Dbd is not balanced

[NoirStealth]

Still pretty crazy to me that people think dbd is actually balanced. The only reason you get any wins as killer is because the game puts against bad survivors a lot of the time to give you the illusion of the game being fair. If you get put with equivalent survivor players to your killer skill. You will get annihilated 9/10 times.

[Tokogawa [GER]]

Compared with the early states of DbD we are in a Era of really really close Balance. I´d even say that before the MFT addition the Game was near perfectly balanced

[INFERNAL NEON]

Still pretty crazy to me that some people still claim that killers cannot win at all unless if survivors mess up to a degree.

I suppose those 100 to 500 win streaks on killers were only possible beacuse they faced bad teams 500 times in a row. I'd say that 9/10 is more of a 4/10.

[NoirStealth]

When you're playing blight/nurse with best add-ons and build. While sweating your hardest you can beat the good survivors whenever they come up every 10 games or so. I'm talking about the general killer experience.

Also you do realise m1 killer's with no chase power are absolutely reliant on survivors messing up. If they don't then they will never catch survivors at most loops.

[NoirStealth]

Originally posted by Tokogawa GER:

Compared with the early states of DbD we are in a Era of really really close Balance. I´d even say that before the MFT addition the Game was near perfectly balanced

I understand why you think that but it just wasn't. Sure the game is closer to balanced now then it was but it's still quite rough. The game has never been closed to perfectly balanced ever imo.

[INFERNAL NEON]

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

When you're playing blight/nurse with best add-ons and build. While sweating your hardest you can beat the good survivors whenever they come up every 10 games or so. I'm talking about the general killer experience.

Also you do realise m1 killer's with no chase power are absolutely reliant on survivors messing up. If they don't then they will never catch survivors at most loops.

Well this takes it to a different topic. Yes some M1 killers like Wraith and Trapper really rely hard on the survivors mistakes.

But killers as a whole concept would include killers like Nurse and Blight etc. Thats where i dissagree beacuse those killers with good builds or not can perform super well . General killer experience means that most players are not as good as those tourement players but i'd argue that most killers do not loose 9/10 games even if the survivor team was good or not.

[NoirStealth]

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

When you're playing blight/nurse with best add-ons and build. While sweating your hardest you can beat the good survivors whenever they come up every 10 games or so. I'm talking about the general killer experience.

Also you do realise m1 killer's with no chase power are absolutely reliant on survivors messing up. If they don't then they will never catch survivors at most loops.

Well this takes it to a different topic. Yes some M1 killers like Wraith and Trapper really rely hard on the survivors mistakes.

But killers as a whole concept would include killers like Nurse and Blight etc. Thats where i dissagree beacuse those killers with good builds or not can perform super well . General killer experience means that most players are not as good as those tourement players but i'd argue that most killers do not loose 9/10 games even if the survivor team was good or not.

Every single m1 killer relies on survivors mistakes, straight up. If the survivors don't screw up at all they lose.

This is the whole mmr deception thing. I understand why you feel the way you feel. As a killer I imagine you win most. So it's very hard to get around the idea that the game is very survivor sided. Even for me, when I am winning so much, I have to remind myself who I am being put against.

Even if you just take away your subjective experience on the game and just look at the facts.

Survivors have to do 5 gens which at the MOST take 90 seconds. However it can often be a minute or less, toolboxes, perks and multiple on one. A very good chase with most killers could take you about 30 seconds. Taking into account the sprint burst from being hit. So if every chase was as efficient as possible (which never happens due to the unbalanced loop designs). You would be able to kill everyone in about 7 minutes taking into account the time it takes to put them on hooks.

The time it takes to do the killers objective as intended is significantly longer than it takes for survivors to do 5 gens, even at its absolute fastest.

When you tunnel and camp believe it or not you make the game more balanced. Getting a survivor out hurts they're efficiency a lot. I don't think it should be this way though.
It should be reasonable to be able to get 12 hooks no camping or tunnelling before they do 5 gens when they're playing good and being efficient.

Perks do play a factor but not enough. Due to the nerfs the best perks we have are just gen slowdown. In an ideal version of this game there would be no gen slowdown/regression perks the game would be balanced enough to where it wasn't a huge necessity when playing against a team that's efficient.

[INFERNAL NEON]

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Well this takes it to a different topic. Yes some M1 killers like Wraith and Trapper really rely hard on the survivors mistakes.

But killers as a whole concept would include killers like Nurse and Blight etc. Thats where i dissagree beacuse those killers with good builds or not can perform super well . General killer experience means that most players are not as good as those tourement players but i'd argue that most killers do not loose 9/10 games even if the survivor team was good or not.

Every single m1 killer relies on survivors mistakes, straight up. If the survivors don't screw up at all they lose.

This is the whole mmr deception thing. I understand why you feel the way you feel. As a killer I imagine you win most. So it's very hard to get around the idea that the game is very survivor sided. Even for me, when I am winning so much, I have to remind myself who I am being put against.

Even if you just take away your subjective experience on the game and just look at the facts.

Survivors have to do 5 gens which at the MOST take 90 seconds. However it can often be a minute or less, toolboxes, perks and multiple on one. A very good chase with most killers could take you about 30 seconds. Taking into account the sprint burst from being hit. So if every chase was as efficient as possible (which never happens due to the unbalanced loop designs). You would be able to kill everyone in about 7 minutes taking into account the time it takes to put them on hooks.

The time it takes to do the killers objective as intended is significantly longer than it takes for survivors to do 5 gens, even at its absolute fastest.

When you tunnel and camp believe it or not you make the game more balanced. Getting a survivor out hurts they're efficiency a lot. I don't think it should be this way though.
It should be reasonable to be able to get 12 hooks no camping or tunnelling before they do 5 gens when they're playing good and being efficient.

Perks do play a factor but not enough. Due to the nerfs the best perks we have are just gen slowdown. In an ideal version of this game there would be no gen slowdown/regression perks the game would be balanced enough to where it wasn't a huge necessity when playing against a team that's efficient.

I see your points, agree to dissagree

[Bobo]

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

When you're playing blight/nurse with best add-ons and build. While sweating your hardest you can beat the good survivors whenever they come up every 10 games or so. I'm talking about the general killer experience.

Also you do realise m1 killer's with no chase power are absolutely reliant on survivors messing up. If they don't then they will never catch survivors at most loops.

Well this takes it to a different topic. Yes some M1 killers like Wraith and Trapper really rely hard on the survivors mistakes.

But killers as a whole concept would include killers like Nurse and Blight etc. Thats where i dissagree beacuse those killers with good builds or not can perform super well . General killer experience means that most players are not as good as those tourement players but i'd argue that most killers do not loose 9/10 games even if the survivor team was good or not.

I main Wraith and can confirm this. I typically run meme builds because I think the chases are the most fun. But yeah... survivor mistakes are my bread and butter. If there are no mistakes, and it does happen, I'm just chasing when I can.

[NoirStealth]

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

Every single m1 killer relies on survivors mistakes, straight up. If the survivors don't screw up at all they lose.

This is the whole mmr deception thing. I understand why you feel the way you feel. As a killer I imagine you win most. So it's very hard to get around the idea that the game is very survivor sided. Even for me, when I am winning so much, I have to remind myself who I am being put against.

Even if you just take away your subjective experience on the game and just look at the facts.

Survivors have to do 5 gens which at the MOST take 90 seconds. However it can often be a minute or less, toolboxes, perks and multiple on one. A very good chase with most killers could take you about 30 seconds. Taking into account the sprint burst from being hit. So if every chase was as efficient as possible (which never happens due to the unbalanced loop designs). You would be able to kill everyone in about 7 minutes taking into account the time it takes to put them on hooks.

The time it takes to do the killers objective as intended is significantly longer than it takes for survivors to do 5 gens, even at its absolute fastest.

When you tunnel and camp believe it or not you make the game more balanced. Getting a survivor out hurts they're efficiency a lot. I don't think it should be this way though.
It should be reasonable to be able to get 12 hooks no camping or tunnelling before they do 5 gens when they're playing good and being efficient.

Perks do play a factor but not enough. Due to the nerfs the best perks we have are just gen slowdown. In an ideal version of this game there would be no gen slowdown/regression perks the game would be balanced enough to where it wasn't a huge necessity when playing against a team that's efficient.

I see your points, agree to dissagree

Fair enough.

[Truth seeker]

Unless its a nurse in my opinion killer should always lose. Map favor survivor too much and if everyone in the lobby are equal then the side with the most player will win.

Winning with other killer then nurse take skill but the skill is just knowing how to capitalise on the survivor mistake and seeing those mistake so seeing this as skill or not is dependent on the player.

[Sluzzy]

Killers can win thousands of matches uncontested. I would definitely say it is not unbalanced for sure.

[Lord Cyphre]

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

If you get put with equivalent survivor players to your killer skill. You will get annihilated 9/10 times.

No. This is way too generalized. Highly skilled survivors will give most killers a hard time but that isn't purely because of the games balance.
Good players who play well should have a chance of winning. Not just a slim one.
A match between equally skilled players should be close, not onesided and dominant.

The game isn't perfectly balanced but it is probably more balancede than you make it out to be.

[Valion]

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Still pretty crazy to me that some people still claim that killers cannot win at all unless if survivors mess up to a degree.

I suppose those 100 to 500 win streaks on killers were only possible beacuse they faced bad teams 500 times in a row. I'd say that 9/10 is more of a 4/10.

the only people winning 100+ games in a row a full time streamers or the top 0.1% of the player base, no one average or casual is ever winning more then a hand full of games in a row if their lucky

[Evil Minіоn]

Originally posted by INFERNAL NEON:

Still pretty crazy to me that some people still claim that killers cannot win at all unless if survivors mess up to a degree.

Beause it is technically the truth. However, nobody is perfect and all survivor teams will mess up to a degree. Then it comes down to actually exploiting that.

In practice the average game seems fairly balanced with a slight bias towards survivor teams, but it depends a lot on the specific characters, perks, maps etc. Basically "randomness" is higher than the bias towards a certain side.

So if the thesis "you lose 9/10 times against a survivor team of equal skill" was to be true that would mean survivor skill would be much lower on average than killer skill and MMR would match more skilled killers against less skilled survivors on average. But what does "equal skill" even mean then? I would be more likely that the survivors you consider "equal skill" are in fact a lot better than the killer.

[NoirStealth]

Originally posted by Lord Cyphre:

Originally posted by NoirStealth:

If you get put with equivalent survivor players to your killer skill. You will get annihilated 9/10 times.

No. This is way too generalized. Highly skilled survivors will give most killers a hard time but that isn't purely because of the games balance.
Good players who play well should have a chance of winning. Not just a slim one.
A match between equally skilled players should be close, not onesided and dominant.

The game isn't perfectly balanced but it is probably more balancede than you make it out to be.

Dude even I probably underestimate how unbalanced this game is. Just look at the facts.
Also I agree that a match between equally skilled players should be close but it isn't.

Most survivors don't take the game seriously that seriously I can tell.