jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766616#Comment_2766616
For some people. MANY people have had the matchmaking not work at all the way its supposed to, which the devs have admitted is by design. Putting aside how bad the whole survive/kills are the only metric argument, the system prioritizes wait times over actual skill based matchmaking... Meaning if you play at off hours for your region, it doesnt even exist. Rank based matchmaking had the same problem of course, but at least emblems took more into account than being a locker jockey claudette who lets everyone die so she can be the 1 survive in a 3k. Since you could still pip while dying, good players still got rewarded even if the game turned against them. Basically we went from a flawed system to an even more flawed one, which still suffers from the same issue of not-actually-doing-its-job half the time.
I think maybe the only good thing about the new system is that it doesnt reset each month. That said, the fact that killers don't have their own unique MMR like they originally planned can make that a pretty big detriment to people trying to use under-equipped or new killers.
So the worst thing you can really say about this system is that if you play at off hours, you're back to the way emblem based matchmaking worked?
I'm not defending its current implementation, I think the "speed over accuracy" thing that they explained in the QnA is probably the truth- that definitely would cause the problems that I've been seeing with it. It's very important to note that I'm not saying this system is good- I'm just pointing out that the emblem system was categorically worse.
Regarding your example, I don't see how it's better or more accurate for someone to still gain rank when they lose...? I don't think the current system is perfect, I think emblem score should be factored into how far you move up or down, but it seems pretty painfully obvious to me that the criteria the system should look at is whether you win or lose.
-
Because they didn't do a good job with the emblem system, at least as far as matchmaking goes. It actually works a lot better now, just as a personal reward for how well you did in the match.
The emblem system was an atrocious matchmaking system. It categorically did not work, it wasn't fit for purpose, the amount of variance even within a rank was gigantic and it would very consistently match people of different ranks together anyway. For all this system's flaws, and there are a few, it is at least very slightly better than that.
-
@Myla said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2765977#Comment_2765977
That's not a game design flaw. That's you have terrible game and map sense. God forbid you actually have to think of what's happening around you? You're not supposed to know what everyone is currently doing EVERY MOMENT OF THE GAME which most Solo queue players seem to think they deserve that amount of information 24/7 because discord exist and woe is me for I am suffering with random inexperienced players please bottle feed me I want a smooth match experience!. Me saying you should equip a perk is me saying you have awful game sense not that the game designed is flawed. Game design is flawed but for a different reason and that's balancing territory and a different discussion altogether.
Again it's fine as it is. You can reliable tell what people are doing. You are given a third perspective camera throughout the game take advantage of it. If Killers with a god awful first person camera and bad fov can predict what players are doing without any information perk at all then you can do it to a certain extent. Both killer and survivor are similar like this but survivor is especially forgiving in this aspect. Hook states a WHOLE MINUTE only move when you have to and you can win games and put trust in your teammates. Judge how long your travel time is to the hook in correlation to the hook timer and only move when you really have to at the very last second that you could afford or you judged that everyone in injured and you should drop whatever you're doing and go for the unhook to play it safe.
Again anymore than this is already handholding the players. You don't deserve every information handed to you in a silver platter throughout the game. Work with what you got.
I feel like part of what's going on here is that you don't really understand the goal of these changes. It's not JUST that SoloQ players lack information in general, though that's certainly a part of it- it's that some players have a ton of information and some don't, which makes balancing very very difficult.
The chasm that exists between the effectiveness of soloQ players and SWF players means that changing anything about survivor becomes at least twice as hard as it needs to be, because you have to consider how it would affect a solo player AND how it would affect a team on comms- this also applies to killer balance changes, AND new killer designs.
It's not about whether it's reasonable to expect solo players to overcome the lack of information they have, that isn't the goal. The goal is to make survivor more of a cohesive whole so the entire game can be balanced better, rather than right now, where they're two distinct groups that would be affected differently by any given balance change.
-
@cutiekiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766554#Comment_2766554
I am pretty sure since the devs KNOW we want jason and THEY want jason too, I am sure they maybe already had few discussions about what he would be about to do if he would get into the game, so I am pretty sure there's already a prototype in some doccuments about him already, I am sure they already know what to work on if the deal is made.
Right, but they still have to make the deal, which would be a series of talks over the course of a few months, and then they actually have to code and test that prototype, make any changes that are necessary, maybe update it for the current state of the game...
It's still going to take a long time if they ever do actually get the license.
-
It's a mixture of them being so uncommon most people don't know how to play against them, and them actually being genuinely strong. Of course, there's the new-killer MMR lowering at play as well for you, but in general people have a very incorrect perception of the Twins.
I wouldn't say they're OP in anything but the most dedicated of hands, but they're genuinely an A tier killer, even after all the nerfs made them clunky- and even though they do struggle against perks like Circle of Healing.
-
There's no way it'd be that fast- license deals take months to even conclude, and then the actual design and development of the content has to start, which takes another few months, and then it's scheduled for release at the end of all of that.
It is possible they could start that process now that the rights battle is over, though!
-
Damn, that's 50% of all the Twins mains in the world!
A very prestigious set of commissioners.
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2765124#Comment_2765124
Just seems like you're playing semantics for the sake of disregarding what I said while at the same time agreeing with me. Why are you acting like just because you didn't spell out the word title that you weren't directly talking about peoples' titles???? You said word for word
People who play the game for a living don't have any inherent insight into the realities of game development on the managerial, technical, social, or resource level
There is absolutely no special trait that people who play this game for a living actually have for this
Translation: Player = Zero value when it comes to insight on the backend & Developer = Insight and credentials in the backend. You're literally saying that there's no reason to assume they have that level of insight which is irrelevant because one doesn't need to assume anything when people have entire catalogs of work that are public. These aren't people with a reputable name but no face to the name, these are people with entire bodies of work that are public on both Youtube and Twitch. Yes, they actually do have insight into the backend...If they didn't then why would people get removed from the Fog Whisperers program for providing objective feedback? Its because they disagree with the feedback but acknowledge that it holds weight...If it didn't hold weight it would just be disregarded
I'm not saying they know everything or they know better, but I'm saying that titles or jobs don't mean everything in life when it comes to insight or experience. You're acting as if a regular person can't possibly take a better picture than a professional photographer or help the professional choose better angles and edit the images better afterwards...It happens every single day lol. Based off your logic, If ScottJund shares an idea, well there's no way to verify the validity or viability of the idea because he has zero special traits with this category.. yet if the same exact idea gets spoken word for word from a game developer then its now valid and viable..... What is the difference between the two people saying the same exact thing? Their title or role.
Clearly they're not already doing what you said they're already doing because if they were then this thread wouldn't exist because SBMM wouldn't exist in its current form to begin with. Hearing with your ears and reading with your eyes is completely different than actually listening or reading. They aren't actually listening, they're just hearing what people say and not applying it because they're using the same logic that you are. 'They're not the ones sitting in these chairs therefore they don't know enough to help us with these issues'
...What? Let me try and figure out where the misunderstanding came from here.
Okay, so, let's use that Scott Jund idea. If Scott Jund shares an idea, my point is, that idea is not inherently more valuable than the ideas of any given forum user.
He does not have any special trait or credentials for ideas about how to move forward with the game. What he does have is a better understanding of how the game is right now, a higher amount of skill while actually playing, and more insight into how balance decisions affect the higher tier of MMR once they're implemented.
I think the core misunderstanding is that I'm not drawing a comparison between "streamers" and "developers", I'm drawing a comparison between "streamers" and "everyone else". When I said that there's no reason to assume a streamer knows better than someone with game dev experience, that was an example to highlight that "game dev" is a category with relevance, and "streamer" is a category without relevance.
It's also not about specific ideas. Specific ideas can be good or bad regardless of who they come from- the point is that streamers' ideas and insights aren't automatically better than anyone else's. Streamers can have dumb ideas too- let's use Scott as an example again, though it does feel slightly mean; some of the ideas in his Patch 7.0.0 video were pretty damn bad, and his rework videos have been extremely hit or miss. That's not a slam on Scott, I like his stuff just fine, it's to highlight that he's just some dude with a lot of experience in a mostly unrelated area to what is being discussed here.
-
My money is on an addon pass and some minor changes to his basekit- I'd imagine most of the work is going towards his reveal mechanic, but it's possible they have more ambitious plans than that.
-
@Jukenobi said:
People don't like perks that reward poor performance . IE Dead Hard and NOED. Both easily countered/dealt with by smart survivors/killers.
I don't think that's fully accurate, on either side- NOED doesn't reward poor performance, and Dead Hard isn't easily countered or dealt with by smart killers.
However, you are right that the perception of rewarding poor performance is what people don't like about NOED- they're just wrong that it actually does that.
-
I agree with this, I think something like six seconds would help make sure it isn't used for distance but still allow a skilled player to dodge a hit and continue a chase without too much interference.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2764552#Comment_2764552
Try using it in soloQ then tell me. If you get destroyed by 4man's on comms, CoH is not to blame.
I'm usually quite sympathetic to the perspectives of individuals that might conflict with the dominant narrative, but in this instance I have to say that I do think you're still pretty wrong. I have used Circle of Healing in SoloQ, both bringing it myself and using it after a teammate slapped it down, and even a potato survivor like me got pretty insane value out of it.
The perk is strong. This one isn't a SWF vs SoloQ thing, it's strong for everyone- stronger for SWF, obviously, but most things are. It's still a very, very potent perk to bring in SoloQ, especially when you bring other healing perks/items along with it.
-
I'd like to laser focus in on feedback number 3 for a moment, the one about the cyber security.
I find it strange that you ask them to simply say "updated security" in patch notes, when... they did? That's literally in the PTB's patch notes- specifically, the one that everyone is bemoaning for having nothing in it, despite containing very crucial things like this and many others. Feedback and criticism is all well and good, but they deserve credit for actually doing the things that people want- and since they did very much do this thing, I wanted to highlight it so it could be acknowledged!
-
The killer is not fundamentally in control of how many hooks they get, so you can't balance around that- especially not for the matchmaking system.
Balancing generally around kills/escapes is fine if you also consider how those kills and escapes are earned, which to their credit they do acknowledge some problem areas there, so it seems like they are doing that.
-
I'm not sure what the point would be- the hatch only spawns when one guy's left now, so if you camp it even without closing it they can just go do generators, and if you do close it they'd need a key to open it - and can just go open exit gates.
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2764887#Comment_2764887
And how exactly is what they're 'already doing' working out for them again? Lets see, declining population on a monthly basis...comment sections on all of their social media posts making the same point about SBMM, Discord game-discussion and the Forums having thousands of messages all talking about SBMM being bad. This is bad logic and historically this leads to compromised results in multiple sectors of society such as gaming, sports, fashion, music, tech etc. Why would anybody be that arrogant to believe that their title alone makes them above guidance or input from people without that title?
Just because somebody holds a certain title it doesn't make them the best person on planet Earth to handle a task or the most knowledgeable person in the room for every single little thing. Should there be a correlation between comptetence and experience? Sure, but that's not what always happens in reality. You can't possibly believe that a developer knows better about every single aspect of implementing systems than every single player in the world that makes thousands/millions playing these same games when plenty of players are used by other developers in other studios to make sure their systems are good.
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to tell somebody they plugged something in the wrong slot. Their system self-admittedly doesn't work properly (Despite what Patrick just said the other day, they've already contradicted themselves multiple times on the same topic) so perhaps they actually do need to listen to these players more. Does that mean the players know how to code and handle back-end for them by themselves? No, but I guarantee you listening to these players on this subject would 100% make the player base happier and the SBMM better received by the community because they're the ones that have purchased and mastered the product. I'll take the advice of somebody that has eaten a dish 5,000 times before I take the advice from the person who cooked it 5,000 times but only tried it themselves 10 times
So, first of all, "title" is fully irrelevant. I never used that word, the concept of a title never came up in my argument, and so I'm going to ignore it. It's not about what title you hold, it's about what actual inherent insight you have, those are two very different things.
Second, I never said anything about ignoring them, and I never implied no individual high-level player would know what they're talking about. I'm saying that there's no inherent reason to assume that someone who plays this game for a living knows more about the specifics of, to use this example again even though this is a generalised topic, implementing a matchmaking system than someone who has only played a handful of games but has good insight- and especially no reason to assume they'd know better than people with experience in actual game development.
Not just this dev team, to be clear, but experience with game design in general.
There is absolutely no special trait that people who play this game for a living actually have for this. They're good at analysing what's in place right now, might have some good insight on what's broken, and are excellent at providing feedback for the higher levels of play to complement the kind of feedback you'd get from forums and other social media since that's more likely to be low- or if not actively of the lowest tier, certainly lower than a streamer.
And, finally, the most important part: I never said that what they're doing is working out. I'm saying that they're already doing what they should be regarding listening to various people. Clearly, the problem comes from somewhere else, because they clearly already have the web of feedback they'd need.
-
Same here.
I do think he feels worse than he did before, which is a problem that should be addressed, but he's definitely still fun and definitely can still do work if you're good with him. I don't think he's moved in a tier list at all since his nerf, I think the buffs he and his addons got did juuuust about make it so he's exactly where he was before, for different reasons.
Slightly smoother gameplay feel for ADS turning and bringing up your gun, and something to do with his TR, are the only things I'd want looked at.
-
I don't get bored of the game because I play it in moderation and I don't go in pinning all of my fun on whether I win or not. For the few games I'll play before doing something else, my goal is to either improve my skill at a given killer (or recently, at survivor in general- if you're burned out on killer then playing a few rounds of survivor could be fun, I recommend doing adept challenges as a training tool, it's been working for me) or to try and make a specific build work, or learning more about the map I've loaded in on and how it interacts with my power...
Not to say I never get frustrated, but crucially, when I do I stop for a bit.
No game is going to keep your interest forever. If you're bored with it, do something else for a bit. You don't have to be married to only ever playing Dead By Daylight, it's not a betrayal to look at your library and go "eh I'd rather do [x] today".
-
That would be a nightmare, the numbers on Pentimento are far too high for that kind of consistency.
What Pentimento needs is more incentive for survivors to break totems instead of bless them, something you can somewhat achieve with some additional perks but that could definitely come from other sources as well.
-
The flipside of that argument is that having a thorough understanding of how the game is doesn't automatically translate to knowing best on how it should be changed going forward.
People who play the game for a living don't have any inherent insight into the realities of game development on the managerial, technical, social, or resource level, they're pretty good for theorycrafting or identifying objective flaws (IE, bugs, or truly broken designs) but they have absolutely zero inherent value when it comes to larger things like the best way to implement a better matchmaking system.
What BHVR should be doing is taking their input into account and giving it a little more weight in some scenarios, namely things like feedback on high level balance and any edge case bugs that they'd struggle to catch due to playing the live version of the game less, but not listen to them on everything- which is what I understand they already do.
-
"As opposed to" is the part I would personally disagree with here.
Your MMR obviously shouldn't go up if you lose, so the system should still primarily look at kills and escapes- what I think they should do is use the emblem score to determine how much you go up or down after a win or loss.
-
...Bro, it's a QnA stream, not a list of demands. I can get behind wanting less repetition on things being soon (though that lays at the feet of people who ask + upvote things we know the answers to already as well), but that last point is just silly.
-
It is nice to hear that they understand the issue, and nice to hear a little insight into how tricky it'll be to address it.
Hopefully it doesn't take too long, but it sounds relatively involved so who knows.
-
@Tekno_Badger said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2761373#Comment_2761373
How on earth is it a good idea to give the killer more objectives and force them to defend the entire map instead of a group of 3 or 4 gens? You really must be a surv main or a casual killer if you think infinite boons is fair.
Let's take Circle of Healing out of the equation for a moment, and focus solely on the other two boons, which I personally believe are much more balanced.
In order to use, say, Shadow Step, you must be in its radius, and so must the killer. It provides a little benefit if the killer is on the other side of the map, but if you want to use it to its fullest, then the killer has to be close enough to notice that you have it and then hear that it's active. In that scenario, the killer can down you (assuming you don't play well enough to win the chase, which is aided by but not guaranteed by Shadow Step itself), and then use that downtime to go snuff your boon. Once they do that, you now have to spend another 14 seconds setting it back up again- a GIANT net loss of time compared to how much time the killer invested in taking it off the battlefield for a moment.
Similarly, even if you do manage to evade them, they now know your boon is there and can at least force a situation where you're either down one perk or you're not on a generator for those 14 seconds.
If the killer and survivor must both be in the boon's radius for the effect to do anything, infinite boons aren't just fair, they can be more of a benefit to the killer than the survivor, if the survivor plays poorly or the killer plays well.
So, where do the problems pop up? They're twofold, in my opinion. One, verticality and totem spots that weren't designed for ease of killer access put a wrench in this, I do think those two things should be changed, and two, Circle of Healing doesn't require the killer be near you, and so it is much harder for the killer to snuff it out a lot- but since we've already covered why the concept of infinite boons in general is balanced, I do still think it's possible to bring CoH in line, even if its design will still have it be the strongest boon because it doesn't require the killer be nearby.
-
It's been a while since someone trotted out this video. I understand wanting the game to look better in a general sense, but surely we can all see how this aesthetic specifically would be a bad idea?
It'd be like a return to older version of the game, where it was so dark that "Blendette" was an actual thing you could do. I remember old Gideon's and old Coldwind, seeing things was a nightmare on either map.
Taking the brightness out of the equation, this only looks a little better than DBD in sheer quality, and nowhere near as stylised.
-
It was before my time, but my understanding is that the conclusion of the experiment was "removing Bloodlust would make the game worse, so it'll stay".
-
I'm assuming whatever they're planning isn't literally just making the current effects of Borrowed Time basekit, probably more in line with a few seconds of no collision/endurance effect/whatever to dissuade hard tunnelling.
I'm all for it. There are two kinds of meta perks- perks that are just unambiguously stronger than all the others, and perks that cover a gap so common that you feel like you're punished for not bringing them. The former should be nerfed, and something should be changed about the game to stop the latter from feeling so necessary- which would look like some form of basekit BT, in this instance.
Obviously the specifics are up in the air right now and there are bad versions of this that could manifest, but something to stop a survivor from being smacked down seconds after being unhooked would be a good thing.
-
I'm assuming whatever they're planning isn't literally just making the current effects of Borrowed Time basekit, probably more in line with a few seconds of no collision/endurance effect/whatever to dissuade hard tunnelling.
I'm all for it. There are two kinds of meta perks- perks that are just unambiguously stronger than all the others, and perks that cover a gap so common that you feel like you're punished for not bringing them. The former should be nerfed, and something should be changed about the game to stop the latter from feeling so necessary- which would look like some form of basekit BT, in this instance.
Obviously the specifics are up in the air right now and there are bad versions of this that could manifest, but something to stop a survivor from being smacked down seconds after being unhooked would be a good thing.
-
Who can blame him, really...
Great work!
-
I think this is a good read on the situation. I don't dislike this nerf, necessarily, but I'm not really convinced it'll do all that much to prevent the worst parts of this perk from being a problem. However, I don't think just removing the self heal is the right call.
I've maintained that self-healing should have a hard cap for a while now, and I really do think it's the best indirect nerf to CoH you can give, without making it useless. Nothing too crazy, it's fine for survivors to heal themselves at default 16 seconds and I'd even say it's probably fine to speed that up a little bit, but the amount to which they can do it right now is pretty insane.
-
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762270#Comment_2762270
Ugh. I hate that I'm responding to you when I said I wasn't going to anymore. I could careless that you disagree with literally everyone that has chimed in on this post and any post that revolves around players dislike for the SBMM system. The reason why you're coming off as a dev apologist on this particular subject is your unwillingness to see that game imbalances and the SBMM system are two different things and think that people that are complaining about SBMM, are actually pissed off about the game imbalances. It's BOTH for two completely different reasons. You just want to be right on this issue instead of finding a middle ground and talking about the flaws with both game imbalances and SBMM and how they affect each other. You even admitted that there's flaws with the SBMM system so I don't understand why you're adamant on dying on this hill.
So... yes, it is a term you slap onto anyone who disagrees with you on this topic?
We can drop this here, I'm only going to respond if I'm insulted again. I do appreciate the clarification, though.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762262#Comment_2762262
I'd say shameless dev apologist instead of white knight, but that's just me.
It's also kind of wild that in a thread where I'm constantly critical of the devs, say the system has flaws, say it needs work, and that the main point I make is that people are misplacing their annoyance with a separate flaw with the game onto the MMR system, I'm called a dev apologist.
Do you guys actually think for half a second before applying that label, or is it just slapped onto whoever disagrees with you?
-
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762242#Comment_2762242
Like Pulsar, I'm giving up this conversation with you cause you're either a white knight, a mod, a dev, a contrarian or simply trolling this post with no intention in finding reason as to why so many of us are calling out. I've been playing this game for almost 5 years, shortly after the game's release. And yes, since SBMM the matches have become more sweatier and that's a fact. To say otherwise is completely baffling and therefore I'm done in my responses with you cause you're not looking at this for what it is. It's both game imbalances and a faulty SBMM system. One doesn't negate the other. They're both a separate problem with this game. Period.
Alright, dude, whatever you say.
I will say this: I never thought it'd get to the point where the whole "white knight" nonsense can apply to literally any disagreement on the internet. Truly, we've come so far since the old days.
-
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762224#Comment_2762224
I disagree because you're still under the impression that there's nothing wrong with SBMM. It's still matching survivors with killers that are far lower in skill. Does fixing the imbalances in the game fix this? No. It doesn't. That is an issue with the SBMM system. Not an issue with game imbalance. And yes, that is a partly why games are sweatier because killers have to work extra hard if they ever want the dopamine hit of a win because they're being matched with survivors far beyond their skill because THE SYSTEM DOESNT WORK.
When the game matches people weird it does go both ways, you also get matched with survivors that are far lower in skill. That is an issue, it's the thing that sparked this whole conversation- it's what the devs were talking about when they said the thing that angered you so much. It's fair to separate the MMR rating itself, and the matchmaking system that sorts it, those are two separate things, and the matchmaking needs some work to better handle things like backfill.
This, also, as with everything else, happened before, and far more frequently. Rainbow ranks was a very real thing that happened almost every other game at its worst.
It also can't be why games are sweatier, because games aren't sweatier. They were sweaty before and they're sweaty now, that has not changed.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762215#Comment_2762215
I do not understand you.
Do you enjoy losing? Is it something you strive to do? Most people like to win and will generally try their best to do so. Few people set out to fail. That's what you are proposing.
If you don't like your MMR, just throw matches until it's better.
Likewise, I've been keeping stats on the teammates I've been seeing. I have seen FAR more brand new players than before MMR. Sub-20 hour teammates every other match.
You're just ignoring the obvious and I'm starting to think you are arguing in good faith, so I'm out.
People do like to win, generally, and will generally try to do so. That's not changed since SBMM- they did it before, and they do it now. The game is not sweatier, the only change that's really happened in that regard is that certain parts of the game's balance (CoH being the biggest offender) have gotten a little worse. That's the part I think you're misunderstanding- it's sweaty now, and it was sweaty before.
My point isn't to try and say you're actually having a great time and don't know it. My point is that the reason you're not having a good time is not the MMR system because it's not made that kind of difference or that amount of difference. The MMR system has made matchmaking very slightly better, and that's it.
And yes, there is still inconsistency. As the devs said, that's something they acknowledge and are making changes to fix. I never said there wasn't, I just said it's slightly less- and in my experience it is, which is just as valid as your experience. Neither one is more important than the other.
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762215#Comment_2762215
That's not at all true. The imbalances of the game and the SBMM system go hand in hand. The imbalances have been exasperated BECAUSE of the SBMM system and not the other way around. Fixing the imbalances is not going to fix SBMM. It's a sh-t system no matter how you try to explain it. The fact that it factors kills and escapes only as a base for one's skill, already shows how faulty it is.
That makes zero sense. If SBMM has exacerbated the balance issues, then of course fixing the balance issues will fix the SBMM, because the balance issues are the thing that is actually wrong here.
-
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762195#Comment_2762195
You're missing a major factor that I've tried to answer above when you initially asked me why we hate SBMM so much and it's that the killer base is far smaller than the survivor base of this game. Because of this, being even somewhat good as killer is matching you with the best of the best survivors that in most cases, far out match the killer they're being paired with skill wise. Again, as I was saying above, people like to have a win and "winning" as killers these days you either have to play sweaty or extremely toxic which feels awful. It's not fun and SBMM forces you to play this way. Trying to play casual is either boring (cause you're hardly ever going to secure a kill this way if you're somewhat decent at the game and things get stale) or you're just met with survivor toxicity and ego.
Both my major points in one post!
Most people who dislike the SBMM system base that dislike on a combination of thinking that games are "sweatier" (when they aren't really, it's just slightly less broken up by the matches with baby survivors) and that the system is in any way forcing or even encouraging them to play a specific way.
Since neither of those things are true, the only conclusion I can come to is that people say they dislike MMR when what they actually dislike is the state of the game's balance. It's the only conclusion that makes sense.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762178#Comment_2762178
I'm not pointing to that. I don't know why you think I am.
The games aren't anymore consistent than they were under the old Rank system. If anything is even worse.
Rank Reset once a month, MMR never resets which means over time, people will work their way into 'high mmr' no matter what.
I'm just going to have to disagree with you there. From everything I've seen, not just from my games but from anyone else's that I've been able to view or hear about, games are definitely more consistent.
Some of the time that's because of people whining about their games being harder, sometimes it's from people talking positively about their experience. Usually not from streamers, I'm given to understand they're victims of the "prioritise speed" thing a lot so they get some really wack games- but even then, some of them are definitely having a harder time.
I really do believe that the primary issue with the current inconsistency that exists is because the matchmaking wants fast, not accurate. It seems very coherent with what I've seen- that this system does have the potential for much greater consistency but needs some more tweaks. I do think things like emblem score should be factored in as a secondary weighting mechanic, but otherwise it's probably more on the "fast not accurate" thing.
To your last point, rank reset was a nightmare and it's absolutely a good thing that it's gone. I also have to assume people lose MMR faster than they'd lose rank, but to be fair, I don't know that.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762171#Comment_2762171
The first two were awful.
The third saw queue's (for me) ranging up to 1 hour and 45 minutes.
The final test was extremely sweaty all the time.
The Live release was really sweaty for a month, but now it's back to being a mess of random players since MMR never resets. We have literally just come full circle. Nothing was accomplished.
MMR was a waste of time.
Yeah, exactly! When people complain about MMR, they inevitably point to how sweaty games are. That's my point.
Not to say it's working perfectly because I'm sure someone'll try that despite me already saying it multiple times. The games are more consistent, but not by that much.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762166#Comment_2762166
What do you call the last few years worth of MMR tests?
The first two I'm given to understand went poorly, I wasn't playing for those two so I'll believe it- I've heard some pretty wack things.
The third one was net neutral, not much difference.
The fourth one was actively good, which I feel like a lot of people forget? That the final test of MMR went really smoothly and everyone was pleasantly surprised?
And then the system was implemented, and... things are only very slightly better. The system is far from above criticism, there's quite a lot that can and should be improved- as the devs have said themselves, the actual matchmaking part is a little too lenient and throws people into games it knows they're unbalanced for just because it's faster- but people who claim it's made the game worse are completely wrong. Usually, they seem to blame the MMR system for the game's balance, despite it having been this way since before the system was introduced.
So, yeah, I wouldn't call that "something that, for all intents and purposes, completely failed".
-
If they put that much manpower and resources into something that completely failed, it'd suck.
Of course, you already know I don't agree that happened, so I'm not quite sure what you expect me to say there!
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762123#Comment_2762123
Seeing BHVR devote man hours and resources FOR TWO YEARS to a system that has, for all intents and purposes, completely failed has basically sapped any hope I had of this game getting better.
For maybe a month-ish, I almost thought MMR was working because all of my games were super sweaty on both sides. Now it just feels like old Red Ranks, a total potluck of players.
That'd be pretty soul-destroying, if it happened!
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762137#Comment_2762137
Bit of a sticky situation, really. You probably had a ton of people playing this sort of way anyway most of the time, but the iffy matchmaking (on all sides) would tend to give people breaks sooner or later. And when you say you're doing "skill-based" matchmaking, nobody wants to sell themselves short when it comes in and play bad.
So, you've got a ton of people stuck in a situation where they're going to have a bad time either way, and then if you do too well with less serious builds you get lobbed upwards into the kill-escape-meta-is-all death cloud (when that doesn't happen by accident anyway).
Either the balance needs to change faster, or MMR needs some more fiddliness bonked into it so at least it's vaguely in line with how people want to (or claim to want to, some people are unpleasable) play in the first place.
It's both, I think. The balance needs some looking at, and the system should probably use the emblem system as a second series of checks to see how far up or down to adjust the MMR of a player post match.
Of course, the core problem behind the people dramatically yelling about how much they hate MMR isn't really the game, it's that a lot of people are burned out. Everyone needs to stop memeing that dang Civ clip and actually listen to the advice in it, because it's always just been the correct thing to say.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762123#Comment_2762123
That it's "working well" but is also selecting teams based on a subset of the gaming experience is probably the whole problem. You took a game where the most competitive end of the balance is really limited and tires people out fast and told all the reasonably good players "play like this all the time or eat a ton of losses in a row and hope you'll get easier games", which is a great way to lead to nobody having fun. And then, of course, the game's balancing cycle is way too slow to shift this balance.
I'm pretty sure feeding on hope is meant to be the Entity, not the game itself.
That is definitely the other problem- WAY too many people think that they're being told to play a certain way because they hear "MMR system" and they think of a ranked ladder.
I think that's why we initially didn't know how it worked, I think BHVR kinda knew that people knowing how it worked would lead to them assuming they'd be rewarded for playing that way or punished for not playing that way, even though that's not how it works and it's just a matchmaking system. A bit naive to assume it would work out as a secret, but understandable.
-
So, here's the problem, right? I'd kind of agree with you on boons, I think they aren't working fully as intended and should be tweaked a little (though obviously they shouldn't be made limited use, that'd be silly), but when it comes to MMR...
Yeah, sure, a lot of people are saying that they're quitting. Maybe a lot of people are! And they're blaming MMR... but have you ever asked them to explain what they dislike about it?
Because usually, in my experience, their answers have extremely little to do with the SBMM system. Usually it's stuff about how fast gens pop, or how strong certain survivor perks are, or the feeling that they have to play "sweaty" to get anywhere... and those things aren't MMR. Those things were a problem before MMR, even. The MMR system is just a convenient scapegoat for people's generalised frustrations.
I generally believe them when they say that the MMR system itself is working well, and that the problem is that they let the matching get too lax to prioritise speed. I think a little more work should be put in regardless (and they've mentioned fixes for facecamping which is one of the most glaring issues rn), but the system clearly isn't actually broken, it just isn't working as well as it could be.
-
Overcome is good for immediately stopping a chase as soon as you get injured, I'd probably recommend that or the obvious pick of Dead Hard for your exhaustion perk. Lucky Break is good for stealth and synergises pretty well with Overcome. Windows of Opportunity will help you use the resources around on the map, Self-Care and a medkit will help keep you alive, hell, if your plan is to let your teammates die you can go for Fast Track or Self-Preservation.
Oh, there's also the wallhacks build- key with Blood Amber, Open Handed, Streetwise.
-
Were you cloaked? If you were cloaked, it wasn't a chase and so the entity blocker wouldn't kick in.
-
It's probably going to include some nerfs, yes. I imagine they're going to want to nerf their ability to camp to a very high kill rate, but this time around they've at least acknowledged that they have, in their words, "friction points" causing them to feel bad.
How effective it'll be remains to be seen, BHVR have kind of a mixed record when it comes to big killer changes, but I doubt it'll just be nerfs. They're going to try and make them feel less clunky to play, if nothing else.
-
@Hex_Salt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2761532#Comment_2761532
No i think I'll blame the devs. Whether they like it or not they have a duty of care, something which in this case is lacking
You can blame them for not addressing it, absolutely. It's just really weird that apparently a ton of people expected it to be in the QnA when it wasn't one of the questions and it wasn't an announcement about a new event, which are the two things that would be in that stream.
-
@Zozzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762020#Comment_2762020
You can't balance free team wide healing.
Of course you can. A pretty great start would be to put some kind of range requirement on it, or maybe make survivors spend almost the full equivalent of a heal to even set it up...
After that, you'd just have to make sure that it isn't too fast. Survivors healing without a medkit clearly wouldn't be broken if it took them five full minutes to complete that heal, so clearly it's the speed of the heal that matters. Make it slower, make it not stack as aggressively with things, and it'll be fine.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2762014#Comment_2762014
Shadowstep certainly does break the game in some way, just people aren't good enough to abuse it.
Again, it really doesn't.
Shadow Step is a perfect example of the current state of boon totems as a whole; its core effect is perfectly balanced, its secondary effect needs slight looking at but seems to be fine, and its main problems have far more to do with specific problematic maps or totem spots, not what it actually does.