Do you need more science than "this happens sometimes, therefore I'm right"? Yes, absolutely. Assuming you want people to take your guess seriously, that is.
You're being willfully blind to the statement.
Well go play solo and test for yourself. If I'm wrong, you'll only load into full lobbies.
I don't have to.
I'll just guess like you did.
No tests needed.
Not since dedicated servers, I think.
Ok how should I go about this? Record myself playing solo and loading up into lobbies that aren't full? Would that work or is that not scientific enough?
First, establish what would prove your guess to be false.
I play on xbox so I'm used to lobbies always having a delay before survivors joined. It hasn't happened since servers went live on xbox, so I think you're right here.
I'll load 50 lobbies before I give up on finding one that isn't full. Sound good?
And how would that prove your guess to be false?
The problem is that his guess doesn't make any predictions that can be tested, it just attempts to explain what is currently happening. Therefore the experiment needs to be made with the intent of falsifying the guess, instead of confirming it.
Your edit is you denouncing anyone who brings up valid counter arguments/theories as nitpicking...
I do not think you want to have a proper discussion.
Ummm...idk, doesn't it kind of prove that solos must find 3 survivors and a killer before they enter a lobby?
Which proves nothing because the same would happen with a lack of killers.
So me being wrong about why swf queues take longer is a valid theory as to how much queue times are indicative of the killer-survivor ratio? How exactly?
The same would also happen with a bad ranking system or errors in matchmaking. It's all speculation, I can't prove queue times are not caused by a killer shortage, but neither can anybody prove the inverse.
Since dedicated servers killers and survivors b both look for each other. That is why you can be in a lobby with a full team of survivor and no killer or a killer can have a lobby with 2vsurvivirs waiting for others
Personally I find Queue times are really variable depending on time of day. Starting at like 9AM in the morning, Killer queue is slow and I find Survivor games really fast (though that may just be me not playing Survivor much) and starting at 9PM, Killer queue becomes lightning fast.
A theory needs to be tested with scrutiny inorder to try to prove its its true or false and thus if a theory cannot survive the most basic level of scrutiny then either the theory or the way you got to the theory's conclusion is wrong.
It could just be your region being empty in general. My rank 16 survivor alt account has queue times as fast as rank 4 killer.
On the other hand, Occam's razor leads to the "killer shortage" hypothesis. It makes no assumptions and is therefore the simplest explanation.
Right but how does that validate the theory opposing mine? Their theory doesn't survive the most basic level of scrutiny.
The "killer shortage" hypothesis survives Occam's razor, which is, in fact, the most basic level of scrutiny.
Doesn't it assume there is a shortage of killers?
No, it proposes that as an explanation for the queue time discrepancy between survivors and killers. There's a difference.
What are the assumptions the other explanations make?
If your statement is true, then why does it take me 3 times as long to find a survivor game and why is there an overpopulation of green-ranked killers?
There definitely IS an issue with the matchmaking. I'm seeing screenshots like this one, or even worse constantly being presenting in a DBD facebook page I'm in. You cant tell me this is how its SUPPOSE to be.
This btw isnt me, just a random example I snagged.
Ok I guess matchmaking errors do exist, but do they negatively affect queue times? We don't know.