body blocking
If a killer body blocks one survivor and the other 3 survivors refuse to leave the game in order to start EGC...which party is holding the game hostage?
Comments
-
Killer also you just took this post from the other person.
1 -
I'm going to say in this scenario...the survivors are holding the game hostage. They can finish gens and trigger the end game collapse. The body blocked survivor will be consumed by EGC.
0 -
Well the answer has already been given in the post your referencing. The wraith was holding the game hostage
1 -
It was closed... i wanted more discussion about it
0 -
There's no more discussion. The ACM answered with a clear answer. And in case you didn't see this
3 -
The other 3 survivors had the choice to start EGC.
0 -
The first one to keep the game hostage is bannable. So, the killer.
Also, remenber: Bodyblocking As Nuts = B.A.N.
And so the topic probably will be closed cause it has been discussed in the other topic...
0 -
Holding the game hostage means the match cannot progress. In this case, the match can progress. The 3 survivors can finish the gens and power the gates triggering the end game collapse.
0 -
The rules don't make sense as the match can still end. It's on the survivor's control...
0 -
@Peanits clarification on holding the game hostage por favor
0 -
In starting to think you were the wraith in that game
2 -
The killer has the power to kill the survivors which mean if they hold the game as hostage it there fault. This was already answered on a previous thread where the survivors hid for 10 minutes and found not to be taking the game as hostage. So this discussion needs to stop alright it already been answered.
0 -
You're assuming...I didn't charge my headphones so I ditched dbd for diablo 3 tonight...
0 -
If a mod or dev censors me or my post then i'll leave it at that. Until then, i'm curious for super, detailed clarification. I'm not insulting anyone, or bullying others...i'm asking why... there is nothing ever wrong with asking why.
0 -
We already answered it
0 -
It was not answered by definition. Holding the match hostage means the match cannot progress. In this situation, the remaining survivors could progress to the end of the match but chose not to do so.
This action would probably fit in to griefing perhaps, but holding the game hostage??? Not by how they define holding the game hostage.
0 -
Before i go to 😴😴😴😴😴...
I'm not arguing if the wraith's actions are bannable. The wraith in this instance should be banned, if i understand the rules correctly. I'm arguing if the wraith held the match hostage by bhvr's definition, which in this particular instance, I do not think the match was held hostage as the 3 remaining survivors could still progress the match to an end.
0 -
The survivors are holding the game hostage; you can still escape (excluding the blocked survivor).
1 -
Off topic, if i recall correctly, you are a clown main...was going to ask you about build/strat but Idrunk...sooooo if you are the clown main i'm thinking about...what's you're two top clown outfits 👀, if not lol oops...
0 -
Santa outfit all the way.
My current and main build:
"Corrupt Intervention + Discordance + Dying Light + Thanatophobia"
1 -
The wraith also has the option of forcing the EGC and forcing all the survivors out of the game or allowing them to get eaten by the entity, instead he was busy griefing another survivor.....
This has been answered. I will take the dev's post on it which I had posted in the other thread. Someone argued that it is now INVALID due to EGC, however I have not seen a statement made otherwise. Until then I will continue to go with the dev's statements on the matter.
We can all wait on an answer. And hopefully we get one. As long as everyone's civil I don't see why they won't let us know. The dev's are busy, so we have to be patient.
3 -
There is discussion to be had. The ACM did not answer the question directly and simply said "Send a report here and we'll look into it" that doesn't mean that its actually bannable. On top of that, the post you keep linking is old from before Endgame Collapse was a thing. Things may be different now.
1 -
I would appreciate updated clarifications on situations as the one i'm referring to, but I understand they are super busy. I'm trying to be civil as my next infraction will permaban me from the forums lol and I do enjoy the forums as a whole and heck lol I need to stop looking at the forums and go to sleep 😂
0 -
Like I said in the other discussion, survivors are clearly holding it hostage. I guarentee that killer had a cypress mori and just wanted to make sure it wouldn't go to waste. Fueled by entitlement and spite, the other 3 bring the game to a grinding halt until the killer lets him leave or quits. Easy to demonize a killer when you only look at it from one incredibly biased side.
0 -
The wraith was only stopping one survivor from leaving, wasn't preventing the game from being finished. Same thing would be attained if he was getting hookcamped or slugged, baby survivors just didn't like the method he was using. Cry me a river.
0 -
yeah and the killer had the choice to down and hook the survivor they were body blocking soooo yeah if both do nothing, both are holding the gmae hostage.
0 -
and the killer is not entitled to that cypress mori, you are the incredibly biased on if you pick any side in this.
Both do nothing, both hold the game hostage, simple as that.
1 -
lol. Well that's good. I doubt the Canadians are up this late to answer. Maybe tomorrow.
In the meantime I found a sort of similar thread of 99 gates. If anyone is interested. Peanits replied. https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/121871/adress-99-ing-the-exit-gates/p2
And this
Peanits (regarding slugging though but mentions holding game hostage)-
"It is not. It takes four minutes for the survivor to bleed out, at which point the game ends. We only consider it to be holding the game hostage when there is no possible way for the game to end."
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/62203/holding-the-game-hostage
0 -
Ok first off reported for swearing, very childish behavior and does speak volumes of your weak position/argument.
The did objectively not earn it, a Cypress Mori requires there to be 1 last survivor in the match, when the killer chose to body block a survivor in the corner expecting the rest to leave, they did not leave yet, so non of the requirements were met.
The killer not doing anything at that point is not better nor worse then survivors not doing anything at that point, both were holding the game hostage and at the same time non were.
0 -
I'll be honest I really dislike this Killer Vs Survivor mentality. Why do we have to be in separate groups? We are all humans working together and playing a video game. Trying to make it fun and as fair as an asymmetrical game can be. We are all in this together.
I think we are getting a bit off topic and the OP wants to hear from the dev's. Let's be civil with each other or they will just close the topic all together.
It's okay to disagree, but don't make it personal.
In the end it is the dev's decision on what happens and what rules they want to put in place and enforce. Let's wait and hear back from them.
0 -
I personally wouldn't have moved a muscle as that killer, I'd be prepared to leave my PC on all night.
0 -
Swearing? Lol, no point in talking to someone so sensitive and blind. "At the same time none were" lol wut.
0 -
not point in talking to someone, and then you ask for a clarification... ok then.
Non were because both could have just continued playing normally, the game wasnt actually being held hostage by anyone, both parties just chose to not continue playing.
0 -
And Peanits himself said, it's only holding hostage when there's no possible way for the game to end. There was, angry survivors chose not to take it. Good try I guess?
0 -
and ermm entitled? killer chose not to take it either soooo yeah again, my statement stands.
1 -
Killer had zero power to hold the game hostage, survivors held themselves hostage to spite the killer. I don't know if you're legit slow or something, but it's literally so simple.
0 -
As far as the survivors go they basically "99" the gates. Or just didn't start EGC.. Which the dev's never said that was holding anyone hostage at all. (Especially in the link I posted earlier). The killer was not the one being held against his will.... The one survivor was trapped and being held against their will...
In the scenario the OP says. IF killer traps one survivor against their will for an extended period. AND the other 3 survivors will not start EGC and leave the game.. who is at fault? The killer is at fault for not hitting the survivor he is bodyblocking. The survivors are not holding the game hostage, due to the killer being able to open it themselves and also forcing the survivors out.
0 -
I was going to ask you the same thing.
If survivors do nothing in a match, the killer can down them, hook them and when they are all sacrificed the match is over.
The survivors did nothing, but by doing nothing did not hold the game hostage.
If a killer does nothing in a match, the survivors can do gens, open the door and leave and then the match is over.
The Killer did nothing, but by doing nothing did not hold the game hostage.
in this scenario the killer is body blocking a single survivor to kill them specifically, other survivors chose to not reward this by not leaving, the killer at that point could have down the person they were body blocking and gone after everyone.
Nothing was stopping the killer from doing just that, so yeah again, both were holding the game hostage and non were.
You can't make an argument against this, your opinion does not matter, this is objective, this is just a fact.
0 -
However the killer did do something. He chose to grief a survivor. You can't inhibit someone else's gameplay....
As for doing nothing and basically AFK'ing: From MandyTalk -
"You are free to report AFK killers/survivors - it's not something that I would immediately think is bannable but it certainly isn't playing the game as intended, and yes it would fall under Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
I'm going to say though, you certainly won't be banned for 1 match when you are AFK (it's actually happened to me, got distracted whilst waiting for a lobby and missed the match!) but if it's something that someone is doing consistently, then yes that can be looked at."
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/115799/is-afking-as-the-killer-to-depip-bannable/p2
0 -
Imagine being so desperate you say your smooth brain hot take is oBJectiVe lmfao you're obviously a dogmatic survivor main. If I ever play you're, you're going straight to Bubba's Basement to get hook camped.
0 -
Hooking someone inhibits their gameplay, downing them does, even hitting them does to a degree. This is so funny lmfao.
0 -
Hooking someone has a timer (and even a chance of self escape). And is part of the gameplay. Downing and slugging them does the same thing, there is a timer and the dev's stated this is not holding the game hostage either. Hooking and slugging allows for the survivor to eventually leave the game, aka not be held hostage. -
Edit: Also slugging there are perks, like unbreakable and tenacity. They can move around again and possible get right back up. etc.
0 -
getting upset about it does not change anything.
trying to put in me in a box so you think you can just ignore me does not change anything.
Stop thinking sides, stop taking all this so seriously with so much emotion, if you want to talk about what is obvious, its obvious you got tilted too many times playing this game and now you are just bitter.
For what its worth, I play both sides, completed the killer side of the tome just now with half of the survivor objectives still remaining.
again, this scenario is not about your or my opinion, its just facts, they dont say anything bad about you or me, its just how it is, so accept it.
0 -
*Please Note the time stamp of this year*
1 -
What? Sandbagging is bannable?!
I think like half of the people I've played with are gonna be banned now lol
0
