BodyBlocking and Keeping the game HOSTAGE should be LEGAL.
BodyBlocking and Keeping the game HOSTAGE should be LEGAL.
You read the title.
In my opinion, (which is a fact) it'll take less time to implement the change I'm about to propose than going through all the bodyblock/hostage reports and see which ones are valid.
What is keeping a survivor hostage?
Keeping a survivor hostage means that through bodyblocking, you prevent them from moving. This prevents them from doing anything and if you don't attack, then you stand there infinitely, thus forcing the survivor to Disconnect.
Keeping the game hostage only counts if the killer doesn't gain a strategic edge from bodyblocking the survivor for a prolongued amount of time, for example:
If 2 survivors are dead, 1 is hooked and you bodyblock the last one, than you can validly do so for the entire time the other survivor is hooked if you wish to do so.
Let's not waste time!
Angry survivors are quick to throw out statements about "You bodyblocked, reported!". Of course, valid users of bodyblocking wouldn't get reported easily, but why waste time at all?
Let's make keeping the game hostage no longer a bannable offense!
Are you crazy?
No. Instead of making bodyblocking reportable, forcing others to check if it's valid, we replace this whole process with a few lines of code.
Now network the code and done.
Explanation:
Instead of using the report system, we make it so that there is a bodyblock timer. This timer counts to 60 and if you have been touching the killer for 60 seconds, you'll be able to pass through him for 5 seconds. When not colliding with the killer, the timer also slowly decreases.
End note
Boom, problem solved. Only a few lines of code, no more bodyblock whiners or need for people to have their accounts banned for simply playing the game (in a funny way).
Comments
-
body blocking is legal, also the code I do not understand at all
1 -
Body blocking has always been permitted by the game rules. Its in the same bracket as camping/tunneling. Its annoying, but its perfectly legit.
3 -
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
Body blocking has always been permitted by the game rules. Its in the same bracket as camping/tunneling. Its annoying, but its perfectly legit.Not if it's used to keep the game hostage, from what I have read.
body blocking is legal, also the code I do not understand at all
explanation right below the code.
0 -
How can body blocking keep the game hostage?
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
Body blocking has always been permitted by the game rules. Its in the same bracket as camping/tunneling. Its annoying, but its perfectly legit.Not if it's used to keep the game hostage, from what I have read.
body blocking is legal, also the code I do not understand at all
explanation right below the code.
It used to keep the game hostage with the camping bug, but now thats patched and really body blocking staircase in basement is known by the community as a tactic and not bannable
0 -
If you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
4 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape I’m not sure what game you are playing, but it certainly isn’t DbD. Body blocking is not bannable, unless it is being used to take the game hostage, thus taking the game hostage is bannable. However, this is NOT the type of game hostage that everyone is talking about. Survivors remaining in the game AFTER the exit gates are open, is what pretty much everyone is talking about. Nice troll post though.
1 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
I'd love to meet the player daft enough to deliberately leave their console or PC running while they go off to Portugal.
5 -
That is why, if there is a strategic purpose to your bodyblocking, it should be allowed. This is why we can use the bodyblockTimer to insert the amount of seconds one should be allowed to bodyblock (typically one could say a total of 120 sec is valid. The same total as hooking time)
0 -
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
same here, but we must go further beyond!!!
2 -
@Kaelum said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape I’m not sure what game you are playing, but it certainly isn’t DbD. Body blocking is not bannable, unless it is being used to take the game hostage, thus taking the game hostage is bannable. However, this is NOT the type of game hostage that everyone is talking about. Survivors remaining in the game AFTER the exit gates are open, is what pretty much everyone is talking about. Nice troll post though.I already made clear what is meant by the terms.
This is about the killer holding the game hostage through bodyblocking (forcing a disconnect), which Not_Queen has responded to is bannable.No troll post here.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@alivebydeadightThat is why, if there is a strategic purpose to your bodyblocking, it should be allowed. This is why we can use the bodyblockTimer to insert the amount of seconds one should be allowed to bodyblock (typically one could say a total of 120 sec is valid. The same total as hooking time)
no, I dont camp, in fact I punish players in game by map pressure so bad that players dc more often than I actually get kills, body blocking killers just moon walk, its hard but you can go around
0 -
no, I dont camp, in fact I punish players in game by map pressure so bad that players dc more often than I actually get kills, body blocking killers just moon walk, its hard but you can go around
I'm not sure if you understand the post, lol.
This is not about camping. It's about catching a survivor in a spot where he is unable to move for a prolonged amount of time with the intend to force a disconnect.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
I already made clear what is meant by the terms.
This is about the killer holding the game hostage through bodyblocking (forcing a disconnect), which Not_Queen has responded to is bannable.No troll post here.
I have never seen any killer do this, and it would be the taking of the game hostage, not the body blocking, that is bannable. Definitely a troll post.
P.S. the timer for taking the game hostage, in this case, does not start until every other survivor is dead. Until then, it is fair game play per not_QUEEN.
0 -
Body blocking is fine.
Taking the game hostage (an excessive amount of bodyblocking) is not fine.If you're going to bodyblock until someone is dead that isn't too long and I would see that as fine, I think it's bad gameplay because as soon as that person is dead you hit the other and the last person gets a free speed boost and could find the hatch and hop out, whereas if you just hit them while the guy is hooked you have the chance to get both of them.
So while I find your reasoning for "taking the game hostage" pretty silly, I do think the scenario you've given would be a fine amount of time to block someone in a corner (although I don't see why, killer is easy).
1 -
I have never seen any killer do this, and it would be the taking of the game hostage, not the body blocking, that is bannable. Definitely a troll post.
Bodyblocking isn't an isolated topic here...
The title says: "BODYBLOCKING AND KEEPING THE GAME HOSTAGE SHOULD BE LEGAL."it means that through bodyblocking you prevent a survivor from moving, and not just moving (as this is often a strategy), but you do so with the intent to force a disconnect.
Not_Queen has stated that this behaviour is reportable, but more than not has this lead to survivors claiming that the behaviour of killers is reportable where it's not.
Thus my post, completely doing away with any form of reportability surrounding taking games hostage through bodyblocking, thus taking away any confusion and useless reports sent at Behaviour.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape read my P.S.
0 -
@Kaelum said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape read my P.S.So you agree with my post? Mostly?
But the difference is that Not_Queen says that after that amount of time it's reportable and instead I say, after that amount of time (wherever during the game) we script the ability for a survivor to temporarily move through a killer.
I don't understand why my post is so misunderstood. I disclaimed most of what you commented about in the original post.
0 -
If you're going to bodyblock until someone is dead that isn't too long and I would see that as fine
Me too. That is why I think settling with a full hook timer for the bodyblockTimer is appropriate.
So while I find your reasoning for "taking the game hostage" pretty silly
What reasoning do you mean? The reasoning that letting a survivor stand there for hours is bad and should be solved through script, not bans?
Or do you believe I stated that cornering and bodyblocking for a prolongued amount of time is an effective strategy? I've never said such a thing.0 -
Bodyblocking to take the game hostage is bannable. Not sure why people don't understand that concept. There are toxic people that literally play Wraith just to plug people up in the basement to stream it on twitch.This would be a good solution.1
-
@Visionmaker said:
Bodyblocking to take the game hostage is bannable. Not sure why people don't understand that concept. There are toxic people that literally play Wraith just to plug people up in the basement to stream it on twitch.This would be a good solution.
@Visionmaker
Thank you!I'm glad you mentioned the basementtrap as well. Multiple people could be caught by that.
P.S. the timer for taking the game hostage, in this case, does not start until every other survivor is dead. Until then, it is fair game play per not_QUEEN.
That also means that the statement of queen if it was specified like that is even disfunctional at actually targeting the full issue as, indeed as you mention, multiple people can be trapped by 1 killer, never triggering the condition of last survivor being held captive.
Happy you mentioned that.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@SenzuDuckIf you're going to bodyblock until someone is dead that isn't too long and I would see that as fine
Me too. That is why I think settling with a full hook timer for the bodyblockTimer is appropriate.
So while I find your reasoning for "taking the game hostage" pretty silly
What reasoning do you mean? The reasoning that letting a survivor stand there for hours is bad and should be solved through script, not bans?
Or do you believe I stated that cornering and bodyblocking for a prolongued amount of time is an effective strategy? I've never said such a thing.The whole
"If 2 survivors are dead, 1 is hooked and you bodyblock the last one, than you can validly do so for the entire time the other survivor is hooked if you wish to do so."
How often does this scenario actually happen, where you need to body block someone for an entire hook death?
0 -
How often does this scenario actually happen, where you need to body block someone for an entire hook death?
It isn't about how often it would happen, but about whether a killer should be allowed to do so.
If yes, then that killer shouldn't be punished by the script changes we'd implement.
0 -
It's in JavaScript, it's a programming language.alivebydeadight said:body blocking is legal, also the code I do not understand at all
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@SenzuDuckHow often does this scenario actually happen, where you need to body block someone for an entire hook death?
It isn't about how often it would happen, but about whether a killer should be allowed to do so.
If yes, then that killer shouldn't be punished by the script changes we'd implement.
But if the killer is bodyblocking to only prevent a survivor from reaching the hook for a rescue it's not holding the game hostage. The bodyblocking is being done to end the game.
As for your code suggestion;
Some problems with the code itself.
- Don't bother multiplying dT by 1, just += the dt.
- You didn't multiply by dt when you were subtracting 1 for moments where the player is not colliding with the killer. But like before, just subtract the dt.
- You didn't declare bodyblockTimer, shame on you.
And there is a possible exploit involved with such a process. A survivor that's hugging the killer (such as constantly dodging hits or just mashing their face into the killer's backside while sneaking unnoticed) can build up the bodyblockTimer enough to trigger the no-collision without it being a situation where the killer was taking the game hostage.
0 -
@Nickenzie said:
It's in JavaScript, it's a programming language.Javascript doesn't declare datatypes.
0 -
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
I'd love to meet the player daft enough to deliberately leave their console or PC running while they go off to Portugal.
When the hell did they get rid of the LOL button and why?
0 -
@lasombra1979 said:
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
I'd love to meet the player daft enough to deliberately leave their console or PC running while they go off to Portugal.
When the hell did they get rid of the LOL button and why?
@Peanits Explained in another post - basically people were setting up bots & alt accounts to go around auto Lol'ing comments for certain users of the forums. It basically became the "Downvote" button.
0 -
I was in Lery's.
Exit gates opened.
Clown killer.
He found a Dwight hiding in the stalls.
Body blocked him the entire time.
He couldn't.move.
We tried getting the Clowns attention.
We ended leaving.
Spectated.
Dwight had to D/C.
It was funny, but well you know, pretty awful at the same time.1 -
Wow, I can't imagine anything more neckbeard-y.SenzuDuck said:@lasombra1979 said:
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
I'd love to meet the player daft enough to deliberately leave their console or PC running while they go off to Portugal.
When the hell did they get rid of the LOL button and why?
@Peanits Explained in another post - basically people were setting up bots & alt accounts to go around auto Lol'ing comments for certain users of the forums. It basically became the "Downvote" button.
1 -
Don't bother multiplying dT by 1, just += the dt.
I deliberately leave it in so it's more obvious to people that it increase and decreases in seconds. But there's indeed no inherent need for it.
You didn't multiply by dt when you were subtracting 1 for moments where the player is not colliding with the killer. But like before, just subtract the dt.
Typing code in the forums opens up so much opportunities for mistakes, good eye there. Fixed it.
You didn't declare bodyblockTimer, shame on you.
I did xD, it's at the top (floating point number). It just has some unintended text in front of it. I'm not that familiar with using Markdown.
0 -
And there is a possible exploit involved with such a process. A survivor that's hugging the killer (such as constantly dodging hits or just mashing their face into the killer's backside while sneaking unnoticed) can build up the bodyblockTimer enough to trigger the no-collision without it being a situation where the killer was taking the game hostage.
Thought about it, but the reason the timer can't reset is because the killer could pull back. If it were to reset then the killer would be able to still keep the Survivor hostage for an incredible amount of time.
I think that if there is a 60 second long collision (among which there are constant moments of decrease) then the survivor would Deserve to move through that killer.
I still it'll be a 1 in a 1000 where such a thing would trigger during a chase.
If not, then we'd change the 1 in a 2 or a 3 multiplied by delta time when decreasing the timer.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
I don't understand why my post is so misunderstood. I disclaimed most of what you commented about in the original post.It is not misunderstood, it is the fact that you are only addressing an extremely small fraction of taking game hostage issue, for a survivor POV only. I don’t remember the numbers, but it’s somewhere in the high 90s, where survivors are ones who take the game hostage by various means. This idea of yours does absolutely nothing in those cases, and would be seen as siding with survivors and further nerfing ALL killers. It would serve very little purpose on its own. I would never condone a killer doing this, but as I said earlier, I have never seen it happen. Understanding that it only comes into play when all remaining survivors are being body blocked.
0 -
Isn't it dead clear what we're talking about? Literally the first Headline-section covers defining what I mean by the title. It even specifies keeping survivors hostage.
0 -
It would serve very little purpose on its own.
I have never seen it happen. Understanding that it only comes into play when all remaining survivors are being body blocked.Well here's the problem;
The problem isn't that it happens frequently, it isn't that the people who are doing it are not banned.
The problem is that by stating that a form of bodyblocking (keeping the survivor hostage) is a reportable issue, which the majority of emotional survivors do not understand the boundaries of, which causes an over influx of reports.By bringing out the statement: Bodyblocking/keeping hostage (again in the killers case, because we haven't touched the survivor case here) is NEVER bannable, we'd be able to get close to nullifying these incoming reports or automatically reject them if in that selected category.
0 -
One point I will make is that Body blocking and Taking the game hostage is strategy.
Like when playing chess and you force your opponent to make a certain move...that too is strategy.
However making it so there is no other alternative is dirty and bannable. This doesn't include hatch standoff as survivor can go do a gen. If you are bodyblocked by a teammate or killer so you cannot participate. Ban worthy as long as you report it.0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
By bringing out the statement: Bodyblocking/keeping hostage (again in the killers case, because we haven't touched the survivor case here) is NEVER bannable, we'd be able to get close to nullifying these incoming reports or automatically reject them if in that selected category.Ok, now I see where the misunderstanding is. You appear to think that these reports are causing a significant amount of time to be wasted by community support. These reports are simply ignored, and people will report this blocking even if your solution is implemented, so it would not accomplish its goal. The only time wasted would be reading the first few words of the report, nothing more.
P.S. You do understand that less than 1% of the people who play the game, actually know and understand all of the rules, right?
0 -
Untrue. In order for you to know the difference between the (what queen states to be) the bannable bodyblocking and the not bannable bodyblocking you need to look into it.
If you reject these reports then you let the bannable bodyblockers slide, if you do the opposite, well we covered that.
So the question is, why waste individual's time with something we can permanently solve, by letting the game handle it, through something that can be implemented with just a few lines of code?
If you are bodyblocked by a teammate or killer so you cannot participate. Ban worthy as long as you report it.
It shouldn't be ban-worthy, that's the point. The game should take care of these situations and it easily can. Way more effectively.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape what is untrue? Everything that I stated is fact, most of which was stated by not_QUEEN. This will not stop the reports in any way what-so-ever. The last time not_QUEEN stated the rules in a live dev stream, she also stated that every time they state the rules, it has no discernable impact on reports. The bad reports still come in. You seem to be making a HUGE number of assumptions that flat out are not correct.
The fact that this solution only possibly addresses an extremely small portion of the “take the game hostage” issues, and the huge possibility of a negative back lash, would make this a poor solution on its own. I don’t see BHVR doing this w/o addressing the the issue as a whole. Anything short of that would be shooting themselves in the foot, and asking for more.
0 -
@Kaelum said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
I don't understand why my post is so misunderstood. I disclaimed most of what you commented about in the original post.It is not misunderstood, it is the fact that you are only addressing an extremely small fraction of taking game hostage issue, for a survivor POV only. I don’t remember the numbers, but it’s somewhere in the high 90s, where survivors are ones who take the game hostage by various means. This idea of yours does absolutely nothing in those cases, and would be seen as siding with survivors and further nerfing ALL killers. It would serve very little purpose on its own. I would never condone a killer doing this, but as I said earlier, I have never seen it happen. Understanding that it only comes into play when all remaining survivors are being body blocked.
... Of course both sides can take the game hostage.. each in their own different way. That doesn't mean we can't work on one without immediately addressing the other. This isn't a zero sum game.
And what the hell do you mean nerfing all killers? No one body blocks for such an extended period of time. Literally no one playing the game in a coherent manner does this outside of exceedingly rare (and doubly unnecessary) situations.
How childish must you be to think that we should not resolve something like lagswitching because survivors have the ability to glitch onto rocks?
3 -
if you implement the code into the game then yes, you take care of the issue... sorta.
two things are still an issue as far as I can see.
1. if a killer keeps a survivor bodyblocked into the basement, this could be done without constant contact and would avoid triggering the detection.
and 2. why should we allow said killer to waste the survivors time like that, to even attempt such blatant intentional toxicity without any true penalties?
this game has enough toxic players as it is, if sifting through erroneous reports is what it takes to thin out the toxic herd, then so be it.... we will all be better off with fewer of them in our ranks.1 -
@Avariku said:
1. if a killer keeps a survivor bodyblocked into the basement, this could be done without constant contact and would avoid triggering the detection.I think it's okay. At least people can't just head out to the movies and leave survivors stranded for two hours.
1 -
I'm literally telling you that unless the killer is touching the survivor, the script won't trigger, thus they will still be stuck... (unless I'm reading the script wrong)Visionmaker said:@Avariku said:
1. if a killer keeps a survivor bodyblocked into the basement, this could be done without constant contact and would avoid triggering the detection.I think it's okay. At least people can't just head out to the movies and leave survivors stranded for two hours.
1 -
@Avariku said:
Visionmaker said:@Avariku said:
if a killer keeps a survivor bodyblocked into the basement, this could be done without constant contact and would avoid triggering the detection.
I think it's okay. At least people can't just head out to the movies and leave survivors stranded for two hours.
I'm literally telling you that unless the killer is touching the survivor, the script won't trigger, thus they will still be stuck... (unless I'm reading the script wrong)
Yeah, the survivor can touch the killer too. Bodyblocking means that they're touching at some point.
0 -
@Visionmaker said:
Yeah, the survivor can touch the killer too. Bodyblocking means that they're touching at some point.From this post, and your previous jibberish post, you really don’t know much of anything about game design. There is only touching when trying to get past the killer; otherwise, there is most likely no contact at all. I’m still trying to figure out what you were smoking in the previous post, as it makes no sense what-so-ever.
2 -
I'm glad I'm not the only one trying to figure out how to explain this any clearer for him... but since you know what I'm saying, @Kaelum, how would that resolve the issue unless the survivor already knew to just push themselves against the killer in order to trigger the code and get passed them?0
-
That individual has some serious mental issue, that was obsessive, like a salty, cowardly and arrogant Myers being bitten by a radioactive nerd kind of obsessed.Visionmaker said:
Wow, I can't imagine anything more neckbeard-y.SenzuDuck said:@lasombra1979 said:
@Dwight_Fairfield said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Dwight_FairfieldIf you corner a survivor and you go on a vacation to Portugal, then the survivor has no way to end the game other then to be forced to disconnect.
Posts like this make me miss the LOL option.
I'd love to meet the player daft enough to deliberately leave their console or PC running while they go off to Portugal.
When the hell did they get rid of the LOL button and why?
@Peanits Explained in another post - basically people were setting up bots & alt accounts to go around auto Lol'ing comments for certain users of the forums. It basically became the "Downvote" button.
0 -
right, just like the supposedly universal "camping" signal of flailing around like a epileptic mongoose while on the hook... except most people are ignorant of the meaning or ignore it...
so again, unless all people are aware of how to trigger the code, it would be pointless.
and yet again, I prefer the current system as anyone who is going to employ such obviously toxic behavior NEEDS to be properly dealt with.1 -
@Avariku said:
right, just like the supposedly universal "camping" signal of flailing around like a epileptic mongoose while on the hook... except most people are ignorant of the meaning or ignore it...so again, unless all people are aware of how to trigger the code, it would be pointless.
and yet again, I prefer the current system as anyone who is going to employ such obviously toxic behavior NEEDS to be properly dealt with.
You're equating an unofficial signal to a built in, intended game mechanic. Okay.
You act as if there's no way for information to spread in the game. They can add a visualization. A tool tip if survivors are in one area for an extended period. Patch notes. News. Anything.
Working on a code that'll last the rest of the game's lifespan is far more efficient than manual labor of reviewing video evidence (and anyone that works for a living can attest to that..) but you can try convincing yourself otherwise.
1 -
@Avariku said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one trying to figure out how to explain this any clearer for him... but since you know what I'm saying, @Kaelum, how would that resolve the issue unless the survivor already knew to just push themselves against the killer in order to trigger the code and get passed them?If BHVR deems this worthy of something to do, they could detect when the killer is in the blockable stairway area, there are no survivors above the killer, and there are survivors in the area below that. It would be a resource intensive test, but it could be done. The coding for this would be nowhere as simple as the OP thinks, which brings up the cost vs rewards argument. Will the cost justify the rewards? As a software engineer of over 40 years, I seriously doubt it. This is why sales engineers and CSRs are not project managers.
However, I seriously doubt that they will do anything until they rework the end game, and have completed the dedicated server changes as well. The reason being, it will be easier to perform this detection server-side, and could possibly over tax the resources of the current host.
TBH, this is an end game issue. It is not solely a “take the game hostage” issue, though that is the end effect.
1
