About AFK players and hook suicides.
In another thread, it has been suggested to use what amounts to an activity detector to check if a player is letting himself die on hook, essentially giving up, or if he is trying to hold on.
As long as being able to suicide on hook is a thing, it may be used to give a slap on the wrist of players who give up. (e.g. first hook, already second phase and letting go)
Such a feature could also detect AFK players.
I thought it was a good idea.
Comments
-
What do you mean by activity detector? There really is no way for the game to know if someone is trying to 4% or die on hook
1 -
The 4%, no.
But if the player doesn't react when the wheel is on screen, he is obviously giving up.
And if he is giving up immediately after "attempting a 4%" … well, that pattern is pretty obivous.
0 -
What about when there's 2 people left and the person on hook wants to give hatch though? Would they be punished for making themself die faster? I understand where you're coming from but I just don't think there's a feasible way to implement it without backfiring a lot.
15 -
It is very obvious but you can't prove they didn't legitimately need to go afk or were somehow distracted or simply just forgot they needed to do it.
Yes, 99% of the time it's someone giving up but there can be edge cases where someone just happened to go through the same things in-game but didn't actually mean to kill themselves.
A better solution is to just remove self-unhook attempts unless you have an active Deliverance or are on basement hook with… Wicked I think it's called. Could also just remove the second stage skill checks or make it so you at least don't die after not inputting anything twice, just have the bar go down a little just when you miss one.
1 -
Easily fixed by taking being only two players left into account.
Having legitimate use cases for hook-suicides beside that one would be interesting though.
I'm naturally thinking of the first elimination of the game because that's usually how it happens. I'm not even sure it should be taken into account after that first one (because if a player has given up at the start, the game is as good as over)
0 -
There is no "legitimate" need. Well, there is but it shouldn't be the game's concern. I say that as someone who already had to leave my desk to get a delivery. That's exceptional so it shouldn't be an issue.
Forgetting to do it, you do it once. After that you remember.
To allow for these limit case the system wouldn't give a sanction on the first (few) offenses.
I agree removing the possibility of hook suicides entirely would be best.
0 -
I agree with the "idea" but I think this opens up a can of worms that BHVR shouldn't go down, too many false positives
0 -
I don't know. If the system is lenient enough (see previous posts) and only look at the first kill, I don't see "false positive" problems to speak of.
And it could deter from a pretty common method used to throw matches.
0 -
Curing the symptom instead of disease thread #3481
7 -
I guess it could work but saying there are bugs in the game that have been here for 5+ years on certain killers (apparently plague not losing her power when stunned was a bug for example), I highly doubt BHVR would ever go as far as to implement an entire system just to counteract toxic survivor behavior while also taking it by a case by case (as you said make 2 survivors left an exception). It's a good idea, I'm not trying to argue that, I just wouldn't have any hope for such a system in DBD anytime soon. Good idea though, I can't think of the amount of times I see a P100 in my game and I'm like this person is gonna be awesome and then they kills themself on first hook when we already completed a gen or two.
1 -
Of course, in this case all quitting survivors well suddenly stop attempting to leave the game, and instead will forget all the reasons why they wanted to leave, and start playing normally, slamming 'em gens and looping 'im killer like never before! And by no means will they just run to the killer after every unhook, all while dropping every pallet on their way just to spite everyone, this will never happen, right? One genial solution after another.
2 -
Doesn't work that way, you cannot punish a player for using a mechanic in the game. They need to remove the unhook!!!
0 -
If they do those things they can be reported and banned.
2 -
The disease is a lack of respect of the other players. This could teach them that.
0 -
It's more to discuss the idea than for anything else. That being said BHVR in the past has invested resources in something nobody wanted.
It is a big problem for me too. I deplore it when I'm killer and it makes me angry when I'm survivor.
0 -
That would require more effort and time. Given the lack of fortitude they display, it will at the very least inconvenience them. Besides it's easier to report.
0 -
That's not about the 4%, that's what follows.
But yes : removing the self-unhook-suicide would be best.
0 -
That's not true. I recently had a game were I was SWFing with a streamer who has strict rules about not DCing or giving up on hook. Well, due to a sudden bout of extreme lag I didn't run from killer as he quickly arrived to rehook me, then I missed every struggle check and died nearly instantly. The streamer was mad at first, but I swore to her that it was a bout of really bad lag, I would see if I could fix it, and if it happened again, I would quit entirely for the night. I did manage to fix the issue (forget how.)
But point is, sometimes a 'give up' or DC is not intentional. I'd say most of the time it is, but those few times it is not, are they reason that you can't blanket punish.0 -
That's weird because the wheel is not bound to the network. It's local, so maybe there was some weird task going on on your machine.
But that wouldn't be a problem because, among the suggestions in the discussion, the system wouldn't react with the first (few) detections. You'd have been safe.
0 -
@Krazzik mentions this already but:
If you don't want players to do something, just don't let them do it. You're adding a lot of things to solve a problem that doesn't need to exist in the first place. BHVR could easily penalize/stop people from hook suiciding, they've decided not to.
0 -
And your teammates be damned?
0 -
Still less effort than actually playing the game they desperately want to leave. And you can't report someone who is deliberately playing like a genuine potato survivor.
1 -
When a survivor is saved by a teammate and failed to suicide, he usually runs straight to the killer, points at him and/or to a hook.
As far as I'm concerned, that's usually when I bleed him out but that's another story.
0 -
I agree 100%, but you need to look further up the chain for that 'lack of respect'. This game went down the hole of "Ur fun is not my responsibility". And now we're stuck in a loop.
It's like the DM in AD&D decided to do the crappiest things possible to the PCs just because they can, then get angry when the PCs no longer play in character and play like asshats.
Either the power role needs to understand "with great power comes great responsibility"; or the power role needs to no longer be the power roll.
Something like…5 join up and killer is chosen at random.
2 -
I have never heard that before. I tend to miss skill checks more when I play with European friends, due to the higher ping, or are you talking about hooks and skill check are different?
0 -
You can't really do that
People suiciding on the hook is sometimes the best option (hatch play for example).
But i do agree that people giving up is no fun and should be punished. I don't know how tho.
The amount of survivors giving up when they see me or when i beat them fast is ridiculous theses days. I feel bad for the other guys cos, what can i do besides killing them fast and go next
0 -
The problem with the random role assignation is that more people will leave immediately because otherwise they'll play a role they don't want.
0 -
Basically, "QTE" in the game are local mini-games. If they "lag", it's a local problem. It happens of course (because what's not even a bit broken in this game?) but when they do, it's not (directly) because the servers are lagging.
0 -
The hatch isn't an issue as it would only look at the first death. (There are two corner cases, including Hatch, discussed around the start of the thread.)
0
