xoMadii
xoMadii
About
- Username
- xoMadii
- Joined
- Visits
- 31
- Last Active
Comments
-
@wydyadoit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3351278#Comment_3351278
simply put I don’t agree with punishing players that hook pogo outside of the expected mmr penalty that should technically already be happening. Assuming this game has mmr to begin with. This would act as a “bad sport lobby” without the need for any added effort.
dc’ing already has a timer penalty. So this is a non-issue.
the grey area of hook escapes exists regardless of player intention. I still run ace from time to time and play hook ward with kindred, slippery meat, up the ante, and kinship. So at least one player in the community does try to unhook themselves.
Using perks and attempt to Kobe isn’t the same as killing yourself in hook (making attempts, and then hands off the controller/keyboard for second phase until you die).
I don’t agree that MMR punishes poor sports, it just sticks them with newer/less experienced players which only ruins their experience. Newer players are much more likely to quit the game altogether over more seasoned players lol
-
@Technature said:
Don't want to comment on anything else, but this
"While we’re at it, NOBODY remaining in the lobby should be able to depip, it should be an automatic safety pip ideally with some sort of incentive."
Along with De-pip, people Disconnecting because someone else disconnected should generally not be punished either. No sane person is going to argue that you can win 3v1 at five gens and to be at the killers mercy in that situation isn't fun for anyone.
I agree completely, I sat here for 10 minutes before posting trying to figure out what I was forgetting to add, and you comment is exactly that lol
-
@wydyadoit said:
so… i play r6 siege and league of legends. Both have honor/reputation systems.
the way disconnects work in dbd is simple. If you disconnect during a match you get hit with a matchmaking ban for a certain amount of time. I’m not 100% sure, but i think it stacks if you do it multiple times within a time frame.
however, as far as killing oneself on a hook goes… slippery meat builds, self unhooking challenges, busy lives, and various other perks and mechanics that go into the thought process of “do i try to self unhook” and “do i bother struggling”
…I don’t think these things should be punished. Because technically they already are. If you choose to attempt a self unhook and succeed you unhook yourself which is actually a challenge. If a player fails then they die quicker. And if they choose to not struggle then their emblems and bloodpoint gains are reduced in survival and unbroken.
and at the end of the day survivors always have the option to swf if you really need that try hard team.
killers benefit in almost every regard when a survivor rage quits except when it comes to adepts and 4k sacrifice specific challenges. So you’re really only hurting your teammates and yourself as a quitter.
Attempting unhooks with perks/challenges is extremely uncommon, most of the time it is done as a way to avoid a DC penalty.
Yes, you are correct there is an increased time penalty whenever someone DCs but it doesn’t help with anything. DCing/Killing yourself on hook immediately is so common now that I easily have more games with DCs than not.
Life circumstances is fine, no one DCing over IRL things is going to do it frequently enough to be shoved into a bad sport lobby. The point of bad sport lobbies is to punish frequent offenders by lumping them altogether.
You’re also right about to being selfish and not helping the team, but these guys don’t care about helping the team lol
-
@jesterkind said:
I'd rather see hexes changed as a base mechanic, rather than see a perk that helps band-aid the problem.
Still, something would be nice.
I don’t disagree with that at all, but I think we’d have a better chance of getting a perk than an actual mechanic change lmao.
I’d love it if the hexes we’re active but hidden for x amount of time at the beginning of the game.
-
@TotemSeeker91 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/311081/corrupt-intervention-but-for-hexes
No... because you don't get the full 120 seconds?
Huh?
-
@ThanksForDaily said:
Yes, rework a licenced map because of 1 perk. 😭
Instead of 4 slowdowns, use IG, Agi for a few games.
update: they did in fact add more hooks to the library with the most recent update today. 😁
-
@ThanksForDaily said:
Yes, rework a licenced map because of 1 perk. 😭
Instead of 4 slowdowns, use IG, Agi for a few games.
It’s not just one perk, you can exploit the library with many different perks.
but yes, let’s just run a very weak agitation, iron grasp, Madgrit build every game as a “just in case”.
Adding some more hooks, or a second exit out of the library isn’t a big wild change by any means.
-
@ClumsyTrapper said:
The just needs auto hook spawn in the Library that would fix the boil over abuse same in Erie if the crow give an always hook at the top floor of the tower and were gtg
Yea but if they bring oaks there won’t be one in the library anymore 🥲
-
@PlaysByShady said:
The recent controversy over Patrick's comments embarrasses me; it just highlights the mob-mentality of the DBD community and I absolutely empathise over why the devs refuse to comment on matters... because too many people screech in response about things they don't understand. And right now it's MMR, like everyone has suddenly become experts in how it works and are therefore qualified to comment on it.
Sadly, this is not the case, and let me explain why.
Warning: this will be slightly complicated, because that's just the nature of how these things are. But I'll do my best to simplify.
Short background: I've been a software dev for 20+ years, been involved in some mmr systems in the past (did some collab with the original MS Trueskill researchers back in the day), and generally deal with s/w that support large amounts of concurrent users.
So... let's start at the basics.
The system is known by multiple names, the two common ones being SBMM and MMR. I'm going to use 'MMR' because the term 'Skill' in SBMM is a loaded term that can be misinterpreted. It doesn't mean skill in the way you would mean in natural use.
The purpose of the MMR is to provide Match-Making... hence the MM in the name. More importantly, it's to provide MM between parties who are considered "equal", so that matches will be "balanced". You'll notice those terms are in quotes, because they don't necessarily mean what you think they mean. They need to be defined.
Before we do that, let's also point out some assumptions the system makes:
1) Both sides are attempting to achieve their overall objectives, i.e. killers are trying to kill, and survivors are trying to survive.
2) There is 1 killer and 4 survivors (to begin with)
3) A desirable match (i.e. what the MM should aim to produce) is one where all players have equal chance of achieving their (diametrically opposed) objectives... either the killer kills, or the survivors survive (on a 1v1 basis, i.e. per survivor... the killer either kills the survivor, or the survivor survives).
Now... you can argue with those assumptions if you like, but that'd be a separate discussion altogether
So, how is does the MMR system match people together?
IT REDUCES YOU TO A NUMBER!
That's literally it. To the MMR system, you are just a number! All your skilled plays, jukes, strategies, etc are distilled down to a single number which represents your "skill" or "level"!
That's the first thing to understand and get over. The system knows-not, and cares-not, about how you played, the incredible saves you pulled off, how you sacrificed yourself to save your team, how you did or didn't tunnel/camp, etc. It just cares about what your "level" is so that it can find suitable players to match you with for the next game. Anything else is just noise.
For those that want to argue whether it should be this way, I would invite you to please design a system... heck, even an Excel spreadsheet with basic formulas, that'd take all the data you want to count and be able to not only interpret it, but also provide some objective mechanism to determine how it should affect your level or how it affects who you're matched with (in an absolute mathematical sense, not some vague description of wants!)
What is the number you'd give to a person who had a 5-gen chase and chased, such that no-one else would get that number from escaping via other means? It can't be done! When you reduce things down to a number, it loses all of this nuance!
Software isn't magic! Computers are not people. They don't understand nuance, or intention. Everything that happens to affect any calculations has to be written/coded to accommodate that!
There's a lot more to be said on this, but for the sake of brevity and sanity, I'll leave it there for now.
So, now you're just a number. Here's another important point to understand. YOUR NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER!
Think about it. If your number was 10, 100, or 1000, what difference does it make? You might be tempted to answer "well, 100 is obviously more than 10", but lets say your peers where in the range of 9-11, or 90-110, etc, it still puts you in the same spot, i.e. smack-bang in the middle.
So I'll say it again... YOUR NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER!
What does matter is where your number stands in relation to everyone else's.
If yours is 10, but the player-base only ranges from 5-15, then you're firmly in the middle. But if the player-base averages around 100, then your number (or level) is severely below average. Your number doesn't matter... where your number fits in relation to everyone else is what matters!
The MMR system produces matches by trying to fill a lobby with players who have similar numbers, i.e. they're within a specified range of each other. That range could be determined by a number of factors, and we also know it increases the longer you're in the queue (so you'll match with more players whose level are further away from yours).
Now, here's what too many people fail to understand. In order to do any match-making... any system has to have some way to rank or equate players so that it can determine what is a good match vs a bad match. How else are you going to compare players with each other without some common comparable criteria between the two? Think about it! You need some objectively measurable indicator that you can ascribe to both survivor and killer in order to compare them with each other to match-make! Otherwise you're literally comparing apples and oranges.
So now you're in a match, and the match plays out. You either survive or die, or as a killer you get kills or not. At the end of the match, THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS HOW MUCH YOUR LEVEL MOVES! Remember, the MMR system doesn't care about your amazing plays, because there's no objective number it can ascribe to it. It just needs to know whether your level should be adjusted, and if so, by how much.
Remember, you and your plays are just being reduced down to a number!
Here's where there's a lot of room for confusion, misinterpretation, and a range of opinions. There are many ways to skin a cat... and there are many ways to determine what that adjustment should be.
Maybe it should take hooks into account, or how many chases won/lost? All great ideas. And I'm sure BHVR have tried these out - we've had a number of MMR tests in the past year or so. I strongly suspect that, at the end of the day, the results they produced weren't as good as what would have been desired.
Or, more likely, they discovered something else... but before I mention it, let me point out another mechanism of the system... THEY'RE DESIGNED TO WORK OVER A RANGE OF MATCHES!
There is literally NO ranking system anywhere in the world that will accurately place any player after a match or two. That's impossible. There's simply not enough data points to determine where you fit in the ranking overall, unless you play enough matches to provide as much.
And the second point... YOUR LEVEL FLUCTUATES!
No-one is the same "skill" all the time. You're either a newb, and your skill increases. Or you've been away for a while and have adapted to the new mechanics etc, and your skill decreases. See, by the time you've played enough matches for the system to know where you rank in comparison to others, bear in mind that their rankings have changed too! Perfection is a moving target, and a good working system is one that can accurate match-make based on the data it has at that time.
You will never have any system that accurately places players exactly where their rank is for all time... the system just tries to get as close to an ideal as possible given the current data!
At the end of the day, if the system produces a match with an even 50/50 result, then it's done it's job. The 4 survivors had 50/50 change of surviving or dying... 50% survived, 50% died, that's an even match! Hence BHVR mentioned back in the day that they consider 2-kills+2-escapes an even match.
Note: as a gamer, I recognise how stupid this seems, because we know that once two survivors go down, the other two have a harder job to survive... unless the deaths are occurring in end game which probably means the killer had a stressful game. I get it. It seems completely counter-intuitive. But the maths checks out... 4 survivors, each with 50/50 chance to win/lose will mean that 2 "win" and 2 "lose". It's mathematically balanced so should be a "good" game, as far as one can predict.
So, back to mechanics of how to reduce the game to an adjustment for your level... it appears BHVR have noticed that a persons average kill/escape ratio appears to correlate with other more complicated mechanics... so rather than fiddle around with the complicated mechanics, they can just take the shortcut and go with the clearer/easier kill/escape mechanic.
And herein is the misunderstood point... Patrick said that it's an indicator of skill, and when you consider that the MMR self-calibrates over a series of matches, it appears to prove an accurate one.
So let's clarify some things bearing this in mind:
A face-camping Bubba is more skillful: No, that's not what he said, nor is what he's suggesting. Firstly, ignore the term "skill", because it's confusing... the devs and players are using the same term to mean two different things. What he's saying is that if the killer is consistently getting kills - howsoever they're getting them - then they should go against "better" survivors who'll be able to resist their strategies and provide a more even match. They're not saying "wow, great plays"... they're saying "fine, we'll match you against better players, now let's see how you do!" The "skill" is in Bubba being able to catch the survivor in the first instance (and then however the rest of how the match plays out... maybe he loses 5-gens 'cos of the camp, maybe altruism gets the team killed). Either way, the Bubba will be adjusted to go against teams better suited (in theory).
Losing a 5-gen chase is low skill: Again, no! If you lost a 5-gen chase and died (which could be for a number of reasons, maybe your team just left you to be one-hooked, etc) then one of two things happened: (i) it was a completely fluke chase against a bad killer which you won't be able to repeat, and you're fine as you are... or (ii) you are that skilled that you can do it again, and over a series of matches your level will increase because you will do it again!
Again, straw-manning the point and expecting the system to produce an accurate result on a match-by-match basis is stupid. It's not going to do that. It's not designed to do that. It cannot do that, because the data fluctuates anyway!
Perfect example is Patrick's hockey example... he mentioned that for hockey players you could rank them by how many shots they take on goal... but if they're winning games (i.e. scoring more than others), then you can already presume they're taking more shots because how else are they getting the goals? You don't need to do the complicated calculations when there's a much simpler indicator that correlates closely enough. For any sport, if you look at their league tables, you can infer the teams (consistently) at the top have the best players... because how else did they get there? You don't need to know the ins and outs of each player, etc.
But of course, the DBD community are just like "waaah... hockey is not dbd, waah!" completely missing the point of what he's saying!
There is also the factor of diminishing returns to consider... the more "fine-tuned" the system is, the more effort it takes to maintain that system, and the less useful (i.e. different) data is produced. Whilst it is technically possible to build the system around hooks, or chases, etc... it requires so much more investment in time/development, the results aren't worth it because they don't produce anything that is fundamentally different from just looking at kills/escapes. So why adopt the harder method?
So... back to the adjustment at the end of the game. Adjusting your level by kills/escapes is very simple, and a reasonable indicator of where you need to be. If you're killing everyone, you need to be moved up to match against players you struggle to kill. If you're escaping every match, you need to move up to face killers that can better catch you and do something about it. And vice-versa.
Stop thinking about the MMR system as an ego-boost, the way some strimmers say they are "max-mmr"... there's no such thing. If the system matches you with players that'll give you a "balanced" match (as per how it was mathematically defined), then the system works as intended.
One other minor interesting point to note: Patrick mentioned the adjustment to a survivor's rank is also based on the order in which they died, because they recognise that a 4v1 death is different to a 3v1 death, etc, so you "lose" less if you died later (in order) rather than earlier.
The system, as a whole, is supposed to self-calibrate. It requires you to play a number of matches, and so long as you play consistently (for the most part), it'll do it's job in matching you with players that'll give you a 50/50 chance of achieving your objective. But bear in mind other player's levels are moving too, so it'll never be perfect. And there are always ways to "cheat" the system by artificially lowering your rank over a series of games (how is the system supposed to know though?)
Again, I've glossed over a lot, and simplified things a lot, to make it easier to understand... not to make it easier for people to provide strawman rebuttals. As a community, I wish we'd try to understand things properly before passing judgement/comment... and not just wildly complaining for the sake of complaining because we don't know what we're talking about.
If the whole MMR system is just reducing us down to a number to boost our MMR then why can’t it in another way that doesn’t account for kills/escapes only?
How is there no way to take the same thing that determines your pips, and implement that into MMR?
Each medal has its own set of numbers, kill/escape medals can be set at a higher number value than the others, and the MMR system could average out the number for the whole game and reduce you down to a number in that way, no?
The current MMR system rewards selfish players, and tunneling/face camping (don’t get me wrong, it’s a completely valid strategy, but killers should have the option to play without doing that to achieve kills).
Altruism is a big aspect of the game, so is looping, and obviously so are objectives. So why have you guys designed your whole MMR system around escapes/deaths, when you guys repeatedly say the game isn’t meant to win, it’s supposed to be more of a “draw” type situation.
The game isn’t fun when you’re constantly being tunneled out as a survivor, and for a lot of killers it isn't fun to have to tunnel one person out just to have a chance either.
Nor is the game fun when you get left to die on first hook, because locker Dwight made it into high MMR too because he hides and escapes often.
You guys say it eventually evens itself out and that it doesn’t happen as often as your player base is saying it happens.
So when does it even itself out? Because myself, and a ton of others have multiple experiences back to back, and it’s not “evening” itself out.
Also, why does the reasoning for not completing nerfs/buffs/changes always consistent of something along the lines of “it’s too hard, why would we do this when we could do that?”
Your player base is reaching out to you with ideas, and while a lot are based on opinions, or are clearly favorable to one side over another, a lot of suggestions are actually very well thought out, neutral suggestions that could really help.
Even within your very detailed description, you yourself threw in, “low blows”, towards your player base, when all anyone is doing is expressing their frustration and making suggestions.
I am 110% on board with an MMR system, I just wish you guys would listen to your players feedback and adjust your improvements based around that.
-
@Pandamonium31 said:
So there's obviously a lot of turmoil in the community lately about the recent Q&A, COH, No ED, etc., so it got me thinking on a rework for COH.
While No ED can be annoying to play against, it can be countered pretty easily by cleaning all totems throughout the game, or one totem in the endgame, and specifically only in the endgame.
So I just thought, "why not apply a similar principle to COH?".
Each survivor can bless only one totem per game (should they have the perk equipped), and once the totem is snuffed out, that's it. The trade of is that the healing rate goes back to the original 90%/95%/100%, and the killer won't be able to hear the humming noise it makes when nearby the totem. The killer will however still be able to hear the thundering sound when the totem had been blessed, indicating to them that a totem has been blessed on the map.
Maybe only one totem can be blessed per perk aswell, and at any one time? So only one COH totem, one ShadowStep totem, etc. This would make survivors rethink equipping all 3 of the current Boon perks as once their totem has been snuffed, that's 3 of their perks wasted.
At the same time, it requires the killer to 1. Have a good sense of awareness as they traverse a map, noting where dull totems are, and keeping an eye out throughout the game, and/or 2. learning common totem spawns for each map, both something survivors already have to do.
I think this kind of implementation will induce more thoughtful perk choices, risk vs. reward factors, killer awareness and attentiveness, and survivor strategy, at least adding to the dynamic of the game.
Anyone agree? Think a couple things should be changed around? Disagree completely? I'd be interested to hear!😁
I disagree with it, for starters to make it even remotely balanced, it would need to spawn in randomly just like hexes, and it would need an increased time to snuff, not an instant snuff. They would also have to give survivors their own unique totems because there aren’t enough totems to support boons, and hexes at once, especially if one Boon perk could only go on one individual totem.
A one time bless would take away all the value to survivors, and it would barely be used as the risk outweighs the reward by a long shot.
Forcing killers to have to seek out and snuff a boon, would also add another objective on the killers plate. Time is already so incredibly valuable to killers, and having to devote time to snuffing multiple totems at an increased time to snuff just gives the survivors free time to rush gens. They would be better off leaving the boons up rather than wasting time seeking and snuffing a boon.
-
@SilentShepherd said:
It's become abusive at this point to go Bubba and then ruin everyone's day with toxic gameplay. Every single Bubba I see, is an abusive toxic player. Face camping, etc.
Myers = to instadown, needs to charge up Tier 3, which takes a long while, AND is not forever. It runs out and he has to do it all over again.
Ghostface = to instadown, has to stalk you to fully charge
Bubba = to instadown.... nothing. he has to do nothing. he just runs at you and starts swinging.
I think a fair nerf to Bubba would be, once you use your chainsaw, add a cooldown of 20 seconds before Bubba can revv it up again. So Bubba's can stop spamming it. Or, if not a cooldown, then change it from AoE, to you can only down 1 person at a time with it.
There is no looping when it comes to facing Bubba. Every single one of them just do their special ability and get to lunge forward with an insta-down AoE (area of effect) attack that downs everyone and anything in it's path. It's easy to control, unlike Billy, who has to charge in 1 direction. Bubba can change directions during the entire special.
Why does it last so damn long? He gets to swing about 10 times with that thing and insta downs everyone.
And forget trying to save your teammates. He can facecamp everyone 1 by 1 and even if you come 3 strong to try and get save, he will just AoE everyone in a couple swings and insta-down EVERYONE from healthy to dying.
Bubba needs a nerf bat. really hard. Shorten the time his special lasts.
I'm at the point now that if I see another Bubba, I will intentionally kill myself on first hook and move on to another match.
I don’t disagree with the points you make at all when comparing him to other instant downs killers.
However, looping a bubba is relatively easy, and his chainsaw doesn’t pose that much of a threat.
UNTIL he gets someone on a hook, that’s when the intentional toxicity happens.
I personally think a good nerf would be to make him similar to Pyramid Heads cages, and have the hooks move locations if Bubba is camping.
OR have his chainsaw completely deactivate when he is within x meters from the hooked survivor. Maybe just far enough so that, as long as the survivors play the unhook properly, the bubba cannot reach them and get a double down, or even an instant down right off hook.
The second idea is more balanced to me than the first one. The second idea still allows bubba to camp like any other killer should he choose too, but he would just have to use his regular power, but it also gives the survivors the opportunity to get their friend off the hook, or trade hooks if need be, so it doesn’t have to be a “rush gens and let the first person die on hook” game.