smurf

I'm surprised how many people here say that MMR doesn't work. It really does it's job as intended, but it's paired in the matching algorithm with a factor that also prioritizes matchmaking speed.

I wonder if it would be feasible to make a matchmaking update that lets players have a slider in the settings menu that increases or decreases the weight of MMR vs matchmaking speed in the matchmaking algorithm.

If I had to program this myself, I'd probably assign each player an MMR score and an associated available MMR pairing range (i.e. outside that range, you can't be paired with them), then put them into a matchmaking pool queue with a timer that periodically updates their matchmaking MMR range. The longer the wait, the more their MMR range broadens. Likewise, upon creation of a lobby, the lobby gets an average MMR score and an MMR range which similarly broadens with time, perhaps averaging out the MMR pairing ranges of players already in the lobby. Then, each lobby pings the player queue pool, running through all possible matches and checking whether their MMR range overlaps with the lobby MMR range. If they overlap, join lobby.

I'm sure it's more nuanced than this in order to make additional balancing considerations, but here you can imagine the problem: if the MMR weight is too high, players could wait ages to have their MMR pairing range overlap with a lobby. If the MMR weight is too low, stupid matches will occur. No sugarcoating that, stupid things will happen. But I could see allowing players to make small adjustments to their MMR weight by allowing a slider in the settings menu to adjust the MMR weight in a small range.

in 1500 paired against 10500 Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@Senaxu said:
The uncomfortable truth is that many players here only really play one side and then consider themselves a seasoned professional.
I've read a lot of posts here now and no joke, it's always clear in the first 3 lines which side this player is fighting for in the rest of his post.
Well, let’s get that out of the way. What it boils down to is that players always play the game with their own motivation. A fun social evening with friends, Tomb quests & achievements, blood points, streaks, comp play, etc.

I'll avoid writing a wall of text now because it comes to the following summary:
The fact is that with the advantage of coordination in SWF, players have an advantage over solo players. BVHR has already improved a few things here. The long-term goal should be to supplement differences (missing information compared to SWF, kindred basekit, global anitcamp measurement, etc..) for the solo player. Afterwards, killers (AND PERKS) should be strengthened so that it is fair for both sides again.
Many good points have already been made for both sides, but these are things that can follow.

I'm actually surprised at the number of players who appear to play predominantly one side here. Most of my comments likely come off survivor-sided, but I play killer in about 30% of my matches.

I kind of suspect that while there are some people here who play almost exclusively one role, a lot of us just see certain things as more egregious than other things. For me, I stopped getting annoyed at teabags a while ago, so there's not much survivors can do to annoy me other than selling out their teammates. But killers can do things that I find make the survivor experience just ridiculous.

Totally agreed about swf though. I swf without comms occasionally and that on its own is enough to make matches better (though I often play and enjoy solo queue). Swf with comms, especialy if the players use communication effectively, is kinda op.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843810#Comment_3843810
What choice? To lose? I've already explained this:
Whether you're talking about high level players, or even average players at this point, if it's not a mismatch (one side knows what they're doing while the other doesn't), then the survivors should win by default. The math says that killers need to be hooking someone every 30 seconds or so, to kill them before they do the gens and get out. You can only come close to that time efficiency by tunneling and camping, meaning that just chasing without tunneling and camping, mathematically, should be an automatic loss. I can't explain it simpler than that.

Okay, that is absolutely not true for players with average skill levels.

Also, if you don't camp or tunnel, your MMR will adjust to put you against opponents who are at a skill level where you lose sometimes and you 'win' sometimes. You can choose not to do those things and still 'win' matches. You aren't forced.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843545#Comment_3843545
It is forced. It's the end result of being as efficient as possible as killer, in response to survivors being as efficient as possible. When you're playing in the best way as killer, and you're still losing, that's not on you. Going down in MMR for those killers is just giving them a break from opponents of equal skill. Suddenly they'll start beating teams like nothing, even without strategy, because the survivors are bad. Then they go back to their correct MMR, which you disagree on, and get beat effortlessly by opponents of equal skill again. Good killers want to beat good players, not bad ones, but when we go against them, the game is rigged to lose. You can't out-skill the system of "chases takes X time" and "gens take X time," when the time spent chasing is always greater than the time it takes to do gens. There's nowhere for that skill to go, because you've already hit the limit of what you can do. Survivors can do a heck of a lot better in chase, but they don't have to because they're already winning via fast gens.

You have a choice. It is not forced.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843714#Comment_3843714
Fundamentally disagree.
It is intended mechanic not circumventing.
Slugging does require skill, you had to outplay them to down in the first place. It also does not guarantee a 4K, just inaccurate. I’d also disagree about only earning a 3k. If you are getting hatch you don’t earn anything. If a hatch is used to escape it was an earned 4K. Hatch is an unearned free escape for no reason.

You don't earn a 4k until you best all four survivors individually. But once there is one survivor left with one full gen or more remaining, there is realistically no hope of finishing another gen. Hatch is meant not only to prevent a long drawn-out hunt in this scenario, but also to give the last survivor a fighting chance so they have a reason to play the game.

It's also sometimes the case that a particular survivor will outplay the killer for the entire match and get left in favor of easier targets. I've had matches where the killer refuses to come after me following some first looping even when I later body block for a teammate being tunneled, tank hits, and try to look like a good target. I don't think the killer should think about 'earning kills' in that scenario.

It should be remembered that the game isn't just killer vs survivor team, the game is also killer vs each individual survivor. By slugging for 4k, the killer is ignoring that they may not have outplayed the last survivor at all, forcing the third survivor to waste time laying on the ground doing nothing for up to several minutes, and bypassing an intended mechanic that's designed to prevent a long drawn-out hunt and give the last survivor a fair shot. And all this is being done so the person who is slugging for 4k can get a kill that's nearly free. This is also usually being done so the person slugging for 4k can feel like they got what they consider 'the best outcome.'

Also, I do slug for 4k against bully squads, and I can definitely say that it takes no skill to pull off that fourth kill. It might take a little extra time if the fourth survivor picks up the slug because you go hunting instead of camping the slug. But then you just go do it again. It's a trivial thing to pull off, and only requires the killer to have finished a little more than two survivors to perform.

in Can We Please Get a "Bleed Out" Option Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@crogers271 said:
The most uncomfortable truth? BHVR isn't that overly worried about balance. The game is designed to have a wide degree of variety, the option to sweat, and random chance.
Camping and Tunneling Are Necessary for Killers to Win
The uncomfortable truth here is that everyone has a different definition of what camping, tunneling (and slugging) are and when they are fair. Lots of disparate disagreements and suggestions get lumped together making discussion difficult and strawman easy.
Balance Favors SWF Teams Over Solo Players
Conceptually, I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that a SWF can and generally are stronger, but it depends on the SWF. Are we talking 4 person comp team (exceedingly rare), a group of friends, or someone playing with their spouse who touches the game every couple of months?
Balancing is often based on killers performing at their maximum potential and survivors playing solo or with minimal coordination.
I don't think that's true at all. We've got balance changes for killers based on them being more difficult to play on console for example. If we were just balancing killers off their maximum potential, Nurse, Hillbilly, and Blight would get massive nerfs.
Meanwhile, killers have no equivalent teamwork mechanic, leaving them at a significant disadvantage in SWF-heavy matches.
I'm going to say this is wrong and a huge misunderstanding that comes up in any type of asymmetric activity. Being on your own makes things easier. Having to deal with team work, even if we just artificially limit this to SWFs, are having to add a whole new thing that they can mess up (communication) that the 'one' doesn't have to deal with.
This isn't just DbD. It comes up in other asymmetric style games were players who like to play the side with less players think they have the harder role because they have more opponents, when in fact they have the simpler side.
The 40% Escape Rate doesn’t mean a 60% Killer Win Rate
The uncomfortable truth here though is that the kill rate is a better long term reflection of what the game is actually balancing around.
Unlike survivors, who can focus on a single objective (generators), killers must simultaneously manage multiple objectives: chasing, hooking, preventing rescues, and patrolling gens. This disparity makes playing killer far more stressful and demanding.
So this is one of those things I've come to realize the community is just going to always disagree on. When I first started this game and being involved in the community I couldn't believe people found playing killer stressful, while it can feel like I'm having a heart attack playing survivor. At first I thought people played killer because they didn't like the intensity of survivor.
I find the idea that survivors have a single objective particularly striking in light of your examples. Likewise killers only objective is to kill. All of your examples are things the survivors have to worry about as well. Do I focus on the gen or go for the rescue? Is it worth it to heal? Where should I take the killer on the chase?
Both sides have a single objective (well, survivors also have the gates), and a number of other things that they may or may not do during the game to increase their chance of completing their objective.
For me, win or lose, killer is chill. The meta-gameplay seems pretty obvious. As survivor, you have to do the same thing, while either also communicating (SWF) or, more commonly, having uncertain information about what is going on (soloq).
Many updates are driven by community outcry rather than long-term strategy. Some changes address vocal complaints but lead to new issues or unbalanced mechanics.
The uncomfortable truth here is two fold:
1: Balance is only one of BHVR's decision makers on game design.
2: They want the game to constantly be changing, for metas to come and go. There isn't some long-term perfect goal for DbD. To say they lack long-term strategy makes the mistake of thinking there is an end goal for DbD.

I think this is well said. It makes me want to change my display name to 'tarjay631'.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@SidneysBane1996 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843607#Comment_3843607
I lowkey support this idea on both sides. As Surv there is nothing worse than when I am downed as one of the last two, then the Killer cannot find me so I bleed out. As Killer, I hate losing slugs too, it's legitimately my nightmare scenario and it's happened way too many times. I'm a pretty nice Killer - I still like to give hatch even with the basekit Mori and I'm just not into slugging for anything more than quick pressure. Sometimes, I will down one of the two at the end then kill the other, but give the first person downed the Hatch as a sort of "sorry about that long slug but I wanted your friend more than you, here's the hatch/gate for your trouble". I actually don't enjoy slugging unless I absolutely need it for pressure, I WANT to spread my hooks due to my build and I hate it if I have to leave someone slugged and then they crawl away and I cannot find them, so we both waste 4 minutes at the end.
I would support this idea for the louder noises and faster bleedout alone, but the basekit Tenacity, being able to use keys, and being able to swap items is nice. Though I do think with this change, Tenacity itself would need something else - perhaps it reveals where exits and the hatch or chests or something like that are if you're Death Hook, Wounded, or last Survivor?

I'll slug for the 3k like that if a survivor sells out their teammates. Slug gets hatch, but that betrayal isn't going unpunished!

in Can We Please Get a "Bleed Out" Option Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

I like to run Surveillance on Pig, which makes kicking gens tell me where my next target is in addition to giving regression. That lets me push them off a gen, and start almost all chases with the survivor injured (as long as I approach without line of sight).

But yeah, agreed. Survivors are the target, not gens.

in You Shouldn't Be Patrolling Generators (Or Kicking Them That Much Either) Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843017#Comment_3843017
If we're in the habit of complaining about grammar, I hope you have no complains to me checking yours? Ignore the quote line above, that's a forums error that copied over from Notepad and I can't seem to fix, sadly ^
"I can only assume that you have made this post as a troll?."
"You have" can be shortened to "you've" for ease of reading, and there's no need to put a full stop following your question mark. A question mark ends a sentence, so there's no need to then re-end it.
"Ignoring the fact that the English grammer in this hurts my brain,…"
Everyone in this thread is speaking English; there's no need to clarify that the grammar specifically is English. Also, grammar*.
"…you basicly want to removed every part of his power and turn him into an m1 killer…"
Firstly, basically*. Secondly, "remove" not "removed" - "you basically want to remove…". Minor point, too, but the M for M1 should be capitalised.
"…that can go stealth…"
The phrasing of "that can go stealth" is clunky - either go for "enter stealth" or "become stealthed", and instead of "can" the conditional "could" works better with the phrasing when using "that": "that could enter stealth".
Moreover, though, as the Wraith is a killer (a character and person, not a thing) the "that" is also not the best fit - you'll want to use "who", so while your "can" could be correct ("who can enter stealth/who can become stealthed") the "could" is still the best fit, IMO.
"…but then never have a benefit to that because of the insane debuff from uncloaking?"
This is missing a conditional clause, which was present in the last phrase (even when using "can"). "But then would never have a benefit" would work better.
Following this, you've got 2 line spacing, which can work if you're consistent, but in general you'll want to stick to just the one, particularly on these forums. Smaller line spacing can be accessed using shift + enter, so the double space is gramatically incorrect also. You can see what that looks like above.
"My assumption is that you have been destroyed by a good wraith player and just want him out of the game because entitled...."
Now this starts off promising (though again "you have" can be shortened to "you've" for easier reading, especially as these forums aren't generally hugely academic so contractions are allowed and often used, case in point), but you stumble near the end. The "just" is unnecessary to get your point across, though not hugely harmful to the sentence. There are, however, missing words between "because" and "entitled" - perhaps a "you're" wouldn't go amiss? "Because you're entitled" flows much better, but you've got some options here.
Also, an elipsis is only three - like this "…" - anything further is unnecessary and looks like the same issue with the question mark above - you're trying to end a sentence which the elipsis has already ended. While they can serve many purposes, and don't always end a sentence, in this case the general rules of grammar dictate that it ends that sentence specifically.
Finally, Wraith is a proper noun as it refers to a specific person, place, or thing, so therefore must always be capitalised.
"I do hope your post was a joke because if it is a serious suggestion then you need to take a break from dbd my dude…"
Very nearly correct, but "dbd" should be "DbD" because it's a shortening of "Dead by Daylight", which is capitalised. Also, the "my dude" is a separate clause, so should be separated with a comma; "…break from DbD, my dude,…" works much better.
"…because it's very clear your burnt out with dbd…"
You're using "it's" here, which is inconsistent with the rest of your answer. I'm aware I've corrected you not contracting before, but as here you are I'd advise that you pick one or the other - either go for a fully academic writing style, or use contractions constantly. To do otherwise reads poorly.
Also, it's "you're" and not "your". "You're" is a contraction of "you" and "are" - "because it is very clear you are burnt out…" - while "your" dictates that an object, place, person, or other thing belongs to the individual with whom you're speaking to. "Your burnt out" could work if it was instead "your burn out", as "burn" is then used as a noun and not a verb, however that would require further sentence restructing.
Finally, as before, it's "DbD" and not "dbd".
"…as of you're complaining about an of killer that is mid tier at best"
I'm not entirely sure what the "of" is supposed to be in either use - this simply isn't grammatically correct, and I'd suggest rewriting using a different word.
The good news? You've successfully used the correct "you're" here - why could you not do this earlier?
As you've contracted "you've" and "it's" above, contract "that is" to "that's" or uncontract the "it's" and "you're". Consistency is key.
Finally, you'll want to end on a full stop (or other related punctuation mark). For example: ".", "!", "?", "…" are all valid ways of ending a sentence.
Overall, I give it a 4/10, needs improvements. I'd advise working on your own grammatical standards before complaining about other people's. As the proverb goes, "Good writing is good editing, and vice-versa".

I enjoyed reading this. I'm not taking sides in whatever is going on there, but it was a fun read!

I'm curious about that whole separate clause thing though. I've recently started to see people address me that way in online communication (e.g. "Hi, Name!" vs. "Hi Name!") but I find it awkward when the comma is used.

I'm aware this is a stupid thing to mention, but I'm curious about whether that's considered the correct approach. I think I need to read up on this.

in Why Wraith is so insanely overpowered? Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@buggybug said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843031#Comment_3843031
My friend you just turned my most bad day at work into a postive one with this reply. You had me in tears of laugher lol thank you so much!!😄

That grammar comment was so long that I didn't read it until I saw your reply to it. It's a fun read!

in Why Wraith is so insanely overpowered? Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@Vishlumbra said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843544#Comment_3843544
I think that slugging the third survivor and hunting for the 4th is the best way to secure a 4k, specially if both are on dead hook.
I understand it might feel bad, but sometimes when you want the best result you have to do it. I think is fair, since there are plenty of outcomes in that situation.
IDK. I would also consider rude Tbags, Teams with sabotage, flahlights, flashbangs etc, yet… they are in the game and you have to deal with it.

I think a simple solution would be granting survivors a 4% chance to stop the hemorrhage and stand up or die. Just like hooks. Wouldn’t really change that much the current state of the game.

You don't need to slug for 4k though. Sure, doing it makes it almost trivial to get the 4k, but it generates a nearly impossible situation for the last survivor, forces the third survivor to just wait in most cases while the killer hunts the last survivor, and often causes a long, drawn-out hunt. Hatch is meant to prevent those things.

And hatch race should usually be won by the killer anyway since they have higher move speed and don't need to restrict their movement if the survivor shows up. And the killer can win hatch race by finding the hatch or the remaining survivor, while the survivor only wins hatch race by finding the hatch. Sure, a small fraction of the time the last survivor will be lucky and escape. But slugging for 4k removes that small chance of escape. Without a realistic chance to escape, why should the last survivor even play the game?

Ultimately, slugging for 4k isn't about winning for the killer since a 3k is already a 'win'. There's really not a reason to slug for 4k except to satisfy a player's desire to get an easy kill. But it's not much of a game when the opponent has almost no chance of winning :/

in A potential fix to slugging Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@Vishlumbra said:
Which killers, though?
Because this seems to be a sentiment shared by a handful of killer players who seem to consistently complain about how hard the game is, and immediately attributing it to game balance.
As opposed to, perhaps, their own competence.
If the game's difficulty were purely about individual competence, why do lower-tier killers consistently underperform at high MMR? Shouldn't they all be equally viable if it's just about skill? Also… comp.
The balance issue arises because survivors have access to tools and teamwork that scale exceptionally well when used efficiently, while killers often rely on strategies like tunneling or camping to stabilize games. These strategies aren’t about incompetence; they’re about compensating for the pressure that 4 survivors can generate when objectives are completed in 80 seconds with optimal play.
And although streamers can't be taken as representative of the player base as a whole, they do represent some fraction of the spectrum of players, and everyone gets to see them perform at whatever level they can manage. And there's one streamer I watch who regularly dominates nearly every match I've ever seen them play as killer without resorting to tunneling or camping, which suggests that it is definitely possible to do that. It might not be possible to do with all killers, and there might be a fraction of survivor players who can dominate every match they play, but it appears there aren't a large enough number of these super dominant survivor players to prevent some killer players from winning at an extremely high rate. From my own experience in game, I've also never reached a level where I thought the survivors were so good that I couldn't get a 3k in at least some of my games if I just kept improving.
It’s important to recognize that what a skilled streamer can achieve isn’t necessarily representative of what the average or even above-average killer player can consistently accomplish. Streamers often play with thousands of hours of experience, near-perfect map knowledge, and optimized strategies. Additionally, they may benefit from survivor behavior that isn’t always optimal due to the casual nature of many public matches.
Moreover, not all killers are created equal. The streamer you mentioned may dominate with specific killers or under certain conditions, but weaker killers require significantly more effort to achieve the same level of pressure. The same applies to map design—killers without mobility can struggle on large maps, even in skilled hands. The difficulty disparity between killers is an acknowledged design choice, but it does mean that balance issues affect different killers unequally.
It’s also worth saying that survivor skill scales differently. A single skilled survivor can loop a killer for an extended period, but a coordinated team with voice communication exponentially increases the pressure on a killer. This creates scenarios where tunneling or camping becomes less about lack of skill and more about adapting to overwhelming survivor efficiency in the absence of coordinated teammates on the killer's side.
If a small fraction of survivor players dominate matches, as you suggest, shouldn’t we also consider that a small fraction of killer players can dominate without tunneling or camping? Wouldn’t it be fair to focus balance on what’s feasible for the majority of players rather than a few highly skilled individuals?
Personal thoughts:
Statistics from platforms like NightLight demonstrate that survivor escape rates generally range from 40% to 52%, depending on factors like skill, perk usage, and teamwork. These stats often combine all survivors into one category, as survivors fundamentally share the same tools and objectives. However, for killers, this kind of amalgamation is impossible due to their vastly different power levels and mechanics. Balancing killers is much more nuanced, as some killers (like Nurse and Blight) have extremely high skill ceilings and dominance at top levels, while others (like Trapper, Clown, and Myers) are considered borderline unviable due to their outdated mechanics, reliance on RNG, or inability to apply consistent pressure.
Many killers urgently need reworks or buffs to make them competitive. Trapper, for instance, is heavily dependent on map RNG and preparation time, which modern survivor tools and perks nullify with ease. Killers like Clown or Myers lack the mobility or utility necessary to keep up with high-pressure survivor playstyles, making them extremely challenging to play effectively even at average skill levels. This discrepancy highlights a fundamental issue: while survivors function as a relatively uniform group, killers face a balance spectrum so wide that some are effectively excluded from competitive play.
Balancing Dead by Daylight must address the unique struggles of both survivors and killers. Survivors' universal tools and shared mechanics make balancing their stats straightforward, but killer balance requires addressing the glaring disparities between strong and weak killers. Ignoring this reality risks alienating a significant portion of the player base who enjoy playing less viable killers but feel left behind due to outdated design.
If balance continues to cater to survivor preferences—such as nerfing strategies like camping or tunneling without compensating weaker killers—it risks reducing the game to an unchallenging experience that undermines the satisfaction of victory. The developers should focus on making all killers viable, balancing the game for achievable fairness rather than appeasing demands for ease, ensuring every match retains its tension, challenge, and sense of accomplishment.

This explains some of our different viewpoints! You and I have interacted some, but I always discourage tunneling, camping, etc., and you always say it's needed.

Now I see why :)

I agree; some killers have powers that aren't a good fit for top MMR play. But I've always had the perspective that if you want to face the most talented survivors you possibly can, you have to pick a viable killer. So for example, if I'm playing Pig, I'm fine with the fact that some teams are going to bring a commodius with add-ons, split up on gens and make my life hard. If I lose to them, no problem. And that likely keeps my MMR lower for certain killers. But if I'm playing Nurse, I usually consider losses to be a skill issue from my side.

I think it's a near-impossible task to balance all killers in a way that makes them viable for top-tier play, but I just accept that and make sure I give my survivors a good match for whichever killer I'm bringing. Honestly, with that approach, I usually still get 3k or 4k more than ties or losses, but on some killers, my MMR is probably lower than on others. And that can bring some rubberbanding issues, but then I just get to sharpen my skills more :)

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 22, 2024

@SidneysBane1996 said:
And they are all playing like they have to win the $5 Subway gift card.

Can I have a gift card if I hide behind a finished gen for most of the game with a key I found in a chest?

in These are the only survivors I keep seeing in 2v8 Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

@danielmaster87 said:
Trueeee!
Camping and tunneling are kind of forced at this point. You can play the game normally, and lose every time. Or you can use these strategies, like a normal person in any other online game would, and maybe win.
I don't know why it isn't obvious to everyone, but SWF are the most privileged role of all. They literally never get nerfed. It's always stuff that affects solos and killers. All this solo buffing does is make SWF stronger, because the buffs you're giving these solos... They're not even supposed to be winning. The reason they're not winning is because they're bad, uncarryable even. No amount of buffs is going to make uncarryable teammates carryable, and neither is killer nerfs that are blatantly anti-fun and cater to the most casual level survivors possible/super biased survivor mains. "Killer shouldn't even be able to see aura" and crap like that.
It does feel like killers are seen as the strongest they can be, and survivors as their weakest. "But what if the killer has a really strong start and plays well?" Then he should win. "But what if the survivors play really bad and give up?" Then they should lose.
The 40% escape rate, if it wasn't obvious, is because survivors play bad. They throw the game, and throw the killer free kills constantly, in almost every match. And like I've said before, even if the kill rate is 60%, most likely a majority of games the killer is drawing. The survivors complaining about dying all the time, and always blaming the killer instead of themselves or their teammates, need to play killer. Watch in amazement as you do like 3-5 normal chases, nothing crazy but nothing bad either, and see that the game's already over. That's what happens when your survivor opponents aren't nothing.
I think it's misworded to say that killers have responsibility for the game pace. They definitely bear the punishment of the game pace. It's really controlled by survivors, because they can, at any time, just decide to focus on gens, and they're done. I've seen it, from unbeatable SWF teams to my half-cocked solo teams. I get on the gen with 1 other person and think out loud, "Oh look. We could have done this at any time, and closed out the game." instead of looping badly, healing constantly, and taking forever to do anything.
Updates most certainly are reactionary, and it's terrible. The one proactive change they ever did was give Huntress 7 hatchets. People lost their minds. But don't you see? People are saying even now that she's fallen out of favor in recent years. She's just too slow, and no amount of hatchet cap raising is gonna make her Nurse/Blight level: viable. Them giving her those extra hatchets, when they did, means that she's not as trash now as she would have been considered. But all the other reactive changes, you could go on and on about how nonsensical they were. Freddy nerf, Wraith nerf Pinhead nerf, Pig nerf, Twins nerf, Pop nerf, Pain Res nerf, Eruption nerf, Clown add-ons nerf, Nemesis zombies nerf, Knight nerf, base BT, base anti-camp, self-blocking gens, hook timer increase. They're all in response to complaints about strong killer stuff. BUT are those complaints well-founded? Are they affecting players who know what they're doing, and actually play both roles? I think not!

Camping and tunneling aren't forced in any kind of way. It's always a choice whether to do it or not.

If you 'lose every game' because you can't win without camping or tunneling, your MMR will drop and you'll start winning matches without doing those things. Then you'll land in an equilibrium MMR state where you win sometimes and lose sometimes.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843497#Comment_3843497
"This post has been completely invalidated as you clearly do mainly play killer per your comment on another thread calling for killer to receive equal treatment. "
So because you think one side needs more improvements that makes you a killer main? What lol? That does not make sense.
"Now, go play 100 survivor games and keep count of how many times you are slugged for 30 seconds, a minute, 2 minutes, till bleed out. Now you can also add in slugging for the finisher mori AND I want you to do this in solo q. Come back when you have those results and we can compare notes. "
Outside of end game or just looking around not once in 100 games. Slugging at end game isn't an issue and I expect them to. 100 games is nothing, I've got thousands to look back on. Unless you want to count someone on top of me when I go down so he chases them? I don't really count that as that isn't what were talking about. We're talking about slugging for pressure and just leaving to go look for someone else. Very, very rare.
"If you are not willing to do this, then I guess you should stop arguing as you do not have enough experience as a solo q survivor player to speak against slugging. "
Yes please, tell the person with 11k hours they don't have enough experience rofl. You're making the same mistake the other person was and assuming a lot about me that isn't true.

@upsideinsanity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843504#Comment_3843504
When that one side that you want to be improved on is already the focus of the game, yes. You cannot say this is not a killer sided game when killers are supposed to get a 60% kill rate. While I understand a difference between a kill rate and a win rate, if they are supposed to kill more than they are to let live, then the game is killer sided.
I am happy for you that you do not experience the level of slugging so many others do however you cannot sit here and say it does not happen. Congratulations on your 11k hours in the game however that means absolutely nothing. There are plenty of killer mains with thousands of hours that just do not play survivor. And saying you have 11k hours does not mean you know more than anyone else or that you are right while everyone else is wrong.

I think both of you are making valid points, but I think in response to Blueberry's comment, it should be noted that a lot of people view endgame slugging as a major problem for at least a couple reasons. I think it shouldn't be expected and is pretty extreme bad manners. If anyone wants, I can explain my thinking about why that is, but no need unless someone cares :D

in A potential fix to slugging Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

I'd be interested in seeing manifestations of more urban legends. Someone mentioned the Mothman recently, which I think would be great. But also maybe things like Bloody Mary or the Jersey Devil. Though admittedly, Bloody Mary could be hard to introduce powers for... feels like a mix between spirit and Onryo.

in New Killer Ideas? Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

I think it's partly fine to have this as long as every game isn't wildly mismatched. The tradeoff for getting matches with closer apparent skill levels is slower matchmaking. Don't get me wrong, sometimes there are definitely severe skill disparities that make matches seem dumb to some people in them. But I'm happy to take some weird matches for faster matchmaking.

I think the bigger issue with the skill-based part of the SBMMR system is that it's only taking into account things like escapes through gates and number of sacrifices per match. It would probably be somewhat more effective if the system also took into account things like number of saves or gens done per match for survivors, and average chase duration for both survivors and killers (in addition to things that are already considered). Having said that, I think that could lead to some unexpected new issues where certain playstyles get paired into certain MMR states in strange ways.

Anyway, just my thoughts :D

in 1500 paired against 10500 Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

I definitely agree that updates feel reactionary, and that swfs have a rather unfair advantage over solo queue. There's really no stopping those things.

Camping and tunneling aren't necessary to win though. If someone needs to camp and/or tunnel to gain control of the match, they need to just take their loss instead of resorting to things that will make the game pointless for other players. A lot of people will say it's necessary to do those things to win against highly talented survivors, but if that's true, then it shouldn't be possible for some people who 'win' more than 'lose' beyond what's expected from matchmaking algorithms.

And although streamers can't be taken as representative of the player base as a whole, they do represent some fraction of the spectrum of players, and everyone gets to see them perform at whatever level they can manage. And there's one streamer I watch who regularly dominates nearly every match I've ever seen them play as killer without resorting to tunneling or camping, which suggests that it is definitely possible to do that. It might not be possible to do with all killers, and there might be a fraction of survivor players who can dominate every match they play, but it appears there aren't a large enough number of these super dominant survivor players to prevent some killer players from winning at an extremely high rate. From my own experience in game, I've also never reached a level where I thought the survivors were so good that I couldn't get a 3k in at least some of my games if I just kept improving.

And even if the game mechanics do make it necessary to tunnel/camp to 'win', that's not a reason to do those things. Someone else's gaming experience shouldn't be ruined by hard tunneling just because one player might not win otherwise. If games really can't be won without those things, and nobody does them, BHVR will have to rebalance some of the game to ensure survivor and killer roles remain competitive at all levels. And that's really the answer to all these complaints.

in Uncomfortable truths of DBD Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

I feel like Taurie is going to always be trying to be besties with Nea. It just seems canonical based on Taurie's backstory and certain known lore.

Also the perks sound fun.

in November 28th is the New Chapter Comment by smurf November 21, 2024

@Vishlumbra said:
These complaints come from players that had a bad match where someone playing survivor just gave up, played horribly or was just messing around.
It’s common sense understanding that there are more chances of having a bad team if your side is actually team based. There is no way a killer is slugging all 4 at the start of the match and no one does nothing and no one has any perk countering it unless survivors are playing to lose.

I've definitely been in 4-person slug matches before. In some cases, it's because everyone messed up. But there are people talented enough with certain killers to 4-person slug over and over again, match after match. A survivor doesn't actually have to make mistakes or give up for this to happen.

Obviously streamers aren't the only players of the game, and shouldn't be taken as examples of the average player base. But I've watched a streamer go on a very long 4k 5gen streak with Billy. He was disappointed when a gen got done before his 4k was secured in one game, breaking his streak. I suspect that if that person can do that, others can too. And that means there's some set of players who are capable of abusing slugging in a way that makes it almost impossible for survivors to escape a match.

It's likely that this is a minority of matches, and that people are posting about this after it happens to them, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem that this is possible.

in A potential fix to slugging Comment by smurf November 20, 2024

@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3842618#Comment_3842618
You really experience more slugging for the 4k than you did before? Cause for me, slugging for the 4k has been the same as it always has. Only difference is I get a mori instead of being thrown on hook, which I personally prefer cause it's cooler.
But regardless of that, any reason not to have this buff on Left Behind?

I won't talk about my thoughts about the finisher mori since it doesn't seem super necessary in this thread, but I agree that Left Behind is kind of weak. I ran it a bit some time ago, but other perks help the team more.

Maybe it would be good to have it play a bit of an altruistic role so it represents having been left behind after saving someone. So maybe you get some tokens for unhooks or heals, and then for each token you get scratch marks suppressed for some time. And the hatch reveal stays as it is.

What you suggest is also pretty solid though :)

in Left Behind buff to be Anti 4k Slug! Comment by smurf November 20, 2024

I saw someone write somewhere that the more time you spend in the Entity's realm or the more times you get sacrificed, the more blue you turn. But that's probably nonsense because Vittorio isn't very blue colored...

in What’s with the colour blue? Comment by smurf November 19, 2024

I think I saw someone else above suggest doing some other simple things you enjoy while waiting for your match. Maybe that can help to distract your mind while you're in the queue :)

in Thoughts of a Survivor player who would like to play Killer but I'm standing in my own way Comment by smurf November 19, 2024

@strai06 said:
I’d like to share my idea, even though others might have suggested something similar before. The idea is to add a diverse leaderboard system, implemented in any way that fits the game. My suggestion is to base it on ranks, using the Survivor and Killer grades as a foundation.
Alternatively, it could also be based on player statistics. For example, in the case of Survivors (regardless of individual characters), the leaderboard could track how many generators they’ve repaired, how many totems they’ve cleansed, how many rescues they’ve performed, etc. For Killers, it could include stats like the number of hooks, downs, or even moris performed.
I understand this idea could be tedious and complex to implement, especially since tracking all these details for matches might be challenging. On that note, I’d also like to suggest implementing a match replay system. This would allow players to review their games, identify their mistakes, and improve over time.
That said, I believe adding a leaderboard system could attract and motivate players further. Thank you for considering this idea!
STRAI
---

I can see how some players might enjoy this. Personally, I wouldn't want this info for my own performance to be available to me or anyone else. I'd probably want to never see my own stats so I don't end up comparing myself to other players.

But it's not a bad idea, and others might like to see their own stats.

in RANKING LEADERBOARDS Comment by smurf November 18, 2024

Three is definitely not enough. If two people bring chest perks, there's a solid chance that those are wasted slots. A lot of chests do go unopened, but it would make sense to give a little extra value to chest perks.

in Add more Chests into the Trial Comment by smurf November 18, 2024

200% recovery might be a bit much, but I agree about No Mither being awful. As killer, if I see someone start injured, I usually think I'm in for an easy match.

in no mither buff Comment by smurf November 18, 2024

You're not wrong. I've reported people for the exact thing you mentioned above, and for aggressive name-calling/disparaging in post game chat. I've been fortunate to have not been the target of that kind of abuse myself, but I always stick up for whoever is being targeted. I don't put up with that kind of behavior toward anyone.

If I see someone tunnel or camp and I get frustrated myself and feel the need to express that in post game chat, I've learned to just type a sad face and express how I'm a little sad and it's just no fun to play in a match like that. That usually drops the toxicity out of my opponents and I tend to see them say 'Oh... My bad. Sorry :('

But yeah, some people here have suggested a sort of positivity reward that players could give to other people on a limited basis. Maybe BHVR could make it possible to give everyone a rating only after exiting post game chat. And if you get positive ratings, you get bonus BP?

in The amount of toxicity and I fear for new players that join the community Comment by smurf November 18, 2024

This Bubba Main is correct. I've been M1ed after fully landing across a pallet, and watched others take an M1 after a pallet was dropped all the way down :/

Edit: I forgot to comment on the main post. This would be challenging and separating the queues could make wait times quite long. Is there a reasonable way to check whether someone's in a wired connection? I know it's possible, but I don't know if it's good to do.

in seperate matchmaking for players not using wired connections Comment by smurf November 17, 2024

@TheGopher said:
Just an idea I'm throwing out, but what if after a long period of time on the ground, a plugged survivor is put on a hook?
It'd punish survivors for crawling to the edge of a map and wasting everyone else's time.
And
It would also punish killers for slugging excessively.
Behavior would just have to balance it so it doesn't punish killers who are slugging for pressure.

This doesn't actually punish the killer for slugging. It just makes it easier for the killer to run around looking for their target.

In a slugfest, this would mean the killer can slug and if they're lucky, get hook stages without ever worrying about picking up.

In a slug for 4k, this means the killer gets to know that even if the survivor crawls away, the survivor will still go on hook, even if the killer loses track of them.

I'd also argue that if the killer doesn't want the survivor to crawl somewhere where they're hard to find, the killer should just put them on a hook. It's often the best strategy for slugged survivors to prioritize crawling to a new location over healing so that a heal can be done somewhere the killer won't find the survivors while healing.

The proposed idea makes it safer for killers to just slug and run to their next target. It would act like a buff to slugging strategies.

in A potential fix to slugging Comment by smurf November 17, 2024

I don't suffer from migraines, but this sounds like a good idea. Maybe having an option to apply some kind of filter from the game settings would be good :)

in Migraines from bright lights Comment by smurf November 17, 2024

@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841451#Comment_3841451
Calling something "the best M1 killer" is like determining "this is the strongest ant I've found." There's just nothing there. And you using emotional buzzwords like "annoying," and saying that ALL people who play Wraith are the biggest campers/tunnelers, isn't helping your case.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841469#Comment_3841469
That is such a lie. Play him and see how smooth his uncloak/lunge is. Except it isn't, because it's slow and janky, ever since his nerf way back when. I can't remember the last time I got a hit with Wraith that I didn't have to fight for. He's like Freddy or Pig. He's got to fight for every little hit, even at the weakest of tiles. If your survivors have no clue what they're doing, then maybe your experience is different. But either way, we seem to be appraising two totally different killers.

Bubbas should be holding the award for biggest tunnelers and campers ;)

in Why Wraith is so insanely overpowered? Comment by smurf November 17, 2024

I would definitely not like to see this. Having two finisher moris would strongly encourage slugging for 8k, especially since each killer player could feel like they need to help their teammate get a mori, even if they don't care to do it for themselves.

in Only thing 2v8 needs is 2 finisher moris Comment by smurf November 16, 2024

I don't think they failed to fix it. There's likely just not a reasonable way to get enough demand among the player base for playing survivor in this mode.

in How did behavior fail twice in a row Comment by smurf November 16, 2024

This is the second post I saw recently saying Wraith is op. Wraith's greatest power is hurting my eyes while I don't blink so I can see him coming.

I don't think he's op at all. That addon that lets him see gen progress by their auras is pretty strong, but he's not Nurse, so I'm alright going against a Wraith :)

in Why Wraith is so insanely overpowered? Comment by smurf November 16, 2024

@Vishlumbra said:
People love to toss the "toxic playstyle" constantly. WHY do you think tunneling, camping hook and sluggin exists?
Do you think MOST killers are just wanting to ruin your game? NO. People like to win, thats the whole point. The whole idea of the game is to be competitive and surviving a match feels like an acomplishment, just as beating a group of good survivors is for killers.
The thing is that with whats POSSIBLE to do, with the current perks and add ons and items survivor have, it´s not easy for killers to win matches. WHEN survivors are playing to win.
Strategies come from EXPERIENCE playing the game. Survivors and killers are getting better, pushing the boundries of what is possible to do.
Right now, what you call TOXIC, are strategies to WIN, of course, I do not agree it should be encouraged or hell, even allowed, fine, BUT, you also have to ask WHY. If they were to completly eliminate something killers are doing to counter current meta game of survivors, you also have to check the balance of things that are possible with a group of GOOD survivors playing to win.
Finisher Mori is not the reason why killers slug at the end, they slug so the fourth cant escape because they want to get the BEST result possible, which is: 4K.
Just as why 3 survivors escaping a trial could just leave a fourth guy behind to assure they will win, but sometimes they come back and try to go for the 4 people escape. The BEST result they can obtain.

Slugging for 4k makes the last kill into easy mode. I only slug for 4k against bully squads since I don't think they should have any reward for their playstyles. But I do know firsthand how much easier it makes it to get a 4k. Having said that, against groups that aren't going out of their way to harass me, I'll often give the last survivor hatch or the gate.

Hatch is meant to give the last survivor a fighting chance at an escape, and to prevent a long drawn out hunt at the endgame. Slugging for 4k instead just gives the killer an easy 4k and sometimes creates a minutes-long hide and seek game that's almost hopeless for the remaining survivors. Slugging for 4k isn't about getting the best result possible, it's about making it easier for the person playing killer to get a last kill. If they want a 4k, they can still do hatch race, which the killer should be winning most of the time.

But now we have the finisher mori providing an incentive to get a 4k without any regard for the methods used to get it. So it's encouraging the exact scenarios hatch is meant to prevent.

in remove finisher mori please Comment by smurf November 16, 2024

@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841450#Comment_3841450
I get that but I honestly do not see why killers that didn't slug for the 4k before would do so now. Are people really that desperate for the animation?
I can't say I have noticed an increase in slugging as a survivor either (although to be fair, I haven't played a whole lot lately). It just feels like everyone that used to slug still does so and the mori is wrongly considered an explanation as to why it happens.
@UndeddJester recently suggested changing the mori to only be available on the 3rd survivor, if the 4th is still up to disincentivise slugging. If people actually care that much about the mori, it would definitely help and if they don't, it won't do any harm.

I think some people see the finisher mori as an indication that they had a good match and did a good job, and feel rewarded by it. I'll say that in the time since the finisher mori released, I have seen almost zero instances of killers giving hatch or gate to the last survivor.

And the incidence rate of toxic playstyles (e.g. tunneling and camping) in addition to slugging for 4k became so prominent that I was only playing every few days for some time. Though I did have a couple days last week where I saw less of it, so there were a few bright spots.

But back to the point, there are a lot of people who when they play killer, want to feel like they did a good job. If the reports people are making here are true about increased slugging for 4k, the finisher mori may be making some players feel they've done better if they get a 4k and even making them think that's what they should do. Honestly, from my perspective, there are days when I want to play as survivor and then think about the game I expect to experience; I realize I'll probably have matches where killers tunnel and camp to get easy wins, slug for 4k, and I just decide it's not worth it. The likelihood of having my match end in a slug for 4k kind of feels like it may have tipped the scales into me not really enjoying the game as much as I used to. I'm still trying though :/

in remove finisher mori please Comment by smurf November 16, 2024

It might not be bad to give bots an MMR dependent skill level.

Maybe for high MMR, they can get an added feature that stops them from running into corners because they're scared of a terror radius. That would involve detecting map position and prioritizing nearby strong tiles instead of only distance from the killer.

But for killers who just started playing last week, the bot might be the strongest player on its team. So then it might be reasonable to make it not loop very much.

This sort of thing might mitigate the problem somewhat.

in There needs to be more penalties for players who repeatedly disconnect and abandon games. Comment by smurf November 15, 2024

@Jhei said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3830411#Comment_3830411
Can you link me to where the devs have said that repeatedly hitting people on hook is a bannable offense? I've run across several killers who thought that speeds up the hook timer and I think it would be weird to ban them.

That's fair. I remember reading it awhile ago. I'll see if I can find it and link here.

Edit: I searched for ten minutes or so and can't find it now. It's possible that I saw it previously described as a factor that could prove griefing or harassment.

But that would have to be pretty extreme. So I doubt that part of my original statement is correct. I'm going to edit that to say "I thought it was bannable harassment."

It likely is something that could be used to prove griefing or harassment if recorded. Like if someone targets you specifically in multiple games, a recording showing them hitting you on hook for an entire hook stage in multiple matches while not targeting other players might be used for that. I did think I read it on some BHVR webpage a while ago though, so I'm a little surprised :|

in remove finisher mori please Comment by smurf November 15, 2024

@iceeinchrg said:
Hard disagree. Game mode is not fun. It’s just survivors farming altruism because that’s the only reliable source of BP and then escaping is a secondary objective. Every toxic trait you might find in a 1v4 is just doubled. Killers are overtuned and it’s the same combos and tunneling over and over. None of these maps were designed for this mode either.

I'm not sure there's a lot of tunneling since the killers don't have a good way to locate survivors they just hooked.

But it's definitely my least favorite game mode, and I'd be happy to see it not come back. I'm with you there.

in 2v8 is amazing ans should become a permanent gamemode Comment by smurf November 15, 2024

Oh, please do not do this. 2v8 amplifies most of my least favorite things about DBD and gets rid of the things I enjoy.

in Please keep 2v8 permanently! Comment by smurf November 15, 2024

All these topics were appearing on the forums with regularity until 2v8 released again. Then 2v8 discussions became more prevalent.

Tunneling, proxy camping, and slugging for 4k regularly have threads suggesting they need to be dealt with. And a lot of people have pointed out that the finisher mori incentives slugging for 4k. I'm inclined to agree with those sentiments.

At least the anti-camp meter is there though. Being facecamped by a Bubba is unpleasant, but with the anti-camp mechanism, you can waste a bit more of his time after a self-unhook so you team gets more time to do all the gens :)

in Returning player: 4K slugs and camping - killer design even more toxic than when I left Comment by smurf November 15, 2024

@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3840631#Comment_3840631
But it is about winning, and it's not easy. You've ignored what I said. The struggle that killers and survivors have to do against each other, whether it's a hooking situation (closing out the game normally) or a slugging situation, is about the same. If the survivors are good, it's gonna be hard for the killers, and maybe even they'll escape. If they're bad, they lose either way. You underestimate how well killers have to play for the slug to pay off and not be recovered from. I think yours is a purely emotional argument, talking about supposed "misery" which only 1 side experiences (but not the other?), in situations where good survivors will fight hard/overcome, and bad ones are just mad because they lost, regardless of method.

Slugging for 4k and slugging for 8k aren't about winning. Once you're able to use those tactics, the game is already "won" by the killer.

Regarding the difficulty of pulling off a slug for 4k, I play killer often, and I slug bully squads for 4k, but never anyone else. It's generally very easy for me to get the payoff in that scenario. I have also accidentally put myself in slug for 4k scenarios against others, but if I do that against a team that wasn't explicitly going out of their way to harass me, I'll just let the last two live. Slug for 4k is really a maneuver that just oppresses the last two survivor players, barely letting them do anything.

Hatch race makes it somewhat less likely that you'll get the same result, and killers that slug for 4k don't want to give that fighting chance to the last survivor. Having said that, the ease of pulling off a slug for 4k is somewhat killer dependent. High mobility and stealth killers can manage it somewhat more easily than others.

Also, some people are posting purely out of emotion, but that's not what I did here. I said nothing about "winning" or "losing" until you mentioned it :) I simply stated that joint moris will almost certainly increase incidences of slug for 8k. That is very likely true.