If you block people you should never que with them again
The suggestion is obvious i mean why isnt it that way?
edit:
And guys please dont tell me
1.) The chances are super slim to play with them again anway
2.) Than queing takes forever since you block too mutch people
Both statements cannot be right. Please choose one.
There are 40000 dbd players on steam alone per day. If someone doesnt want to play with the people he blocked, why do you want to force him? I dont understand the argument of some of you guys.
Comments
-
How often do you end up queueing with the same people? I only have it happen once in a blue moon, so it hardly matters if you block anyone. Your chances of queueing up with them again should be very, very low as it is. Unless you have crossplay off, maybe?
0 -
Sounds like a way to prevent you from playing with people who are better than you or play in ways you don't like playing against. And then what, if one Survivor in a 4man group has banned someone that bans that Killer, that's quickly the whole region. Yeah, there are reasons why the game isn't made this way, cause it would be abused super fast and prevent regular play.
You can report targeted play if it is consistent over multiple games, if that happens too.
5 -
If you play during odd hours it will happen a lot. At least it does in my case. During primetime the chances are very low.
0 -
Player is better than you = block
Player is worse than you = block
Player is using a killer you don’t like = block
Player uses perks you don’t like = block
Player uses strategies or play-styles = block
Player uses charms / name you don’t like = block
Player does absolutely nothing wrong = block
You see what I’m getting at?
17 -
I guess if you want 30+ minute queue times, sure.
3 -
Than your own queing takes alot longer in the future, you are only punishing yourself, so be free to do it.
Yes I can ban people i dindt enjoyed playing against. For example if i see somebody who tunnel and camp, or try to annoy me in the game. The goal is to have fun in the game, and if I dont have fun playing against certain people why should I be forced to do it?
I dont understand how its "abuseable" if i dont play with/against certain players. How I allready said, in "worst case" i extend my own Queing time and thats it. It will only punish myself to "abuse" the system. If you are playing with 4 SWF and all of you are guys who try to abuse the system and ban every killer avaidable you need very long to find a game, but whos fault is that? Your own. So thats not really an argument.
1 -
Even if you don't block anyone, people in your lobby can have people blocked and others can have you blocked. The game has to look at everyone's block list that is in queue or waiting in a lobby and put people into lobbies that don't have each other blocked which will make queue times longer for everyone.
People who block no one can be punished with hour long queues just because they are good at nurse.
6 -
Cause Camping and tunneling isnt breaking game rules. This is a game where the Killer hurts the survivors, ofc being mean to them is what you want to have in your game. You cant implement a banning feature people will use if you are being mean, if the purpose of the game is for the Killer to kill or be mean to Survivors.
If you are not having fun having a guy attempt to murder you, this game isn't for you, quite clearly so.
If you are not having fun with Survivors using whatever they can to save themselves from you, this game isn't for you either.
Try to think about the experience that bHVR is creating here, Sure its creating a ton of players who feel they have been slighted by any murder, but thats just how the game is. If you allow everyone to ban anyone for poor reasons then everyone will ban everyone, which is why real bans or true bans is always handled only by bHVR.
There is no reason to change that, even if you think you would have more fun if the Killer dont have the ability to annoy you.
3 -
I mean the Block List in its current state has an upper limit of people you can add to it.
I think a small Block List reserved for people who you have a genuine reason to not want to go against would be able to exist without destroying queue times or allowing you to block every single player that's better than you.
0 -
The block list is so you cant be friended or invited to their games all the time, not actual blocking from play.
How big would that block list be then? How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
0 -
Yeah I know how the current block list works.
I'm not sure how the block list would be, that would be down to the dev's discretion really. I think Overwatch has something like that.
0 -
And its your choice to play against them if you are survivor. I dont understand your problem, do you really play that toxic that you fear that everyone is blocking you?
this game isn't for you, quite clearly so.
So if I understand you right, you would rather prefere that a player leave dbd entierly as just that he blocks you because he dindt enjoyed the way you play?
There is no reason to change that, even if you think you would have more fun if the Killer dont have the ability to annoy you.
He still has the ability. Every killer and every survivor can go on playing however they want. Im not saying to stop anything with it. Im only saying that it would be nice if you can block people with whom you dindt enjoyed to play.
I really dont understand how that could be controversial, that you dont have to play with people that you dont enjoy to play against. There are like 10000 active Dbd players atm, whats the problem if i only want to play against 9970 from it?
And how i said, it woulndt even bother you. Its my Que i only prelong my queing time not yours. Your queing would only be affected if hundred or thousend of players are putting you on their blocklist. And TBH if thats the case, maybe you should change your behaviour.
You sound like a very toxic player who fears this scenario, because why else would you be against the rule? You dont need to block anyone if you dont want.
How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
Its not a big one. The peak in the last 24hours were 40000 people on steam alone. If you dont block very very high numbers of people, it wont extend your queing time.
0 -
Who decides what is a “genuine” or a legitimate reason to block? It’s too slippery slope.
2 -
Well I don't like the suggestion of an Unknown Block Lists size either. No Thanks.
So if I understand you right, you would rather prefere that a player leave dbd entierly as just that he blocks you because he dindt enjoyed the way you play?
Its not my preference, but if the player hates what can happen in the game, then ofc Im going to suggest they should not play it.
My wish is for them to grow with the game and accept that yes sometimes it gets tough and learn to deal with that.
Giving them a block list that will hinter the matchmaking system is just a bad solution when they could quit to preserve their fun.
He still has the ability. Every killer and every survivor can go on playing however they want. Im not saying to stop anything with it. Im only saying that it would be nice if you can block people with whom you didn't enjoyed to play.
Yes the Killer has the ability to Kill you, Welcome to Dbd. The Killer can be extra ordinary awful in the game to you and yes bHVR is working to limit the absolute worst parts, like the new Anti camping system. Just because it would be nice to your personal fun does not mean it would be a good idea for the game as a whole.
You sound like a very toxic player who fears this scenario.
Nice ad hominem, however most people I meet with after play with say im the chilliest Killer they ever met.
And how i said, it woulndt even bother you...
How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
Its not a big one. The peak in the last 24hours were 40000 people on steam alone. If you dont block very very high numbers of people, it wont extend your queing time.
You don't understand how the numbers work and how many players are near each other in each individual search pool to make any sort of rational argument regarding the numbers.
Regarding MMR the numbers would most likely be in a bell curve, do you know how few people are in the low and high mmr ranges? No ofc you don't, but there wont be many so you system would cause them to take even long to find a queue. Now we have regions how many players are in each region right now? You dont know that either? Would there be enough players to allow a 10 people per block list? I doubt it. Those small outliners we have not idea about, yet here you are suggesting changes that might delay their queue.
You might say you dont care about other people queue times, but then why would they care about your fun?
It has been bHVR's policy to not give players a blocklist that removes players from people's queue, and I think that has been working fine. bHVR is also working to remove the worst elements, which is fine too.
I just dont think there is any need to rock the boat on this subject, and thats not me being toxic meanie.
0 -
I don't think you really need to decide what a genuine reason is. If you keep the list size small enough, people will use the spots sparingly. I'm talking like 10 slots here.
A genuine reason to block would be for example getting harassed by a player.
0 -
.Giving them a block list that will hinter the matchmaking system is just a bad solution when they could quit to preserve their fun.
I honestly dont understand the point, how exacly would a blocklist hinter the matchmaking system? They could also have fun in DbD and ban the bullysqats out. They would have to face a toxic player only one time and give them an escape solution. Why exacly do you want them to face em again if they dont want to play with him?
Nice ad hominem, however most people I meet with after play with say im the chilliest Killer they ever met.
Its not ad hominem, its a real question. Why do you want to force players to play with people they dislike, if they could just play with other players?
You don't understand how the numbers work and how many players are near each other in each individual search pool to make any sort of rational argument regarding the numbers.Regarding MMR the numbers would most likely be in a bell curve, do you know how few people are in the low and high mmr ranges? No ofc you don't, but there wont be many so you system would cause them to take even long to find a queue. Now we have regions how many players are in each region right now? You dont know that either? Would there be enough players to allow a 10 people per block list? I doubt it. Those small outliners we have not idea about, yet here you are suggesting changes that might delay their queue.
Please just check out how the matchmaking and MMR works in DbD its way easier as you think.
You might say you dont care about other people queue times, but then why would they care about your fun?
With 40000 players alone on Steam it woulndt change your que times alot only if you ban alot of players or are getting banned by alot of players. Since you are the "chilliest killer they ever met" and you obv. dont want to play very very mutch player it woulndt change anything to you.
It has been bHVR's policy to not give players a blocklist that removes players from people's queue, and I think that has been working fine. bHVR is also working to remove the worst elements, which is fine too.
DbD changed pretty mutch everything so far. The argument "We allways did it like that" is not a good one. There will allways be a way to troll and be toxic in games. You cannot really remove that. For example the teabagging on survivor side or hitting the survivor on the hook on killer side.
0 -
I honestly dont understand the point, how exacly would a blocklist hinter the matchmaking system?
Consider a matchmaking pool of 25 Killers and 100 survivors, under normal circumstances the pool would produce 25 games. Now lets say each player has a list of 10 people they don't want to play against. Lets say each survivors have at least 8 Killers they don't want to play against. By random chances alone some lobbies will be delayed because an available killer cannot join a lobby due to your system, that lobby would have to wait for another Killer and then hope that killer does not have one of the other players in the lobby blocked either. This is why modern games just hides the info from you its just too hard and disruptive for matchmaking.
I hope that explains it, tho I am not the best at forcing horses to drink.
I'm not sure how the block list would be, that would be down to the dev's discretion really. I think Overwatch has something like that.
I researched it cause it sounded weird, but it seems players still get queue with people they have blocked. I would personally think Overwatch with its huge playerbase could support such a system. Blocking just prevents them from communication.
0 -
"With 40000 players alone on Steam"
And what do you think happens if all those 40,000 block 10 people each?
4 -
I feel like if you're aware of meeting the same opponent again, you need to either play more or pay less attention. If someone's getting under your skin so much you're memorizing their name and willing to wait long queues to avoid them, you're letting them win.
I love pretend-murdering people over a pretend-vendetta. You didn't see what we pretended went on between us, but I'm a dirty camper since I stopped you from last-minute unhooking him. He's not mad, he knows what he did, but you're mad and don't want to play with meanies like me ever again.
On the other hand, if someone on your team makes me laugh, there's a good chance I'll let the whole team out. When I see a team playing the way I like, I kinda want them to escape. I like players that don't give up and I like it when they make smart choices and work together. Rewarding that is also a power I have.
I've been enraged in game, but it's pretend. I'll put it on pause if I see you doing a glyph, you might be my worst enemy for a few minutes, but I won't mess you up on your glyph.
What I'm saying is, it's all for fun. Pretend murder should only pretend-upset you.
It's way more fun and rewarding if you recognize the trial isn't the game. The game of DBD is all the trials you play. If you've been playing any time at all, you've played more than a thousand. That means every trial is less than 1/1000th of the game, and getting smaller each time you ready up. There's no championship, no final boss, no big fight. Just little tiny trials that pay us points, but are really just for fun. A ranking that isn't public and resets every month.
I'm like Buddha of DBD, I want you all to enjoy the game like I do. You have to embrace the hard aspects, and remember that none of it matters.
0 -
This
0 -
Overwatch actually used to have "Avoid player" as a feature, but then what everyone should've seen coming happened.
And this is why you don't put a feature like it in your game. At least the successor ("Avoid as teammate") was inherently far less likely to be abused for reasons like this. Not a very good play to use that on players for the sin of being too good at the video game when that just means they'll always be on the enemy team lmao.
1 -
Hot Damn, Good find.
1 -
Thats not how the MMR works in DBD. In Overwatch if you are 1500, you match with 1500 -+ 50. In DBD thats not the case. In DBD there is a bracketlimit. So everyone from 1600 - openend and be in the same game. Additional if you dont find someone in your MMR range, you will just match with better and worser player. Thats why sometimes somebody with 80hours and somebody with 7000hours are in the same game.
The told problem that the good players dont find any matches was allready the case in DBD and thats why the system got reworked.
Just watch how a youtube video how the mmr and matchmaking works in dbd and you will see that the problem of not finding someone will not happen in dbd.
Than each one of the 40000 players can only play with/against 39989 instead of 39999. That doesnt really make matchmaking harder.
Imagine a line of 40000 people and instead that they are playing with the closest 5 players, everyone playes with the 6-10closes players
Also to you the question: We have 40000 players in 24hours, why do i have to match with the people i dont want to play against? There are more than enoth people to choose and if not, MY OWN QUE takes longer.
That doesnt make any sense if you put "fun" in the focus (what i do).
And btw we got "hidden matchmaking delay" and "anonymous mode" for exact that reason so we can avoid targeted ingame harassment
0 -
i mean overwatch already has something like this where its only up to two or three people and i'm pretty sure resets after a period of time and as far as im aware. regardless of what these other people have said i think it works fine and i don't think it would really harm the queue times either. more of a casual player myself so take that with a grain of salt i suppose.
i can sympathise with the running into people frequently at certain times, as an oce player i tend to run into the same 10 people every couple of games i play, and the way some team mates play and killers play i can definitely understand the desire to never play with/against them again. i personally don't believe hidden matchmaking delay works that well as i have been placed in multiple games against the same person, even with said delay on.
i think people can be a little exaggerating in scenarios like this (like no one is blocking anyone for charms/names, be serious). like if i don't want to play with urban evading leon, or kate who runs around dropping all the pallets on the map, anytime soon, i shouldn't really have to. i don't think blocking people they're really good at the game or someone you don't want to play against is a crime either, there have been times i have gone against the same really good, oppressive blight 3 or 4 times in a row, its really unfun. i don't think you're alone in wanting a feature like that, plenty of people in my group of friends have voiced that idea too. if you are a casual player, there's a good chance that you don't want to play 5 games in a row against the comp blight or #1 trickster lacerations oce and i think its a fair opinion to voice.
i think if they were to add this feature it would have to be similar to overwatch in regard to having a timer, along with a cap on how many people you can avoid, and if you want to avoid someone else, you have to choose which person you want to return to your player pool. i think a lot of people forget (and i'm not sure if this applies to you) but a majority of the player base ARE casual players who just hop on to have some fun, or maybe just play with their friends, and playing against the same thing over and over, especially when it's maybe a killer you're not fantastic at looping, or one that is going out of their way to make the game miserable, is boring and ruins the whole mood and enjoyment of the game.
0 -
overwatch has a different MMR system. Overwatch makes fair matches>queing time, dbd does not.
In DBD there are like 3 brackets, and you can match with all players in your bracket. If you are over 1600MMR you can match with the best killer and best survivors in the world. DbD "tries" to find partners with similar MMR, but if noone qued than the circle will just extend more and more.
i think a lot of people forget (and i'm not sure if this applies to you) but a majority of the player base ARE casual players who just hop on to have some fun, or maybe just play with their friends, and playing against the same thing over and over, especially when it's maybe a killer you're not fantastic at looping, or one that is going out of their way to make the game miserable, is boring and ruins the whole mood and enjoyment of the game.
Totaly agree with this its a game for fun and thats why you should not have to play with people you dont enjoy playing with.
1 -
yeah i get that, and i'm not gonna sit here and pretend i know all about dbds mmr system, but i don't quite understand why dbd implemented sbmm if they are not going to prioritise it over queue times. i get queues suck, but so does the random team mate you get that hides in lockers the whole game. i'd be willing to wait an extra couple of minutes if it means the game is at a level that matches/is similar to mine.
i think if it is advertised as something that while it blocks out people you don't want to play against, with the trade off that it may increase your queue times slightly, i don't think there is any real harm in such a feature? queue times for where i live are normally pretty quick anyway, but regardless i don't think removing 2 or 3 people from the queue if going to tack on a whole lot of extra queue time like people are making it out to be.
imo if people don't want increased queue times, don't use the feature
0 -
If such a thing was limited to a middle/low single digit number of players on a list (rotating out the oldest when a new one is added, or being able to lock in or manually remove those from that small list), then this would likely be fine. This would also need the limitation to actually play with someone before block/banning them. Otherwise the problems others have listed would most certainly crop up.
I don't think anyone has a legitimate issue with not playing with the unhook spam Survivor or bleedout Killer that both are intentionally being a jerk, each having fewer people to torture. If they act so uncouth that no one wants to play with them, then they honestly don't deserve to play. Just like when we learn as kids, if you attack another child unjustly, no one wants to hang out with you, so you have to actually not be anti-social. This is lacking on the internet, so people act anti-social and get away with it.
0 -
"imo if people don't want increased queue times, don't use the feature"
You are blocking 10 people for everyone you are in the lobby with. Not just yourself. This will blow out if everyone online has a list of 10 people.
Post edited by Simfeliz on0 -
everyone will have a list of 10 people? if its 2/3 people (that rotate out), you are missing 8-12 people out of a player base around (more often than not) 20000 people. but unless you're playing in a 3 man swf it doesn't really matter? because if you are already in said lobby of people (that have supposedly used the feature) you're already in a game to play. if someone doesn't use the feature, they will have more people to play with due to having those 2/3 extra people in the pool no? i really don't think it would be as big of a deal as you think it is.
+ if someone is being blocked by SO many people that no one wants to play with them i think that someone needs to look on the inside and evaluate how they are playing the game.
2 -
I remember Overwatch tried this a long, long time ago and all it did was make the best players never find a game because everyone blocked them.
Same would happen here. Or imagine being a Knight or Legion main, you would never get into a game again.
An “avoid as teammate” option could work, but an “avoid as enemy” option would just be too abusable.
1 -
"if someone doesn't use the feature, they will have more people to play with due to having those 2/3 extra people in the pool no?"
No, because anyone you queue up with their block list comes your block list too for that match. I don't play in a SWF.
"if someone is being blocked by SO many people that no one wants to play with them i think that someone needs to look on the inside and evaluate how they are playing the game."
I'd disagree. All you need to do is have a good read on these forums and you will quickly see people will block just because the wind didn't blow favorably for them.
I just don't see them implementing said feature and I really don't care either way. The only people I never want to play with again are cheaters and people who use slurs in chat and I repot that crap.
0 -
Why do i have to write the same stuff again and again and again? It woulndt happen in DBD since dbd have a different matchmaking. In Overwatch you are paired with people on your skilllevel, and if there are no avaidable you will wait. In dbd if there is noone avaidable on your skilllevel you will just be paired with whoever comes closest.
You are blocking 10 people for everyone you are in the lobby with. Not just yourself. This will blow out if everyone online has a list of 10 people.
If everyone has this, there are 40 people blocked. Thats still not ver mutch. And yes if one of the 4 people who are allready in the lobby put you on his block list you wont que with them, but whats the problem now?
I'd disagree. All you need to do is have a good read on these forums and you will quickly see people will block just because the wind didn't blow favorably for them.
This will put the person who blocks tons of people in a disadvantage and makes his que taking alot longer
0 -
In dbd if there is noone avaidable on your skilllevel you will just be paired with whoever comes closest.
YES AFTER SOME TIME. You do realize there is some time that counts up before it goes out of your range????
If everyone has this, there are 40 people blocked. Thats still not ver mutch.
It is if its small region or skill level or playing time of the day, like I pointed out earlier you dont know how big or small each queue groups are. So yes some regions does indeed come down below 40 people. 100%.
This will put the person who blocks tons of people in a disadvantage and makes his que taking alot longer
Yes. but it will also trap people who make it into a lobby with the guy, because if the system cant find an unblocked person quickly it will take time. There is no saying how long it would take. It wont make it a personal problem. it can affect multiple people.
Which is why most games companies dont do that, its a terrible idea. Even tho you do have that one person you hate so much and want to ban.
0 -
YES AFTER SOME TIME. You do realize there is some time that counts up before it goes out of your range????
No i dindt knew that, how long is that time?
It is if its small region or skill level or playing time of the day, like I pointed out earlier you dont know how big or small each queue groups are. So yes some regions does indeed come down below 40 people. 100%.
So you are saying with 40000players (on steam alone) there are some regions were are only 40 people are playing? I think the smallest region would be Australia. Do you have any souce that only 40 players are on that server?
I mean it sounds like BHVR would make a massiv loose of money for haveing dedicated servers for only that few people.
Yes. but it will also trap people who make it into a lobby with the guy, because if the system cant find an unblocked person quickly it will take time. There is no saying how long it would take. It wont make it a personal problem. it can affect multiple people.
Yes if you have an ######### in your SWF group who blocks hundreds or thousends of people or whos blocked by hundreds or thousends of people you will que longer. Tell your friend to stop acting like an #########.
0 -
And guys please dont tell me
1.) The chances are super slim to play with them again anway
2.) Than queing takes forever since you block too mutch people
Both statements cannot be right. Please choose one.
There is nothing wrong with those statements. You are not alone with the block feature, if everybody start blocking other people you will get bad q times.
0 -
No i dindt knew that, how long is that time?
I assume minutes, but only bHVR knows how it works currenly.
So you are saying with 40000players (on steam alone) there are some regions were are only 40 people are playing? I think the smallest region would be Australia. Do you have any souce that only 40 players are on that server?
I mean it sounds like BHVR would make a massiv loose of money for haveing dedicated servers for only that few people.
No Im saying there are times when the Asia Server has that few. Australian players connect to the Asia Servers. I know some Australian players, they tell me their queue experience.
Yes if you have an ######### in your SWF group who blocks hundreds or thousends of people or whos blocked by hundreds or thousends of people you will que longer. Tell your friend to stop acting like an #########.
No, im not going to let my queue experience be dependent on how much insight I have into my friends being blockheads.
Again, the idea is terrible in every example we talk about here.
0 -
The odds that you will encounter Player X (whom you hate) are very slim, but for the matchmaking to avoid EVERY single "blocked" player is not trivial. You'd have to add code to query/use that data for each separate player combination (both killer and survivor) so the complexity increases very rapidly.
So, yes, both statements CAN be right.
I'm not saying you don't have a point. I'm not against the idea of blocking players, but it doesn't sound like you program these types of systems for a living, so you kinda don't know what you are talking about
0 -
I dont think its so complex its basicly just useing a blacklist. For example you pair 2people together, than combine their blocklist and check for another 2 people who are not on the list. Than you just look for the last one with their combined list. If you dont find one, kick one pair out and match them with a new pair of 2 people so you get a new combined blocklist
The complexity is not very high since its an easy "if, than" function.
Im sure a programmer will find an even easier solution to this problem
And i assume its instandly. How about since we dont know how it is and are only guessing, we dont use it as an argument?
No Im saying there are times when the Asia Server has that few. Australian players connect to the Asia Servers. I know some Australian players, they tell me their queue experience.
I que with people who has asian names, but does that mean they are from asia? I dont think so. If you check the side:
You see that Australia has his own servers. If you have newer update that australia dont have their own servers anymore please feel free to post a source. But in that case the server would be even bigger since Australia dont have a own server than and share the playerbase with asia.
Post edited by Hanuka5 on0
