Is this bannable?
Nurse-Midwich
2 survivors die, perkless, very weak. Through the whole match I only find a good kate. 1 gen left
Slug Kate 1 time. nothing for 1 minute. Then she gets picked up, then gets away somehow, and so I go to protect gens. Nothing, all regressed.
Slug her another time. Nothing for 2+ minutes straight, meanwhile I try to find the closed hatch but i can't, until she's near to bleed out.
At that point I didn't want her to die and the other survivor who plays super safe doing nothing getting the hatch. So i pick her up, let her wiggle out, and she goes straight to a Zarina hiding a the locker near the hatch. I Down her, hook her, joke with kate in the meanwhile, I give her the hatch as a reward for being good. Then Zarina reports me, but the match theorically was already won for me, so is this bannable? Because Kate dying or bleeding out would have meant 3 kills total, which is a still a win for me.
Edit: a win following Dbd's win condition, indicated in the game tutorials, which is sacrificing survivors to the entity or killing them
Comments
-
You didn’t do anything intentionally wrong. If anyone were to get in trouble, it would be the Kate for leading you to her teammate.
6 -
It would still be nice a definitive confirm from a dev
0 -
A friend of mine got banned because of EXACTLY the same reason. I don't find it a reason to be banned, the difference between you both might be that he was on the black list due to past dids. Either way, i think it wasn't deserved so i hope you will be fine.
I'm not trying to scare you, just saying what happened.
0 -
Not bannable.
The survivor was a bit naughty for leading the killer to her teammate, but still not bannable even for her. If she did it repeatedly then it would be a different story.
Not even remotely breaking the rules from the killer's perspective.
4 -
I think it's tricky:
Had the kate been ratting her teammates out from the start, she'd risk a ban.
But the zarina has refused to engage in regular gameplay, waiting for the kate to bleed out of get hooked to get the hatch, so there's that.
1 -
Why exactly wouldn't this qualify as working with the Killer, which is a punishable offense?
2 -
I think the big thing is more if Zarina had recorded the game and sent that recording off to the devs. It's probably unlikely that she did.
Some people do get banned as they think its teaming with the killer.
A dev probably won't be able to confirm if you will/won't be getting banned. I wouldn't worry. She sold her out once, not like she was doing it the whole game. It's unlikely you'll get banned but I would be careful when it comes to that situation again, so you don't start to think you'll get into any trouble.
0 -
They make a judgment call on every case. So, whatever you read here won't matter because the decision is not up to us and this particular case would have to be proven with screen recordings as well.
With that being said, this scenario is bannable in a vacuum and you were working with the survivor, whether from a certain moment rather than from the beginning is beside the point. Not long ago, there was a thread detailing the same exact situation and the player got banned. Next time kill them both or neither, but never reward someone who gives away their teammates.
2 -
Working with killer is stated under reports as bannable. So yes, you should both be banned for a time.
2 -
This is bannable.
The definition "working with the killer".
Nothing wrong with Zarina who played "super safe". She didn't brake any rule. She went to the locker near the hatch because you downed Kate.
She needs video evidence for that tho.
3 -
sadly Zarina did nothing wrong in terms of gameplay but she was scummy for doing that. Kate however sort of broke the rules
2 -
The whole scenario with this company is. I dont think they watch these matches from Start to Finish and why things happen. When a Report is filed.
1 ) I don't ever bait a killer to a location of a survivor unless they are absolutely sandbagging others, and there are crows on the locker. while they wait for everyone else to complete generators.
I get those survivors on my team whom think they are entitled to a "heal" or they pout and begin sand bagging people. Most of the time they are angry because someone didn't pick them up off the hook right away or bother to heal them. Because they failed to realize the killer has NURSES CALLING and proper timing for a rescue wasn't at that moment they wanted OFF the ground.
2 ) If someone was running a perk like BOND or Empathy and they ran right to a survivor. Sure, it would be more than reasonable for them to SUSPEND players from public matches for a period of time.
3 )There are also those survivors whom perform Unsafe rescues infront of the killer. Whether their intentions are good or bad. The person shows more intent if they pull the survivor TWICE, infront of the killer. Yes, I get bent out of shape when it comes to someone that does that to me and they receive a ton of "verbal lashing" in chat for doing that.
-----
I've encouraged the Dead by Daylight staff to approach their ban system with a PROFITABLE approach in hopes of making our community MORE alive and appealing to everyone. If we just ban people for being NORMAL online gamers. There isn't much left there to it. Now is there?
Abusive chat revision - MUTE PENALTY FROM CHAT. ez to program. Implement a chat timeout.
Sandbagging penalty. - Match time out. Player is banned from a public match. Must have 4 invited party members in order to Q for a match.
Public match bans - Player must have 4 swf group in order to Q, as they have been suspended from public matches.
Disconnection time out - I really believe this system is much too strict at this point. Until the Staff can iron out their mechanics of this game to be more FLUID like it was back in 2017 and 2018. There isn't much here now to say this game should have the penalty in place. Q times are mess again because of this.
- Hatch closing.
- Keys
- Mori Balancing.
1 -
I think repeat offenses would be, but I don't care. If you are willing to let someone spend 4 minutes on the ground to get out, then tbh you deserve it. I would've done the same as the kate.
2 -
The zarina wasn't participating in normal gameplay. That's bannable too.
0 -
I honestly think all three of you were in the wrong
You: Holding the game hostage by not hooking the Kate and extending the match longer then it needed to be.
Kate: For working with the killer by leading you to her teammate.
Zarina: Holding the game hostage by hiding instead of going for save or doing objectives.
Just my opinion though I could be wrong :/
0 -
Waiting for someone who has been downed to bleed out or otherwise die so you as the last person can get the hatch isn't a bannable offense. The bannable offense would be to either help the Killer down someone or just hide indefinitely to make sure the game never ends.
5 -
if the game was being held hostage it was the Killer doing it...
2 -
It's Kate who's risking the ban not you. Not your fault she led you straight to the other survivor. You wanted to kill everyone so it's not your fault that you had to let Kate get off your shoulder to do it.
I'd say from now on still kill the Kate after you find the other girl. Then it shows you weren't working with her since you didn't let her escape.
1 -
The only person that might possibly be in the wrong is Kate and even that's iffy. No one else did anything that is "not normal gameplay" or anything like that as it's not against the rules to slug, and it's also not against the rules to be selfish. She didn't have to play along, she could've refused to snitch on Zarina if she so desired.
I'm not entirely sure if she'd get in trouble unless she somehow ends up in that exact situation very often or it's confirmable that she's friends with the killer on whatever platform she's playing on, as it's not like she started out trying to screw Zarina over. Personally I never rat on others in situations like that but that might just be me, I just run to the closest gen and start working on it to let the killer know they gotta kill me if they don't want to risk failing to find the other player in time.
0 -
Imagine Kate, was a Chad.
Imagine Zarina was a Blendette.
Imagine the Killer was a actual reallife killer.
Any scenario with a Chad would be, he willing to screw over anyone so Chad lives.
Blendette only knows how to take care of herself and hide til things are safe.
Killers Gotta Kill as Killer Sees Fit.
Killers holds the power to decide what they want with their victims. Chads are cowardly notorious for thinking only about themselves to live and throw others under the bus to do so. Blendettes hide til things are clear.
It is a scenario that holds up in real life as it does stereotypically in movies. So there's no say these actions are punishable.
0 -
Zarina expected to be spoonfed a win and didn't get one.
She is a Karen
1 -
I love some people's bias. It's wild how people twist things.
"Oh the survivor was wrong because they led you to the killer. You're not at fault because you're just doing your job."
Ummmm, pretty sure they had to follow the survivor to the locker (not killing the Kate), hook the other survivor, and then admittedly let the Kate go. None of that was accidental. It was coordinated between the Kate and the killer. Both of them are in the wrong
2 -
dude. This is not the stuff they ban for. Sandbagging you’re teammates is not bannable. It’s not what they mean when they say cooperating with the killer. They’re talking about people syncing up ahead of time and making a go at being a team.
0 -
That offence relies on context. Antother, similar offence is farming, and our favourite streamers and content creators don't get punished for that despite literally broadcasting it.
Generally speaking, that Kate wasn't really "working with the killer." That would imply out-of-game communication. What was described was a pretty annoying situation all around, which could have also come under the definition of holding the game hostage.
0 -
You were playing like a dick but did nothing bannable really. Kate would definitely be in more danger than you for what she did siding with a killer against a team mate. Slugging to 4k is a cheap, lazy ploy but not against the rules, just lame. Should have hooked and killed Kate and let the chips fall where they may with Zar. From the 1st down for Kate instead of letting Zarina have a minutes long run around to find the hatch. Hatch is killer sided anyway, you probably would have beat her there and won anyway.
0 -
Antother, similar offence is farming, and our favourite streamers and content creators don't get punished for that despite literally broadcasting it.
That's because you don't get punished for farming unless you screw over someone who doesn't want to farm just so you can farm with the people who want to farm.
Generally speaking, that Kate wasn't really "working with the killer." That would imply out-of-game communication.
To my understanding, working with the Killer does not require out-of-game communication (if I am wrong, please correct me). All it requires is a Survivor working with the Killer to locate and/or take down another Survivor. If the Killer deliberately allows a Survivor to live, then the Survivor deliberately shows the Killer another Survivor, and then the Killer deliberately takes down that other Survivor instead, that is the Killer and the Survivor working in tandem against another Survivor.
What was described was a pretty annoying situation all around, which could have also come under the definition of holding the game hostage.
Not particularly, based on what the devs consider holding the game hostage. Zarina was not holding the game hostage because she was not doing anything to prevent the game from reaching a conclusion (going by OP's description of the events). The Killer wasn't really holding the game hostage because the Killer wasn't keeping the downed Survivor in a perpetual cycle of downing + picking up + wiggling out + downing + picking up + etc. etc. to keep Kate stuck. And obviously, Kate was not doing anything to hold the game hostage.
2 -
This is banable, category "working with killer".
0 -
You are wrong, about pretty much everything. According to the Devs the last time something like this came up, working with the killer is pretty much fine unless you either deliberately sandbag form the very beginning or are working together via outside communication. Almost every time the killer farms, they are screwing over someone that doesn't want to. And yes, stealthing around the map and not completing objectives is considered "holding the game hostage" about as much as pointing out the arsehole in the very end of the game is considered "working with the killer."
0 -
I see "wrongdoings" for all of you, but nothing that should cause a ban unless the devs were being real hardasses
Killer: nothing wrong with slugging to try to get the 4k. Some people are telling you that's lame or skeevy or holding the game hostage, but that's BS. if you don't slug the 3rd survivor, that usually guarantees an escape for the 4th. If you EVER want to 4k, you gotta do that. The problem was letting Kate go. It was the honorable thing to do, as she was playing and zarina wasn't being a team player, but technically, you shoulda gone for the 4k to honor the spirit of the game.
Zarina: not being a team player sucks. Teamwork is how survivors win. She was coasting off the skill of other survivors and being greedy. She should have rushed a gen while Kate distracted you.
Kate: can't blame her for leading you, but technically she's the most in the wrong because its undeniably "working with the killer". Idk what else she was supposed to do though, if she kept letting you chase it would be pointless because zarina wasn't working on gens. Its hard to actually escape from the killer without a distraction or really specific perks.
0 -
According to the Devs the last time something like this came up, working with the killer is pretty much fine unless you either deliberately sandbag form the very beginning or are working together via outside communication
This I do not believe. I want to see a source for this.
Almost every time the killer farms, they are screwing over someone that doesn't want to.
If they are screwing over someone who doesn't want to farm, that is punishable.
And yes, stealthing around the map and not completing objectives is considered "holding the game hostage" about as much as pointing out the arsehole in the very end of the game is considered "working with the killer."
The devs have time and time again repeatedly stated a very specific definition for holding the game hostage. In order to be considered "holding the game hostage," the offender(s) must be engaging in an activity that is keeping the game going indefinitely. Examples of this is bodyblocking someone in a corner without allowing the EGC to start or having all Survivors not doing gens and hiding for an absurdly long time. People have brought up stuff like "slugging" or "cornering someone so the RBT timer runs out" as examples of hostage holding, and the response from a dev/mod has always been "That's not holding the game hostage. Holding the game hostage means you're not allowing the game to end and are forcing it to continue indefinitely." Hiding because the 3rd player was downed and you want to wait for them to be hooked/bleed out is not that because that 3rd player is in a position to die in some form, which opens the hatch and either leads to an escape or a hard timer set for the game to end.
0
