Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Perma ban people who kill themselves on the hook when they are the first person to be hooked.
Title says it all, problem solved. Please try to fix your game, it's getting to the point now where you'll become a class example for how to not manage a game.
Comments
-
That’s never going to happen since the game can’t tell if someone is just playing badly by pulling themselves off the hook or is actually trying to kill themselves.
Personally I kind of think a better system would be survivors get three attempts to pull themselves off but they don’t reduce the timer on a failure, and then make the timer for first stage take between 60-90 seconds instead of just 60 (I’m not sure what number it should be exactly but longer than current and less than 2 minutes). That system has a few advantages:
- Suiciding on the first hook takes longer. You can’t simply skip over that first 60-90 second time frame. This gives the person time to cool off and hopefully get rescued and continued playing rather than just instantly giving up.
- It makes the Luck effects actually maybe be worth running since, with no harm done if you fail an attempt, increasing Luck is objectively a benefit rather than something which encourages really risky self unhooks.
- It disincentivizes face campers since they would potentially have to be at the hook for up to 90 seconds to secure second stage instead of just 60. With the first stage taking that long the better strategy becomes more clearly to be proactively going after the other survivors.
2 -
How do you know they were killing themselves and not going for the unhook yourself achievement.
1 -
This would be treating the symptom rather than the cause. Don't put a band-aid over an infected wound, sterilize it first. Why are people quitting early? Is it the 12th Blight/Nurse in a row? Introduce a killer ban system or no repeat killer system. Is it due to lag? Add an option for maximum latency in matchmaking. Did the killer immediately camp or tunnel off the instasave? Make it mechanically punished instead of rewarded.
A short term fix might be removing DC penalties if anyone else DCs first, or if the first survivor to be killed is killed before a single gen pops. However this may have unintended side effects, so I can understand it not being implemented.
1 -
There is no valid gameplay reason to DC other than cheaters or gamebreaking bugs (like being permanently stuck in a hill).
0 -
So now your teammates can get your permabanned by not unhooking you.
Bans for dying on hook are simply never going to happen. The only things the devs can do is make it impossible to let yourself die on hook, but there is a valid reason to do so in the end game to let your teammate have a shot at hatch.
1 -
Gameplay sure, human reasons, plenty.
1 -
I laugh imagining a situation of a surv trying a Slippery meat + Up the Ante + Salty lips offering build and getting perma-banned because he failed to unhook
1 -
??? Like what lmao.
The only valid excuses to DC are cheaters, game breaking bugs, and IRL reasons (eg need to do something/emergency/etc)
0 -
A fire, injuries, pets acting up, unexpected knock at the door. That is why I said human reasons. Which doesn't make sense why you are confused then list the exact reasons that were implied.
0 -
Why are you bringing up non-gameplay reasons in this context? They are literally irrelevant to the topic.
0 -
You qualified the statement which wasn't a full picture view. I tried to bring the full picture into the conversation and you are now being adversarial about it. It most certainly is relevant to the topic since gameplay reasons are not the only reasons to quit (or have a quit forced upon you in) a game.
0 -
Giving survivors free self-unhook attempts is just not a good idea. Every survivor would try to kobe every time once the killer got a reasonable distance away. If they get "lucky" and jump off the hook they just allowed the rest of the team to continue to sit on gens.
It would also significantly lower the stakes when you actually need a kobe. Those rare times when your entire team is down or hooked and your only chance is to kobe and you actually do and pull the game back from the brink... those are some of my best memories in DbD.
I'd rather see self-unhooking removed from the game than have it be buffed like that.
0 -
Assuming the devs want to keep self-unhooking in the game then I don't see anything wrong with the scenario you described, particularly since the killer is presumably already chasing some of the others off the gens. I also don't have a problem with "lowering the stakes" when it's the first hook. Honestly I'd rather see more players more active in the game as a whole and less downtime.
0 -
If the killer hooks all 4 survivors and all 4 survivors attempt to unhook themselves with 3 free attempts, there is a 38.7% chance that at least 1 survivor will unhook themself. Just one Jar of Lips raises that to 58.7%. Under ideal circumstances Up the Ante would raise that chance to 81.2%. These calculations are just for at least 1 so more than one survivor could be kobeing here as well. I didn't do the complex math to calculate those odds.
Do you see a problem with that?
0 -
No I don't because, on the off chance they ever put this change in, they probably would also if necessary rebalance the gen or hook timers to compensate. Right now the game is somewhat slightly killer slanted, not by a huge amount but probably about something like 56% or 57% kill rate versus 50%. So there's actually some room where, if one out of 3 matches someone gets off a hook slightly early, for the escape rates to improve a few percent without the game becoming too survivor sided in the process.
0 -
Worst idea ever just no. Someone might want to do achiement or some just are bad and think it helps. Also sometimes you can give hatch to last survivor doing it. Also it's intended game mechanic why should anyone get banned for that even short amount time and you're talking about perma ban which is just crazy. I know it sometimes frustating when teammates do this even when your team has good chance of winning.
1 -
I kinda liked the idea of this. But instead of just free unhooks, make the person that kobe perma broken until hooked again. Just to balance the things.
0 -
HELL NO, even if they could tell this is literally the solution we have for some of us to get out of matches we can't contribute to or won't have fun on at all. I ersonally on dredge games will make my presence known, get hooked and kill myself on these because my eyes are already bad. His nightfall power is more severe for me in that I can not see the ground I am standing on nor the wall I am next to in nightfall. this isn't scary, it isn't atmospheric, it's just stupid and if I DC I get penalized because of my disability. If you wanna ban me for it then you can piss right the hell off and the company would have a lawsuit that they would lose for this.
0 -
Honestly you really aren't making a good case for the devs to not do this.
0 -
Just nitpicking here, but no, you would not win that lawsuit even in your dreams. I’m basically any online service at all, the standard is the company can ban or delete your account for any reason they feel like. It’s just they don’t randomly ban people for no reason, because that would be bad for business/reputation. This has been legally upheld and tested before against multiple companies.
0 -
Why not, I cannot play effectively against this killer because of my visual impairment and the poor implementation of the killer's power. I should not have to ever see this killer because of this, they need to implement a way to not be put against killers if their powers cause accessibility issues that other killers don't. There is no good reason for me to go against this match and there is no good reason to stay in a match when this is the killer. I can't play this killer for the same reason.
0 -
Probably would have a case.At the very least it would be a PR nightmare. Banning people for not playing a part of the game they can't play based purely on something they could easily implement a way around.
0 -
That's fine but while we're pema banning people who are ruining the game can we also ban
Killers who bleed out survivors
Killers who lobby dodge SWF
Killers who face camp
Killers who give up against SWF
Killers who 1 hook matches
And everything else that ruins DBD. Then the game would be much better. Seriously some people will do out of their way to desperately justify ruining matches and then act shocked when people don't want engage with them. You want a serious fix to survivors giving up? Just ad a whitelist list to allow players to stop players form having to deal with players they don't want to. They will give up once and then never encounter them again.
0
