Read more Dead by Daylight ➜ https://deadbydaylight.mgn.tv
http://www.twitch.tv/ScottJund
https://discord.gg/TheBreaderhood
source
Read more Dead by Daylight ➜ https://deadbydaylight.mgn.tv
http://www.twitch.tv/ScottJund
https://discord.gg/TheBreaderhood
source
Balancing the game based off the database of the best players in the game is awful it makes the game unfair and unfun for a large portion of the player base or it just makes the game unfun and not enjoyable to play for everyone
Its almost like you can't balance this game at all. :O
just remove nurse 🙂
Scott, I don't think you're so much proving that "we can't balance around the top 1%" as you are proving that "it's unrealistic to expect BHVR to make significant and radical changes to the base game, or even to each killer individually" which isn't wrong, but it's just… not the same argument.
You argue that making gens take longer to make playing (a low-tier killer like) Clown easier would, or at least very well could, make the game too easy for (a top-tier killer like) Nurse, and I agree! But that's not how I understand balancing for the top 1%. Wouldn't balancing around the top 1% involve nerfing Nurse so she's more like Clown? Or maybe that is balancing around the bottom…
Well, probably not Clown specifically, but more like a mid-tier killer like Demogorgon (in terms of raw capability, of course).
Is the idea that only (top-tier killers like) Nurse and Spirit are "viable" from a competitive standpoint, but making every killer that strong or nearly that strong would be bad? Plus there's the side argument that Nurse is already so good that no matter what the gen speeds are her optimal performance stays the exact same. Not sure if that's really here nor there.
I just don't know, though. Because I don't know what competitive players find problematic, or prove to be problematic with their gameplay, which would be balancing around the top 1% of players (as I understand it). But it kind of seems like you might have meant balancing around the top 1% of the roster, not the player-base. Which isn't usually how I've heard the idea invoked, but it's valid. I only know what every color of casual player finds the most *annoying*, and I think that's a fine and dandy way to balance Dead by Daylight, depending on how valid those complaints are.
I guess there's always the argument that because there's a survivor side, it would be too complicated to pull off a fairly balanced Dead by Daylight. I can't tell if that's what you're talking about, but I will say that I don't think it matters how difficult it is as opposed to how beneficial it would be to do so. I get it, BHVR doesn't really care (to do it) but I do… for some reason.
Maybe my only problem is the word "around," when it seems like what you're talking about is "towards." To make everybody more like a competitive team. But I think my real problem with this video is that I'm having a hard time understanding it (and I assume my confusion is fair, considering this video was explicitly recorded in a sleepy haze.)
And I mean, there's the big, fat, fundamental issue of "how could we ever balance this game considering there's no clearly defined win condition, anyways?"
Thanks Scott
There are certain things you can balance without affecting the lower skilled player, namely things only the high skilled player really use.
Like the structure of some tiles or skilled applications of killer powers. And map design in general.
I feel like most people don't care about becoming top-tier players at this game because of how… dunno… unique (?) this game is. What I mean is that if you played, say, Counter Strike or Call of Duty for the longest time – you become good at shooters, which implies that you'll be more-or-less as good in basically any shooter game, be it single or multi-player. If you play a lot of Dota or League, you'll most likely be as good in Heroes of Storm and any other MOBA. And if you are really good in one Total War or Mortal Kombat game, you'll get a grip of any other game in the respective series pretty easily and quickly, contrary to completely new players. But with DbD… it's just DbD. You won't necessarily become a priori good at any other game if you are a DbD god. Even all the other asymmetrical "horrors", although have the same base idea, play very much differently and vary a lot in mechanics and gameplay. So it might simply feel like a time-waster.
It’s the exact same situation as the SWF problem. The low end of the spectrum needs to be buffed in order to balance better.
I recently tried Leatherface again and I couldn't get over how strong he was. He felt like he was a few notches shy of spirit in terms of chase power, and I honestly think if everybody was balanced to the level of bubba the killer experience would be excellent. Sometimes I thought he was downright op but I still had a couple matches where the survivors showed me my place lmao.
Tldr: congratulations bhvr on a really good killer rework
Protect my poor solo que ass
My point of view is im not going to try to be the top 1% but if that happens it happens. I play the game because i love the game. That is all.
What interests me really is the question WHY killers DO NOT have second chance perks. Killer perks consist out of gen defense, aura reading and brutal perks (aka perks supposed to help in chases). I'm fine with that, because all those perk do is supporting the killer. It's essentially the "tool" in the killers hand. The better the killer is, the better those perks work. Survivors on the other hand have a fascinating number of second chance perks with absolutely no counterplay/mindgame involved. Unbreakable is the prime example here. Personally I do not like the idea behind perks helping them without any preparations or requirements. However I can understand why they are in the game – and that is for a reason.
On the other note though, killers do not have any kind of "help" once they miss a crucial attack. No perks that activates when you miss and magically bamboozles said survivor and downs him instead.
Sadly this is a deeeeep rabbit hole that has so many different hybrid subjective opinions that it is essentially impossible to have a decent discussion about.
There will always be situations in which a perk like unbreakable seems fair, but listen up:
A simple example would be: The killer has a hook and a slug nearby. 4 gens are done. Injured survivor runs for the save, gets downed too. Killer follows last survivor because of distant scratchmarks. At this point the game ends in a 3k (or 4k), because the survivors decided to NOT heal and take the risk. Its not the killer slugging or camping, its not the killers skill that decides that those situations happen. Its usually up to the survivors and their behavior that leads to a "slug for win". Now, one slug has unbreakable. While the killer is on the opposite side of the map, the survivor can pick himself and the other slug up and unhook the third survivor. With double heal, even without perks or items, they are able to fully reset the game to a state in which its unwinable for the killer.
This example is again very hypothetical and shouldnt be looked at as the "one and only outcome".
tl;dr
I think that second chance survivor perks need a rework, just like they did with decisive strike.
Unbreakable needs a nerf in situations in which either the killer did a particularly GREAT play OR the survivors massively messed up and should be punished for that.
A short idea of mine in terms of unbreakable would be to disable that perk when the survivor who uses it is NOT the only slug. That would still give unbreakable a massive potential in many many situations, but nerfs its game-changing second chance ability when the game was lost by 4 survivors decisions.
thing is that the average player is braindead, i still see people with 3k hrs just hide in corners and die in the first 5sec of the chase, if the average player was at least decent at the game the unbalance would be very visible
This entire can literally be dismantled as a false dilemma fallacy. The idea that the game can’t be balanced because it’s asymmetrical isn’t true. Just because it would be harder, doesn’t mean impossible. “If we do blanket buffs and nerfs, the other side is upset.” You say this like Bohr can’t ever do things for both sides. So what if gens take another 10 secs for example? If you don’t like gen speed, bring things that can speed it up (pts, toolboxs). Also, just because a patch favors one side, doesn’t always mean it’s bad. I think ppl can agree that iridescent head on huntress had to go. While this favors survivors, I don’t think people are going to say it was balanced. “We can’t bring EVERY killer to nurse level”. You don’t have to. There can be a power disparity between killers, but to say we can’t buff killer AT ALL because not every killer will be nurse is ridiculous. We can buff legions recover speed when he end his frenzy (4 secs is ridiculous) for example. Or give better addons to the killer. We can buff them but not every buffs has to put them exactly where nurse is. The disparity shouldn’t be so unbelievably big. “We don’t know even if the buffs would work because it could be like clowns buff where it does nothing” …….that’s why we have a ptb, to test these things. And request make changes accordingly. Let’s not use the excuse that behavior won’t change them at all because look at the nemesis changes from ptb. “If the new killers aren’t nurse level, we can’t buff the others so either they have to be nurse level, or we leave them alone” prime example of a false dilemma. You say this like new killers can’t be buffed after release or even right after the ptb. You say this like every killer HAS TO be at nurse level or never at all. You can do things like give killers more tools to make up for map pressure or lethality in chase without them being “exactly like nurse”. “There’s no incentive to get better for survivors”. First off, there is. You said it yourself, the skill ceiling isn’t that high. So just learn to be better. Also, if you keep losing, that’s an incentive to get better, because otherwise you’re bound to lose more often. SBMM would solve this ideal very quickly. “Many people at high level don’t have fun so lower skilled ppl just fuck around” Why do you say this as if people at high skill, can’t do the EXACT same thing? “Most people don’t care, it’s been 5 years” Quite the generalization. Also, you know devs can give players incentive, even after 5 years right? You’ve even suggested some small ideas yourself in the past for being the best at certain killers so I don’t know why you would contradict yourself here.
I agree with most of this. I also would have been too lazy to get out of bed at 4am to make this video so props to that.
Make it so the weaker killers- clown, legion, etc have a passive perk like in Apex. Gens naturally go slower, etc
thats why bhvr needs to step up a little
Balancing DBD is a lost cause, it’s not what this game is about. I think it’s possible to balance the gameplay, but think about how much shit you need to rework. You’ll have to:
1) bring every single Killer to one level — and I don’t think it’s possible to make them all S-Tier (like how? Clown can now become intangible or something?), you’ll have to bring them all to the current B-Tier and nerf survivor mechanics as well;
2) rework every single perk in a game;
3, the most important one) Get rid of RNG. No self-unhooks, no Bear Trap escapes on your first try, map layouts are fixed, survivor and killer spawns are fixed.
I’m sure I haven't mentioned a lot of other crucial balancing issues. Even if BHVR will make an attempt to change all that… it’ll take ages and the end result will just be boring af. People will definitely leave this game behind if there’s no dumb shit like 4% into Adrenaline.
It’s thrilling to load into the match not knowing who or what you’re up against, that’s what makes DBD so addictive. I think it’s cool that there are DBD tournaments, but reworking the game to suit them will literally kill it. People that are advocating for these changes don’t know what they’re asking for.
I think we're overthinking all of this balance stuff. Make the game a 2v6 so we can see cool killer teamplays like the survivors get.
This is exactly what i've been saying for years. same with overwatch which was ruined for balancing around the top 1%. Overwatch was completely ruined for the average player by being an esports game, due to 32 different heroes, well over a couple hundred true combos, and different playstyles for objectives maps/etc.
Dbd arguably has far less variety in terms of objective. but it suffers from the same issue.
(Go Down For a TLDR)Yeah My "Friends" So Online people who i am good with lets say say: Cmon Dude Bc of You I got a minus pip OR Dude your rank 13*Me: Dude i dont care and Never Will You Dont Get Bloodpoints and the games only get more difficult bc killers will bring 4 perks and be somewhat decent MOST OF THE TIME AT RED RANKS I Mean Im For it Which Wouldnt be crazy is that every Month if your Rank one you get like 100 Aura Cells And I dont think its over the top bc for just a killer or survivor youd be saving up for 5months So Your Better of Dropping 5 Euros its for me or whatever amount of Dollars Anyways And lets not get into epic rarity bc thats almost a Whole year if youd be F2P Or Give The Rank 1s 500k Bloodpoints and rank 2 350k and finally rank 3 100k Bloodpoints Or Just SMTH im For Auric Cells bc no its no alot Let Me Remijd you 5months for a Survivor or killer And for costumes its a year I Wanted to say 250 but thozght it would be greedy but even then epic outfits every 5months bc of the extra 80 you need and Legendary is 6 months So yeah that Would Give a Damn Reason TO rank Up Bc Like Eho cares So Yeah…
TLDR: Add Either 100 or 250 Auric cells per months for Rank 1 Only Or Give Huge Bloodpoints Why I explained above
DBD doesnt function very well as a high level competitive game, especially when there isnt even a clear definition of winning, that you probally shouldnt balance around that level of play
Scott discovering in the middle of the night, that DBD is asymmetrical
Scott randomly waking up at 4am is more coherent than me with a script, damn dude.
I'll never gonna get tired of these theory/analysis videos about DBD.
Dude asymmetric games are just so fucky goddamn