Zombra808
Zombra808
About
- Username
- Zombra808
- Joined
- Visits
- 309
- Last Active
Comments
-
@VoodooChild said:
I dont think your logic really holds up, not in regards to a gen speeds nerf needing a buff to compensate or with the killer kill rates or with the 50 win ratio being the target
See the issue with the stats is they dont tell the whole story. Clown is weak. Clown is dumb. Clown needs a buff. I can 4k with Clown. I have adapt Clown. But I didn't get that going against a good team.
And theres the other side of the story. Survivors are overpowered, theres no question about it just look up any X amount of escapes in a row comp. BUT because survivor is so fundamentally simple in game play you dont have to really be good to win if everyone is just competent enough. Because of that a lot of survivors aren't good, even in red ranks. But if you are good, OR if you are in a 4 man SWF and just decent you can escape consistently. I escape consistently and I dont think im #########, I think im better than the average survivor.
So Clown has like a 60% kill rate but those kills dont consider WHO is getting killed. And to really drive home this point youre talking about how you only care about stats and not "Opinions or feelings" But then by that logic Nurse needs a buff. Shes under par. You say she has a high learning curve but that's your opinion, if we just go by the numbers provided shes the weakest killer, she needs a buff. And dont even get me started on the OP trapper.
But finally the one thing that really goes against everything you are talking about is the 50% kill rate being the goal. This is not a bad thing inherently, infact I might even like the idea. The problem is it completely throws skill out of the window in favor of a fun casual experience, but the game is often treated as competitive. You cant have a competitive game and then aim for everyone to win half of their games. I dont think most people even consider this when talking about the 50% win rate but unless youre talking about making DBD a more casual party game (Which is a valid want, im not knocking that) then it goes against "Balance"
On a final note, camping and tunneling will get you 2 kills. That's a perfect kill rate and a legit strat according to the devs. My little cousin
Oh and actually to answer how do you fix all of this? How do you balance a game where one side has a massive advantage but often doesn't utilize it? Fixing ranks would be a good start but youd run into the issue of red ranks being dead. So idk exactly. Theres already so much in the game that gives survivors power including a built in free win mechanic with the hatch that I dont think it would be a terrible idea to ignore the competitive aspect and make it all for fun. With this new patch specifically stating that ruin was removed because it was too hard for new players to handle, it seems like they may already have decided to go in that direction. Even if its just survivor favoritism right now they wont have much of a choice since this change will Increase killer toxicity and let me tell you, that's not gonna be much fun. Doesn't matter how much they nerf killers since anyone can slug, camp, and tunnel
I was aiming with this post to move away from balancing, and more towards issue regarding the stats. For example, the matchmaking. If we fix that, we could have more accurate stats, since this seems to be what most people say scew data. I feel personally that solo and duo survivor is balanced, while 3-4 mans are overpowered. However, 3-4 mans only make up a minority of games. Just because they seem coordinated, doesn't just mean they are a SWF, perks like Kindred exist for that reason. I feel like worrying more about fixing the game is more important, rather than balance. And for your survive in a row statement, Scott made a video of him getting more than 40 4ks in a row on Leatherface. This does not mean leather face is OP.
-
@T2K said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/978250#Comment_978250
Idk for how long you are active in the forums, but these statistics were discussed to death already. To the latest ones, even the devs said to not take any conclusions out of it. There are way too many variables hidden in these killrates.
Nothing but killerbuffs since then? Thats just not true. Just in the last patch spirit got nerfed pretty hard, legion was tweaked again. Since then there was hotfix with a nerf to freddys slow down addons and onis blood marbles and flick.
I meant killer buffs for every killer, not specific. Spirit and Freddy were both performing much more than the average killer, hence their nerfs. Legion was changed due to him being annoying to play against, and considered bad by the community. And regarding the inaccuracy of the stats, they are showing which killer is over performing and which is under performing, which most people agreed upon. If these stats are completely false, then Spirit and Freddy are both fine and balanced because of the inaccuracy of the stats, along with the weak killers being average. I agree that there are many factors that affect kill rates, but this is showing the plain and simple kill rates across the board.
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/978272#Comment_978272
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/978272#Comment_978272
Most red rank survivors aren't good. Even when they are, the atrocious matchmaking will often pair them with a rank 15-20, which pretty much destroys any chance a competent survivor could have.
The one problem I have with this claim, is that you state that a majority of red rank survivors are bad, which would still technically mean that killers are still better than the average player, while also continuing to state that if the killer is a lower rank, the survivor is usually far better because they are red rank and are good. If most red ranks were bad, then the bad matchmaking wouldn't really be far off because red ranks play like purple/yellow ranks, which is the rank of the associated killer.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Can we please stop using those incredibly inaccurate stats for arguments?
Those "red rank stats" didn't care if the survivors had rank 20's in those matches. If a killer was a red rank, and the survivors were all rank 20's, the statistics still counted that as a "Red rank" match.
Tell you what, let's have 4 red rank survivors go against rank 20 killers, claim that these are the escape rates in "red rank games", then lets nerf survivors because they have an 80% escape rate.
But that's not how it works. My matches from both sides before the matchmaking was messed with, which is when these stats were taken, were a vast majority of consistent ranks, 1-4 for every survivor, and 1-5 for every killer. And for your last statement, that is a very rare case of red rank games. In matter of fact, what would dictate a red rank game. A red rank Killer or Survivors. Each could argue to bloat each side.
-
@Tohmo said:
Stats aren't really a good thing to base assumptions off of. Stats at "rank 1" could have any other rank due to the SWF change. So, technically, there could be 3 rank 20s and 1 rank 1 and that'd be a "rank 1 match." Plus stats don't count in skill curves (like Nurse). Honestly you just have to play killer and get the experience for yourself. If you ask me, at the current moment, I think killers are weaker solely because of the map design and the majority of maps favoring survivor, but when those are fixed there won't be much keeping survivor ahead of killers.
I agree with the map aspect, but these stats are before the matchmaking was really messed with, when killers would actually be put against survivors at their own rank. Plus, 3-4 man SWF make up a smaller percent of total matches played.
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/118676/are-killers-really-underpowered
As the devs like to say (when it suits their narrative), stats aren't everything. By and large, players in the community are not good at the game- that's why kill rates seem to be so high. Unfortunately, the devs balance around people who don't know how to play the game, which has led to its current state.Good players will absolutely abuse all of the advantages that survivor has over the killer, while bad players will continue to lose.
I see what you mean, but if kill rates are this high, getting even higher at red ranks, where the best players are supposed to be, wouldn't it take a tremendous amount of "Bad" players to bloat stats this much. After all, the lowest the kill rates drop in all ranks is 55%, meaning even a drop of 10% to ignore "Bad" players, would still be a 45% kill rate, which can be a discussion for buffs.
-
@DeathBeam said:
Many killers are just terrible on large maps and have no mobility or way to end chases fast. Not to mention I've seen some really terrible red rank survivors as well.
Agreed. But some killer designs, specifically with one shots are built to be looped for long. For example, Hillbilly, Leather Face, Michael. On the travel note however, I can see adding some type of mobility to killers to give them the ability to travel the map.
-
@T2K said:
Omfg there are still players who base arguments on these statistics. Honestly please stop. They are just not the "facts" you think they are.
How are these not stats. Sure they are a little outdated, but nothing but killer buffs has come since then, to my knowledge. I see them as facts, I'm interested to see how they aren't.
-
@FregglesFred said:
They are weak.
But on good maps, they are good. It's just map design that screws a lot of people over. These killers don't have enough to get around the map. Or just strong pallets waste time. It matters.
Agreed, maps do need a change, but we also want to make sure that surveilling time isn't too short to give Survivors enough time to get gens done. I do think however that survivors need strong pallets, but not infinites/god loops.