The second iteration of 2v8 is now LIVE - find out more information here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/480-2v8-developer-update

Whats your opinion on killing on hook?

2»

Comments

  • Unequalmitten86
    Unequalmitten86 Member Posts: 272

    I think this is certainly a regional thing. So I play a lower MMR on one side and a mid MMR on the other. I will see a lot of hookicides for being the first down or after running they get caught. Most just DC. Sometimes it's warranted with no one doing anything, a camping killer (they walk by the hook constantly but not enough for the meter to raise up), tunneling.

  • GhostsCore
    GhostsCore Member Posts: 30

    I think it's the inconsistency that is the worst part. They added bots specifically so the game wouldn't be at a massive disadvantage but added a penalty to the action and made hook suicides free.

    While killers get no way to leave the match without a penalty. Either they should accept both are bad and punish suicides made within the first 3 minutes (specifically struggling or failing 2 skill checks that early) or they should remove the dc penalty for both killer and Survivor so at least Survivors get a bot. And if the killer leaves the match ends anyway.

  • Reinami
    Reinami Member Posts: 5,520

    Camping is not punished in CoD or any other games with strategies that may be considered "toxic" what are you talking about? What these games punish is griefing, like intentionally feeding, assisting the enemy team, going afk, etc.

  • Reinami
    Reinami Member Posts: 5,520
    edited October 29

    These games do that though. Punishing AFK is easy, they literally already have AFK detection in the game in terms of crows, punishing griefing is also easy.

    Its pretty easy to see if someone has 3 chases in a game that each last 3 seconds. Or if both of their hits happen in the exact same spot. And yes, someone can be bad at the game and this could also happen sure. This is why you don't punish people for a single game, you do it based on a repeated pattern of behavior.

    Even the worst of the worst survivors are still going to get some progress done on a generator, and are still going to have a chase that at least lasts some number of seconds once in a while. But if you see someone for 5 or 10 games in a row, get 1k bloodpoints, with 0 progress on generators, where all of their chases last 3 seconds, and they get hit while standing in the exact same spot for 3 chases. There is obviously something going on there.

    Such detection could even take into account MMR averages. For example, if you are at 500 MMR (some extremely low number) they can know that the average chase at that MMR lasts X number of seconds, and survivors tend to get X average bloodpoints and X average gen progression and so on. Then just base their detection on that, so that "bad players" aren't judged the same as top mmr for example.

  • Reinami
    Reinami Member Posts: 5,520

    I mean, that is easily accounted for with multiple factors, teammates unhooking them out of spite for raging, and the 4% mechanic.

    Think of it this way. Lets say hypothetically 25% of skull merchant's kills are based on people rage quitting (We don't know if that is the case, but it doesn't really matter too much as we are dealing with percentages here.)

    Lets imagine a scenario where we are looking at 100,000 kills.

    • 25,000 of them are people doing a hook suicide.
    • 75,000 of them are "legitimate".

    Now, of those 25,000, how many of them do a "4%"? Well, its a 12% chance to do a "4%" based on 3 tries. So of those 25,000 kills, you'd see 3000 4%s. So now the stats are

    • 22,000 hook suicide
    • 78,000 regular kills

    So if her kill rate was 71% before on 100,000 before which would be 129,000 survivors seen, and then they took out the hook suicides, which was 22,000, her kill rate would actually go up to 72%.

    So even ignoring the "spite unhooks" it is easy to see how removing "1st hook deaths" doesn't show the whole scope of the problem.

    There is also more to "Giving up" then just killing yourself on the hook, there is the, running to the killer, teammates unhooking you, running into the killer again, griefing teammates, etc.

  • Xernoton
    Xernoton Member Posts: 5,842

    Not really. To tough it out can also mean, that someone shouldn't just leave at the earliest inconvenience, which is the actual problem.

    We are not talking about something like a 3gen Merchant (thank god that's gone!) but about small things that you may not like but can and will happen.

    Nobody is upset about a survivor hook suiciding when the match is over anyway or when the killer is really going out of their way to be a dick. But even if that was the main cause of rage quits, you should not queue up, if you are going to rage quit anyway.

  • UndeddJester
    UndeddJester Member Posts: 3,346
    edited October 29

    I don't think that's a counter argument at all. There are instances where a killer is being an undeniable jerk and the experience isn't fun, but there are plenty more cases of the killer just playing the game and survivors pitches a fit cause they screwed a vault, or got mind gamed, or see a perk or killer they don't like.

    Where do you draw the line of what is acceptable to quit to, and what isn't? You can't, and no one can, because fun/misery is subjective. Some people happily take camping, tunneling, slugging, etc as a part of the challenge, the comp scene for example. While they are not the typical player, they are still a part of the player base, and who can you name as the arbiter to decide what is OK to quit to, and what isn't?

    I think the easiest way to think about it is, think of your favourite killer to face, assuming playing fair and completely non toxic.

    Now imagine every time you face that killer, one of the players hears their terror radius and immediately runs to the killer, and insists on getting downed and SoH, or othwrwise does nothimg all game but throw. That person just completely killed your game, and you never get to play a normal game against your favourite killer.

    If anyone complains about that person is your response "well they are clearly having a miserable experience, and they shouldn't be forced to tough it out"? That seems a slippery slope, and the fundamental fact is by quitting you give the troll killers exactly what they want, and only punish your survivor teammates and the killers that do actually want to make a game of it.

    Most players would agree, egrious trolling and nasty/boring/toxic gameplay needs working out of the game, but quitting is hardly something that can be defended or justified, except for the most extreme cases... and most quitters simply don't save it for extreme cases.... which is why it needs to be cracked down upon.

  • Marc_go_solo
    Marc_go_solo Member Posts: 5,324

    For me DBD doesn't need to be taken seriously, but that's different from saying DBD needs to be played with a certain amount of empathy. It's possible to have fun and not be a jerk. Someone taking their life on a hook is a jerk move, because it affects everyone involved.

    I'm willing to make a couple of exceptions to the rule: a) someone kills themself, so that the last Survivor has a chance for Hatch, or b) the game is unplayable, due to some major bug or hefty exploits (but they have to be so big as to make the game truely unplayable). Obviously, b) does not apply to someone feeling a game is unplayable because they got hooked early or had a temper tantrum. Option b) is rare in the most extreme.

  • Prometheus1092
    Prometheus1092 Member Posts: 398

    I know people say suicide on hook ruins the game for everyone else but imo that's part of soloq. It's no different than someone trying to do a challenge like look for glyphs or totems instead of doing gens as they can been seen to "ruin the match" for the survivors that are actually trying to do gens and escape. Try beating a sweaty killer when half your team is doing random stuff like looking for glyphs or dropping every pallet in sight to try get a challenge done lol it's just not going to happen. But you can't stop people from basically abandoning the match to do personal challenges or going next.

  • ponzukun
    ponzukun Member Posts: 29
    edited October 29

    I mainly play with killers, but if I happen to down a survivor I encounter within the first minute or two of the match, he often chooses to die on his own


    Sometimes, even after being rescued, they would abandon the controls and not move


    I really felt sorry for the other survivors

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,424

    It's weak-willed, cowardly, and selfish behavior. People have said it doesn't factor into kill rates, but I reckon it does. And worse, this happens against the weakest killers. They just decide, "Wraith? Freddy? Ghost Face? Oh man. I gotta get outta here!" You know, the killers who have literally nothing once the chase starts. Survivors really don't have it that bad. I mean, they do in terms of the teammates they get in solo. Nobody likes a match where 1-2 players did really well, only to be sunk by 2 do-nothing teammates. It's a 1v4 for a reason. But to say that the majority of survivor losses are due to killers being OP is pure folly. They can only do what survivors allow them to do. The killer can't be 4 places at once, so if 1 person is on hook and none are on gens, whose fault is that?

    The only time I don't tough it out no matter what, as you suggest, is when I deem the team too incompetent to go forward in MMR. For lack of a better term, I'd be doing my fellow competitive players a "public service" by causing those fools to die as well. We're talking like a 10, 15, 20 minute game vs a whatever killer, when all gens should be done in 5-7 minutes, because 1-0 people were on gens all game, and people kept healing or hiding instead of pushing them, constant walking around doing nothing. So I don't make that decision on a whim or in the heat of the moment like others do. It's more of, "If I let them escape in place of me (when we easily all 4 could've got out), will they continue to martyr me or other good players in future matches?" Now, usually I'm not so lucky with the timing of this decision. Sometimes they're down to 1-2 gens, and then as I'm dying, all of a sudden they rush gens like crazy when they haven't all game, and they manage to escape before my accelerated death could do anything. That is the type of player who shouldn't escape, because if they only play well to save their own skin, and only after their teammates have made the ultimate sacrifice for them, as they did next to nothing all game, then those people escaping constantly are all you're gonna be matched with when you try to climb out of MMR hell.

    So in 99% of DC cases out there, they're just entitled and pouty. The 1% of justified DCs, like from my above-mentioned pov or from hackers stalling the game, does not justify the rest of the people DCing. By and large, it's a way to signal to the devs that something needs a nerf (usually killers), but you don't have to do the work of arguing on here for example, as an intellectual. No points are brought forward, and no real discussion is had. You just cry and get stuff done for you. That's why we detest it.

  • Hex_Llama
    Hex_Llama Member Posts: 1,837

    I think that, if your leaving the match will hurt your teammates, you should DC instead of letting go on hook, because at least then they get a bot.

    There are exceptions to every rule, but I don't think that leaving a match in progress should be a casual thing.

  • joybonru22
    joybonru22 Member Posts: 20

    is something that usually happens, if you look at the current balance of the game.

  • Pelaan
    Pelaan Member Posts: 221

    All these don't even fit in the same genre of what we're talking about Next.

  • angel_pellegrino
    angel_pellegrino Member Posts: 60

    There are only two reasons why I would ever give up on hook-- So my teammate can get hatch or if one of my teammates has "become buddies" with the killer. I refuse to play a game with some Leon helping the killer out in order to troll and escape. Usually, when I see people "go next" it's because the killer started the game out strong (getting people hooked before a gen is fully complete.)

    I don't judge it. Having been on the receiving end of so many doomed games, I understand the desire not to spend the next so and so minutes getting curb stomped. I would still rather keep playing and try for hatch at least, though.

  • PreorderBonus
    PreorderBonus Member Posts: 318

    Players who kill themselves on first hook should receive a DC penalty doubled for ruining the match and not even providing their teammates a bot. If you queue up, you should be ready to commit to a full match, regardless of the killer, their build, map, etc. If you don’t want to face certain killers, go play customs and stop ruining it for everyone else. But of course, many people feel entitled to leave whenever they want and expect no penalty for it. It’s funny, because back in the day, it was Survivors making Killers give up, not the other way around.

  • emetSdidnothingwrong
    emetSdidnothingwrong Member Posts: 321

    The first person who does this it's unacceptable and is a huge problem in every game I play from both sides, it ruins the match for 4 other people at the entitlement of the one and I will be very surprised if this isn't removed soon. The people who do it after the first one though is understandable, the match is most likely lost and most people just want to reset and try again.

    P.S. The only people who defend the hook suicide (the first one doing it, not the follow up players trying to leave) are the people who are the problem and 100% they do it at their earliest inconvenience.

  • miniwengsel
    miniwengsel Member Posts: 391

    Huntress slugging everyone wouldnt count as an arguement here, because when everyone is down slug the Killer has already won.

    Also protecting a three gen at the start is rlly stupid from the killers prospectiv and should be a easy win for the survivors, cause to the changes for damaging every gen 8 times max.

    So my opinion would be, making killing on hook not an option, so no self unhook atempts exeptions:

    1. Only one survivor is standing
    2. after all gens are finished
    3. and if you have perks, that interrakt with that

    At any other point if you dont want to play the round eat the dc penalty and DC. One survivor dont want to play doesnt mean the other also dont. One killing them self on hook means in like 99% of the times everyone dies. So if you dotn want to play dont be a dick and dc, get you teammates a bot

  • TheSingularity
    TheSingularity Member Posts: 97

    Unfortunately I see a Legion in at least every 1 in 10 games.

  • satx3241
    satx3241 Member Posts: 110

    Exactly this. The only thing that ever makes me intentionally die on hook is other survivors. If I am playing with survivors that are intentionally sandbagging I'm out on first hook. If I'm five minutes into a match and I'm the only survivor that has touched a gen I'm out on first hook. Other survivors can play how they want, but as far as I am concerned I have zero obligation to tough it out and stick around in a match where the other survivors aren't even trying to win.

  • Rudjohns
    Rudjohns Member Posts: 2,160

    If all my teammates are on death hook and theres 5/4 gens left, yeah, I'm dying on hook