Is holding one survivor hostage while actively pressuring others holding the game hostage?
My example: playing twins on the silent hill map.
A survivor runs up to the top of the stairs where it is a dead end.
I block the small passage out and use victor to traverse the map.
The one survivor is stuck doing nothing during this time.
I'm still downing other survivors and pressuring gens, is this foul/exploit play or a creative situation?
Edit--
To further give example, they were trapped for about 1 1/2 min as I slugged one survivor and pounced another before returning to charlotte and hitting the healthy trapped survivor. (Which then runs through me). I could've technically brought victor back to me first for the double hit, but I was just playing a fun game rather than tryharding.
It was near end game with 1 gen left.
The trapped survivor actually found the occurrence entertaining and praised the creativity of the situation.
I feel like everything is always up to interpretation/perception.
Comments
-
Its a survivor so you will be banned for doing that to them.
9 -
It's definitely holding one person's game hostage.
16 -
I think it's bannable, you're bodyblocking the survivor there, and the only way he could do something it's dc, you should not do that again.
12 -
I got told, that as long as i still pressure and down other survivors, its not bannable.
If you still stay there even if you downed everyone, then it is bannable.
2 -
I'd say no. If you are forwarding the game then it is just kinda scummy play but a legit one. On the other hand if you kill everyone and keep them blocked where only option is to DC, that's holding game hostage and bannable.
6 -
Holding the game hostage means the game can not end on it's own.
Trapping one survivor in a corner while others are still on the map is not holding the game hostage seeing how the game can end when they do all the gens and trigger egc.
Prolonged bodyblocking does count as grieving so it honestly depends. If you spend 20 minutes running around as Victor not actually doing something then you might want to refrain from doing that in the future.
If you just used Victor to pounce someone on a nearby gen and said survivor was stuck for like a minute or something i think that's not a problem.
They really should make it so if player hitboxes are colliding for like 30 seconds they lose collision for a short time so stuff like this doesn't need to be asked
8 -
I don’t think it is. But it is pretty damn funny
3 -
Answer given by the Mod one week ago:
There seems to be a bit of confusion.
There is bodyblocking where you run in front of a killer to attempt to stop a hook or protect a survivor, which is not bannable.
Before I explain the part which can be bannable, to clarify this: If you block a survivor in a corner for only a few seconds or a minute, that's not bannable. I will explain down below what is bannable
However, what can be bannable, if a killer or survivor decides to lock another survivor in a corner and they can't leave for several minutes. This is considered griefing as it doesn't let the player play the game. Blocking players from the game is what makes it a bannable offense if it lasts long enough. Running in front of a killer to protect another survivor is not bannable. Camping isn't bannable either.
On the other hand, if it was just before EGC started (this requires EGC to start shortly after), then it's not bannable anymore, as it was shortly before EGC and EGC will make the game end.
Example 1: There was this jolly happy Kate walking around, she sees a totem, she's full of joy, yay, she thinks! Time to cleanse a totem. She couldn't have anticipated that the Killer would appear and stand behind her. Now Kate is stuck, the game just started. She waits and waits, but the Killer doesn't move. For the whole game. EGC finally kicks in, but it took long enough.
Can Kate report this incident as it took place throughout the whole game and for several minutes? Yes, Kate can report this scenario.
Example 2: However, if Kate were to cleanse the NOED totem at the end when EGC started and the Killer would lock her in again... No, Kate wouldn't be able to report it, because the game was done already.
The situation OP is describing is bannable bc you're preventing the survivor from playing the game for several minutes. It doesn't matter if the game is progressing by your hands or the hands of survivors.
7 -
Why would you want to do this? I mean, you do understand it is another human being playing, right?
18 -
I'd say if crows are showing up on the bodyblocked survivor, you've held them up too long.
7 -
There's a difference between holding the game hostage and one survivor hostage, but they are both bannable offences. In one case you're preventing the game to end, in the other you're preventing a survivor to play the game.
The only time you can body block a survivor like that is when you know they will die for sure, for example during end game collapse (after it has started already).
Avoid doing it again because if reported with proof you might get banned
5 -
This one actually is legit like when you've hit 3 crows. We got an issue.
6 -
That's almost certainly considered griefing.
6 -
They're shadownerfing the Twins so that Charlotte loses collision after 20 seconds so this won't be possible anymore
5 -
If you do this so long they get afk crows be prepared to get a ban if they decide to report you because that is the definition of griefing.
3 -
Only because you are using the one Killer which can apply pressure while still holding a Survivor hostage, does not mean that you are not holding them hostage.
Still bannable.
5 -
It's ... unclear. You're still moving the game along with Victor, but you're still preventing one guy from moving the game along. That's probably why they're removing Charlotte's collision after a while of idling her.
0 -
That’s a bannable offense because it’s actually holding a survivor’s game hostage.
3 -
If this is true, then good. That she can block the only entrance to a room with a hook, including the basement, while Victor is out, is ridiculous and shouldn't have ever been possible. And with the new change to BT, it should count too (even though the nerf that came with it was entirely unnecessary)
2 -
Was near end game, and just happened to realize it could occur and so decided to use it to my advantage. The survivor actually thought it was an entertaining occurrence in end game chat.
0 -
On the contrary I think collision should always be apparent, but map generation should account for this to prevent body traps.
0 -
you should not do that again it is a bannable offense. Just you are holding someones game hostage
1 -
Thank you for answering with some context. I understand a little more now.
4 -
Considering it is bannable to block people for them to die by EGC unless it's done after it has started or "shortly before", there's probably some situations where this isn't considered fine as well. But I wouldn't know for sure, but either way it's probably gameplay the devs would be happy to very clearly discourage.
But it's more the kind of thing that people shouldn't be surprised if the devs made changes to make it impossible to do in the first place if it became a common thing for people to do, like they did when they widened a lot of one-way entrances (like the basement stairs many places) and added alternative paths (like the dropdown in Thompson House) to prevent more "general" non short-term blocking scenarios.
1 -
Preventing a survivor from being able to participate in the game by blocking them in a corner for extended time is considered griefing and is reportable/bannable. The mods have said this multiple times that if you body block a player in the corner for the match where they cannot move you can be reported and banned. It's nice this survivor said it was fine but the next survivor may not and can send video down if you are body blocking them in corners.
3 -
i would try to avoid doing that, I believe it’s bannable. also kind of cheap.
0 -
Good rule of thumb is if you have to ask what you're doing banable and if it does seem scummy, it probably is.
Although that particular survivor didn't seem that bothered most would he very upset by this.
0 -
@MandyTalk thoughts?
0 -
So I guess if we are being really granular, I technically didn't have to ask. I was just curious of people interpretations in this specific example.
I myself would've also given props if this occured to me, while on the flip side if I were stuck for like 5 mins would've been agitated.
0 -
As always, that's an interpretation, and not a bad one.
I find cheap to be an interesting description in this case though. I could've alternatively just slugged them?
I feel this situation was more creative (and at least different from the norm).
0 -
Well technically you can body block someone until their reverse bear trap or endgame collapse kills them which would give them three crows and this will not be considered holding the game hostage or bannable it would be a massive douche move but yet not bannable
0 -
That's a good point. You could just sit in front of the jigsaw box they need.
0
