http://dbd.game/killswitch
The Disconnect Penalty System Needs To Go
Im not saying I ragequit at this game its just that I hate the fact when I lag out sometimes or whenever its storming and the power goes out it I still get matchmaking banned for mins-hrs. To be honest this should be removed from the game or changed because I really hate it.
Comments
-
If you're getting banned for hours you're rage quitting.
7 -
It should just put you in a queue with other people who dc a lot
4 -
There's no way the power is going out at your house often enough that you rack up hours on the penalty from d/cing that way.
10 -
No. The last time we did not have the DC penalty, only 1 in 10 games played to completion.
And, as a Killer who never DCs, the only games for me that played to completion were when I lost. If I ever started to win, Survivors would ragequit.
If you're playing while it's storming out, you are knowingly starting a match while you could lose power, and thus risking ruining the game for 4 other people. At that point, it's your fault if you DC.
And if you're getting hours-long bans, then either you're quitting allot while trying to pretend it's not your fault, or your internet is crappy...At which point; it's still your fault, for playing an online, multiplayer game, knowing your internet could cut out.
Did you think you deserve to log in to a multiplayer game, knowing your internet is flaky, and ruin it for 4 other people, and think they should just accept it?
5 -
Don't play during storms or if your internet is #########. If you're getting hours-long matchmaking bans, you're rage-quitting. I don't like dealing with dc penalties when I dc from a hacker game or there's a power surge, but I get like a 5 min ban at max.
2 -
I agree I should be able to quit any matches I don't like...do you see the issue with removing it?
2 -
I actually don't, I really wish it would be possible again
0 -
Nope. The decay timer is extremely punishing, meaning someone losing connection once a day due to distance to there servers will inevitably get the maximum ban even though they play 15 trials a day or whatever.
0 -
People of my mindset would DC because of any reason without a deterrent it could be because of any silly reason.
They don't like the killer
They don't like a survivors gameplay
They don't like how fast gens are popping
They're the first ones hooked
Killer slugs(I agree on this one but ya know can't have one without the others)
Tunnelling and camping
Toxicity
A certain perk was used
The list goes on but these are the big ones.
1 -
Then they should be looking at better internet provider then? Yes?
0 -
Its easy said than done but i really think game should have reconnect feature. They also have to introduce bots, who will take player's place when they DC ( its strange mobile version has bots, pc and console still do not).
1 -
It's not the ISP, it's the server connection. Someone could have gigabit fibre and still get dropped because they don't live close enough to the servers.
0 -
My isp ######### up some times, I have regular blackouts, I often forget to verify cache. I have dcd to quickly see what the mmr gave me as opponents as killer, I have had griefing teammate that made me dc. The harshest penality I have ever got is 10 minutes. If you got hours suspension it's you who is the problem.
0 -
That’s such a lame excuse to someone telling you there’s an actual problem
1 -
Before the dc bans were introduced there would be so many times where people would dc because they were the first to be hooked, or some equally obnoxious reason. Playing the game was so frustrating because of players throwing their toys out of the pram.
I do agree it can be very frustrating for people if it's a connection issue, or worse a bug. It's only ever happened to me once and it was really irritating. But there are four more people to consider in that match, where there experience is trashed because of that dc.
Overall, the bans should stay. It deters people from being so liberal with disconnecting. They were far more common than people unfortunate to be booted.
2 -
There 100% needs to be a penalty for deliberately disconnecting from a match - you are ruining the experience for 4 other people, and there should be a consequence for that.
I just wish the system was sophisticated enough to differentiate between a deliberate disconnect and an accidental disconnect. An accidental should NOT punish you at all, IMO - whereas a deliberate one I think should start at 20 minutes of being unable to queue for a match and double for each subsequent deliberate d/c within a 24h period.
0 -
Your wish is not possible with current technology. There is no way for the game to know that one DC is due to steam going down, or an ISP going down, or a storm, or someone pulling the plug, or pressing alt-F4, or whatever.
All the game sees is that someone quit, and punishes. It can't infer motive and emotions.
Also, this is insanely wrong to the point of being a deliberate lie. The punishment system works on a ratio of disconnects to completed games. if you're getting punished with 'hours long' bans, it's because you disconnect more than you complete games.
0 -
But still wouldn't it be wise to look in to it? See if there is something better out there?
Thanks for your 2 cents.
0 -
... so you want people to move to a different location, uprooting their entire lives and potentially crossing borders, in order to avoid getting kicked from trials due to poor server-side management?
1 -
Last year I had a week where this happened due to work being done on my street and I think I got up to a day-long ban at the end of it after disconnecting less than once per 24 hour period.
The Devs might have fixed it so that doesn't happen any more, but I wouldn't know because they never tell.
0 -
There's more then one internet provider in an area.
If not then it's still on them, and still I don't believe getting kicked from a match once a day is going to give you an hour ban unless their also quitting their match as well.
0 -
While I believe disconnecting is the DCers fault; there is not always more than one ISP in an area.
In my state (I live in the US), we have Comcast. That's it.
Many of the large ISPs have 'agreements' to avoid poaching in each other's areas. (IE: Comcast gets my state, while agreeing that AT&T gets California) This allows those ISPs to have no competition while technically avoiding a monopoly (monopolies are illegal), so they can lower quality while raising prices. Because they don't have to compete with anyone.
1 -
Okay, first of all, there are plenty of locations in which there is only one provider, and/or in which the best provider still sucks. In fact, I'd say that's the majority of locations.
Second of all, why are you focusing on someone's ISP when the scenario I opened up with is an individual with the best possible internet connection in the world? Do you even understand the concept of poor server-side management or distance-based connection issues? None of these have anything to do with someones ISP, stop bringing it up.
1 -
no they wont get a maximum on first time dc ban on less they dc a lot before
0 -
What are you talking about?
0 -
I don’t get what’s so hard to understand about this
1 -
No need to get all worked up.
Yes I do understand poor services
0 -
Then why do you keep bringing up ISP's?
1 -
Because where I live I have a few to choose from.
0 -
And have survivors disconnect every time they get outplayed? No thank you.
0 -
But ISP's have nothing to do with DbD servers. At all. In any way. It's the DbD servers that are the issue. Bringing up ISP's is like me complaining about a crappy sandwich and you saying I should have ordered a different drink to go with it.
0 -
Ok then
You keep defending the rage quitters
0 -
So you realised you goofed and now you're changing the subject completely?
0 -
Sure if that how you want to take it.
I was wrong the DC penalty shouldn't exist.
0 -
Yes, i know
Again, I see nothing wrong with any of those 😳
0 -
It would kill the game. Killers would DC when they are losing. Survivors would DC when they are losing.
People would leave reviews talking about no games ever finish because entitled people feel they can DC whenever they want.
That's what's wrong with those. The fact that you can't find problem with people DCing for petty reasons is kind of worrying.
0 -
Game survived 4+ years while that was happening, how would it kill it now?
0 -
Because people would never complete a game. Then people would review the game as 'Not worth it; games never complete'.
I played before the DC penalty. Unless I, as the Killer, was losing; I would never get a full match.
Find a Survivor too fast? DC.
Hit a Survivor too quickly? DC.
Hook a Survivor? DC.
Play 'toxic' Killers? DC.
A bad map? DC.
Perks Survivors don't like? DC.
If you can't see how this is bad for the health a multi-player PvP game; either you're part of the problem & want to DC for free again, or you're being deliberately obtuse.
No one with even the slightest idea of how game design works can think 'People are allowed to quit a match whenever they want' is a good idea for a multi-player PvP game. No one would want to play a game where they only play to completion if they are losing.
And if people would DC whenever they are losing, then only those who DO NOT do so, would see complete games. Because when they start winning, the other side would DC because they are losing.
0
