatever)
You can completely tell if someone is using stretched res.
I've played a game (ironically it was my one game against Tru3) where I spectated a random Nancy. She constantly had her camera pointed at the ground, where you could only see Nancy and basically none of her surroundings.
She was playing normally, as if she could see things miles away that weren't on the screen, and she escaped against Tru3s Nurse by playing immersed and seeing him halfway across the map when I could only see Nancy's feet.
I don't see how that's "blown out of proportion". Stretched res gives you a huge advantage, you can see things you shouldn't be able to, without putting yourself in any kind of vulnerable position, and now you can reveal GF when completely behind cover so...
-
I don't think we need to know what the win conditions are. They're going to be similar to the emblem system, and so you'll know if the outcome of your match was a 'good' one or not, based mainly on your pip progress and bloodpoint score. What else do you need? It's not going to be a binary win/lose situation, but more likely a 'good' result (a pip) will likely increase your MMR slightly, while a 'great' result (2 pips) will probably increase your MMR a bit more. 'Safety pips' will probably more-or-less equate to a static MMR, and 'losing a pip' (or relative equivalent) will be a reduced MMR, and the exact amounts of each of them will likely also vary depending on the outcome. They're not completely redesigning the wheel here, the emblem system is still going to be a fairly decent measure.
The point of no visible ranking is so that people aren't sweating to raise their Rank/MMR. The idea behind SBMM is that it doesn't matter what your skill level is, or how quickly it increases, you will be paired with teammates/opponents of a similar skill level so that your experience is more balanced and consistent.
If you're a highly skilled player, you will know it, and you won't need to 'maintain your rank 1 status' to prove it.
Your 'sense of growth' will be the Grade progression, which will largely be an indication of how much a player has played since the last reset, or rather if that player has made progress since the last reset, which would indicate a certain amount of 'wins'.
Basically for both of your first 2 points, I find it hard to believe and experienced player won't know what a good match is and whether or not they're growing as a player. If you don't, then you are not a good player, and you still have some ways to go.
Killer balance is a big thing, and it needs to be looked at. MMR will highlight these issues much more clearly and show which killers are thriving in which MMR brackets. IF the highest level of MMR is nothing but Nurses, Spirits and Blights, then they should be addressing it, but they need MMR to do that.
Ultimately however, if there are some weaker killers, it won't matter as much, because they will settle into their skill brackets, so long as there is some more variety at the top it'll be fine. e.g. if some killers get buffed to the extent that the top MMR bracket is not just Nurse/Spirit/Blight but also Wraith, Freddy, Nemesis, Billy, Hag, Oni and Huntress... that could be just fine, that's 10 killers at least. If they can't rework the entire game to accommodate slower killers with no map pressure at higher MMR, so be it. Those killers will still get played, and more often than they are currently.
Perks and Add-ons, in an ideal world, should count. At the very least, they should account for missing perks and perk tiers. Lets say each 'perk tier' (if we consider 4 tier III perks to be 12 tiers) increases base MMR by 1%, and each add-on rarity level (brown = 1 ... red = 5) increases MMR by 1% also, a full perk build with two Iridescent add-ons should increase your MMR by 22%.
I probably wouldn't count items for survivors, because they can find items within the game anyway. So it wouldn't be fair to reduce someone's MMR because they didn't bring an item, only for them to find a purple medkit in a chest.
But this is all a bit of a moot point because unless we end up locking our loadout before we queue up, there's no way perks and items/add-ons can be a factor in MMR. The most we can do is presume that more experienced players will be using better perks/items/add-ons, which is a fair assumption and will likely end up factoring into MMR indirectly anyway.
-
Agreed.
I think it's easier to tunnel someone intentionally without a hook counter, than it is to avoid tunnelling someone. It's easier to keep track of one person than all four people and tally up their hooks (and hook stages) in your mind.
But, if they really don't want to feed the killer this info, even something that only showed up as you're carrying the survivor would be cool.
Say you down a survivor who is on death hook. You pick them up, and as you do, a red skull flashes over their portrait. You can then drop them, to avoid sacrificing them yet, if you wish. At least that way you can't use it to tunnel someone (they're already down).
-
@fogdonkey said:
3 gen situations would be impossible to solve for survivors, so some modification is needed.
E.g. it gives as much % as many gens are remaining until exit gates powered.
This is also something I've suggested before.
5 gens = 5% instant regression... 1 gen remaining = 1% instant regression.
This would apply more pressure early on in the game, which is where you ideally want it. Whereas end-game kicking is usually a desperation move by the killer, and it wouldn't be fair to be too oppressive in a 3 gen situation or you'll end up with a stalemate and holding the game hostage.
-
Gideon, Midwich and RDP are pretty faithful licensed recreations, so they're limited as to how they can alter them. However I would love for RDP to have two variants, each with an alternate 'wing' of the map mostly blocked off.
Haddonfield should be able to shuffle the houses around though, and it needs a rework anyway so why not?
Ormond and Lery's are originals so absolutely should have more variants.
-
@Hippie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2475517#Comment_2475517
That sounds decent, but keep in mind that if Survivors are swarming a generator a Killer won't be able to keep it from being done with the regression being balanced around a single Survivor repairing the gen. At 3% regression, with 2 Survivors repairing the generator it would undo the Killer's 2 second kick in under 2 seconds!
I think it should take 2 seconds of commitment to repairing a gen before any repairs go through, at least if it's already regressing.
So if the gen is regressing (because you kicked it and applied 3% instant regression) then they would have to repair it for 2 seconds before repairs began, which means it would take 3 seconds to apply 1c, 4 seconds to apply 2c, etc.
This would make gen tapping a risky move, because similarly to Pop, the killer could come right back, kick the gen again within those 3 seconds of repairs, and apply another 3% regression.
-
Survivors repair at 1c/s and it takes 80 charges to complete, which means each second of repair is equal to 1.25% of the total progression.
If it takes the killer 2 seconds to kick, then tit-for-tat that should equate to 2.5% regression. Rounded up to 3% would be perfectly fine seeing as you have to commit to the kick animation to actually trigger regression, so accounting for player reaction times it's closer to 3 seconds anyway.
3% instant regression would be perfect. That would at least mean your action to kick the gen (minus any excessive travel time) is not wasted, even if a survivor jumps back on it immediately.
Pop should still cap out at 25%, not add to the base regression. Hell 25% might still be too much, it is a meta perk after all.
I like the idea of 1+1 for a perk though. Combined with this, it could be +1% base regression for each unique survivor hooked, so your kicks would end up with a permanent base regression of 7%. For a permanent Pop effect 7% seems reasonable. But would not stack with Pop because Pop should, as I mentioned, cap out at 25% no matter what.
-
For starters, I think Blood and Spirit should be swapped around. Seeing survivors auras even within 12 metres is way more oppressive than being able to vaguely track gen progression.
Then I would give the now Ultra Rare "All Seeing - Spirit" have an additional effect of "Slightly increases The Wraith's reappearance time" and the new Iridescent "All Seeing - Blood" have an additional effect of "Slightly increases The Wraith's reappearance and disappearance times"
-
I mainly play Wraith and Doctor. Wraith will rightfully have a high MMR, but my Doctor will probably start off with a higher than suitable MMR. I don't intend to stop playing him so I'll probably just play with him for a few weeks without his best add-ons/offerings until he settles.
But I'm looking forward to being able to play Demo and Plague without getting stomping on now. Plague maybe a little less so, but she's a ranged killer and I'm on console so I'm inherently worse than average with her.
-
Nothing about cross progression is confirmed yet, let alone what will be carried over. We still don't have even a rough time frame. There's also no financial incentive for them to rush it out, people paying for things multiple times is a pretty lucrative business model...
If you want to play Stranger Things content on PC, your best bet is to buy it now.
-
@Clowning said:
Wait, the release isn't confirmed for tomorrow? The main website says this, am I missing something?
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/KYCJJILDHN8L/hmmm.png
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2475323#Comment_2475323
It was only confirmed a day or two ago right?
-
@Mandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2475318#Comment_2475318
As far as I'm aware it's the highest grade you achieved...I can double check that though to make sure nothing has been changed, not today though cos the Office is closed as it's Labor Day in Canada.
Considering that there's a limit to how much you can regress, I'm presuming that you can't go back a grade colour, right? Like once you reach Iridescent IV, then you're guaranteed an Iridescent until the 13th?
Or is it individual grades? Like you don't 'downgrade' at all, but you can lose pips until you back at the start of Iridescent II, making it take a little longer to reach Iridescent I.
-
I always thought 'Rank' was a bit of a misnomer personally.
When I think 'rank 1' I think the single highest scoring individual, and 'rank 2' would be the second, etc. Or at the very least, percentiles, with 'rank 1' being the top 5% of the playerbase, etc.
That's how 'rankings' typically work in other competitive games, showing the 'top 100' players and where they each fall into the 'ranking' based on their score. Or something along those lines.
Given that Ranks in DBD were never relative to the skill of the playerbase as a whole, and instead entirely personal and dependant only on your own personal achievements, it always felt more like 'levels' or something else like that.
-
Of the killers I actually intend to play: Demogorgon, Oni and Plague. I'm so stoked to be able to play these guys now.
Of all killers: Nurse, Trapper, Leatherface, Huntress. But I doubt I'll be playing them anyway.
My time playing Wraith without sweating is probably coming to an end, but at the same time I'm not too pessimistic about my chances, because Wraith is pretty strong.
-
I would like to think we won't be reset to Ash IV on the 7th, seeing as the monthly reset is only 6 days later. That doesn't give anyone any time to reach a reasonable grade and earn any significant reward on the 13th.
I would hope that everyone is translated across by one colour. So if you're red rank, you start at Iridescent IV, purple rank goes to Gold IV, green to Silver IV, etc.
This would be a nice "welcome to SBMM" gift, and a good start to a new and untrusted system, to give everyone a bit of a bonus on the 13th.
-
@steezo_de said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2473386#Comment_2473386
There are new colors with numbers in the icons. I don't remember what meant what but there was some type of ranking in the PTB.
Those ranks have no connection to your MMR, they will reset to 20 each month so will only be a measure of how much you've played in the past month.
-
While I love Hawkins, as the best indoor map, the last three new maps have all been indoor, so an outdoor map would be a nice change of pace.
-
You literally have to pressure gens to get anything out of these perks.
Tinkerer goes off, you have to drop what you're doing and make a beeline for that gen.
That's fine for high mobility killers like Blight, Billy, Wraith etc. but not so easy or cost-free for slower killers.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2474320#Comment_2474320
Yeah, a few seconds of vision at the beginning is totally worthy of 25% of your build. The sad part is most perks are so dog that I am not even being sarcastic.
When it allows you to get an incredibly good start to the match, and apply a ton of pressure early on, it absolutely can be worth 25% of your build.
Corrupt Intervention is similar, as is Ruin. Ruin is typically gone within the first few minutes of the game, and yet it's still meta, because of the pressure it awards you early in the game.
If you fail to find a survivor within 30 seconds, you're probably losing 2 gens within 60.
-
@Yords said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2474362#Comment_2474362
I disagree, I think that 1% would be way too little and I think that the end game should be more intense. The killer should be at their strongest towards the end of a match and I think my idea would work well. A 3 gen scenario can be avoided as long as the survivors pay attention.
I also think that early game generators should go by quicker since it gives survivors a chance to split up on generators, I think that it is okay if the survivors complete 2 generators within 4-5 minutes of a game because that is expected at the early stages of a match.
Survivors complete 2 generators within 1 minute of the game, not 4-5. It's most definitely the early game that needs slowing down. Games snowball one way or the other, so the early game is where it counts. Lose 2 gens in a minute and you've probably lost the match.
3 gens can't be too oppressive, otherwise you get a stalemate, survivors refuse to do gens, then you or they end up holding the game hostage.
-
@Yords said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2474330#Comment_2474330
It would make more sense to always have a 5% instant regression penalty when kicking a generator and to bump up the regression rate to 150% at base. It wouldn't be too strong either since the counterplay would be to spread out on generators.
Ruin would still be a great perk and would be a sort of extension to the killer's abilities.
The reason why I think having the instant regression scale with number of gens, is that it could be very oppressive in a 3 gen situation. Survivors are rightfully trying to get back on gens as quickly as possible, and if you could very quickly kick a gen 3-4 times in quick succession due to survivors tapping them, it's basically a free Pop Goes The Weasel.
1% at a 3 gen scenario would still be enough to warrant kicking a gen without a kick perk I feel.
Plus this way provides more gen pressure in the early game, which is where you really want most of your gen pressure. You want to delay those first couple gens being repaired for as long as possible.
-
Yet as survivor, you can burst out when the killer is right in front of you and nothing happens. Or you hit it, and nothing happens for 2 seconds, and then you get yanked out of the locker, and still get exhausted.
-
While I agree with the principle that the Killer should decide the turf... this can never be balanced when we have indoor maps.
Doctor on Midwich, Scratched Mirror Myers on Lerys... etc.
-
Ruin and Tinkerer might be 'meta' but they require you to effectively pressure gens in order to get anything out of them. If you're not playing well already, those perks are worthless.
-
@Sickerton said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2473124#Comment_2473124
That is also an argument against text chat. Or visible names. Or, well, any interaction whatsoever.
At least with in-game voice chat, other Survivors can re-evaluate their priorities with assisting a toxic player on the fly and let things sort themselves out naturally. And let's not act like removing all dialogue fixes this in a game where people can't hear each other but still manage to get angry at people crouching rapidly.
Chat is censored, and you can be banned for inappropriate names.
There's no way to police voice chat.
If you want to talk to people, use Discord.
-
While I agree that base regression is so little that it doesn't make it worth it to kick gens most of the time, simply increasing base regression could cause problems for other methods of triggering regression, such as Surge, Eruptions, Oppression, etc. Plus when combined with Pop's 25% instant regression, just 30 or so seconds of pressure could completely deplete that generator.
Something a bit more graduated would be better I think:
- Kicking a generator applies a % of regression equal to the number of generators yet to be repaired. e.g. at the start of the game, kicking a gen has 5% instant regression, and at the last gen, 1% instant regression.
- The first 15 seconds of regression after kicking is at .5c/s, after 15s it slows to .25c/s. (basically Ruin speed for first 15s)
This provides more up-front regression, and instantly rewards you for the kicking action, and would do two things to player behaviour:
- Survivors would be incentivised to halt regression within 15 seconds.
- Killers would be incentivised to 'guard' a gen for 15s, and if a survivor jumps back on it to 'tap' it, then they get to kick it again for more instant regression.
Which I feel would open up more strategic gen defence plays, and add more risk/reward elements to it.
-
Please use them now and make the most of Hawkins while we have it.
-
@bjorksnas said:
There are 96 killer dailies and 113 survivor dailies, I don't see a problem here other than it might be nice to decide which side a daily is generated for
The point of dailies is largely to encourage players to leave their comfort zone and try other characters. Especially when there's an imbalance of roles which leads to heavily skewed queue times. being able to veto one entire side of the game would be a pretty bad move.
The one reroll per day is enough to eliminate your "absolutely not" options, and get you something more appealing, usually. If not, try again tomorrow, it's only 30k BP.
Everyone should absolutely play both roles. It would fix queue times, reduce toxicity, and enhance your understanding of how the game works.
-
This isn't a bad rework, so long as it kept the Broken status when you did eventually get yourself up from dying.
I think it just needs to not start you injured from the get go, even if it worked exactly as it already does, and just didn't activate until the first time you got injured. But your suggestion accomplishes this too.
-
How are there only 9 survivor dailies when there are 27 survivors?
You're completely discounting all of the "unhook 3 survivors as [survivor]", "open the exit gate as [survivor]" and "escape a trial as [survivor]".
-
I think the Glass Bead effect should be default on all Maps. Perhaps it only has a 60 second duration by default and the Glass Bead add-on enhances that or something.
Another useful buff would be to show the aura of any players or objectives within 2-4 meters of the beacon. Plant it on a Hex Totem, all players can see the totems aura and assume "it must be the Hex". Pop it on a generator to say "there's a gen here I'm working on in case you can't find one". Stick it on a trap to show other survivors that there's a trap there, etc. If the killer passes through, it, all survivors know the killer is there, even if for a split second.
This would make it incredibly useful for solo survivors, while being superfluous information for SWF.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I think they should just do what overwatch does.
Casual mode with hidden skill based matchmaking
Ranked mode with more precise ranked base match making
- Ranked based matchmaking.
- More precise matchmaking.
Pick one.
-
No there shouldn't.
We have Casual Mode, it's called Custom Game.
By all means there should be more to facilitate the use of Custom matches, better flags in the friendlist, etc. But there's no need to make this a fully fledged game mode with matchmaking.
Presumably you're implying Ranked Mode would have MMR and Casual Mode would have no matchmaking. This would make Casual Mode a crazy free-for-all where highly skilled players could reliably be paired up with lower-skilled opponents in order to noobstomp them. Casual Mode would be the most un-fun experience this game could possibly provide. All the SWFs would play Casual Mode so that they get potato killers they can stomp all over. Most of the top players don't give a crap about rewards, and we all know the most toxic players don't care about BP.
Once the new ranking system goes live you won't have to worry about pipping and depipping. You'll be limited to how much you can regress, and so as long as you play regularly, you're almost guaranteed to progress and rank up.
-
"Gen Rushing" is precisely as real as "Tunnelling".
Killers objective is to kill survivors.
Survivors objective is to repair gens.
Neither are inherently 'bad' things.
-
There's nothing wrong with that.
If you play like #########, dicking around and getting yourself killed, then you'll end up with/against players where you can do that.
If you're dicking around to get to a stage where you can... continue dicking around, then it's working as intended.
"Abuse" would be if you AFK for 20 games, just so you could get to a stage where you can steamroll your opponent, but that might only last 5 or 10 games before you need to AFK for another 20... so is that worth it?
-
DH's distance is pretty useful, but there's no reason why it needs to be effective out in the open. It's effectively being used as an on-demand Sprint Burst at that point.
Have DH apply 2 seconds of Hindered status after the distance is gained. This will slow the survivor down a little so that maybe half of that distance can be made up again by the killer.
It would still be effective at loops, and at getting to loops and vaults if used at the right time. But it would mean that less value is gained from it by using it out in an dead zone to make distance to an objective like an exit gate.
-
@ScottJund said:
Otherwise we're putting up with the current terrible matchmaking forever, and the game is virtually unplayable for mid-level killers as it is.
"Virtually unplayable" oh please. Aren't kill rates like 50% or higher for every killer in the game?
A kill rate of 50% means nothing.
50% of matches are against sweatsquads who run rings around me and all escape, leaving me with 1 or 2 hooks if that.
50% of matches are against potato survivors who I completely wreck and never stand a chance.
I have a 50% kill rate, which was enough to take me to rank 4/5 where I'm in this situation.
No killer game is ever really that enjoyable, I have a 50% chance of winning (which is great when it happens) but in the end, I get little satisfaction out of noobstomping, and my chances of winning have nothing to do with my skill, and everything to do with who I get matched against. It's a coin flip I have no control over.
Maybe one out of every hundred matches is against survivors who I feel are of an equal skill level, games where I'm actually trying to win, and making decent ground in doing so, where I get 2 hooks per gen, and there's clutch moments at the exit gates. Where I feel I'm actually tested without getting bullied, and where I get on average 2 kills. You can feel it when you get matched against the right opponents, the games feel tangibly different.
During the MMR tests, I got that experience nearly every damn game.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470981#Comment_2470981
Again, more insults, not a lot of rebuttals.
I'm saying even as a player who got boosted to the top % and is falling down to where they should be (ie great player but not quite top %) you'll still be matched with them because there will be WAY more Survivors than Killers at high MMR and the game will expand the matchmaking pool if the queue is too long.
Which will be a balance issue that could only be highlighted by an SBMM system, and can then be fixed.
Otherwise we're putting up with the current terrible matchmaking forever, and the game is virtually unplayable for mid-level killers as it is.
I have ONLY ever had enjoyable killer matches when under an MMR test. The rest of the time, 99% of the time, it's a sweatfest or a noobstomp.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470957#Comment_2470957
I didn't say I wanted easier matches, don't put words in my mouth, friend.
I said that the matches at high MMR are inherently unfair and that no amount of skill will change that. Why do you think tournaments put such heavy restrictions on Survivor?
Until the game is balanced at high MMR, it WILL be miserable for everyone who is good at the game. I'm perfectly content to wait 6 months and watch more and more content creators step away and get burnt out because the game is so ######### at high MMR.
The game won't be balanced at high level play unless we get MMR. Because so far there's been no easy way to measure relative skill and the impact of imbalances in the game.
Did they win because they had an imbalanced perk? or did they win because they went against relative noobs? The ranking system puts all players in the top 6 ranks in a pool together. It's easy enough to reach rank 1 without actually being that good at the game (I've reached rank 2 and I'm a ######### survivor) but then you also have rank 1s goings against rank 6s.
Rank based matchmaking is a shitshow and it's a wonder they've ever been able to get any useful data out of the game so far without SBMM.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470963#Comment_2470963
Lol, no it won't.
Because you lose, that means the Survivors win, ergo their MMR increases.
They get longer queues (since they keep winning) which causes the game to expand the acceptable pool of matches which means you play against them anyway.
Only if you are in the top .1% of players. I know your ego is pretty big but still.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470348#Comment_2470348
Nah, it just sucks to play only Nurse and Spirit and if you dare play anyone else you get annihilated.
The game is super unfun at high MMR and it always has been.
That's precisely what SBMM will fix.
If you keep getting annihilated when playing as weaker killers, then you will lower your MMR with that killer, until you face opponents of equal skill.
Each killer will find it's niche in SBMM, instead of all being judged by the same metric as Nurse and Spirit.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2469952#Comment_2469952
Ah yes, emotional appeal, call me a bully.
Isn't this a casual game? Isn't that why we don't balance around the top players? Why do we need SBMM in a casual game.
You think I matter less than other players? That's sure what it sounds like.
Why do we need SBMM in a casual game? So casual players can actually play it without getting stomped on by the top players all the time.
You matter precisely as much as everyone else, which is why you should be paired up with players of an equal skill level. How is this hard to understand?
You want to be paired up with players of a lower skill level than you, so that you can win easier matches with less effort, and ruin the games of your opponents. That is your entire issue with SBMM. How does that not make you a bully? You need to practice a little self-reflection.
-
@Astrian said:
Lithe is properly rated.
Trash. Can't extend loops, can't give you head starts. Can't do anything.
If you use it at a vault where you can get to a new loop. The killer will just drop the chase and your lithe was useless.
If you use it at an unsafe vault, the killer will more likely than not just catch up to you anyway.
Lithe is bad no matter what, doesn't even have meme potential like Head-On.
If you on console, just run Sprint Burst :/
"If you use it at a vault where you can get to a new loop. The killer will just drop the chase and your lithe was useless."
That's usually the intention. You want to escape the killer.
Unless you're that flashlight clicking survivor who refuses to touch gens.
-
@Sypherpathic said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470832#Comment_2470832
But it could be random. Sometimes it would work and other times it wouldn't. It's also what I imagine for the 'I'm at the top and can't play sweaty matches all the time' solution - occasionally give that player an easier match to shut them up.
And would there be a random chance of being matched far above your skill level? What's the downside?
Why would I, as a hypothetical noob-stomping bully, not want the chance, however small, of being paired up with noobs?
Why would an option that allows newbies to get paired with terribly over-skilled opponents be a desirable system to implement?
-
All low-mobility killers have an incentive to stay close to high priority survivor objectives, such as hooks...
-
@Sypherpathic said:
What about a 'casual preferred' check box that tried to give you a more casual experience but... it might or might not :D
A toggle that would expand your MMR range, but only downward? That would be abused by everyone to attempt to getting lower ranked opponents, and thus, noob-stomp.
-
@BuddhaBing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2470796#Comment_2470796
Yup, exactly. I think what they'd need to do is have something more like a 'party' mode. Some people already claim this is a party game so might as well go with something that fits the bill. Basically, I'm talking about adding a lot of RNG that would make it less appealing to more competitive players, but more appealing to more casual players. Something like items in Smash.
A lot of competitive players would still play it and would still be better than casual players, but the RNG nature would even things out a bit.
There's other approaches they could take with the 2nd mode, maybe leaning into the horror aspect by making the game more immersive. Either way, a carbon copy of the normal mode with MMR removed wouldn't do much good for anyone.
Custom Games is party mode, it's just not as accessible as public matches.
What they could do is expand the functions of the friends list system.
Have it so you can set up a Custom game, and display it in the friends list as such, with a 'private'/'open for all' setting. Then you can send out individual invites, or wait for people who check on it to see that you're recruiting. Custom games could be open to spectators on your friends list, who could hang around and wait to join the next match. If you have more than 5 players in the lobby, then there could be a small matchmaking/RNG system to determine who plays the next round, if you choose that setting, it could be 'all roles set'/'survivors randomised'/'all roles randomised'.
We have the infrastructure in the game already, it just needs to be made more clear. Custom games doesn't need public matchmaking, it just needs to be made obvious that you can join in without needing to check on discord or something first, and for people to make use of the friending feature and add people they encounter in public matches who they enjoyed playing with/against.
-
Ranked Mode with SBMM = Where everyone is matched with players of a similar skill level, and get an enjoyable but challenging game.
Casual Mode with no matchmaking criteria = A free for all where good players stomp on noobs. Lower skilled players will have a crap time playing here, and so they will all go to Ranked Mode where they actually stand a chance. 'Casual Mode' will become a sweat fest of all the bully players who are crying that they can't noob-stomp with SBMM anymore.
Eventually nobody would play Casual Mode, because it wouldn't be any fun for anyone. People dicking around, teabagging, clicking flashlights, and disconnecting when they can't get their own way, and hacking. Meanwhile with matchmaking and DC penalties on in 'Ranked Mode', it'll draw in the majority of actual, fair players, who want to feel like they're accomplishing something with their efforts.
-
@woundcowboy said:
This is flawed logic because the game is imbalanced. If you take the best possible survivor and match him/her against the best possible killers, the survivor will win almost every time because the game is massively survivor sided. By that logic, no one would be a good killer. The game needs to be balanced before it gets mmr.
And I would argue that this game needs MMR before it can BE balanced.
-
@Verconissp said:
There's many reasons why i don't want SBMM..
Main Reason is: Versing Survivors that just Pre-throw. have Stretch res on 1080 x 1080 or even 900x800. looking over half the loops. making mindgames "unmindgameable"
Along with Hold W and Gen rushing with No skill...
It should be a Casual and Ranked mode. not this...
What incentive would there be to play Ranked over Casual?
You will get one of those modes being an exact copy of what we have now, with the other being a ghost town.
We have Ranked and Casual. Public matches are ranked, and Custom Game is casual.
Otherwise, what's to stop bully squads from just playing Casual to continue noob-stomping?