When is camping/tunneling ACTUALLY going to be addressed?
Comments
-
how do you expect us to know
0 -
Maybe they'll make some sort of ruling clarification regarding blocking people in a corner, explaining how it is not normal gameplay.
Maybe they'll do the same regarding cheating.
Perhaps a petition to the devs is in order for them to also emphasize during the portions of their video tutorials that discuss/explain hooking/phases/etc that being hooked IS NOT a part of 'gameplay' despite having the game running and being listed on the server as an active participant in the match.
I'm also down with investigating people that are not able to contribute to all of your listed categories as they are clearly not playing/being prevented from contributing!
Someone needs to tell these devs what gameplay is and how their game works!
1 -
not grounded in reality? i gave you an example of how being on the hook is not playing the game and in each part i used the same time as someone on a hook for each stage. well now i know not to reply to anything you have to say if your gonna try to bring some poor argument like that. i wish you the best of luck but i don't see a point in talking to you with poor arguments like that so have a good day and goodbye.
0 -
Feel free to tag a dev/mod and ask them directly if being on the hook is part of the gameplay loop/playing the game.
Get your answer straight from the top - You can do it!
2 -
The thing is a killer body blocking a survivor in the corner of the map is a reportable offense.
The killer preventing you from being unhooked is not.
You can't list unhooking as part of survivor gameplay and being on hooked is not intended gameplay, because in order for a survivor to unhook someone they have to be on the hook.
The idea that the killer's main way of killing survivors in a trial is somehow causes survivors to not be playing the game is just not true at all.
3 -
Bro/Sis...
" When one side enjoys it and the other does not, when one side only cares about winning and refuses to consider the bigger picture (balacing the experience for both sides, in this case), it's usually not called a videogame, but war."
I think we're in the trenches.
0 -
When one side enjoys it and the other does not, when one side only cares about winning and refuses to consider the bigger picture (balacing the experience for both sides, in this case), it's usually not called a videogame, but war.
Well i did a little experiment for roughly two years until last December and played intentionally fair for survivor and played for 8 even distributed hooks with intentional avoiding camping and tunneling even to my own detriment no matter the situation.
And oh boy are survivor out for war. Way more than 50% of all that time didn't anyone care about my fun and if i wasn't matched with lower skilled survivor, even getting to 8 hooks was a pipe dream.
Survivor aren't any better than killers but somehow hypocritically expect more from the other side.
3 -
If they throw the game just to do it, they're either salty or just bad at the game in general. Probably both.
If a situation arises (cuz game design...) where doing it is the best play, they should do it. In those situations as unfun as it might be for most survivors, they have to deal with it.
I think the problem is that some people have very questionable perceptions on when these situations actually take place.
I will also say though, that the people who do indeed throw just to make the match unfun for others (i say others and not just survivors because they too can throw to make the game unfun) deserve the -reps they get.
0 -
You are still purposedly failing to see the point, aren't you? Being hooked is a part of the game indeed. Being CAMPED and FORCED TO DIE on the FIRST hook is not. Jeez, I really don't know how much simpler I could make this for you to understand. But then again, if you fail to do so on purpose, not much that can be done. Some people never listen, after all. If that's how you are, fine, but spare yourself and me the hassle, and end our one-sided conversation here.
0 -
Never said survs are better, I have always been against campers, tunnelers and SWFs players. If you take those things out of the game's equation, most of the community wouldn't be able to stand a chance against bots, let alone players. The thing is, it becomes a vicious circle. If someone plays like a di*k because somebody else did, it never ends (or better, if someone plays like a di*k against players that haven't behaved as di*ks). How do they say it "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"? I appreciate people like you. Hell, if they played fair and struggled, I'd even give myself to be hooked. There is so much the devs could do to fix many things in this game, but they refuse. Had I been a dev, I'm not saying those things would have 100% fixed the game, but at the very least we would have known what could have been and what would've changed.
0 -
just ignore him man he doesn't want to actually discuss with people he just wants to constantly say your wrong. he's literally not worth the effort.
2 -
Define skillfully? Is it playing musical hooks? Is it letting survivors survive so they can play musical generators? Putting a limit on someone and then telling them they have no skill is ridiculous. Periodt.
2 -
Dying on first hook is a part of the game. If the devs didn't want survivors to be able to die on 1st hook they could simply remove the ability to transition between hook states and force needing to be hooked multiple times.
1 -
Well, so a full premade SWF with BnPs on everyone and all of them running meta perks with second chances for the entire party is still allowed, I don't see why so many killers dislike it then. Really, is there anyone who uses some reasoning here, or am I destined to yield less success chances than those I would have if I tried teaching maths to a wall?
Give me a second, I'll try to phrase it in a way that is easily understandable:
If something is part of the game it doesn't automatically mean that there is nothing wrong with it.
There, should be everything-proof now.
I could develop a game and put in it a weapon that automatically wins you the game if you pick it up, or something that makes you deal quadruple damage for 5 minutes and makes you invulnerable to damage for the same time, combined with the damage. I put it into the game, so it is part of it. Doesn't make it any more justifiable, nor does it mean that it isn't a flawed "mechanic", or something that should have never seen the light of the day.
I mean, up to this point you people should already know how few of BHVR's devs play their own game, and how even less of them get to the "important" ranks, to truly understand the game fully. But if they put something into the game, it's gonna be flawless cause it's there, is it? It's a rethorical question, there is no need for you to reply to it. Unless you are gonna put some sense into said reply, of course. But I doubt it. You are probably gonna tell me that something like "a killer killing 4 people 2 minutes after the game has started, without moving from where he spawns, is totally ok, cause dying is part of the game".
1 -
No one is saying you can't dislike being camped on the hook.
Just that you aren't being prevented from playing the game when it's happening to you.
2 -
It appears that you and me have a very different idea about what playing a game is. If you enjoy staring at the screen and consider that playing, suit yourself. I don't, nor do those who have some common sense. What you are saying, in this regard, is that even a loading screen is playing the game, then.
And remember that I am not just talking about dying on the first hook, but of being camped to death, on that first hook. Those are two very different things.
P.S: I used the term "dislike" as an euphemism of what killers actually do and say about BnPs and so on. They don't limit themselves (or should I say yourselves) to "disliking" it. I don't see why it shouldn't be the same for survivors. Except that, as always, the killer is never being actually prevented from doing anything. And only the killer.
0 -
Genuine tunneling and face-camping is not as ubiquitous as some might lead you to believe. However, when it happens, it can really negatively affect how fun a match is. And no, it's not the Killer's responsibility to make sure the Survivors have a fun time. It's the Devs' responsibility.
From big to small: Solo Q needs more information so that coordination (necessary for saves against campers) is available.
There could be baseline incentives to leave the area of a hook, like Devour, new Monstrous, and MYC have on a perk level. Or conversely, buff Survivors in some way if the Killer stays within say 8m of a hook.
Personally, I find the extra 2 seconds from DS could make a difference, depending how you can position yourself close to a strong loop. I've seen an idea where Killer powers are deactivated and have to recharge after DS, which would help vs. Nurse and Blight but not affect M1 Killers. "Just be good enough that tunneling ends up hurting the Killer more than it benefits them from removing 1/4 of the Survivors from the match." IMO you could go on a 100 second chase and your team gets 3 gens done and it could be argued that it's worth the tunnel for a Killer. But at least you got to play for another 100 seconds, assuming you can loop well enough. Was it really skillful play if you didn't win? But in my experience I find that the tunneled survivor doesn't last that long, and a teammate is floating around trying to take a hit or pull aggro because until you confirm hard tunneling that's the right play.
But in the best case scenario, where a Killer only gets 1 kill, 1 survivor likely has a rather unpleasant experience. And that's not the Killer's responsibility to address. But maybe the Devs could at least make that playstyle (because no matter what, some campers will always camp / tunnel) less rewarding / harder to do.
Reassurance is a band-aid, and depending on the map and Killer can be less effective, but at least it's something.
0
