Home Dead by Daylight Forums Discussions General Discussions

How do killer only users feel about a perfect MMR system?

TrickstaaaaaTrickstaaaaa Member Posts: 1,252

How would killer only user feel about having a perfect MMR system?

Would guys enjoy always facing teams of equal skill the majority of the time?

Because for when I played survivor during MMR the teams in general were more of my skill level. But when I played killer I found the matched to be a mixed bag, either the survivors were real good, or not that great.

«1

Comments

  • CoalTowerCoalTower Member Posts: 1,730

    I'd love it if it worked right. It'll actually give a challenge, unlike ranks that give me this:


  • tippy2k2tippy2k2 Member Posts: 2,982

    It would never work because if you pit top killers versus top survivors, the survivors will win nine times out of ten.

    It's always been an issue with this game and it's something I doubt will ever be fixed. There are a LOT of little tricks and strategies that survivors can use that make them incredibly difficult to take down. You can't really tone those tricks and strategies down though because newer survivors need them to survive but seasoned survivors who know all the exploits can make even the best of killers look like a fool.

    It would likely work really well at the low levels and even mid levels but once you get to the top levels, killers would bleed from the game (even more than they currently do) as it would be nothing but frustration and sadness for them.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    Assuming it works and also assuming one of the defining metrics of it being 2 escape/2 kill average, it would be good for balance. You would see what killers aren’t able to reach the top MMR of survivors and be able to buff them. You can also make changes to survivor/killer balance and it be much more evident on the outcome of the changes to reach their balance metric. Also, the only ones that would really feel the downside of the balance issues if a working MMR was in place would only be the top few percentile of players.

    The downside is I think most of us are very conditioned to having games where we don’t really need to try all that hard and still be able to get 3 to four kills and going to a system where we have to try hard all the time to average 2 kills (presuming that is their balance goal) might not feel like playing killer is as rewarding as it once was.

  • FrenziedRoachFrenziedRoach Member Posts: 2,585
    edited June 2021

    I don't like facerolls anymore than I like being made felt helpless and out of control of the match.

    I'm most engaged when I feel like I have a chance, but I have to work for it.

    If I give a team "GG, you guys made me work for that one", I'm usually very happy and pleased with the game.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    How many kills would you need to get to say that? I'm guessing if you said that you probably got a 3 or 4k. If your average drops down to 2k, and more times than not you trying results in a 2k, do you think you will feel the same?

  • PulsarPulsar Member Posts: 12,473

    It's going to be miserable at the top.

    And I doubt BHVR will do anything about it.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,119

    I think the point is that killers should feel like their play matters and has consequences. With most of the cast, I know when the game loads in if I am going to be able to win or not, depending on the skill of the survivors. The match shouldn’t feel predetermined, which it does right now.

  • WiiFitTrainerWiiFitTrainer Member Posts: 788
    edited June 2021

    For people who have main killers, or a couple, it's going to be miserable due to the sweatlord squads at high rank (unless your good with nurse or spirit).

    I know people like to blow off streamers a lot but Scott jund made a video very recently about this and it's 100% correct.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    I don't disagree with anything you said. My question though, if you are already a better than average killer, getting on average more than 2k, then MMR hits and it works as intended, dropping you down to a 2k average, are you going to be more or less satisfied with the game?

  • TrickstaaaaaTrickstaaaaa Member Posts: 1,252

    I mean both sides can play real sweaty. But even nurse and spirit would lose 6 out 10 times vs players of average skills. Since there has been videos were top level nurses end losing to high level "competitive squads".

  • ryzen0849ryzen0849 Member Posts: 141

    Can there even be a perfect mmr for this game? Maps and RNG can heavily affect how well I do against a team.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,119

    Less. I shouldn’t be handicapped into not being able to 4k . Why play if I don’t influence the outcome. The potential for a 4k should always exist

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    So then you are against a perfect MMR system that matches you with evenly skilled opponents with a balance philosophy of 2 kills and 2 escapes?

  • knellknell Member Posts: 563

    How about you? If you are playing a game of basketball, would you be more or less satisfied winning against a bunch of kindergartners 20 out of 20 times, or being able to win 10 games out of 20 against people of equal caliber?

    Ultimately, whether you are for or against this MMR system will tell you what kind of a person you are.

  • FrenziedRoachFrenziedRoach Member Posts: 2,585

    Sorry for the late response.

    I'm usually satisfied with a minimum of 2 kills, even if I had to scrape and claw for them. It's rare that I'm happy with a 1k. And most no kills were usually pretty miserable games I had to force myself through.

    With MMR, I do expect that I will get zero and 1k's from time to time. But if it lowers the overall complete blowouts (from either side), I'd say it was better than what we have now. (we're still going to get blowouts, regardless of what they do. All we can do is hope they stop being most of our games)

  • danielmaster87danielmaster87 Member Posts: 6,151

    Well I think killer-only players are thinking the same thing as any normal person: a perfect MMR system would be... well... perfect.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    That is a false equivalence. Let me try to make it a little more accurate.

    Myself and four of my friends decide we want to join a basketball league for fun. The league we choose isn't a super try-hard competitive league because we aren't super try hard, competitive people. The league has been going for a couple years and we don't know any of the other teams or what their skill levels. That's not really important to us though, just that we think the game looks fun and just want to experience it.

    When we first start playing matches, we lose almost every game because we aren't as good as the other teams and we just don't have any basketball skills. But we keep playing because we find it fun and we know we are new and can still improve. Little by little, we start to get the basics and learn how to play and we can sneak in a win here and there. Sometimes new teams join and we beat them, but we tell them, hang in there, we were in the same spot as you not long ago and if you keep at it you will get better too.

    After 3 and a half years, we have really improved from where we were at the beginning. We are better than average and win more of our games than lose. That doesn't mean we don't lose. There are still teams that have been doing it longer that we go against every once in a while and they give as a good romping. But we know it is because of them having more experience than us and after all, it's just a game, nothing to be upset about. And we learn some things we can try for next time.

    Sometimes we get one of those newer teams that hasn't been playing as long and we know we have more skills than. But this isn't a super competitive league. We chose not to be in a super competitive league on purpose. So we always play chill. They score some points, we score some points. We have fun, they have fun and hopefully learn some things from us that helps them get better.

    Maybe they aren't exactly a new team, but their skills are just a little below ours and they are an average team. We still play pretty chill, but man we are making a lot of mistakes and they are on point. Maybe they beat us. Usually they don't because our skills are just a little better than theirs so most of the time we edge it out. But hey, we are all here to have fun and learn and get better.

    Sometimes we go against teams that are about par with us. It's always a battle, every time we face them. Half the time they come out on top and half the time we come out on top. We are glad we don't face them all the time though, because we didn't really join to be in a super competitive league, we just wanted to play a game that looked fun.

    So here we are, with a better than 50% win rate. We don't take the losses personal, it's just a game. But we do like that we can win the majority of our games without getting super sweaty because we have put in the time and honed our skills.

    Today we got the news that the league has decided they are going to start matching people differently. They have decided no team should ever have to play against someone they don't have a 50/50 shot at beating. If you start beating the teams they are matching us with more than half the time, we are going to match you against different teams that you can only beat half the time. No more can you say you win more than 50% of your games.

    So now to answer the question, if I am better than average and get more than a 50% win rate and the match making is changed so I can only get a 50% win rate, will the game feel less satisfying to me? Yes it will. Because part of the enjoyment for us was being able to see the progression from new to 3.5 years later and being able to say I've improved enough that I can win more of my games than I lose.

    Does that make me a scum of the earth person because I might find it less enjoyable to have to play more competitively to win? Is that what you are trying to infer the people against MMR are?

  • glitchboiglitchboi Member Posts: 5,408

    We'll probably only see Nurses and Spirits in top MMR. I'm kinda scared about MMR tbh.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,119

    No it won’t…. the game is broken. M1 killers like pig and Michael will lose 9/10 matches against good survivors. If the game was balanced, mmr would be fine.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    But that's not really how the MMR will work though since killers will have separate MMRs. The top tier trapper player will probably not be matched with the same people that the top tier spirit player goes against. And the survivor/killer balance is really only going to affect those top teams. For example, if I am a medium MMR trapper player and am getting matched against a set a survivors that I get a 50% win rate against, and then there is a significant nerf to trapper, the system will eventually shift me to a different set of players that I get a 50% win rate against.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    Theoretically, since there will be separate MMR for each killer, MMR will adjust the people playing those killers so they are facing teams they win 50% of the time with. They will most likely not be facing the same teams that a god tier nurse/spirit player faces.

  • sulaimansulaiman Member Posts: 2,312

    The comparison is bad, in my opinion. What you dont acknowledge is the fact that the games you win in the old way might end up 72 to 75, but are often more likly to end up 93 to 5, either way. While it might be more enjoyable to you to lose a game 93 to 5 because you also win in this way, the new system will move to matches that are more likly to be 72 to 75, and at this point people like myself dont even care who won, because it was pretty close and a game up to the end, not already determined after the first quarter.

  • D3spairD3spair Member Posts: 530

    Unfun if every equally survivor is good. Killers always look for the weakest link. If there's no weakest link then the only way to get a 4K is either be Spirit and Nurse.

  • truegod_10truegod_10 Member Posts: 393

    I personally love challenges and enjoy playing sbmm games, so I would enjoy the change, except it is unclear what factors the MMR system takes into account when balancing a match.

    There is a big difference between playing a killer with a meme build and no or weak add-ons and playing them with a meta build and powerful add-ons. i worry that MMR will make it impossible to run meme or fun builds without the game ending in 5 minutes.

  • Red_BeardRed_Beard Member Posts: 550

    I don't have the same experience as you then. My games with rank based are not one extreme or the other. I have lots of matches that are in between. But I don't usually sweat it out for the 4k because I find this to be a casual game. That doesn't mean I don't take pride in the fact that I have a better than average win rate or the player base as a whole. Or at least I do with killers I play compared to the last stats I have seen.

  • knellknell Member Posts: 563
    edited June 2021

    We'll continue with this basketball analogy.

    How does beating up on a bunch of kindergartners in basketball make you feel like you are making any self-improvement? As more and more baby players join, you have more and more opportunities to be matched against those who have less experience than you - players you are able to curb stomp if you are actually trying. At this point with the current unreliable matchmaking, you can't really say that you are winning games because you yourself are improving - in fact, it's more likely that you are winning because you are facing a larger pool of players who have much less experience than you. And while these kindergartners are trying their best, putting 100% of their effort into the match with you, you toy around with them, always in control and confident that if they annoy your team in the slightest, you will always have the power to put them in their place. And that's apparently the kind of games that give many people who are against MMR system satisfaction. Sure, you will on rare occasion be matched up with professional teams that will treat you the same way you have treated the kindergartners, but on average, just because you have more experience than the vast majority of players in this league that matches you up with anyone, you will be the one in control of the game. And you think you DESERVE these "wins" because you have, as you say, "put in the time" unlike these kindergartners who have just started.

    Let's be honest, people who are against MMR aren't looking for self-improvement. If they are, then they wouldn't be wanting to be matched with less skilled opponents, or opponents who are so much better than them that they won't even have any opportunity to improve. Those who want to self-improve would be wanting to be matched with people of equal skill level, so that each match will be able to mean something.

    No, people who are against MMR systems are simply players who want to face less skilled players so that they can screw around with their opponent who are playing their hardest, and still be able to win regardless. They want the control. They want domination. But self-improvement? No need because they've already "put in the time" unlike majority of the players.

  • gilgamergilgamer Member Posts: 1,922

    Not great, don't get me wrong the current system isn't great but a "perfect" mmr would make playing killer too stressful, ngl getting stomped or stomping someone else is almost like a break from having those actually even matches but in a "perfect" mmr those games would be very rare unless you just go in with the intention to lose, but that's lame.

Sign In or Register to comment.