dooces
dooces
About
- Username
- dooces
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Apple2o said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922573#Comment_922573
I would wager that your average rank 1 killer is going to be a far more competent player than your average rank 1 survivor, even if you transfer them over to the survivor side. As a killer, you either learn how to deal with everything the survivors throw at you, or you lose. As a survivor, you can not see the killer the entire game and still win just fine.
I am sorry you are horrible and don't see how to abuse the game. Or maybe not, because it's the potatoes like you that get farmed for that 75% win rate.
survivors are subject to their teammates, killers will get to rank 1 just by playing. i dont know how to use smaller words or if you would like me to google translate to your native language ill be happy to do so, as you are missing the obvious.
but you think contorted logic makes it otherwise - it doesnt.
-
@Apple2o said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922545#Comment_922545
Looks like someone doesn't know what an infinite loop is. Good. The game would be much worse if most survivors knew how to use them.
i do just fine. sounds like you are mad that something isnt just given to you.
75% killer win rate. rank 1 - 4 killers have a 75% chance of pipping. how is that not a gimmie to rank 1? unless you are garbage and complain its not "balanced" because you expect it to be higher.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922501#Comment_922501
News to me, as a killer who was rank 4 before rank reset, I was getting a lot of green rank survivors.
I'm not cherry picking. This is what BHVR's community manager has said. Unless stated otherwise, that's the facts. I already showed you the thread that provides all of the necessary information.
As someone who said "stats are stats", you sure seem to be cherry picking the actual facts yourself in a way to try and weave a narrative that suits your view. Yet when the context of the stats themselves come to light, you seem more than happy to argue with cognitive dissonance and make excuses for them that they are the way you believe they are when BHVR employees themselves have revealed that is not the case.
How about instead of "stats are stats" we change it to "facts are facts" and stop beating around the bush?
You either can accept the fact that the stats were not gathered in an accurate manner which helped skew them as BHVR has revealed they were, or you can continue to pretend they weren't and play blissful arrogance. Your choice.
you think they were skewed by 25% somehow? that they cherry picked the worst case scenerio?
survivors are subject to their teammates, so however bad they might be, however much they dc, that effects all other survivors in the game. however inaccurate you claim, or anyone claims them to be, they're representative, and they reveal the general balance of the game. if you think statistics works in a way where a slightly different metric would reveal the inverse, you are sadly mistaken.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922472#Comment_922472
No, what I'm saying is that if the stats were taking both the survivor and killer ranks into consideration like they should have, rather than just the killer's rank regardless of the context of the match, the kill rates would more than likely be much lower.
Let's flip the context around from how they were gathered: What do you think the stats would be if the stats only considered if the survivor's were all red rank, and didn't care about what the killer rank was. Do you think the kill rates would stay at 75%?
I am of the belief it would be considerably lower.
yes, because you believe as rank 1-4 killer somehow you are faced against mostly rank 5+ survivors. this is not the case.
and considerably lower, statistics wise, would be 10%. not 50%. idk why you think they cherry picked the worse case scenario to publish, i argue they didnt.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922464#Comment_922464
This is all very uninformed and mostly just misinformation; I strongly suggest you go read the actual discussions on the statistics with all the developer responses, rather than just try and dismiss everyone else who is actually up to date with all the correct information. If you want to add any merit to your opinion.
again, you say nothing except you were told otherwise. you give no argument but dismiss mine.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922424#Comment_922424
If people actually believed rank meant nothing, we would have kept the bug showing people's ranks in lobbies for survivors, because people wouldn't have kept dodging, or wouldn't be demanding for it back so they can dodge.
Actions speak louder than words. People will say rank doesn't matter, but when push comes to shove, they rather play with higher ranks on their team because again, low rank survivors generally don't play very well, and higher ranked survivors generally at least have common knowledge.
For example, I a rank 5 survivor, got pushed down into a rank 15~17 game, where every one of my teammates kept going down from the mend timer. Despite the fact that they could stop it from going down by just sprinting.
The Legion was rank 3 btw. I was solo. We all died. Horribly.
Think that didn't help push the kill rates up a bit or do you think a Legion would be able to 4k so easily if it had been red rank survivors who at least had a generally good grasp of basic game mechanics?
so you are saying survivors are subject to their teammates, killers are not.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922440#Comment_922440
because they leave out so many aspects of information, if you don't want to take the time to read the devs multiple comments and explanations on that, that's fine, but it's not on everyone else to do that for you. Go read some of their discussions on the topic first.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922424#Comment_922424
That's just picking and choosing what information you want to listen too; if you are going to be that bias then there is no point in really having a discussion; since you will only listen to anything that collaborates with your own thoughts, and dismissing anything else.
That's like saying global warming isn't a thing because it's cold outside where you are, it's dismissing the entire actual topic without evidence.
75% is 75%, you cant write off 100% of the games to someone dcing or giving up. even if you are so ignorant thats what you propose, that still leaves the 3 survivors stuck in the game with a 66% chance to lose. anyway you want to contort the numbers or justify that statistic, you wont get that 75% down to 70, let alone 50.
-
@Liruliniel said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922334#Comment_922334
I get lobbies near instantly.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/113148/wait-times-for-killers
Killers also have a harder time overall to earn BP it's just they get a superior amount and rightfully so. They dont get points sitting on the gen doing nothing. Also I dont know where you get the stats, but even the ones released by the Devs recently were mentioned to take with a grain of salt.
explain to me why they should be taken with a grain of salt other than being told to do so? how have i used the stats out of context or what contortions have i made? dismissing data outright because you were told by the devs as they dont want to explain is foolish, i unless you have reasons to adduce otherwise, i will interpret them at face value.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
"For this particular statistical data, Red Rank is defined as 'matches that consisted of Rank 1-4 Killers at the beginning of the match.' The ranking of survivors or the rank results after the match were not given consideration."
as most people will agree, rank means nothing. i dont bother instancing any discrepancy as i dont think there is one. if you play the game, you get rank 1, its not hard just putting time in. if you are still rank 10+ after 200 hours of game play, im sorry to say you are the outlier, and the stats dont reflect your games. edit nor should they.
-
amazing how killers think things are unbalanced when they dont win 80% of their games. try survivor, where your odds of escaping are 25%.
-
rank 3 with survivor. queue times are 1-2 mins. rank 9 killer after reset, queue times are 15-20 mins.
-
@Apple2o said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922367#Comment_922367
Well you are probably a bad killer then. Red rank killers have a Q time of about 10 seconds. Rank 20 killers have a Q time of like 20 minutes.
Clearly I can see what level you are playing at.
if you think killers need any kind of buff, i can see what level you are playing at.
-
@Apple2o said:
Whiney survivor main spotted. There is 0 wait time as a killer. There is 10-15 minute wait time as a survivor. Want to know why? Because killer is much harder and more stressful to play. Next thread.
i play killer a lot, queue times forbid me playing more. i win just by showing up. if you have a hard time playing killer, try not camping or tunneling.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I have almost 20 consecutive losses as killer that disagree with you right now lol.
sorry, but some people have to be below average, thats how we get averages.
-
@Apple2o said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922279#Comment_922279
The developers themselves said to not use the stats to argue game balance. Silly goon.
oh, since they said not to, well then, who am i to hold their stats and make them justify it? much easier to just ask people to not pay attention. stats are stats. come up with any rhetoric you want, the stats say it all.
-
@Apple2o said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/922167#Comment_922167
That is because the overwhelming majority of survivors are terrible and can't run a basic jungle gym loop to save their lives. You could literally 1v1 the majority of the killers in the game for the last 2-3 years. Only recently were survivors nerfed so this was no longer easily done.
Don't forget the hordes of babies who murder themselves on first hook, handing the killer a free 3k at a minimum.
dont forget the swf, dont forget keys, dont forget everything you ######### about to give survivors that 25%.
at the point stats demonstrably prove you wrong you should have the humility to keep quiet.
-
75% killer win rate.
whats with these killers complaining? would you be quiet at 80%? 95%? would that stop you from complaining?
-
75% killer win rate. even considering swf, even high without.
you want what, 80% killer win rate? 95% killer win rate?
quit crying that 1 of 4 survivors make it out alive. if you cant do at least that you are well below average. get better.
-
75 killer win rate. those who think its survivor sided are just the really bad killers who dont get wins handed to them. the others believe they're really good, just ######### about the 1 guy who gets away because survivors are op.
75% says it all.
-
75% killer win rate, and you complain its not 95%? survivors are OP because 1 in 4 get away on average? if you cant win as killer you are way below average.
-
75% killer win rate, and you want more buffs to what? take the survivors 25% down to 10%? 5%? talking about any killer needing a buff is hilarious.
-
75% killer win rate, and preteen killers complain about them still having that 25%. you want people to stop dc'ing? give them more than a 25% chance to survive. moris go, keys stay.