Killer camping

@Mycroft said:

@245_Trioxin said:

@Giche said:
@245_Trioxin said:

But it's fine when a team of sweat lords team up in Cheat With Friends and stack offerings and coordinate. Yeah, sure.

This is an incredibly small percentage of SWF players. You can stop now, your arguments have lost all merit.

Said who ?

Everyone who played killer more than 30 hours know that you're lying, or ignorant.

Or both.

And your wall of text isn't really telling anything, it's like you want the reader to be confused.

InB4 : "Lul that's because youre too stupid to understand it :DDD"

Says actual data. If it was that big of a problem, it would absolutely be on the devs radar, and they would do something about it. If it was actually ruining that may matches and destroying killers across the globe, they would have to fix it.

What of my "wall of text" is confusing? Please elaborate.

By the way, that's not a wall of text. Paragraphs are separated and punctuation is used. It's actually a pretty easy read.

I don't stoop to your level of insults. I encourage debate, and I will listen if you can bring me proper arguments. That's where @Mycroft failed. He didn't bring valid arguments.

Here's a valid argument. A killer has the right to secure a kill in a game where securing a kill is an objective or part of the objective.

Period, point blank. Full stop. Not my concern if the opposition doesn't like it. If they don't like it they play Civ 5.

I agree with you. I'm not arguing against camping. I found your initial comparison to be weak, so I replied.

All I am saying is that people have the right to question it, because it's not a good strategy. Then you went into "all survivors" talk, and that's a strawman, so I called it out.

Generalizations don't work, ever. They just make arguments weak.

@Mycroft said:
So now we come full circle. "Camping is legit. But that doesn't mean i have to like it."

Here's more validity for you. Too bad. Stay off the hook.

Again, none of this is what I argued. I try to stay off the hook, I tend to play stealth builds, and if a killer is camping, I do gens. It doesn't affect me personally. It also doesn't mean that you get to shut down people who question it as a good tactic. Full stop.

It doesn't change the fact that your arguments are garbage, and building up strawmen like "all survivors..." is useless also, because it can be easily destroyed.

@Mycroft said:

@245_Trioxin said:

I try to stay off the hook, I tend to play stealth builds, and if a killer is camping, I do gens. It doesn't affect me personally.

Good for you. You're learning. Grab a cookie on the way out.

I've been doing this for two years. I didn't just learn.

And just like everyone else who can't back up their arguments, you make a snide remark.

GG

@Giche said:

@245_Trioxin said:
Prove it. Back your statements up.

Prove that it is misinformation. Prove that I am being intellectually dishonest.

Numerous feedback since 2 years, my experiences, the dev's stat stating, one year ago ,that 70% of killer's lobby were filled with SWF teams.

But, wait....

Why should i look for all this game's archive just to make a point to someone who clearly can't see it due to his bias ?

I wonder... what would restrain me from also asking you proof to your counter statement ?

Oh yeah, i don't like toxic arguments.

the dev's stat stating, one year ago ,that 70% of killer's lobby were filled with SWF teams.

I have been waiting for one of you to bring this little factoid up again. I see killer mains constantly try to use this as an argument, but all you need to do is a quick Google search and that argument gets deflated really quick.

That comes from the 5 October 2017 dev stream, in case anyone wants to check it out for themselves.

Let's look at where that 70% came from. The devs released some stats regarding survivor group distribution. Here is what they actually stated were the groups by percentage:

• 4 solo: 30%
• 2 friends + 2 solo: 34.1%
• 2 friends + 2 friends: 9.5%
• 3 friends + 1 solo: 17.9%
• 4 friends: 8.5%

So, the way the "70% myth" came to be is based on adding everything up outside of four solo players.

If we really look at the data, we can see that 64.1% of matches have, at the most, two people communicating.

In fact the only point at which it becomes possibly too much communication across the team would be at 3 friends. Include 4-man teams and that equals out to 26.4%, or between 2-3 matches out of 10.

4-man SWF teams make up less than 1 in 10 matches!

Add to that, the fact that most of those 4-man SWF groups aren't Marth88-level de-pip sweaty squads, and you're probably looking at 1 in every 100 matches or so. Which is why I said it's a very small percentage.

Stop parroting talking points and research the actual data.

@Giche said:
@245_Trioxin

Who talked about 4 man SWF specificaly ?

That case is only the cream of the crop cancerous wise.

I talked about SWF in general.

So 1 year ago, there were already 70% killer's lobby filled with SWF (regardless of the number, from 2 to 4, it's only a little less cancerous with the first case)

I wonder how much this number have changed since last year, knowing the recent events.

You just moved the goalposts. SWF duos are not bad and you know it. Prove to me that those dastardly, toxic, horrifying SWF duos are just ruining all of your matches.

I dismantled your argument, and you're doubling-down on it. It's because the actual data destroys your narrative.

@Vietfox said:
245_Trioxin said:

@Giche said:

 @245_Trioxin said:

Prove it. Back your statements up.

Prove that it is misinformation. Prove that I am being intellectually dishonest.

Numerous feedback since 2 years, my experiences, the dev's stat stating, one year ago ,that 70% of killer's lobby were filled with SWF teams.

But, wait....

Why should i look for all this game's archive just to make a point to someone who clearly can't see it due to his bias ?

I wonder... what would restrain me from also asking you proof to your counter statement ?

Oh yeah, i don't like toxic arguments.

the dev's stat stating, one year ago ,that 70% of killer's lobby were filled with SWF teams.

I have been waiting for one of you to bring this little factoid up again. I see killer mains constantly try to use this as an argument, but all you need to do is a quick Google search and that argument gets deflated really quick.

That comes from the 5 October 2017 dev stream, in case anyone wants to check it out for themselves.

Let's look at where that 70% came from. The devs released some stats regarding survivor group distribution. Here is what they actually stated were the groups by percentage:

* 4 solo: 30%
* 2 friends + 2 solo: 34.1%
* 2 friends + 2 friends: 9.5%
* 3 friends + 1 solo: 17.9%
* 4 friends: 8.5%

So, the way the "70% myth" came to be is based on adding everything up outside of four solo players.

If we really look at the data, we can see that 64.1% of matches have, at the most, two people communicating.

In fact the only point at which it becomes possibly too much communication across the team would be at 3 friends. Include 4-man teams and that equals out to 26.4%, or between 2-3 matches out of 10.

4-man SWF teams make up less than 1 in 10 matches!

Add to that, the fact that most of those 4-man SWF groups aren't Marth88-level de-pip sweaty squads, and you're probably looking at 1 in every 100 matches or so. Which is why I said it's a very small percentage.

Stop parroting talking points and research the actual data.

I know you said you try to avoid "General discussions" and i can see why, but it would be nice if you created a thread about this data. People who still think that 70% of the matches are against top tier 4 swf squad need to know.

It's readily available data, and it's information that should be shared. Feel free to post it in a thread.

@Mycroft said:
So let me see if I understand this. Just because every SWF squad isn't top tier SWF isn't an issue? When one can clearly point to the fact the advantage SWF gives alone is the problem. In a game that's already 4 vs 1 the 4 already having a numbers advantage plus the fact Discord gives you the benefit of multiple perks isn't an issue?

All the while the lone killer having to deal with this gets all the crap for being tactical.

Again, no. Nobody is saying that. Toxic players are just that. Report them and move on. If someone is being a jerk to you post-match, it's not cool, and I will not defend that type of behavior. I will 100% stand with you against it.

But stop conflating it to "all survivors" or "all killers", because it's factually inaccurate to make assumptions like that. You have to see that. Please tell me you see how dishonest that is. It doesn't help the situation, it makes it worse.

The 70% myth is false. I have already proved this, and 4-man squads are the basis for every argument I have seen against SWF. I have never seen anyone cry over a two-man squad and two solo survivors. It doesn't happen.

But now it has to, because you can't use the blanket 70%, as it's intellectually dishonest. So you're doubling-down and changing the argument.

The narrative is broken. These arguments are not going to be taken seriously anymore. SWF is not nearly the problem that it has been made out to be. Toxic players, on both sides, are the issue.

The devs will balance the rest of it out, based on the actual data, which means they'll balance around the "2-team, 2-solo" form of SWF, as that's the most commonly played. They won't balance around 4-man SWF.

Once that's done, then they'll have a much easier time balancing the killers against that type of survivor group.

@Giche said:

@245_Trioxin said:
You just moved the goalposts. SWF duos are not bad and you know it. Prove to me that those dastardly, toxic, horrifying SWF duos are just ruining all of your matches.

I dismantled your argument, and you're doubling-down on it. It's because the actual data destroys your narrative.

Where did i mentionned 4 man SWF in this exact thread ?

You are just grasping strawman wherever you can find them.

Also by the data you bringed, 3 man SWF are the most numerous of all type of SWF.

No need to mention the 2 teams of duo SWF.

You can nitpick things all you want, doesn't change the fact that SWF always bring an unfair advantage, that survivors in general love to abuse.

Pretty sure that there's even more than 70% of SWF players right now.

I wonder why.

And even when goofing around with your buddies, you have an unfair advantage over the killer.

It's called telepathy, and if you all can't recognize it, you're all a lost cause.

What respectable gamer would keep his unfair advantage over his opponent untouched for that long ?
Even worse, defending it at ALL COST ?

None, period.

You didn't, but @Mycroft did. So, the argument still stands. I'm not building a strawman. I burned down the one that many killer mains (including you) fall back on, which is the 70% myth.

> Also by the data you bringed, 3 man SWF are the most numerous of all type of SWF.

What?? You obviously don't know how to read data. 17.9% is not the highest number listed. 34.1% is, which is 2-team/2-solo.

Want to shoot yourself in the foot again? Now your argument has even less merit, because you can't even parse this information correctly.

Pretty sure that there's even more than 70% of SWF players right now.

Groan...so now that the data doesn't fit your narrative it's old and out of date. That's not a good look.

It's called telepathy, and if you all can't recognize it, you're all a lost cause.

No, it's not. It's just called communication, let's not make it supernatural now. The last time I played in an SWF duo with a friend, you know what we discussed during the match? Summerslam. Yep, the killer was bested by two guys talking about pro wrestling while holding down a button and hitting skill checks.

Did we mention things to each other regarding the killer? Yeah, from time to time, but most of the time, we were paying far less attention than had we been playing solo. I find I do better solo than in SWF. The chances of me surviving the match go up.

Are there issues with SWF? Yes. I'll admit that. But, crying about that doesn't do any good. I could go back through the Steam forums and pull up comments I made before it was introduced. I said from day one that it needed to be a separate mode that allows for bloodpoint accumulation, but is unranked. I stand by that statement over two years later.

Ranked should be reworked, not reset monthly, and have proper tiers. It should also be solo-only. SWF should be a casual mode where you can have fun, grind bloodpoints, and experiment with new builds before taking them into ranked.

But, that's not going to happen. So, we need to allow the devs time to try and balance this whole mess out. I can guarantee that, if that data is still accurate, they will balance solo and SWF based on 2-team/2-solo, and then buff killers accordingly.

@Mycroft said:

@245_Trioxin said:

@Mycroft said:
New survivors complain about camping? LOL

I sat there and saw one of Jendenise's patented Twitloinger tweets about "I get so tired of being camped. Woe is me."

And about a week or two later they put in the directional hooks.

Killers have been complaining consistently about the same issues since release, nothing has changed.

Right...couldn't have had anything to do with facecamping being an actual exploit that they needed to fix.Directional hooks needed to happen because of prompt blocking.

An exploit? Oh wow, now I know what I'm dealing with here. At no point in time has face camping ever been classified as an exploit. Never. I almost took you seriously.

Yes, it was. Because you could block the unhook prompt. That's an exploit that was taken advantage of. How are you even arguing against that?

That's the only reason they put in directional hooks.

What exactly are you dealing with? Please, follow through on your little attempt to discredit me.

So far, you have failed spectacularly. Keep trying, though. At least you're persistent.

@Mycroft said:
Yeah, we know.

https://clips.twitch.tv/KathishCooperativeFerretSaltBae

So, now we're down to specifics. What is facecamping? Because I have heard from numerous killer mains on here, that facecamping no longer exists due to directional hooks, and it should now be called hardcamping.

Based on that, then facecamping, which was purposely done to block the unhook prompt, was an exploit and the reason as to why they added directional hooks.

This doesn't prove anything. All Matt is saying is that camping is not reportable. Which I, and plenty of other people agree with.

@Mycroft said:

@Mc_Harty said:

@Mycroft said:
Yeah, we know.

https://clips.twitch.tv/KathishCooperativeFerretSaltBae

LOL what does that prove?

Doesn't mentioned that facecamping wasn't an exploit at that time.

Ok then, for the logically impaired.

https://clips.twitch.tv/OutstandingInexpensiveWaterKlappa

Do you want me to tell them to fax it to you?

Didn't they just state that if you are systematically face-camping then it's considered griefing and is a bannable offense?

This makes no sense. You just posted a clip that said it could be bannable if done for specific purposes. How does this help your argument?