When will camping be unfair?

@Orion Of course, the minute I say, "I never get messaged" - I immediately get salty survivors calling me terrible and camping. I got 4k on a SWF group and they only managed 1 generator. A.) I had BBQ Chill so I would never camp, B.) If I was camping, they should have gotten at least 3 generators.

@Orion said:

@The_Crusader said:
It has EVERYTHING to do with it.

If the killer wants to catch the survivor, they will cstch them. It's only a matter of time - outside of maybe a rank 1 survivor going against a rank 15 killer.

So the game gived you the advantage to catch them, then you sit there and say "right pal, the game is over for you. You can sit there for 2 minutes until you're dead".

If they got spotted early enough then chances are they didn't even get to do anything in the game beyond touched a gen for 10 seconds.

That person is willing to play the game with you. They're allowing you to take the power role over them and in return you're turning around and screwing them over. They get no points and depip because you wouldn't give them a chance.

No it's not fair. Always seems to be the same people defending it too.

If you don't have anything to say that is relevant to this thread, you can start your own. This thread is about whether or not camping is fair. The difficulty in catching a Survivor has nothing to do with it.

You are literally using the fact that a once hooked survivor has failed a chase as an argument. Of course it has something to do with it. But really it doesn't matter, because if we are honest you didn't make this thread to have a discussion. You are hear to maka a statement that camping is ok by giving biased reasons.

The thing is fairness is a subjective feeling and in the core of DbD, the killer IS the power role and understood as such. Yes I know the map design is designed against the killer, but there is good reason why killer's complain when game mechanics don't make them feel like beeing that power role.
But going back to this. The core mechanic of the game is, that a survivor has two hook phases, with two possible rescues in mind. Basicly two chances. This is the core idea of the game. If a killer decides to camp, then they decide to take away that chance, by standing around you.
And that is the reason why people say it's unfair. Because it feels that way. It feels cheap and annoying for the person perceiving it. It's the equivalent of a football/soccer game, when one team after scoring their first goal, stop any offensive attemps and fall back on a simple defensive strategy. It's reliable, allowed but like I said. It makes the game boring. And why are we playing DbD again? To be frustrated or to be entertained?

And to be quite honest. The way hooks work in this game is kinda the thing that hurts killer the most. Camping and Tunneling are annyoing but very effecient strategies. And the Devs always have to keep them in mind while designing something. Not that they dislike it beeing used, but they don't want it to be the only working strategy in the game. They even said that about the sabotage changes, that they want more Sabo-squads, but don't want only sabo squads in the game. It should happen from here and there. And that's it.
And that's probably why they did something like the healing changes, from which a killer mostly benefits the game, if they spread the pain.

Orion said:

@alivebydeadight said:

@Orion said:

@alivebydeadight said:

@Orion said:

@alivebydeadight said:

@Orion said:

@Blueberry said:
I don't know if I'd assume a DS in that algorithm. That said, I do agree with you. I'd say most people just don't find it as fun, not really as unfair.

DS is endemic in DbD.

insidious on freddy is an op perk for him, please make freddy 0 movement speed

If you don't have anything to say that is relevant to this thread, you can start your own.

geez, just a joke, dont got to be pissy about it, ds isnt even that annoying

If you don't have anything to say that is relevant to this thread, you can start your own.

ugh, A. insidious is a camping perk that is [BAD WORD] annoying, B.literally mention that ds isnt that annoying

If you don't have anything to say that is relevant to this thread, you can start your own.

::tries not to bash face into wall::

Why not put "force fields" around survivors to prevent killers from stopping unhooks?

But what about ttttuuuunnneling?

Make the survivor invincible for 30 seconds after an unhook Or better yet, make the survivor go invisible!! Yeah! Invisible! for 30 seconds!!! If the killer still manages to hit them then they get stunned for 30 seconds! That would fix tunneling AND camping! AYYYYYAYAYAYAYAYAYAAYAYAYyyyyyy!

[Disclaimer: this post is sarcasm and a joke. ]

@Orion said:
Camping is a hot-button issue for many Survivor mains, who often say it's "unfair". Well, I say it is fair, for now, but I'd like to discuss when it might become unfair.

First, let's analyze camping, from the Killer and Survivor's respective perspectives.
The Killer had to:

• Find a Survivor (won at stealth)
• Hit a Survivor
• Hit a Survivor again (won the chase)
• Pick up the Survivor
• Get hit with Decisive Strike
• Find the Survivor again (won at stealth again)
• Hit the Survivor again (won the chase again)
• Carry the Survivor to the hook while preventing flashlight rescues and bodyblocking (won at whatever you want to call this)

Now from the Survivor's perspective, the Survivor had to:

• Be found by the Killer (lost at stealth)
• Get hit by the Killer
• Get hit by the Killer again (lost the chase)
• Hit a skill check
• Be found again (lost at stealth again)
• Get hit again (lost the chase again)

Under these generic circumstances, the Killer did everything right. They found and hooked a Survivor. They succeeded every step of the way and should be rewarded for it. The Survivor's only success was hitting an easy skill check and they got their second chance for it. Camping is fair.

When would camping be unfair? Well, when the Killer did absolutely nothing right, the Survivor did absolutely nothing wrong, and yet the Survivor ends up on the hook anyway by the will of the Entity. Under this hypothetical and unfair scenario, the Survivor would be punished for doing everything right, as opposed to the current, normal scenario, where they're punished for doing everything wrong.

Playing survivor is the only unfair thing lol.

Weederick said:

If camping is fair, then genrush is fair.
I'd rather have none of those ez cheese strats be the strongest tools available. Playing a close, fun game is what dbd should become. Not "Camping is legit, just rush gens next time. Facecamp is counterable" yada yada its boring

@Weederick said:

@Orion said:

@Weederick said:
If camping is fair, then genrush is fair.
I'd rather have none of those ez cheese strats be the strongest tools available. Playing a close, fun game is what dbd should become. Not "Camping is legit, just rush gens next time. Facecamp is counterable" yada yada its boring

Read the thread to know why camping is fair and make your own thread if you wish to discuss something else.

I read your stupid arguments and its a very biased opinion. even if you do everything wrong as killer, you get bloodlust and down them. As if its hard and skillfull to down survivors nowadays.

Maybe another Bloodlust nerf will turn that frown upside down

Holy necro.