Do we need a reward for hooking every survivor within a certain time?
Ever since they implemented MMR I have realized a shift towards a certain playstyles.
I see a lot of killers play as if they're facing only 3 survivors. Not once hooking that one survivor not commiting to a chase with that survivor unless everybody else is dead.
This leads to boring games (aka gen simulator) if you're the one being invisible/ignored. I think it might be a good idea if there was a bp or shard reward for actually changing targets and hooking all 4 survivors after one another or within a certain time or gen progression.
Maybe that would be an incentive to change the playstyle, enhance fairness and fun and even get something out of it.
Comments
-
Not sure how you'd go about enforcing this without just straight-up revealing the 4th survivor old OoO style.
Also, is this that common? I sometimes do this as well, but that's simply because of who I encounter at gens.
0 -
I run bbq with a lot of killers and it's a common perk that I see in trials. And it's not like you get a penalty if you don't play like that you just don't get the reward ;)
I've had a lot of games. Not too sure if it's "that" common. I guess it's not for one person to decide if it is or not. But I feel it isn't that easy to spot cause it's not always "you" that gets ignored. Some people are probably happy not getting spotted or chased (maybe hit once and thenimmediately left) the whole match as it gives you nice escape points without an actual chase.
0 -
Sometimes you recognize that one person is going to take so much time to down that you'll lose with little to show for it. Then you save them for later. That person may want to try to force the issue to spread the chasing around. The trouble is unless they're playing with friends to help them they might not want to.
6 -
Some people play to win the game, a novel concept. If one guy is leagues beyond the others and quite hard to take down, of course I'll largely ignore him and save him until the last. By himself, he will fall. It's simply not smart to focus on the one great player of a team while the other 3 do gens.
No reward would change how I played, either. And a punishment would just see me playing a different game.
2 -
I know what you are refering to. It might sometimes be the case that you have a team with one survivor that is better at looping then the rest of the team, but that doesn't happen as frequently as it did before mmr was in place.
I'm not too sure if your comments are arguments against my suggestion... if they are could you explain why you are against rewarding fairplay (which, in some cases, will make it more difficult to win)?
For some games nothing would change, but for the other rounds players will get an additional reward for playing fair. I'd like a reward for my playstyle and to be frank I feel like fairplay deserves a reward. Therefore if people choose not to play like it at least they don't get the same as those trying harder to ensure fairness and everyones fun.
0 -
I've found there are one of two reasons why I can have 3 people hooked multiple times while the 4th person has remained untouched
A. They are really good at looping/chases. I have determined that after my first chase with them so I make a tactical decision to go after the weaker survivors and let the super good chaser do whatever. I won't straight up ignore them if I get a free/easy shot on them but I think they think I'm stupid as I will constantly start to chase them and watch them bolt to a Double L and then get confused why I stopped chasing them...
B. They are hiding/stealthy. This seems to be a lot more common that I've seen where the 4th person is just sneakier than the others (or the others are so obvious with where they're at that the 4th person just flies under the radar).
Neither situation I feel like I should be punished for as a killer.
3 -
Tired of not getting chased? just git bad lmao
2 -
" one survivor that is better at looping then the rest of the team, but that doesn't happen as frequently as it did before mmr was in place." - not from my experience. Happens just as often.
"if they are could you explain why you are against rewarding fairplay" - fairplay? By the unwritten rulebook? sighh. There is not enough time for "fairplay". Weak targets need to be determined quickly and eliminated ASAP if killed doesn't want to see a butt dance at the gates.
1 -
Nobody talked about punishing anything. You are making things up.
All I am talking about is that if I play Killer and try to get all 4 survivors on a hook before I hook someone for the 2nd time even if it makes my round a little more difficult I feel like an extra reward would be nice.
No one says you or anyone has to play fair, just that if someone does it would be rewarded.
0 -
So we'll have to disagree on that one. I've had less games like that and you say it's the same. Could both be true.
I see you have 0 clue what fairplay is. Just inform yourself (I guess you are able to google it ;), have fun learing something new)
Sometimes fairplay will lead to a lost. Anyone is free to decide to play for the reward or not. It would be an additional reward for doing so as it usually will make you go out of your way making your round a bit more difficult.
0 -
It's not just that. I also don't like unfair behaviour and feel bad if I see someone getting tunneled, slugged and camped and they have no chance to get points or do anything or have fun for that matter.
0 -
I call that outlier good player the designated harasser. If you start your trial and rin towards one of three farther off gens and one survivor comes running straight at you, chances are that looping killers for minutes on end is their favorite past time and you probably should ignore them. Bonus points if they clickety clicked and/or t-bagged you. They often have their whole suite of perks and load out designed around looping and harassing and there is little to gain by chasing them, but a lot by ignoring them.
Very often they will hover around you, ready to jump to a flashlight save or inhooking other survivors, so chances are that they totally neglect doing gens and sorta obsess about you. Kinda cute, eh?
So normally I will only engage with them when they expose themselves during an unhook/save, or later in the game when the game snowballs in my favor. But they are just as likely to be dancing on my grave, if I cave in and chase them, or the other survs are equally good at looping.
0 -
Problem is: You can't punish or fox tunneling/camping/slugging without overhauling the Gen times. because the moment you force Killers into a 12 hook game; they will leave. With current gen speeds + the plethora of 2nd chance perks; only the best have even half a chance at 12-hooking.
Even players like Otz sometimes see 4-man escapes. And that's when they don't HAVE to avoid tunneling, camping, or slugging.
The moment you take away a Killer's ability to say 'I want this guy dead' or 'I need to camp him out, because no one is on gens'. The moment the game says 'No, you have to let them go'; The Killer is no longer making his own choices on how to play. He's being forced to give up unhooks because the game made him.
And that's not a possible way to win, in 5 minute matches.
And considering the amount of Survivors who say 'Git Gud' whenever gen speeds are brought up...Gens will never be changed/nerfed.
Which means slugging, camping, and tunneling can't be changed, or you won't have any Killers left to play against.
0 -
It is kind of interesting for me to see these comments.
No one would loose anything just some would get a reward for playing differently. Nevertheless the answers here sound as if I was recommending something very awful or big. Everyone seems so deeply offended... by the mere suggestion of fairness being rewarded.
I am not sure what to think of that outcome.
0 -
You're problem is you think 'Fairness' is 'Killers handicap how they play', and feel you can force that idea on others though passive-aggressive comments.
It's a PvP game; Why should one side be 'fair' to the other?
Do you NOT kill someone in a Battle Royale because you found a better gun than them? Do you NOT kill the finale person on a point or payload in an FPS, because your team is up 40 points and it'd be more 'fair' to let them score at least once?
No. You play to win, because the end-state is win or lose. Sure, you can have fun if you lose. But no one can blame you for having more fun if you win, or blame you for trying to win. (Within the rules of the game. IE: No cheats or exploits.)
So stop with this 'Oh my! People are SO OFFENDED over fair play!' passive-aggressive tripe.
Also, hooking seperate Survivors IS rewarded; with more BP. A camping/tunneling/slugging Killer earns less BP. 😉
1 -
- Where did I say punish anything?
- My suggestion of rewarding fairplay has no obligation added. If one plays fair they get a reward, if not it's all the same. That player JUST doens't get this ADDITIONAL reward. So maybe you want to READ before you answer?
0 -
Why do you think it's unfair if the opponent tries to win?
1 -
- No. I don't think that "Fairness is Killers handicap how they play...". I believe that playing anyone playing a game should stick to fairplay, because we all have an innate sense of fairness.
- No I think all sides should be fair
- If I play a something like tlou multiplayer I still stick to fairplay ;) . If for example my team has all the interrogations and the other team has none or few I give them multiple chances to interrogate me or anyone they downed. Why not, we're all there to have fun and I won't loose anthing over that. In these situations I change to a type of gun that I'm not good with or change to handgun only. But it is still different cause it isn't an asymetical game. Makes it easier for 1 person to change the balance of power compared to being a survivor in dbd.
- I play to win if the balance of power is equal. I like to see what happens if it's 50-50 chance of winning or loosing. That is indeed easier to estimate in shooter games than in dbd.
- No thanks. It's up to me if I want to point it out if I see that people are talking as if they were offended by fairplay or fariness. Rising awareness or pointing something out is anyones right.
- Do you have data about hooking survivors seperately is rewarded higher than proxycamping and then tunneling?
0 -
I disn't say that it was unfair if someone tried to win.
Actions, decisions and behaviour can be unfair.
0 -
Whether you are withhold the carrot or using a stick to get killers to do what you want, it's still a punishment to me at a killer if I end up with a survivor as my opponent who has decided that they are never going to be spotted ever.
I always try to naturally spread out my hooks (to at times a big detriment to myself; unless a survivor goes out of their way like BT Body Blocking, I will let them go to go after the unhooker) but there are situations where I have no choice because I can't find anyone else to go after.
It sucks for the person getting spotted if they're the ones doing stuff so that means I run into them way more often or if they're just bad at hiding while everyone else is a damn ninja but I see no reason why I as a killer should be punished (and yes, withholding a prize due to something out of my control IS a punishment; I also think that's why you're so baffled at people's response because you feel like not giving killers something isn't a punishment while clearly others disagree with your definition).
0 -
- But fair play is different to different people. In regards to DBD, you're saying 'Fair play' is NOT camping, or tunneling. Which means 'Fair play' is 'Killers not trying as hard to win'.
- This is fair, but again; how? Should Survivors stop doing gens if they are doing them too fast? If Killers are expected to give 'Final hatch' instead of a 4K; should Survivors let one person be killed if they will ahve a 4-man escape?
- That's on you. But no one else should be expected to do that just because you want to do it.
- See #3
- No. You're trying to shame people though passive-aggressive comments.
- It's logic: If I camp someone on 1st hook until they die, then I'm not getting BP for 2 more hooks. I'm also missing out on any future chase points, hits, and possible pallet breaks by killing them in 1 hook. If I slug someone, then I'm not getting BP for ANY hooks (Or, only the hooks I already did, which means missing 1 or 2, max).
1 -
The time-limit incentivizes the Killer to do it quick, which reduces the amount of BP earned by all parties if there is a skill-gap.
Killer is already penalized for not Hooking/Killing Survivors from a lack of Sacrifice Bloodpoints and the "All dead" deviousness BP Event.
I can see a request for an "All-Hooked" BP Score event (probably in the Sacrifice category), but that would not have a time-limit for it.
0 -
Look, I know I need to play survivor more, but at this point, I am begging survivor mains to play Killer more.
We're already incentivized to spread our hooks out. Not only is it worth more XP, but it gives us better emblems. And there's perks that give you a stack the *first* time you hook a survivor (I run No Way Out, but I primarily play Trickster so far and I got the game on Epic Free Week) and nothing on subsequent hooks.
It's not like Killers have a UI element telling us where unhooked survivors are. If one person has gone unchased for most of the match, chances are we just *haven't found them*. If you get downed fresh off the hook whilst you were being healed, I wasn't aiming at you, specifically I was aiming roughly at the mass of targets. Sorry you got hit.
I've left survivors to "bleed out" on two occasions -- both times, I just couldn't find where they crawled to in order to put them on the hook. I don't get points for it, and I can't use your unhooking noise ping to tell me where survivors are. I just chase the target that I find.
0 -
I think giving killers more incentive to chase different survivors is healthy.
0 -
A question, why do you think 12 hook states need to be distributed evenly? Can you imagine if we proposed this idea for gens? No gen can be completed unless there is an equal distribution of progress across all gens! Tunneling 5 gens 0 -> 100% as fast as possible isn't fair!
0 -
We actually have a new perk that cjust does this, ie Grim Embrace. In its current state its somewhat lackluster, but it could be worked with.
The problem is that you absolutely have no payoff for hooking 1-3 survivors and then the effect for the 4th can come at a moment were it isn't that suitable. You have very little control about when it goes off, if it goes off at all etc. Maybe we could do something like a reverse "No Way Out" in that the gens get blocked for longer or shorter, depending how well you are doing. The fewer gens you have remaining when you hook the 4th survivor, the longer the remaining ones will be blocked.
0 -
I guess we'll have to agree that we disagree. I really can't understand why you are seeing a possible reward so negative.
0 -
- If you have read my first post at all, then you'd know that I am talking about the first 4 hooks being different survivors. It might not always be possible (depending on what someone is going for or how deeply they feel the need to get a 4K to feel satisfied), but it's not necessary for every person to tryhard every casual round. Some people have played for a long time and like some chill rounds with different goals. -If someone goes for a tryhard round because they feel like it, try a daily, trophy or achievement they can do so with no change at all.
- I haven't said that the killer is supposed to give anyone hatch. How do you come up with this and why do you feel it is appropriate to say that as IF it was my claim? It wasn't and you pretending I said that won't change it. If I have enough information (how experienced the killer player is and the other survivors are) I have stopped doing gens in a lot of my games. That is probably not possible for everyone at least from my experience (most of the survivors I get as teammates) aren't even able to prevent a 3 gen or have any idea about strats or map layout or even perks. But for those being able I'd like them to do so.
- He said NO one does that in that kind of game. That is my response to that person acting as if everyone was like that. No that isn't true. I and my longest known gamer friends are all playing like that. Right we cannot influcence others to be a certain way or play a certain way. Every person is free to decide what kind of person they want to be, how they want to think and how they want to act/behave.
- No one can stop them, BUT everyone has the right to judge how someone behaves and what kind of picture they paint of themselves in society. We/They might not like the judgement, but we all have to live with getting judged.
- You are FREE to judge me like that JUST as I am FREE to judge. If I see bad behaviour, if I hear something I feel is inappropriate I will state my opinion just as FREE as anyone. :) Feel free to judge my behaviour and my statements.
- You obviously didn't read or understand my comment. Proxycamping isn't facecamping. And Tunneling isn't facecamping. You had no valid point here. Maybe go back and read and understand instead of assuming whatever you want to think I stated.
0 -
Sounds interesting. It depends on what you might have in mind about that. Could you get into detail?
If it's just "starting a chase" that would be zero effort and that doesn't sound like something worthy rewarding as it happens by sight and is probably more difficult to not achieve then to achieve.
0 -
Not sure if this question is directed at me. If it is: When did I talk about 12 hook stages? Right I did not.
I might not have explained good enough. Probably there is a biased way of thinking involved as well.
And who is "we"?
I propsed that each survivor has to be hooked one after another in the beginning of the game (so everyone has been hooked once before someone gets hooked a second time) to get an extra reward. If one isn't able to achieve that in a round (it might not always be possible) nothing changes for them.
0 -
No everyone has access to that perk and it might help in game, but I'd like a different reward. That is why I propsed bp or shards that would be rewarded to anyone being able to get the 4 survivors hooked each before a survivor gets hooked a second time. The reward would be for the effort and the round being more difficult as one might have to go out of their way to accomplish. It'd add a possible different goal for those that aren't that much into tryharding but still like a competition.
0
