If Camping is not Intended, why are Hook Grabs still a thing?
If you don't want people to camp, then why can every killer instant down survivors when they attempt to unhook?
Comments
-
I think grabs at generators and hooks is simply to make survivors feel more stressed if they do those things in the killer's face rather than just run away. Not that survivors can't make it difficult to grab them by faking the rescue, of course. But the threat that a grab can happen at least makes the survivors actually worry a little about it versus just running in and grabbing without caring as much.
6 -
camping is intended
43 -
who said camping wasn't intended?
43 -
It's completely intended.
33 -
It's an abuse of power in which killers not let one player actually play the game for the entirety of the match.
Back when the game was more fair, they were criticized of this behavior. After SBMM and with killer mains crying that the only real way to "win" (don't even know what that means anymore lol) is to camp and tunnel, these guys are now creating their own alibis to justify themselves too.
Grabbing players is fine, but it's the people who abuse them that's the problem.
Post edited by Gcarrara on9 -
I think healthy survivors should not get grabbed at hooks.
7 -
so you think survivors should get free unhooks? Which means they will just wait for someone to get hooked then immediately unhook them in the killers face since there is no consequence.
15 -
Camping is intended. BHVR just doesn’t want facecamping to be too rewarding (which it is only to solo really, due to lack of info/coordination). Grabs exist so you can’t just do things in front of the killer.
7 -
Poor design is ingrained within the core mechanics of this game.
4 -
You can hook someone, find someone away from the hook, then they can run to the hook during the chase and you grab them there.
Or the case where there is a survivor right behind you as you're carrying a survivor to the hook that tries to unhook the second you hook the survivor you're carrying.
Easy simple examples of non-camping hook grabs.
5 -
To punish idiot survivors who don't deserve free unhooks without repercussions
8 -
Or just fake a grab then go for unhook...tada...or don't go for unhook at all
7 -
Camping is a legit tactic and not an abuse of power or holding the game hostage. I hope you aren't wasting the devs time reporting campers. Kills/escapes =skill. Don't get caught.
10 -
Or how about this...
Wait for it...
.
..
...
....
.....
...... Just a little more!
Not camp at all?
7 -
I don't. Cuz I know the devs think it's legit. It's a waste of MY time, having to report smth the devs don't care about.
But it still doesn't mean it's not frowned upon.
And if your magic button for preventing camping is to not get caught, then that's the most childish thing I've read on this forum until this day.
7 -
Or... you could just not waste time reporting something useless that BHVR literally explicitly says not to waste your time doing? There's no "having to report" anything.
4 -
Read my post again.
6 -
Firstly, grabs barely exist in the first place.
Secondly, to prevent survivors from unhooking in the killer's face.
8 -
It's an abuse of power in which killers can hold a game hostage and not let one player actually play the game for the entirety of the match.
No-one is guarantee to "play the game for the entirety of the match", where did you get this idea? That's just survivor entitlement.
You play the game to go into a trial with a killer. Whether you live or die, and how quick, it down to a combination of factors. For you to have been camped, you must have at least been chased... twitce (being as it takes two hits to down you), and your team failed to rescue you before they were hooked.
They presumably also failed to pressure gens and force the killer away, or trade hooks.
Stop blaming the killer for literally playing the game!
Post edited by Gcarrara on7 -
And once again, I'm not inclined to believe that you have any experience with actual toxic killers or have played enough of survivors to fathom the problem with camping in general (and taking a simple look at your discussions, I can tell you are a killer sympathist right off the bat).
No-one is guarantee to "play the game for the entirety of the match", where did you get this idea? That's just survivor entitlement.
Entitlement? So you think it's fine for someone to bully another? Is that victim entitlement as well? Wow, you seem to be very entitled yourself. Unless the survivor did something wrong (i.e. hack) I find it morally questionable for you to abuse your power as killer to force others from playing the game.
For you to have been camped, you must have at least been chased... twitce (being as it takes two hits to down you), and your team failed to rescue you before they were hooked.
Another unlettered argument.
So out of 6 total hits you are given per match, you're telling me that losing one third of that is justifiable to be camped? And this clearly demonstrates that you never played enough survivors.
They presumably also failed to pressure gens and force the killer away, or trade hooks.
Unless there is a mechanism that forces killers to move to an objective regardless of the input being given from the player, the killer is not obligated to budge. Meaning, camping killers are going to camp regardless.
Stop blaming the killer for literally playing the game!
Lol, can you see how rudimentary, not to mention juvenile the conversation becomes? Instead of actually seeing how forcing a person to stay on hook for an ENTIRETY of a match can be distressing and discouraging for people to play, you brush it off as "entitlement" and pretend everything's fine.
The people who paid good money to play a game should not be abused by others to the point they're either waiting to die on the hook or DC.
Post edited by Gcarrara on6 -
Holding the game hostage?
Hahaha haha please with how many survivors try to hold the game hostage if given the opportunity
camping doesn't hold the game hostage as the game can still go on and end unlike the old boilover fiasco where there were survivor swf's intentionally not playing the game and actually trying to hold the game hostage if the bleedout mechanics weren't in the game both sides would be holding the game hostage
Post edited by Gcarrara on8 -
Holding the game hostage?
Yes.
please with how many survivors try to hold the game hostage if given the opportunity
This doesn't even make any grammatical sense. Please elaborate further.
camping doesn't hold the game hostage as the game can still go on and end unlike the old boilover fiasco where there were survivor swf's intentionally not playing the game and actually trying to hold the game hostage if the bleedout mechanics weren't in the game both sides would be holding the game hostage
That example is specifically criticizing the smallest player group out of the entire DBD playerbase (less than 5% if I recall) and it doesn't justify the reason to camp still.
Those SWF abusers should be stopped as well. But "they do it so we can too" rhetoric is too childish for anyone to actually comprehend it, especially for those who play DBD who are supposed to be an audience of 18 and over.
5 -
Taking the game hostage means intentionally prolonging the game for an indefinite amount of time to prevent the game from ending.
Camping doesn't do that as survivors can do gens and the person on hook will die
Funny thing when I brought up the boilover fiasco when there was actual games being held hostage you ignore the point and say well that's just a small portion of the playerbase it doesn't matter if it's a small portion you know what's also a small portion cheaters
It's obvious that you don't play both sides because if you was you wouldn't be making so many excuses for survivors and doing whatever you can to go after killers
5 -
they should make it to where survivors within like 12m of a hooked surv dont get a speedboost from getting hit but the killers weapon clean animation is much longer to where the survivor get the same amount of distance
0 -
Like using your logic we should just forget about the cheaters as they are just a small portion of the playerbase
Like camping is a issue but it's not holding games hostage
0 -
That won't work as perks like stbfl exists
0 -
So your argument in a nutshell is:
- SWF abuse the game as well.
- It is therefore okay for killers to camp.
- Don't matter about the 95+% of the playerbase who play solo, cuz you guys are all survivors.
- And if you don't want us to camp, make the SWF stop abusing the game.
That's about the gist, correct?
Wow, I don't even know where to start with this one...
you ignore the point and say well that's just a small portion of the playerbase
Excuse me, but I have not IGNORED anything. In fact, I specifically bolded the very phrase: "Those SWF abusers should be stopped as well." after the very statement regarding the percentage of SWFs in DBD.
Stop assuming things and start reading carefully.
Camping doesn't do that as survivors can do gens and the person on hook will die
This is just unfathomable. This excuse is only regarding those remaining 75% of the team. You can't seriously justify that the hooked survivor has to endure this without good reason?
It's obvious that you don't play both sides because if you was you wouldn't be making so many excuses for survivors and doing whatever you can to go after killers
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Being a Trickster/Cenobite main, I can't believe you just said that, but I'll let it slide.
I'm only criticizing killers cuz the topic is about them.
I also criticize survivors all the time for T-bagging, BMing in general and bullying killers. It's just the title of this topic was "If Camping is not Intended, why are Hook Grabs still a thing?" and the last time I checked, survivors don't hook grab and camp so there's no need to bring survivors into the discussion now is there?
and here's a nice little screenshot of my Steam profile page to justify my stance on playing survivor/killer.
4 -
When did the devs say camping wasn't intended?
4 -
You said camping is holding the game hostage which is false as the game is still going on and the survivor on hook is dying its up to the survivors on what happens next if they were smart they would bait out a hit than go for a rescue or have another healthy survivor go for the rescue while they are in the weapon cleansing animation
If the camping killer is a bubba the smart thing to do is do gens and not rescue
Also as someone who has been on the receiving end of face campings I would rather have my team do a gen or two before rescuing me ESPECIALLY if they don't know how to rescue without getting grabbed and ESPECIALLY if the camping killer is a bubba
It's up to the face camped survivor and survivors on how the game goes like will they reward the killer or punish the killer
Like getting camped sucks but it's not holding the game hostage
4 -
Agree to disagree then.
4 -
So wait, camping a hook (which leads to the survivor dying and the match continuing) is now somehow"holding the game hostage"? I don't think those words mean what you think they do.
The game is "held hostage" when neither side is able to move forward on their objectives at all (like say when a wraith wants to body block a survivor or couple survivors in a corner where they can't move, and refuses to down them)
Camping very much allows for both sides to continue their objectives, in fact, the best way for survivors to deal with camping killers is to FOCUS on their objectives. So by definition of both the game rules and common sense, camping isn't at all, in any way, holding the game hostage. The survivor on the hook will go through hook stages as normal, and the other survivors can finish the gens and leave.
I get it, it's fun to throw out phrases like "holding hostage" and "exploit" because there's something one side does that you dislike, however I would remind you the fastest way to lose an argument is to overstate it.
8 -
Just like when a Killer 3-Gens the Survivors they cry out that the killer is holding the game hostage because they won't leave the gens to chase anyone.
2 -
At least in that case (even though it is also not holding anything hostage) the gens are being blocked. Camping a hook does literally nothing to stop the game from progressing.
1 -
With 3-Gening, BHVR has said that's not holding the game hostage because the Killer is doing thier objective to stop Gens from getting repaired. I don't know how many times I got "reported" by sour survivors because they got stuck in a 30+ min match because I wouldn't be drawn away from a 3-Gen that they created.
3 -
Because, while BHVR have said that facecamping is too strong a strategy (and they want to change that, but it's a difficult thing to do without breaking the game), this doesn't mean that you should be able to safely unhook in the killer's face.
That's...not taking the game hostage. This refers to situations where players trap people in a position where they can't end the match without DCing within a reasonable time.
Camping is just a cheesy way to win. I remember back when I first started - I camped a lot. I wasn't aware that this went against the etiquette of the game at the time. Not every camper knows that they are annoying people; it's an attractive, effective strategy.
5 -
That's not taking the game hostage. You may not understand what taking hostage means then.
But the grab - also it doesn´t work half of the time - is a general mechanic. You can get grabbed while vaulting.
You simply always should try not to unhook in front of the killer.
Teams of 2 people blocking with BT can do it anyway.
3 -
Camping in and of itself doesn't need a reason. Some people do it cuz it's necessary, others do it to ######### around.You shouldn't cover people's eyes and tell them that it only happens in a specific situation just to create an alibi for them.
The act of camping is literally holding the game hostage of a player who does not have any other means to alleviate the situation, except to wait and die out or hold out for a fellow player to come get them.
FYI: holding a game hostage doesn't point to a specific premise. If a game halts for someone by another person's influence in a negative way, that's LITERALLY holding the game hostage for that person.
5 -
FYI: holding a game hostage doesn't point to a specific premise. If a game halts for someone by another person's influence in a negative way, that's LITERALLY holding the game hostage for that person.
And that is false.
Taking hostage means that the game cannot end. Like you are the last player and the killer blocks you in a dead end and you cannot get out.
If it means one or all players are dying like camping, bleeding out or Pig masks the is NOT taking the game hostage. It is just unlucky or annoying.
9 -
Do you... guys play any games outside of DBD? Cuz that's not how it's generally used.
Maybe DBD users use it differently, but taking hostage in other games usually eludes to someone literally holding the game to a halt for another powerless person.
Guess DBD uses it more specifically then.
6 -
In other games yes.
But DBD is a team game. If you die but your team gets out this is fine. Thats just bad luck for you but nothing more.
To add one thing - the killers goal is to kill you - so pretty much making your game literally very bad.
6 -
your FYI is false information
holding a game hostage is a term that even predates DBD, its used for when players intend to prevent a game from ever ending, it has been used in other game. Camping someone in DBD means they are are on a timer in witch they will eventually die, meaning the killer cannot prevent the game from ending.
7 -
I literally said that it halts the game for another individual in the past two posts. So... I think I know the older version of the term correctly.
I think I used the term wrong for DBD though. My mistake and lesson learned.
5 -
Camping and tunnelling are made-up words entitled survivors throw around when they lose the game at no one's fault but their own.
3 -
Then is gen rushing a made-up phenomenon created by entitled killers?
I mean your words go both ways you know.
7 -
Camping is not holding the game hostage, for either a team or for an individual player. It’s a legit strategy and BHVR have said this only about 8,000 times. If killers played the way you want, they would lose 99% of their matches and have a miserable time.
5 -
Well, I won't be using the term "holding the game hostage" about DBD in that sense anymore, but I will reiterate that it is still in fact stopping the flow of the game for an individual.
If you claim that playing killer ties your hand to camp and tunnel, then that is a stupid argument that doesn't have a solid argument whatsoever.
That's like me, a survivor main saying, I can't win as a survivor unless I gen rush. Which is also a stupid claim. People CHOOSE to camp and tunnel just like how people CHOOSE to gen rush and do other stupid things like that.
Nothing forces you to play a certain way. Get real.
4 -
Grabs suck as a rift challenge. Just sayin
3 -
Ehm while i already read the whole discussion let me take up one point here.
The devs have said 5% are full 4 men swf, that does not mean 95% play solo.
From my very subjective experience playing between 8pm-1am, eu, on PC, with crossplay on, full solo lobbies are only a little bit more common than full SWF. The majority is a mix of solo/duo/3men swf. You get nearly no lobby without some player playing together.
So i would claim that maybe 50% or even less of all survivor are really solo during prime time.
3 -
Try playing killer and get kills without any camping whatsoever. Let us know how it goes
2 -
4 man SWF is 5%
3 man SWF would be around 7 or 8.
2 man SWF would be around 10 to 13.
All in all, the entirety of the SWF is mostly 20~30% of the entire (including consoles) playerbase.
That's still not significant enough to make a legitimate argument.
6
