Took a bit longer than I expected, but we have our first thread from bad or entitled Survivors using the stats to whine about a Killer.
There’s way too many variables to take into account for these stats to mean something. The devs even told us not to use them lol.
I'm sure that's exactly why they post them, yes. I don't think that's a reason to discount them, though. Obviously there are a lot of factors at play, so you can't use the stats as an ordered list of how strong killers are, or something. That doesn't make it useless, though. If you see a killer that's been out for a while and has a low kill rate, for example, that might be a sign that that killer needs buffs. There could be other reasons for the numbers to look like that, but in the absence of other reasonable explanations that would explain their poor performance (like a "they booped the snoot so I can't kill them" meme) it's still a fair conclusion to come to.
The fact that it's a very broad and general set of stats with no context is what makes it not useful to draw meaningful information from. BHVR knows this, and they're okay with this because they're only putting out that information just for funsies. I don't think it's a fair conclusion to come to without looking at more detailed and specific information that BHVR has access to.
Except I had data in form of experiences. Again you take a comment out of context. Holmes is saying don't just go on nothing. If you have SOMETHING, whatever that something is, you can consider that data. My personal experiences playing as and against the killer can be seen as data. While I didn't exactly record the details of every single game, the fact is I am most consistent with Freddy and most oppressive with Freddy (and feel the most oppressed consistently playing against Freddy) compared to every single other killer suggests something. That something is supported by not 1, but 2 data reveals by the developers, the first of which included more detail stats. When looked at as a whole, I was able to identify exactly what makes him so good and articulate that in the OP, then provide clear and simple solutions.
I mean, people that hate Spirit can't articulate their argument as well as I did in the OP. They say very vague things about it, don't have a clue what the solution could be (maybe because they have a hard time identifying the actual problem), and on top of that the data doesn't support it either. So it's faulty all around.
My OP is not that at all. I have a solid well formulated points about Freddy, and while I only posted the recent data dump I could go back and get the previous ones (and I probably should... and may).
You are intentionally strawmaning my argument so you don't have to admit Freddy is too strong and needs a change. I can and will use these charts to support my claims because that's how this [BAD WORD] works.
Again "do not draw conclusions" =/= "data is meaningless".
Aren't anecdotal accounts also not reliable?
Why would you assume that it’s “bad data”, or unreliable? Do you know what bad data is? Something being an average and therefore a poor candidate for making statements about the state of the game is not the same as “bad data”. This is exactly what I was talking about, people who have no idea how data is actually analysed saying “but you can’t use this data, it’s bad!” No, it’s not. Its usefulness is limited but that’s not the same as being useless.
Edit: I see that you edited your comment while I was writing my reply, so the wording is different but my point stands.
The data isn't unreliable though. Unreliable data means the data itself was not clear.
Whenever i start a game with freddy. i auto dc.
Because they themselves have said that. They have said that those numbers are not taking into account many different factors and do not paint a clear picture of things. It's not good data with regards to drawing conclusions about balance because it is not showing why things are the way they are. Only that they are what they are.
But the data is not clear. It doesn't give any information at all about why the numbers may be what they are.
They have never said that their data is unreliable, they specifically said that it’s an average and therefore not good for drawing conclusions about the state of game balance from. Those are not the same thing.
In any case I’m gonna bow out of this conversation, it’s only going to frustrate me. Have a good one.
"not good for drawing conclusions about the state of game balance from"
This is pretty much what I mean when I say "not good" and "unreliable."
I don't know.
I mean, it'd be really strenuous on my keyboard to link to the devs stating not to use the stats to draw conclusions, note that the killers in the upper tier are generally ones that people find 'unfun'/suicide against, and/or note that anecdotal evidence of playing in the red ranks does not mean anything to anyone. But hey, Nurse worst, amirite?
Pretty hard to argue against nothing :)
Freddy is just easy to use at full potential and that's it. Compared to some other viable killers at best performance he's pretty bad.
He's only actually strong when uses forever build, but otherwise he can't finish chases fast enough or pressure survivors heavy enough to "dictate" his pace of the game. In the end he's just an m1 killer who can end loops slightly faster, who can tp to gens and who can slightly passively slowdown survivors.
If survivors know what to do and don't [BAD WORD] around, he can be defeated pretty easily by doing gens and ignoring dream state. He can't snowball, he lacks instadown so chases last pretty long, his abilities don't spread damage or anything. Just do gens and drop pallets earlier. If he has noed - let him facecamp that one survivor and leave, you've won anyway.
Be careful of these stats? Did they post all the things that go into them? No one would call pig the #2 killer. These generic numbers really don't help provide good details.
is Freddy Good? Sure, but one chart doesn't paint the whole picture.
What are your expecations when you go in a match? I feel like some/many survivors get upset if not 100% of players get away, so I don't know if your mad you lost a player or two vs a Freddy player once or twice, and now want him nerfed, or if your SWF groups get stomped on constantly by Freddy.
Freddy is only op to stupid survivors who can't adapt to a game and have to loop every single tile generally never have a problem with Freddy also hes literally freddy Kruger sounds to me like you don't want one of the coolest horror icons done justice in the game. Sounds like you want a m1 like killer with a Freddy skin
If you don't think Pig (or as we call her in the biz, Mini-Fred) is not worthy of that title with Stealth !!!BT DENIAL!!!, a Secondary Attack, and Slowdown (with add-ons that let you add EXTRA SLOWDOWN OPPORTUNITIES THAT CAN BE !!!FATAL!!! and EXTRA BOXES FOR JUST EXISTING ON THE MAP!!!), let me tell you about my games as killer and survivor in the red ranks :3
And that's what happens when someone takes the stats seriously and doesn't think about WHY he has such a high kill rate compared to other strong killers.
Nurse weak, needs buff.
Now was that so hard to actually put up a discussion?
I do very much agree with a lot of your points, and although I don't agree with the stats either you did use your experience to back yourself up which I can relate to. I'm a red rank survivor and killer and often play both sides survivor sometimes with a friend or two and Freddy for me both sides is unfun and annoying. On the survivor side he is a pub stomper, without a coordinated team or very smart survivors( something you will rarely find solo or duo queuing) you're gonna lose. Unless you have a couple thousand hours, are a god looper, or get lucky rng a Freddy will get you sooner than later as he can mindlessly place bloodpools and shut down most loops. On top of that with most perks he can then apply pressure almost instantly after downing you and start regressing gens. On the killer side you just place bloodpools wherever keep them asleep and keep fake teleporting to gens and boom tons of pressure with almost no skill required. A bad Freddy will win a lot of matches, a decent one will win most, and a great Freddy will win everything except the most hardcore teams. I think that you're suggested changes nerf him a little too hard as it changes him a lot but he definitely needs some tweaks. I never play with addons so I can't speak on that but I can say that his bloodpools need to be tweaked so that they require more thinking and you shouldn't auto fall asleep if you get woken by a clock or at the start of the match making him have to hit you at least once. Having strong killers is great for the game as some killers are at the mercy of survivors rather than the other way around which sucks, but having a killer be strong with almost no effort required is just a shame and takes a lot of fun aspects out of the game like learning the character and having close games that make your heart race.
Also on a quick side note if all you have to say the the discussion is about the op's relation to stats why say anything? He referenced it a couple times in his points, and prefaced it with his own experience. It's not helpful to the discussion at all if all you do is critique one point over and over that the op already brought up in multiple other replies, or at least bring it up as a point in a counter argument but don't only talk about it and that's the whole comment.
while i agree on the general topic that Freddy is a little over the top, i dont necessraily agree with your suggested changes.
i agree that the passive sleeping should only start once a survivor has been dragged into the dreamworld once before andi also agree that some of his add ons need changes, namely those that reduce a survivors action speed while in the dream world.
but thats it. other add ons dont need touching and other base aspects of him are also fine.
If you didn't mention the chart, I bet not so many people would be commenting right now lol. Most of what I see here is that the chart is far from being exact. And although that is true, it doesn't really matter here. You made your points obvious and clear, the chart was just something of a confirmation, something that made you even more confident in your opinion. But as said, even if the chart was somehow reliable, it wouldn't matter! You probably would have made this post anyway. I'd not mention the chart at all next time, as it tilted a lot of people (though you can never fully avoid that).
Imo, Freddy is a very strong killer. Because of his passive abilities, both good and bad players will play him well. Playing survivors a lot, I can confirm that playing against Freddy is much more difficult than against other killers. Wth is that lunge range???
Wish you get some more valuable feedback and not the 100th comment "cHaRt nOt rEliAblE." Yes, we know, we know.
I also main freddy and 100% agree he is op I dont tunnel/camp and end up with everyone on death hook with 3-4 gens left it is def op killer
Always, much like Freddy, Doc, Leatherface, and Pig.
I'm hoping to join the ranks of The Elite Four, someday.
Unrelated to your previous post, but I hope the game runs better on it.
*blinks into boxes*
*looks at fatigue + cooldown*
*looks at kill rates*
Best Killer :3
he can slow at loops, he can teleport and have synergy with a ton of perks, he can slow down your progress, but trapper can't start with two traps by default. But wait, trapper has near 60% killrate, which means he's perfectly balanced. You guys know how strong Trapper is, right? Right?
This is an amazing and well thought post.
A+ criticism, and matches my experience facing Freddie as a survivor, if I win, it's only because the Freddie was bad.