Moonras2
Moonras2
About
- Username
- Moonras2
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,406
- Last Active
Comments
-
I would probably give it a try in the beginning but probably wouldn’t keep it on for long. For the same reasons I turn it off in most games. Someone is going to find a way to use it to be irritating. Such as spamming “what a save” or “take the shot”, in rocket league, every time someone makes a mistake. It’s discouraging after a while and causes some people to just stop playing all together.
You always have the option to try and recruit players from matches to join you while you play. Especially if you know that you all use the chat wheel. Better yet, you could even join each other and join discord together. You don’t have to be a full time swf or group of friends to do this. Just play a match or two and send invites to people afterwards.
I do think the chat wheel is a great addition. Especially for people who want to use it all the time or play more competitively. Some people just want to come home from work, or wherever, and enjoy a game or two before they finish off their day.
The feature should help better balance things between the swf and solo q players who already play to win. Which would be good overall for balancing the game. For everyone else, it may make a difference in the matches anyway, but it means they can still play how they want or for the fun of it. Without backlash from others.
-
@OrangeBear said:
They literally said it's a bug fix
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4059337#Comment_4059337
Is it effectively a buff? Yes. But beyond that, what is there to gain from arguing with the developers word.
The possibility of changing it. They once removed the timing window for flashlight and pallet saves and called it a bug fix if I remember correctly. You could run up, blind the killer at the beginning of the animation, and then just run away. Even survivors were against the change lol.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4052454#Comment_4052454
Honestly, I was trying to remember all the names from the past that deserve to be on there more. There were a lot of users who used to give very insightful and well constructed analysis of things better than my rants, but they've been gone for years for one reason or another. I'm just an old head who barely plays anymore at this point, and I'm probably best known for my posts being too long to read comfortably on a phone 🤷♂️
Appreciate it regardless.
I think you deserve a spot. @Reinami, @RadiantHero, you, and others have all helped me view things in a different manner. They may or may not change my mind on everything but all of you give a great perspective or different lense to look through.
I haven't played in quite a long while and kind of lost the need to keep trying the next match in hopes it would be better than the last. But I still love reading the forums. Will always wish the best outcome for the game, whatever that outcome might be.
-
Pumpkinhead or Critters.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4036527#Comment_4036527
Just keep in mind IIRC gen regression events reset that timer, so kicks or popping pain res or anything like that would extend those situations.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4036547#Comment_4036547
All of this applies to survivor gameplay as well, yet we're at the point where getting picked up 3 times allows you to leave. That isn't to say you're wrong, and its very good advice.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4036513#Comment_4036513
This is why concepts like abandoning are so hard to manage for the killer role. It's load bearing for the entire match, while survivors are elimination based. Killer centric approaches to alleviating these problems need to work within the game itself more than around prematurely ending it.
I would say that's fine. If those things are happening then people are either working on gens for the killer to kick or the killer is getting downs and hooks.
@UndeddJester said:
I'll tell you what I see aspiring killer main...
I was just talking about this movie to someone at work a few days ago. Been long time since I've watched it lol.
-
@DEMONANCE said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4036512#Comment_4036512
yeah if a gen doesn't get done in 10 minutes you can dc not just worked on.
Oh ok ty. That's good to know that it has to be completed and not just touched.
-
@Lothlorien said:
So I was wondering.
Why do we get punished for leaving games as killers?
If I get chain flashlighted in the first few minutes then sabo hooks, body block and all of that because all 4 of them are running around you instead of doing gens, I do not want to play that game.
Even if you just afk they'll take 45 minutes just to click and tbag (I've tried).
When the killer leaves, the bully squad "wins" so they get their ego fix and you don't have to endure. So why exactly do we get punished?
When a survivor leaves, I get it, it throws the whole team off. But this?
I could be wrong as I haven't played in a long time but I thought after 10 minutes, if gens haven't been worked on, the killer could abandon the match? It counts as a loss if I remember or it may have only been in a ptb for all I know.
-
I was a Nancy main for a while and you are correct lol. I always had her setup with goofy builds and was just kind of doing wild things. Back in the day I would just run around with small game and quick and quiet and try to see how often I could use inner healing mid chase. Cleared a lot of NOED's this way.
-
Should run spirit fury and enduring to break the wood faster. That way we can have more wood to build more bird houses so the crows can get some sleep. Maybe then they will stop screeching all the time! :)
-
@Coffee2Go said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3988023#Comment_3988023
I mean what else and how should michael myers killer play out as in general not to be rude but those people in end game chat are rude for calling out the killer as a killer since thats basically mostly his gameplay stalk build up and strike and fall back.
I do hope since BHVR said the game is moving away from pure stalk and play to something else this would mean some more modern michael gameplay where its not as boring as those people claim
For me i find it boring that i join a match and we do gens and 1 left and michael gets infinite and mori kills and only outplay is lockers which is like :/
The majority of Myers I play against tend to run tombstone piece or infinite tier 3. Or both. I personally find that play style unfun and enjoy playing him stealthy. But I can also see how it would be boring to play against stealth Myers. Just hitting and running away, for survivors, just means constant healing and getting hit. It can feel like there was no good chance to run away while the killer just gets hits.
With map offerings no longer being as strong it wouldn't be as much of an issue. I normally ran an indoor map to play this way.
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3988023#Comment_3988023
I think that's people who just don't like facing stealth killers in general. Pig, Ghostface, Wraith, Chucky and so on can all go undetectable base kit. Not everyone enjoys the jump scare factor and that's fair enough.
There's also the factor of survivors who prefer staying injured for their resilience, dead hard etc. But when you have a stealth killer, staying injured is a massive risk because you get no terror radius warning.
That could be another reason survivors don't like it. For people who like to run certain builds it would be just like people who run healing builds then get matched against plague. It just feels awful when that happens.
The jump scare factor isn't the big issue I got complaints about. It was usually the lack of awareness and no way to respond sometimes
-
I played a lot of Myers with the tier 2 stalking addon, dead rabbit, and monitor and abuse. While I find it very fun to try and jump scare people with it, a lot of people have said in the endgame chat that they find it boring to play against. I never played a lot of hit and run play style with it but I imagine that could be moreso boring to those people.
At higher level, where people might play differently, that feeling may become compounded with players. Also add in that people on comms would have a huge advantage over this, as with a lot of play styles. Making it another solo queue nightmare.
Not saying it would be overpowered by any means but if it became more of a common occurrence I could see a lot of people hating it.
-
@UndeddJester said:
My personal stance on it man is... play him. It's very important that you do to objectively assess and really understand the strength of the character. More importantly, it let's you see what survivors do against him and make an honest assessment of how much of the hatred against him is justified or just salt.
Gaining a lot of experience with the character and really understanding him, means you can effectively argue for or against any proposed changes to the killer... However if you don't play him, and let the mob have their way with him, you get a Skull Merchant situation.
Personally, I would say if the Ghoul didn't stop me in place on his vault, I would have much less hatred for him. A Ghoul who out Kagune Leaps me at a tile is fair enough... maybe still annoying like Blight, but at least took skill to do.
What annoys me is I can't leave tile because his leaps cut me off, and often I can't stay at tile because of his vault not only being very fast, but also stopping me still as well. I can't leave tile and I can't stay at tile... but I also can't say if this a good change because I don't play Ghoul...
I tend to think with his absurd mobility, free injuries, and fast Wesker vault, with some Blightesk cut off potential, he should still be plenty good without the hinder... but I am not 100% sure.
So... play him and be the well informed voice that cares about both the killer and survivor experience.
I have personally only played against the ghoul once and it was definitely that full stop that made it feel bad for me. I'm not sure how good the person was at ghoul but they were cutting off areas, using power to stay close, etc... it felt like a lot of things didn't matter for me, like gaining distance for example. But the only thing that actually felt horrible was that full motion stop. If that was gone and I could just take my hit and keep on trucking it would've felt better. Even if it meant the ghoul could just take off as well.
To the op:
You should play whatever character you want. I often feel bad for playing some characters and so when I do I will sometimes dial back the aggressiveness or something. To try and make it a little more fun for the other side.
At the end of the day, it's up to the devs to try and change things that best suit the player base. If no one plays the character then no one will know what needs to change. So it's kind of a service to play them how you enjoy and if people see or have problems with it they can then be vocal about it.
-
@LockerLurk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968450#Comment_3968450
And IMHO, until someone becomes good at that new Killer, this MMR rubberbanding shouldn't exist. Every Killer should have its own MMR that doesn't affect the others, it's stupid you can't get weaker Survivors to learn on when you've never played a given Killer. It's not fun to be slapped around and you won't know what you do right or wrong if all you do is lose, you'll just get frustrated and go back to your mains.
Frankly the MMR bracket needs widening on both sides, it's too narrow. It also needs a reset since we'll be getting new MMR criteria soon anyway.
Well this doesn't really state how wide that rubber band actually is. I don't think any killer, who has experience, should start at the bottom with any other killer. Just knowing the basics of playing as a generic m1 killer will get you past the beginner stages. How wide the rubber banding should go, I have no clue honestly.
I would personally like to see in game tutorials for each killer. Let the community create them even. That way you could have beginner to advanced tutorials on any given killer. I'm sure many content creators and individual players would be happy to contribute.
It would probably take a lot more work than I would ever know to do this. But they could always start small and maybe every patch they could take a submitted tutorial for people to watch. Then create a preset match for a player to test it out. Or make something that will allow people to place assets and characters on a map and create their own preset tutorial to submit.
-
@tes said:
So people who just farm should be matchmaked with p100 masterming or tryhard lobby? If springtrap was just farming, then why he tried to tunnel steeve and was playing on endgame?
It still doesnt correspod to mmr safety mechanic, if u get lobby like this. Just attempt to find an excuse of another lose and put a blame on specififc sideYou are confusing someone farming with someone who always farms. Anytime there is an event going on, you are going to see people playing in all sorts of ways. Especially when blood point offerings are involved. Some people may even go into a match with the intention of farming but then realize the other side wants no part of it, so they then change it up.
So yes, if someone plays at a high level, they should still be matched against these people, farming or not. It would be different if there was casual/competitive queues and the matchmaking could be more relaxed for one. But there isn't.
Then you have to take into account the queue times. The longer matchmaking takes, the more relaxed the mmr becomes to try and find a match quicker. Then there would even be an issue with SWF. I'm not sure how the matchmaking works if one person is at a low level of mmr and one person is higher.
When all of these things come into play, the safety mechanic may not be able to effectively perform its job. There are more variables than just what character someone plays.
I know you said that a lot of players overestimate themselves. This can be true for both sides. But many people often think they are on the same level or higher than someone else, when they are not. Then they try to discredit that person's gameplay.
I could watch any popular streamer steamroll groups of survivors. In my mind it may look easy so I assume those survivors were not as skilled. When in reality that streamer was just more skilled and that same group of survivors could possibly steamroll me if I was playing the killer.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968447#Comment_3968447
Mikaella played like she was actually new to the game. Or I cannot explain why she tried to get back on a gen after getting hit infront of killer face. Springtrap actualy got three hooks in game only and it was easy chase aginst him. U can define level of the survivor by their map knowledge and how they playing around. If killer playing on rpd and doesn't know shortcuts to catch survivors, or can not play around semi safe pallete, is this is good?
I also experienced it myself. Week ago I saw offering from 4th anniversary first time in my life. Person had around 9k hours against my 600. Doubt it was sfw, but I ended up with one hook only. They weren't some cheaters, they just were actually good.
And I see such situations at least twice on a day, from both sides.I simply dont believe in safety mechanism after having 9th game on spirit in my life with -2 gamma challenge from my friend and still somehow getting easy downs.
If I decided to tunnel someone here, they would be dead (considering I lost devour on 5 gens). Doing such terrible challenge on killer I'm new at, and survivors there have poor understanding of play. I don't want to call them bad players. Probably, they were just unexperienced
I posted about the mmr thing above but the full info can be found here.
The Mikaela hopping right back on a generator may just mean they were trying to get themselves put out or trying to farm. The same with spring trap. Perhaps they were just trying to learn his skills and not so focused on winning the match.
I'm not saying either of these are the case as I have no reason to believe what you saw and experienced isn't exactly what happened. But what I mentioned are things that could happen and do happen often.
You can absolutely tell when someone has some skill or knowledge in the game but you can not tell when someone may not even be trying. Hours also do not always equate to skill. It may mean someone probably has a better understanding of things or general game sense. That doesn't mean they've ever actively tried to improve their own gameplay.
I started playing years ago but I've taken long breaks between playing. I also stopped playing for kills or escapes for a very long time. So looking at my stats it would just look like I've racked up 3k hours without learning anything. When in fact I use to play as hardcore as I could for a win and tried learning as much as possible at that time.
Edit: I want to throw out that with how queue times have been who knows where matchmaking even is right now.
-
Just wanted to throw this from the wiki page.
"Killer MMR-Rubberbanding
Each Killer has their own individual MMR score, which is the reason Players are locked to playing a specific Killer once the matchmaking process starts, prohibiting switching to another Killer.
Despite this, however, there is a rubberbanding-effect by which a Player's best-performing Killers will influence the score of all of their other Killers.
This is to prevent skilled Players from being matched with lower-skilled Survivors when choosing a Killer they do not play often or regularly.It can be assumed that an experienced Player will perform reasonably well with most other Killers, despite not playing all of them equally often and matching them with inexperienced Survivors would not be fair.
This mechanic also automatically affects any new Killers the Player unlocks through purchasing DLCs"
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968416#Comment_3968416
If safety mechanism exist, why this mikaellla was there?
or springtrap here:
Or even me having situations like this:(they were all being knock down in a few seconds). Someone posted here about "people don't want to take screenshots as an arguement only because it despises by killer mains. Indeed, not because half of them was blurred and person dont want to tell why.
That’s consistent experience u don’t want to show, and according to your streams from last year, u block survivors if they escape u and type cheeky messages on endgame , or u slug until someone dc as pig on rpd if players shows some resemblance of skill level. I’m sorry, but streams u posted aren’t about facing insanely good survivors…. They working against you. Where u play as merchant on rpd tunneling claudette and got other hook only by camping in endgame. No one will actually believe in your insane experience with such way.
I don’t want to hear killer is easy from people like you, who hides part of their stats and show mid gameplay without actually sweaty lobbies on stream. Other people here proved in a better way. Other killers said it in other way. And they don't hide they are using unfunny strategies
The only consistent thing u are in, I’m sorry, trying to play around my words. Like, I commented about nurse and noed 4 post ago, two times told u it was humorous comment and u still “don’t know why it was said”. Like, I two times in a row told u why, stop being clingy to insignificant words and answer the question directly. Show your consistent experience in reality by sharing hours of gameplay. Come on. Or u’ll try to catch up by one phrase again in search of deep meaning, hiding your true consistent experience?No tunnel/camp/slug.
U told about this and yet somehow on streams there are games where 4 hooks and three belongs to already dead person. Don't get me wrong, opinion about killer side game is absolutely valid, until you dont hide killer stats or post in comments one thing, while actually doing another. Just question yourself why you are the only person I put myself in arguement with and realise sth, while about 5 people replied 'killer is so easy' and I'm fine with their pinion
I just wanted to come in and ask what you are trying to show with these screenshots? I'm not arguing them or anything like that. I'm just not sure what the intent is or how it is connected to the safety in place for mmr.
If it's the prestige levels, the Mikaela could be someone with many hours who just now acquired the character or started playing as her. Survivors share the same mmr as far as I know. They may even be doing an adept achievement.
The spring trap could be the same. Someone may have just picked up the killer. They clearly aren't new with the perks they have.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967633#Comment_3967633
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967681#Comment_3967681
That's completly understandable! Thanks for the input on the situation, my friend who plays on PS5 says the same and they only play console too. So it's why I ask, because I know I'm being really particular and trying to understand why I feel this difference.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967642#Comment_3967642
True, I could see if the steam deck has settings for it. Honestly though would it hurt to have a high refresh rate mode for ps5 pro I wonder? hm…
No it wouldn't hurt at all. Even if it lowered the graphics settings and what not, I think it should be a feature, if possible. I have a fairly capable PC but have always run the game on low settings anyway.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967612#Comment_3967612
Yeah I'm using the steam deck OLED, I figured using an OLED with my PS5 Pro would make it better but I suppose it doesn't help
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967610#Comment_3967610
That's fair, I sadly do notice a difference and I'm wondering if its my settings on PS5 or something
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3967608#Comment_3967608
Yeah this is it exactly, they are very different I feel and it makes switching platforms a nightmare like you are relearning timings all over again.
I don't know for sure but maybe the PS5 only switches to 120hz when a game supports it. So unlike the steam deck or PC, which you could still manually set higher, perhaps it always keeps the tv refresh rate at 60.
Again, I haven't tested this since they added 120hz, in game settings, to PC. It may not even make a difference anymore. I always thought it was odd because I expect a game to have more input delay at 60, but running the desktop refresh rate higher always made the delay better it's not something I've ever really noticed with any other game.
You may be able to test it by hooking your steam deck to your TV and change the steam decks settings to 60 fps and the games settings to 60 fps and see if it feels similar to the PS5. I've never used a steam deck OLED so you may just be able to do it with the steam deck screen itself as well
-
I use to notice this with my Xbox. I'm not sure but I think it was just due to the 60 fps limit when I would notice it. On my PC I could set the desktop frame rate to 60 and it would feel the same. If I set my desktop to 120 or higher the input delay would practically go away, even when running the game at 60fps anyway. I haven't tried this since they added 120 support in game so I'm not sure if that would act the same or not.
For the most part, when I had my steam deck, I didn't notice much difference between it and the Xbox. By chance are you using the steam deck OLED? Maybe the 90 hz refresh rate is helping it.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3962070#Comment_3962070
The devs have never said it, but I have wondered if that's why they don't seem too worried about the high mmr 4 mans having a higher escape rate.I've always presumed this to be the case. It would be very strange for an organization have a goal, to hit that goal in everything they are measuring, but one extreme outlier is a bit off, and then for them to risk breaking everything else to try and fix that small outlier.
It has its ups and downs but they still seem to be working on things that may help lower tier killersKillers are in kind of the same situation as the above. Take Sadako, if you raised her to be at 60% in high MMR, she'd so thoroughly devastate low and mid MMR that not a single Sadako would be left there who wasn't intentionally throwing. If Nurse was brought down on high MMR, she would be so awful on low and mid MMR that no one new might ever give her a chance.
Balance issues are a balancing act. If you have a goal of 60% kill rate (presuming for the moment that's true), the idea that you'll be able to hit 60% for new killers, experienced killers, against soloq, and against coordinated SWFs is not realistic. I'm amazed BHVR comes as close as they do. The main issue, the balancing act, is not let any of the area get too far out of whack to the point that it falls apart.
Oh yes, they could easily make some killers completely broken. I'm fine with not all killers being super strong at every level. There are too many and sometimes making them stronger just makes them unfun to play as or against. I think the small changes, and qol updates, are helping a lot of the killers feel better to play, while not making them as strong as blight or nurse.
They seem to be doing the same things for survivor or solo queue. I haven't played in a while. I just found survivor becoming frustrating and I can't play killer the way I use to enjoy. I'm hoping some of the changes they are making and have planned for the year will bring some life back to it.
-
@crogers271 said:
"balanced" gameplay and that it should stay this way because killer is "supposed to win"To be fair, these are different arguments made by different people.
The first is a blatantly incorrect position because of a bad math concept about what 60% means when there are multiple variables to consider.
The second is a subjective take that a game does not need to be balanced and can be more fun in fact by being unbalanced.
I've spent quite a lot of time arguing against the first and how people are wrong.
The second is a lot subjective stance on what people find fun. I think there is merit to the idea of creating more of a challenge for one side so that escaping feels rewarding (though to me that makes the other side less fun). Personally, I think 60% is too high, especially because a 60% target means some killers will tick up above that, which makes a lot of matches feel pointless.
@Moonras2 is correct that if they went for a general 50/50, you'd have an explosion at the top level, just like killers who want 4 person SWFs brought down from 48% to 40% don't see how that would decimate everyone else.
Ill be honest, I hadn't even thought about the swf argument. That would be a killing blow for solo queue.
The devs have never said it, but I have wondered if that's why they don't seem too worried about the high mmr 4 mans having a higher escape rate. At least not yet. Because they have figured out a way to balance it there, while trying to keep the rest still playable. It has its ups and downs but they still seem to be working on things that may help lower tier killers as well as solo queue survivors.
-
I think it depends on how you look at it. The last official stats I saw put 4 man high mmr swf at I 48%. I could be wrong on this stat and don't mind being corrected. It may not be quite 50% but it is close. So at higher mmr, where players are probably more competitive, it is close to balanced when playing with a group.
If they changed the goal for average players to 50/50 then that could have a severe imbalance at the top level.
Personally I could care less if killers had a 100% kill rate if the matches felt fun and rewarding somehow. I haven't felt that way with the game in a long while though and haven't played in a long while either.
-
I am very sorry for your loss. I don't believe there are words that can make things better. I hope you and your family are doing ok and making it through.
-
I would say because we have no clue yet what any new measures may be or how they will affect the gameplay. Until the updates actually come out we can only speculate things but we really have no idea what changes may or may not be needed until after.
-
I use an Xbox and a dual sense controller. However, I'm not sure where you are playing the game from. Steam handles PlayStation controllers, and others, in different ways for games that don't officially support them. Where as with Epic, or Gamepass/Microsoft Store, you may not have good luck in some games with certain controllers without doing some tinkering.
Xbox controller is pretty universal and works with most any store or game. The 8bitdo Ultimate controllers work well and are good prices too. But mine broke :(
Most of the controllers can be connected via Bluetooth or cable. Xbox has a special adapter that can also be purchased separately and 8bitdo usually comes with a USB dongle depending on the model.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3942219#Comment_3942219
There's supposed to be an MMR update coming, so hopefully that will come with clarity.
Mandy though recently reiterated that wins are subjective.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3920104#Comment_3920104
Oh I haven't seen her post. Ty again. They don't ever really seem to withhold information I just would like to see statements more frequently when possible.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3942206#Comment_3942206
This might be the one you are missing. It's actually has a number of useful comments from Peanits. https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3591335#Comment_3591335
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3591335#Comment_3591335
Yes, tyvm, that was it. I found it and edited my post above. Hard to keep up with lol. I would like to have some newer statements sometime from someone. They probably still hold true today but being able to provide something recent would be nice.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3942194#Comment_3942194
They also make statements saying the opposite. BHVR conflict each other all the time which is why I posted actual evidence and numbers to back up my statements. Those can't be argued. However, I appreciate you took the time to try pulling one side of these. I'll see if I can dig up where they say the complete opposite. The most recent one is the following, but it's on a different topic, but you can see they obviously are posting competent different facts.
One dev says:
"No report is actioned without solid evidence - so video evidence (screenshots are not evidence and are not used) is pretty much a necessity. If players are talking about chat harassment, we do have all the chat logs checked. Nobody is banned without good reason - and even when you receive the "report is actioned" response, that means the report has been reviewed, not that someone has been banned."
This clearly says that getting the report feedback popup merely means the report was looked at and not that a ban was handed out.
However, another dev said
"When you receive report feedback, it's simply to let you know that action was taken against a player you reported. It does not mean that your report specifically was what led to the ban. For example, if the same person had said something hateful in another match, they may have been banned for that instead, but you'd still receive the feedback popup. This way, nobody who reported that person is left in the dark just because they weren't the first to report them."
This is completely opposite to the other dev statement.
Some of the dev statements also dont make sense. I believe it was peanits that referred to killers having a bigger chance to win overall in dbd because they can win up to 4 times a match while survivors can only win once. It could have been a different dev - i dont recall. I believe this was in reference to talking about the game being 4 individual 1 v 1 matches and not being a team vs team game. However, this clearly doesn't really match up to realityon counting killer wins considering the killer needs a 3k+ to win.
Oh I'm sure they've said different things before. However, on the 3k being a win, I would say that is subjective. I'll give you my reason why. I personally never played for mmr. Back in the day I did play to win but this was way back before the emblem system, not really relevant, throwing it out there.
What I do know though is that when I played for emblems, it depended on my rank on whether it was a win or not. After rank reset I could get to purple ranks pretty easy and I rarely killed anyone. I liked 2 hooking people and then just goofing off. I could still gain rank, and play how I wanted, up to a point. Between purple and red rank I started having to kill if I wanted to gain anymore rank. I enjoyed this because I wasn't playing against new players and could still win according to what the game was telling me. It may still work that way but now if I play this way I am picking on new people because of mmr.
If someone is playing for emblems, it may still be possible to rank up this way and they may still consider it a win. I imagine many players don't care about mmr. Some probably don't even know it exist, as it's hidden.
For people playing and trying to win against mmr, then it does provide some what of a win condition. I say some what because I don't know how the mmr gain works with the points. For others the win condition could be all over the place. From doing well on emblems to just finishing a daily quest.
For balancing I would normally not have a problem with mmr and its win condition but I don't really agree with it as it is. By prioritizing matchmaking, as far as I'm aware, it would have to be less effective at what it's intended for. I could be wrong there as I no nothing about it really.
Which is why, at least these days, I have no clue what I would like to see used to balance the game lol. I hope the upcoming changes make it so hooks and other things count towards mmr and a new win condition there. Part of the reason I quit playing is because I don't like playing for kills but I also don't want to be stuck picking on new players. On survivor side I just stopped enjoying it entirely.
I know this post went all over the place I'm having a hard time paying attention atm lol.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3942194#Comment_3942194
You are a hero. I remember those posts, but finding them is always difficult.
Sorry to double post I forgot I quit using chrome lol. Here ya go.
@Peanits said:
Really quick note on this:
This might in fact be why to the devs the Dredge and other killers look perfectly fine: They have an overall decent killrate. Not because they're in a good spot but because very few people know what to do. It's easy to win against survs who don't know about the killer specific things they need to do.
We don't make decisions solely based on kill rates. Kill rates only show us where a problem might be, they don't tell us whether or not there is a problem or what that problem is. We spend a lot of time gathering feedback and watching gameplay before committing to changing something.
That aside, matchmaking is incredibly complex, so it's difficult to account for absolutely everything. To shed some light on why this isn't the case at the moment, most skills you use as you play are transferable and work against multiple Killers. Managing your time and deciding when you should be working on a generator, when you should be healing, and when you should be saving are all things that will come in handy no matter who you're facing. Memorizing the layouts of different maps so you know where to run is always going to be the same. Looping a Trapper isn't very different to looping a Legion, or a Pig, or an Oni, and so on. Some force you to play a bit more differently, but there's still a core set of skills that you bring with you.
The tricky part with splitting your Survivor rating into a rating for each Killer is that there are a lot of Killers in the game - 34 and counting. In practice, this would mean that your rating against any given Killer would only update 1/34th of the time, making it very slow to adjust. If you were struggling against the Dredge, for example, you would have to play many matches against them before your rating would lower to a more comfortable range. It takes a bunch of matches to estimate where you should be, then many more to fine tune it. In order to have an accurate rating against each of those Killers, you would need to play hundreds if not thousands of matches.
And here is one about mmr. I seem to be missing one.
@Peanits said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3662457#Comment_3662457
(Numbers are totally made up, so don't read too far into them. Apologies in advance, this is wordy.)
Just want to start here and clear this up before answering the original question. While you do have separate ratings when you play either Killer or Survivor, MMR for the two roles are definitely connected. A 1500 rating Killer would be matched with a 1500 rating Survivor. Each role is somewhere along the same sliding scale, they aren't scored in completely different ways. Beyond that, the win/loss conditions for each role are the same (but flipped, of course) - and this is a very crucial part which I'll get into next.
For a rating system like this to work, you absolutely need one winner and one loser or a draw/void. In order for one person to gain MMR, another person has to lose MMR. This rule, combined with the way your rating changes more or less depending on the rating of the people you faced, prevents ratings from climbing endlessly and becoming meaningless. The best player in the world will eventually run out of equal or better players to beat and stop climbing once they've reached the top.
This is crucial. If both players can win at the same time, their ratings will both increase even though their actual skill level stays pretty much the same. They could then face off again, and despite being at the same skill level as before, gain MMR again. Across millions of matches, people would generally trend upwards.
To put it a simply as possible, you go from the follow possible outcomes to a match:
- A win
- A loss
- A draw/void
To these:
- A win
- A close match that also counts as a win
- A loss
- A draw/void
There are more opportunities to gain MMR than to lose MMR. Your MMR becomes more of a reflection of playtime than actual performance. An average player could climb to 2000 MMR by playing a lot and end up facing a really good player who happens to play much less often. If that happens, the system has failed.
Now applying that to hooks like you've used as an example, say the Killer hooks each Survivor twice and all Survivors escape.
- Every Survivor gains a lot of MMR because everyone escaped
- The Killer gains some MMR because they got most of their hooks
This is that exact situation where both sides gain MMR simultaneously, breaking the entire system. The only way to fix it is to draw a line and determine who won and who lost. Does the Killer deserve the win because they got 8 hooks? If so, is that fair to call it a loss for the Survivors who not only escaped, but kept all their teammates alive? It is incredibly muddy and impossible to say for certain who deserves to move up.
This is one of the reasons why MMR is based on kills & escapes. For one side to win, the other side needs to lose.
Beyond that, they act as a "proxy" for skill - in other words, playing really well will usually result in you catching and killing more Survivors, and vice versa. The reason why we use a proxy is because it is impossible to accurately assess someone's skill with a formula. There will always be a what-if that throws a wrench in things. "What if it's based on hooks? But what if the survivor escapes in the end anyway? But what if it's based on chase times? But what if the killer is tunneling someone and I never get chased, so the best move for me was to do gens?" and so on.
To put it bluntly, it is impossible for any matchmaking system to accurately assess your skill from a single match. No matchmaking system in the world can do it. There will always be too many factors involved to say definitively, and so proxies are used to help gauge where you should be over the course of many matches.
All this is to say: Your invisible rating going up or down is not a reward or a punishment. It is not to make you feel good or bad about yourself or the match you just played. Its only purpose at the end of the day is to find you a roughly even match. If you're had a close match where survivors are hooked multiple times and one or two just barely escaped, this is a good thing! The goal in that case is not to raise your MMR anyway and give you tougher matches. You are already in a decent spot where the competition is close. You might gain a little here, lose a little there, but in the end you'll be hovering around that spot until your skill changes on average.
I completely understand that it feels good to have the game say, "Way to go, you did well!" in a scenario like that, but for it to increase your rating when you're already having close matches would be a failure on its part and only lead to more frustrating matches where you are outclassed. The only goal for the system is to keep you in that close match sweet spot where you're comfortable, nothing more.
Edit: here is the missing one.
@Peanits said:
I can clarify a bit. I'm not sure where the 60% kill rate = 50% win rate bit comes from, but I don't recall it being said by us. We don't tend to talk about "win rates" because a win is still somewhat subjective. Some people count a pip as a win, others if they get 3 kills, some even consider only 4 kills as a win. If we're talking about solely kills, kill rate and win rate are equal. The kill rate is an average, not a guarantee. You might kill 4 survivors one match and 0 the next, but that'll still average out to 50%. (When you average out thousands of matches, that killer's actual kill rate becomes much more accurate.)
Certain things may influence it, like you've mentioned, but it's a bit too nebulous to speculate on. There are also things that survivors may do to inflate that kill rate, like giving the killer a pity kill after a rough match, giving up when the hatch is closed, and so on. They would cancel each other out to some degree, but exactly how much influence each has is impossible to identify. These would have to be incredibly common to have a significant influence on the total kill rates.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3942194#Comment_3942194
You are a hero. I remember those posts, but finding them is always difficult.
I thought I had them all bookmarked but when I took my long break from the game I may have deleted them at some point. They should be in my post history some where but I just tested the stats link and it still works.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3941980#Comment_3941980
Considering most of your comments goes way off topic or is just completely ignoring facts already laid out by BHVR themselves, I'll skip over those parts.
The part below, you actually came up with a valid point - ironically the point I already made in my post, but before we get to that part, I'll at least respond to your claim that BHVR just pulled the number out of the air because they wanted the killers to feel powerful. Now, I know you said you hate it when people use math to support their statements, but im going to use math - I'll keep it simple. A 50% kill rate is only a 2k. A 75% kill rate is a 3k. If we wanted killers to have a 50% win rate, we would take the middle point between 50 (2k) and 75 (3k) which is 62.5%. At a 60% kill rate, that puts killers at an average of 2.49 kills per match. This essentially gives them a very very slightly less than a 50% win rate averaged out. Remember, a 3k is just as much as a win than a 4k. If BHVR wanted killers to make them more powerful by default, they would have done WELL over a 60% kill rate. It sounds like you mixed up kill rate with win rate. Kill Rates are not win rates. Easy to prove. If a killer has a 25% kill rate (a 1k on average), does that mean he's winning 1 out of 4 matches on average (a 25% win rate)? Of course not. BHVR clearly pulled statistics and math to support their number of coming up with a 60% kill rate - it gives killers a roughly 50% chance to get a 3k+ while giving some leeway to survivors. This didn't happen because they threw a dart at a dartboard and it landed on 60 as you'd presume.
Now as to something actually relevant you brought up, the snowball effect. I entirely agree wiith this part and I already acknowledged this was a thing in my post that you apparently decided to not bother reading. Lets say that a killer tunnels someone right out of the game from the beginning. This effectively creates a situation where the match is pretty much a 1 v 3 in reality (not counting time spent tunneling 1 survivor where the other 3 could be pushing gens...the time they gain by doing this pales in comparison to losing a team member early on, so yeah, an early tunnel effectively turns the match into a 1 v 3 from the get go). This is a BIG problem. However, we can't just assume every killer tunnels. What's the solution? Now comes the part of why I added survivor count scenarios more than just 1 v 4. If a killer tunnels right from the get go, survivors are SCREWED because thats essentially a 1 v 3 from the match start. While the game is balanced around the 38.5% escape rate for 4 survivors, if the match is suddenly a 1 v 3 from the get go, suddenly survivors SHOULD be in a position of having a 50% chance to escape from a 1 v 3...but they are stuck at the balanced rate of 38.5% still.
What I propose is that if a killer tunnels right off the bat and effectively forces the match to be a 1 v 3 from the beginning, have the gen speeds dynamically increase to effectively buff the survivors to the required 50% chance escape rate thats needed for a 1 v 3 game. However, this would only take affect if that 1 survivor gone was not in a position to do anything worthwhile. In other words, if the killer eliminates a survivor too quickly, have the match adjust dynamically similar to how BHVR tested this very idea with the last 2v8 gamemode. Chalk it up to the entity wanting survivors to suffer for a prolonged time or something and discourages quick kills. This would effectively punish early game tunneling by significantly buffing survivor repair speeds to make up for the match effectively being a 1 v 3 from the beginning. Now, this wouldn't take affect if enough time has passed, naturally. Otherwise, we would have a situation where the killer has no kills, there's one gen left, and he finally eliminated a survivor...it wouldn't make sense for the match to be considred a 1v3 at that point.
So yes, snowballing is absolutely an issue, and BHVR has clearly thought about having gen speeds dynamically change depending on killer effectiveness considering they literally added this to a gamemode recently. Why not apply that same logic to the base game if a match FROM THE EARLY GAME was considered a 1 v 3? If the match is effectively a 1 v 3, my chart provides the balanced escape rate that would be needed to adjust the match to be a fair game. This has an added benefit by still allowing optional tunneling late game if things are dire.
P.S. - oh, and it's nice to see another fellow math teacher, though I've retired from it and moved onto another career. Kudos to you.
Personally I don't play much anymore or really care about the math aspects but I just wanted to post this for everyone. It is old at this point and I acknowledge that things can change that we may not know or have information on.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/433-developer-update-stats
"We try to keep Killers near a 60% kill rate on average to keep matches relatively even and support the horror theme of the game, where the Killer is a force to be reckoned with and the survival is not guaranteed."
— Peanits
And with that I also want to post something from another old post of mine. I no longer have the links to the original post bookmarked but I could probably search through my old post and find links.
I just wanted to post these here. They are all from 2 different forums post and one of the statistics post.
"We don't make decisions solely based on kill rates. Kill rates only show us where a problem might be, they don't tell us whether or not there is a problem or what that problem is. We spend a lot of time gathering feedback and watching gameplay before committing to changing something."
-- Peanits
"I can clarify a bit. I'm not sure where the 60% kill rate = 50% win rate bit comes from, but I don't recall it being said by us. We don't tend to talk about "win rates" because a win is still somewhat subjective. Some people count a pip as a win, others if they get 3 kills, some even consider only 4 kills as a win. If we're talking about solely kills, kill rate and win rate are equal. The kill rate is an average, not a guarantee. You might kill 4 survivors one match and 0 the next, but that'll still average out to 50%. (When you average out thousands of matches, that killer's actual kill rate becomes much more accurate.)"
-- Peanits
"For example, a 50% kill rate would mean they kill two Survivors per match on average. We try to keep Killers near a 60% kill rate on average to keep matches relatively even and support the horror theme of the game, where the Killer is a force to be reckoned with and the survival is not guaranteed."
-- Peanits
Edit: the first post and last post seem to be the same after I read through so that can be found on the link provided if the link is still active.
-
I would think, as far as the tunneling argument goes, that they would probably be looking for multiple games where you are unhooked and immediately downed. I'm not saying a person can't be unlucky enough to get tunneled out first, multiple games in a row, but it also may be an indicator that someone is running straight back to the killer.
However, there then comes the issue of what is someone just likes going for protection hits or something with otr or is trying to get value out of DS? This could happen every game if it's how that person likes to play.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3918242#Comment_3918242
Its not willful ignorance, its learning from mistakes. I've been caught out early tons of times. I know its not always your fault, but I also know the vast majority of the time, it is. Thats what building game sense is, taking your experiences and knowledge of the game to predict what is happening outside your purview, as well as what is going to happen based on what you have and are witnessing. The game starts as survivor by panning the camera before the killer even gets into first person, let alone gains control. You get a chance to survey the area before the killer gets to start pursuing you with LP (assuming they even have it.) If your legitimate concern is that they will have LP and head straight for you specifically, you should be using that opening camera pan to identify tiles and begin routing. Like I said, there will be times where circumstances will deal you an impossibly bad hand, but the vast majority of the time there will be at least one avenue for you to identify and utilize.
Also, I don't remember where I said that I had an "objectively correct way to play," just that the post I was responding to was listing common excuses that are made instead of actually improving to mitigate those factors almost entirely. The intention was to reflect "maybe there were things I could have done" and not as an attack. If you (not even the person I was talking to) were offended by that, it wasn't my intention.
Lastly, their point was more that at least 1 gen should be finished before anyone can be camped and tunneled. As long as people are actually doing gens and the person being chased is able to run a modest length of time, at least 1 gen should have popped. If you need to find out whether it was the person in chase or the rest, using a stopwatch can help determine which part of the team didn't pull their own weight to that point.
I may not always agree with you but this one is a big one that I do. When I first started playing there were perks to help find survivors or objectives but they are nothing like what is available today. We had to learn to pay attention to what was around and in many cases I wouldn't even start an objective without doing a quick run around of a small area.
I learned a lot of this from watching some of the older streamers scout ground as survivor or learn to predict survivor spawns and use whispers. The game can seem too fast sometimes and I understand some situations are just bad situations. It's just how the game is.
I do think that more in depth tutorials could possibly help with some of this but I also don't see many content creators actively teaching this like they use too. People just watch them, not realizing how good they actually are with game sense, and then wonder why they aren't playing on their level.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3915975#Comment_3915975
Forgot to mention, on the whole escape is a win but mmr neutral being a bad call in your opinion, there is a reason they do this.
Lets say the survivors just didn't do well and a 3k occurs. The last survivor just happens to find hatch and escapes for his win. Does it make sense that he then has to face harder opponents just because he won? Of course not. Hatches are generally not a reflection of success (though they sometimes can, such as 3 survivors running out the door then hatch opens and the last hatches out). Since usually a hatch escape isn't a reflection of success, they simply allow the survivor to win their match, but the survivor isn't unjustly pushed into harder opponents thanks to the MMR system treating hatches as neutral. Again, MMR systems are entirely disconnected from win loss conditions - they only care about trying to balance future matches. Otherwise, if hatches wasn't neutral, you could literally have a selfish survivor who just hides all game and never does gens until the other survivors are eliminated and escape and end up eventually getting into the highest mmr tier possible.
You might then ask why not make hatch escapes not count as a win? Well, what would be the point of going for hatch? Dont get hatch, you lose. Get hatch, you lose. Doesn't make sense. Thats why it's still counted as a win.
In the end, the game is designed around whether you survivor or not. The MMR system is completely separate to try to balance future matches.
I would like to throw in that hatch, or any escape, isn't necessarily a win either. Even though someone escaped, they may not consider it a win unless they fulfilled the emblem obligation and got a pip. For others, they may not consider it a win unless their mmr has been raised. Some may even consider it a win just for the escape, like you point out, or extra bloodpoints.
Just escaping doesn't really reward anything anymore, unless someone considers it a personal win. It doesn't get you to the monthly rank/reward goals on its own and something like hatch doesn't raise your mmr. Which is kind of like a hidden reward or win condition to other people. It could fulfill tome requirements but I never do those so can't speak on what they are like.
Even for swf, if one person gets hatch but their friends were sacrificed, it may not feel like a win or may even feel like a victory to everyone. It's all kind of up in the air and up to the individual.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899600#Comment_3899600
So if we can go 20 matches and not dc do we win a prize?
Yes, you will no longer have to pay for haircuts because you may/will have ripped it all out :)
Honestly, I think some people don't realize how much burnout may also be the culprit. I've all but quit playing the game but when I do I find survivor can be very frustrating but still some what enjoy killer. I think my brother is the exact opposite and can play survivor for long periods without issue but gets irritated playing killer lol.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885394#Comment_3885394
I think most matches are ok, which is why the official stats always have the kill rates and stuff in the target ranges.
The problem is everything breaks when there is a player that is way above the soft cap.
Yeah I kind of feel this way too. Balance wise, and in an ideal world, the MMR would be close every match and queue times would be great. If they tried to tighten the MMR now though, or even widen the MMR range, I can't imagine what queue times would be at that level
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885355#Comment_3885355
The problem is we have a lot of "I can't believe this game is allowed to have long killer winstreaks", and it's like "yeah, that's because people wanted matchmaking to be less strict".
But for reals, BHVR could just easily fix the problem by bumping up the map rigging. If a killer has a way higher MMR than the survivors, then just super rig the map in the favor of the survivors. Like, if it's a Blight player, then fill the map with irregularly shaped line of sight breakers, and irregularly shaped loops, so the Blight player can't easily navigate the maps with his power. In general, the number of jungle gyms, and safe pallets can be boosted. And the generators can purposely spawn super far apart.
I don't know that they really need to or should do that but it would possibly work. Id be curious to know how close matches actually are MMR wise. Id also like to know if it's kind of evenly mixed as far as the matches go. If more survivors get paired more often with less experienced killers, vice versa, or if it's just mixed across the board.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884221#Comment_3884221
This literally happened because MMR was made less strict. When MMR was new, large killer winstreaks pretty much stopped.
But the players decided they would rather have faster queue times and less strict matchmaking, which is why the game currently has large killer winstreaks.
That's what I'm saying. If anyone post up a video of themselves winning 2 or 300 matches in a row, or winning most of their games, it won't matter. Many of the people who ask for the video will then just criticize every aspect of it. So there's no point in asking for it or going through the trouble of showing it.
I also remember a lot of killer players still winning most of their matches with that mmr, just no longer with the long kill streaks. Many of them also stating they were just having to play sweaty every game and it was boring for people watching content creators. So it was long queues with unfun gameplay. I personally found the emblem system more enjoyable than what we have now. That's mostly because of my personal playstyle though.
I remember when the de-pip squad did their experiment way back in the day. I dont remember any long killer win streaks back then and now it's starting to feel the opposite. I still see a few survivor challenges but I see way more killer challenges and streaks now. Even with what many consider to be low tier killers.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884226#Comment_3884226
majority of maps still have a lot of resources, DH is still very good, hatch was and is a generally unhealthy mechanic.
Yes, survs had a lot more going on in the very far past, but people were doomsday posting way less and were much better even when killers had most atrocious metas, like Eruption + CoB or CoB + Overcharge.
Mindset of players is very screwed up nowadays
Im not saying perks like dh aren't still good but they are not what they once were. The problem with a lot of resources on some maps is that some of those resources aren't really a benefit in any way like they use to be. It's either pre drop and run or you are most likely gonna get hit.
Skill just kind of goes out the window these days and that goes for both sides. I see so many killers who can't find or track anyone these days without an aura reading perk.
There's also way to much for survivors to have to learn now. With so many killers in the game it's probably hard for a new survivor to even learn to loop a standard pallet. At one time the only shake up might've been nurse or instasaw billy so learning to loop could be done with nearly every killer. Now with so many antiloop killers a player could go 100s of hours without ever playing against an m1 killer. So it is learn to predeop and hold w instead.
Then you can throw in things like tomes. Some players aren't interested at all in winning or helping a team advance unless it's part of a challenge.
I attribute a lot of the leaving and quitting to burn out as well. Not just to who does or plays what.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884208#Comment_3884208
???
Let me remind you that the so called "better state of survivor" was also the one when there wasn't basekit BT nor any kind of basekit second chances as a QoL improvement for survivors, yet average survivor was way better back in time and complaints were nowhere near the level of modern dbd.
Nowadays, you have very strong anti-tunneling, anti-slugging and anti-camping and couple of basekit mechanics to handle those, and yet, state of average survivor is the worst it's ever been.
This pretty much tells about rapid deterioration of skill amongst survivor players much rather than killers being "too powerful".
Before you wish to add any further, just give me a clear explanation on how is it possible that game is balanced "more against the survivor" over the time when there were literally so many of QoL features and ways to protect yourself against meta killer strats implemented compared to the times when state of survivor was considered way better, while in fact meta killer strats were much easier to practise.
When I started survivors had a lot more resources, maps were larger, 2 pallets could spawn on one tile, and a survivor could greed loops into a vacuum pull to avoid hits. Dead hard was still used for distance, ds had no requirement, even when changed to needing wiggle progress it was still stronger, and was more chase oriented than anti tunnel. Borrowed time worked on both survivors. Hatch could spawn earlier and keys could get everyone out.
No egc existed, all perks still worked at the end. BNPs were instagen, etc…
Killers had their own things as well that were stronger then but I remember loading into matches with only 2-3 survivors and still winning games. That's not really possible now and honestly it shouldn't be like that.
I'm not saying these changes weren't needed but survivors had a lot going on back then.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3883837#Comment_3883837
I know, right? All these never-lose killer players should be streamers or tourney players, so people can gawk at how good they are. Or teach us specifics of how to get better at killer. I want to know the secret of how to comeback a match where 1 decent chase led to over half the survivor objective being done.
It doesn't matter. Anytime someone points to a streamer like this, or shows off their own gameplay, it just turns into excuses. They must be lowering their MMR off screen, no good players in their region, they are only playing strong killers, they have 90000 hours in the game and no else does, they are the strongest 4 man, etc...
Sometimes it even has an opposite effect. They will post a streamer winning the majority of their games but still somehow spin it to say the other side is too strong.
-
It looks like the problem is that you weren't slugging for the 4k. You wouldn't lose near as much if you just slugged the 2nd to last person and then chased the final person for at least 3 minutes and 52 seconds but no more than 4 minutes. Anything longer than 4 minutes and the person you are chasing still has a shot at hatch. Anything less and the crawling survivor has the chance.
Also you are not playing blight or nurse. It's very hard to get a 4k without them. At the rate you are going, your MMR must be extremely low. Losing so many survivors in such a small amount of games is not good. Complete skill issue.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
judging from my personal experience, state of the soliQ is like this:
my team wanders around the map cleansing dull totems and opening chests while i loop the killer, killer drops chase so they can go for the rest of team, they fall down like flies, they go next on hook.
All in all, i get slugged for pressure maybe once in 5 matches and bled out once in 20 matches.
You are lucky. I sometimes dream that my teammates would work on totems or open a chest. Instead they are usually just crouched down. Sometimes not even in a far corner. Just crouched in the middle of the map for no apparent reason. Not just one, it's always at least 2 of them
-
@WolfePhD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/437336/swf-is-op-because-they-have-no-weaknesses
I have a different perspective. I don't remember the target winrate by the developers, but I think it was last discussed to be 70/30. If you play a game that you are intentionally designed to lose 30% of the time — there needs to be a factor in the game you can lose to. SWF is highly coordinated, highly efficient, and highly technical compared to SoloQ—don't you want opponents that challenge you? There is a well-known member of the community that considers themselves to be "truly talented" at playing Dead by Daylight. This community member, who streams their games, has a reputation for complaining about SWF despite their self-proclaimed talent.
A fair minority of killers purposely keep their MMR low by 8hooking survivors and letting them all leave at the end of the match. If you want to breathe and just mow down players, that option is available to you — but you no longer "win" matches the same way. All I want is for killers to feel like they are lethal and efficient without having to immediately remove one player from the game ASAP. Survivors should have the ability to coordinate and reach the top of the skill ceiling. The game is not balanced for high level play, and I'm not sure how much of the developer's time should be spent addressing it. How many players actually go against SWF groups?
I just want to throw in that not all killers who do this are doing it to keep their MMR low. I started playing this way after around the 1500 hour mark. I just found it more enjoyable. I could 2 hook everyone at that time but still gain rank, up to a certain point, because MMR didn't exist. So I could play how I enjoyed but not feel like I was picking on new players. It felt more like moving up into a casual area where other people also played in similar ways. Before that mark I would try and win as both sides at all cost.
Now I'm forced to either try harder or feel like I'm ruining the game for newer players. Instead I've just pretty much quit playing all together.
-
@Camilll3e said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3872773#Comment_3872773
That'd be amazing. Also replace the crows with owls. Make the map nighttime and spooky.
Would never have thought about that. The sounds would be refreshing and fun.
-
Yes and make some of the tombstones display the names of the survivors that load in.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
If they did this, Survivors would have to be lucky and skill would be non-existent.
To be fair some of the loops now probably feel reversed to someone playing killer. Like Reinami mentioned, shack is a good example. Not only is it long so survivors can see but some also can be seen through. So in these instances it's kind of like the killer is trying to guess with a mind game but the survivors can be patient and either react really early or force the killer to have to react to them.
It kind of balances out between loops that maybe favor killer in this way and loops that favor survivor in this way. I'm not sure what a good middle ground would be.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3869254#Comment_3869254
Uh, i'm not sure how, i explained how it would be good for the game, and how it would not affect average level survivor play and nobody has been able to demonstrate that other than "killer bad" I have never heard any definition of a "Check spot" other than what i described in the thread, so again i fail to see the problem here.
Ahh I misread the last part of what you mean by check spots. Most of the time when I see check spots, it includes the long loops, holes in the wall, and maybe an area where you have time to vault a window by seeing when the killer turns a corner. Basically anywhere a survivor can check and make a decision.
Yeah, I have no problems with holes in the wall being gone but I don't see how this would be more fun for high level survivors. They have put in the effort of learning where and how to use these spots. Removing them will just force them back into a guessing situation. There would be no correct play for survivor but only a correct guess at that point. Against certain killers it may not even feel like that option exist anymore. It may also promote more of just drop the pallet and hold w play styles.
I know you said the survivors could predict based on previous choices but this only works against killers who do the same thing over and over. A high level killer has probably learned not to do this. Then you have to throw in other factors such as survivor noises and how loud injured survivors are. It gives killers more of an edge in predicting where a survivor might be or the direction they might be headed.
On the matter of the red stain going through walls I do think that should be changed. In the current state it shouldn't go through anything. It can make trying to hide it feel useless.
-
I haven't played the game in a while but last I played people were just leaving for no discernable reasons. I use to be someone who would try and justify dc'ing, or hook suiciding, against extremely unfun or broken things but it has gotten way past that. It's not even just a problem of getting matched with bad teammates or anything anymore.
I never had a problem when someone let go if their teammates weren't helping progress the game. Not now, it's gotten to where someone can be downed before anyone even has time to find a gen and they will just dip out.
I don't find it fun as killer either. I always try to make the game fun when I play killer but the moment someone leaves, I don't know if it's more fun for me to two hook and let everyone farm or just get the game over with so everyone can move on.
Ihts hard to enjoy playing either side because of it.