The Amanda's Letter add-on for The Pig has been Kill Switched due to an issue with incorrect RBT count.
http://dbd.game/killswitch
Suggestions to stop camping and tunneling
In Asia, the level of survivors is very high. due to killers do camping and tunneling. This is very sad. The first victim should not lose energy if hung in a row. Just keep resisting. The killer should be rewarded. Defeating a second non-first victim survivor. You get extra points in the hunting category and get closer to preventing rank drop. Do you agree with this?
Comments
-
Tunneling and camping are a necessary evil in the absence of a major gameplay overhaul.
4 -
Of course I agree.
It's just a suggestion to prevent a sad situation in which the first victim is eliminated straight, and for a healthy gaming atmosphere.
0 -
Completely understandable. In a world where BHVR put more work into game health than the cosmetic store, everyone would be able to play a full, satisfying match-- which is what i'd really hope they'd actually start trying to do sometime.
But as it stands, necessary evil. Sometimes you just have to take someone out to make pressure against an extremely strong team. Take someone out early to lessen the risk of losing the game early.
0 -
Sometimes even by killing 3 or 4 survivors, the killer suffers a rank down. Killers are bound to become more venomous, using camping and tunneling as necessary evils. If rewards are applied to the killers The in-game world will be less brutal and less boring. At least I think a lot of people will be happy. From the point of view of a killer user.
0 -
thank you so much, Your reply!
0 -
All I want in regards to this topic & situation is something to compensate Survivors who get face camped and die on their 1st hook. I don't care how "within the game's rules" it is. You lose items, offerings, add-ons, miss out on any Bloodpoints and most importantly...wasted valuable time
2 -
I understand and know very well how bad it feels to get tunneled or camped, however you can't introduce such or almost any changes to tunneling / camping because it would be very easy to abuse by the other side (not all people but many people could do so) punishing and making killer helpless. Besides, sometimes such strategy is indeed important if the killer wants to not lose.
Note: Devs tried in the past to adress some of this but it failed since the result of changes they tried failed because the other side could abuse it.
0 -
This exactly. It's frustrating to be facecamped and there are so many killer mains who defend camping on these forums and claim it as a valid tactic and not toxic at all when it ruins the entire match for the person being camped. Also if the rest of the team are smart it's not all that productive for the killer as they may get one kill while the rest of the team does gens and gets out.
1 -
You know what's so funny about the It's Necessary Argument™? When I want out of a game, killers almost NEVER hook me. If it's NECESSARY to tunnel someone out of the game, why not take the free kill? I've had more than one killer tell me they knew I wanted out, so that's why they wouldn't hook me.
It's not necessary. It's a choice killers make because they're not that good at the game, and they don't care if they ruin the game for someone else.
0 -
I don't think this is a terrible idea. At least with a bit of refinement.
Hooking survivors currently automatically knocks them down a hook state. Well what if that entire hook state was only progressed if the hook wasn't the same survivor in succession.
The hook progress would still carry on ticking, but if they were immediately rescued and then immediately rehooked, they would have only lost the natural hook progress, not an entire hook state in just a few seconds. It would solve hook farming too. Even if it only did this once per survivor per game, so two successive hooks would eliminate the hook state.
Alternatively make it a survivor perk: When unhooked, if you are rehooked within 30/35/40 seconds, you don't lose a hook state. Effect is removed for the rest of the trial once a hook state is lost.
There's bonuses for both sides. Survivor potentially gets an additional hook state if rescued/hooked fast enough, survivors who rescue them get an extra shot at rescue points, killer gets more hook points.
0 -
I doubt any decent killer said that face-camping on first hook is valid tactic. It is bad and that killer will probably lose the game and depip.
Camping is valid strategy and shouldn't be punished, but only in some situations. Camping is valid when:
-all gens are done.
-you have 3-gen in that area.
-there is 99% gen next to it (you can wait for it to regress more).
-there is strong hex next to it.
You just want to camp, when you benefit from it by defending multiple objectives, or it is your only objective remaining.
Tunneling is not that big problem. Just take protective hits and save that team-mate. Killers usually "tunnel" only because they didn't see anyone else and there is no reason why they should let him leave and waste time searching for someone else.
1 -
Nah, the problem with preventing a hook state if they're hooked twice in a row is that it rewards bad survivors. If you get unhooked and the killer comes back and you as the survivor don't run or hide in time, then why reward you with an extra hook state? I say this as said bad survivor who has been caught in this exact situation cus I didn't do a good enough job of running or hiding. Plus it could be abused by SWF teams, by having the person purposefully allow themselves to get caught to buy the rest of the team extra time.
0 -
Alternatively you could be farmed off the hook right in front of the killer.
30 seconds is less time than you get for DS, if you were rehooked within 30 seconds, chances are it wasn't a safe unhook, the killer was actually camping, or both.
0 -
So if it was an unsafe hook, then why would you punish the killer for the mistake of survivors? You know how many times I've hooked a survivor, taken ten steps away from the hook, get the ping for the unhook, and go back to catch the survivors healing right under the hook? I wasn't camping, I was going to go out and look for people. Are you saying that I should give the survivors a pass for making a bad play?
0 -
But the survivor that got unhooked shouldn't be punished either.
And you're not really getting punished as a killer for that. It's wasted about 10 seconds of your time immediately rehooking that survivor, and you've gained another hook score event, while keeping two survivors occupied. You simply haven't gained a hook state progression for the 2nd hook.
0 -
It is hurting the killer because you essentially give that one survivor an extra life, meaning I now have to hook that survivor for a 4th time to get them out of the game, making my already pain in the ass objective of scoring 12 hooks total, go up to 13. Keep in mind, each hook counts as 8% towards me reaching my goal. By making me have to hook someone 4 times, even if it's just one survivor, giving me 13 hooks to chase, then each hook counts as 7% for my objective, where as survivors don't get penalized for reaching their own objective. Which again, this could be abused by SWF teams as well, swapping out intentional unsafe hooks to buy extra time for an easy 4 escape.
The killer's job is to kill. Yeah it sucks for the one survivor who gets unhooked unsafely, but that's where awareness needs to kick in for the team before they go for the save. Punishing the killer for doing their job when the survivors make a mistake, is wrong.
0 -
So? plenty of perks give survivors 'extra lives'.
Adrenaline, Power Struggle, Decisive Strike, Unbreakable, Soulguard, No Mither, etc.
It would have a very narrow and limited use, and then it's gone for the rest of the game.
And so what if it means you now have to make 13 hooks instead of 12? It'll be the single easiest hook you'll ever have had to make, and it wouldn't have taken anything to earn it.
Survivors can get penalised for completing their objective too: Rancor, Bitter Murmur, freaking NOED, Pig's bear traps, etc.
All this perk would do, is IF, you immediately down someone after they were unhooked, IF that survivor is spending a perk slot on this skill specifically, then you don't reduce a survivors life gauge by one entire hook state. They would still lose gauge over time as usual.
They could just as easily have been using DS instead, in which case, the result would likely be the same, you missing out on an immediate hook and the survivor in question gaining a health state.
0
