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!
De-Pip Squad lose tournament
Comments
-
@Karon said:
Holy ######### it's insane how many people in here love to suck russian dickSo we should hate all russians because of a few cheaters..? I don't particularly like or dislike them but i'm not going to defend someone just because they ######### up and give them the benefit of the doubt. Wake up sheep
1 -
@only1biggs said:
@Abyssionknight said:
@only1biggs said:
The rules could have been clearer, sure. But we wouldn't be talking about the rules or the hatch or what constitutes a "stand off" if Marth hadn't messed up.This is where we disagree.
If Marth had lunged for the survivor, or blink lunged, and he had somehow missed, that survivor could have made it to the hatch and jumped in, or at least been on top of the hatch first the instant it opened, automatically giving them the win.
The smart play on Marth's part was to stay on the hatch. There's a 100% win chance for Marth if he gets into a stand off, and 0% chance for the survivor. Every other scenario you can imagine at that moment had at least a small chance of Marth missing his swing, and the survivor getting into the hatch. So the optimal play was to enter into a hatch stand off.
So if you knew the hatch had to be opened to count as a stand off, then Marth clearly made a mistake. If you didn't know the hatch had to be opened, and just used the normal hatch stand off definition, then Marth made the right play, and had already won when he hit that survivor. That's where the issue lies.
I personally think Marth should have waited until the hatch opened to hit the survivor, just so there would be no dispute of whether or not he won. Personally I think Marth tried to hit the survivor the instant the hatch opened, and was a half second early. The rule was so poorly written that if they were both on the hatch, it opened, and the survivor jumped in without Marth hitting them, there was no clear definition of whether that would be a stand off and Marth's win, the survivors. Hell, you could even argue that the hatch rule was vague enough that, even in the downed state, the rule as written would have counted Marth as the winner, since they were both at the open hatch, and Marth was there first (even though under no real circumstances would a downed survivor reaching hatch ever count as a stand off).
So while I think it's valid to honour the intent of the rule and give the survivor the win in that match, I also think it's fair to simultaneously view the rule itself as total garbage that ultimately cost Marth the win. If most of the tournament participants, and most of the viewers, misunderstood your rule, then you wrote a bad rule.
You can disagree as much a you want, that means you are irrational and delusional.
He wouldn't have missed and allowed him to jump in. Stop making excuses. Stop making up things that didn't happen or could have happened. Marth lost and he lost because he made a mistake. Any killer knows he had time to put him down and pick up BEFORE the hatch opened. This is a fact. It's indisputable. Everyone can see it.
Marth's decision in this case was of course influenced by him not understanding, or the organizers not being clear with the rules etc etc..but Marth messed up. He could have won it and didn't. Then they carried on and lost again.
I'm so done with this now, when it's just so clear as to what happened. To argue otherwise is to deny reality.
Multiple people (including me) have already said this multiple times, they're all delusional marth fanboys who think he can do no wrong.
6 -
I dig marth, he's hella good and even better person but if i had to choose between him and DICE for a tournament i'd take DICE. He actually plays the most efficient way to win every day so he knows what it takes to kill as much survivors as possible and yeah that happens to involve camping, tunneling and so on.
0 -
Marth's decision in this case was of course influenced by him not understanding, or the organizers not being clear with the rules etc etc..but Marth messed up.
the lack of understanding came
from previous rounds where the same situation lead to a win because killer was on the hatch before it opened, another round the killer assumed he’d won because he found the hatch first but survivor jumped in after a chase and they gave the point to the survivor because the killer wasn’t on the hatch as the survivor jumped in.
Of the rule was clear than there would be no grounds for confusion.3 -
@only1biggs said:
You can disagree as much a you want, that means you are irrational and delusional.He wouldn't have missed and allowed him to jump in. Stop making excuses. Stop making up things that didn't happen or could have happened.
I like that you're telling me not to make up things that could happen, while you yourself are making things up. I said there was a chance he could miss, while you're saying he absolutely wouldn't miss. Of the two of us, you're the one making ######### up and claiming it as factual.
Also I don't know why you think I care about Marth. As I said in my last message, it's fair to give Marth the L based on the rules as intended, but also valid to simultaneously think the rule is garbage and resulted in a ruling that cost Marth the match.
Not sure why you're so angry about people disagreeing with you that you have to throw ad hominems. It's a video game bro, just relax.
0 -
The main issue here is the rules. They are vague, poorly defined and confusing for not only the players but also the hosts who are not experienced with DBD. The rules were made by BHVR, probably in 20 minutes without thinking much about it. Both the survivor and the killer thought they were in a standoff situation. the killer would for sure not have hit the survivor if he thought they hadn't already won and the survivor would have never stood on the hatch next to the killer had he not thought he was in a hatch standoff. Both players reflect exactly the situation of a standoff, regardless of the hatch being open or closed at that time.
Was it a mistake for Marth to swing? Yes. That was a poor lack of judgment. Does it mean he lost? Only BHVR know the answer to this as they made the rules.
BHVR need to review this event and clarify their own rules, then keelhaul the person who made them so they think harder the next time they make rules for a $15,000 multinational, multiplatform tournament.
1 -
tbh EU has way better players than this team but either way, they deserved the win at the end aside from all the lag talks which is not really their fault they play with NA players.
0 -
@Paddy4583 said:
Marth's decision in this case was of course influenced by him not understanding, or the organizers not being clear with the rules etc etc..but Marth messed up.That’s the point....
the lack of understanding came
from previous rounds where the same situation lead to a win because killer was on the hatch before it opened, another round the killer assumed he’d won because he found the hatch first but survivor jumped in after a chase and they gave the point to the survivor because the killer wasn’t on the hatch as the survivor jumped in.Of the rule was clear than there would be no grounds for confusion.
And if Marth hadn't have messed up and just killed the guy, this w> @Abyssionknight said:
@only1biggs said:
You can disagree as much a you want, that means you are irrational and delusional.He wouldn't have missed and allowed him to jump in. Stop making excuses. Stop making up things that didn't happen or could have happened.
I like that you're telling me not to make up things that could happen, while you yourself are making things up. I said there was a chance he could miss, while you're saying he absolutely wouldn't miss. Of the two of us, you're the one making ######### up and claiming it as factual.
Also I don't know why you think I care about Marth. As I said in my last message, it's fair to give Marth the L based on the rules as intended, but also valid to simultaneously think the rule is garbage and resulted in a ruling that cost Marth the match.
Not sure why you're so angry about people disagreeing with you that you have to throw ad hominems. It's a video game bro, just relax.
LOL
I couldn't be further from angry... "bro"
0 -
@RemoveSWF said:
After two draws, the De-Pip Squad lost 7-9 to Russian team Tournament Monsters.Cue excuses, rage and crying from Marth fanboys.
I congratulate and welcome our new Russian overlords.
This "tournament" was a shitshow, and you know that.
3 -
The rules were written vaguely and changed after the match already ended. They were not even clarified, they were straight up altered. That is unethical and a completely illegitimate point to change the rules.
All you people saying "but eh the hatch wasn't open" there is NO PART OF THE RULE saying it needed to be open.
The fact is that the Claudette was not contesting the hatch. She was trying to hide. Marth was on the hatch and then spotted the Claudette. He was there first, and then she ran to the hatch, contesting it afterward.
Marth lost because after an 11 hour tournament he made 1 mistake based on a vague interpretation of the obscurely written rules, and his mistake was clicking a button in the 1.5 second time frame in which the casters could possibly, by any stretch of their imagination, consider it "wrong".
If he clicked earlier? Indisputable win. If he just waited a bit longer? Indisputable win.
But sure if you want to side with Space Esports and their blatantly unethical change to the rules post-match, knock yourself out. Continue rolling with the argument that "but it wasn't open yet!" even though that does not apply. If it is not in the rules then it is not a rule. And consider if the rules were written clearly. What would have happened? Marth would have waited a few seconds longer and there would have been no argument.
Hopefully there are no more tournaments for this game. Blatant cheaters not getting removed, allowing players with multiple permabans to play, casters who know nothing about the game, terrible wait times, unethical rule changes, biased decision making, stolen artwork for the tournament cover, no region lock, and failure on multiple instances to follow their own rules... Yeah, this tournament has set a good standard. A pretty good job so far.
But anyway ggs. Welcome to the team that should not have made it to the finals anyway. Remember the rule about there being a 10 minute time limit to get into your match?
Well it took well over 10 minutes for this team to resolve the issue in the semifinals after a possible lagswitch and get back to their match. They should have been DQ'd on the basis of this rule. "On the dot, no exceptions" my ass.
13 -
@Spudbar said:
The rules were written vaguely and changed after the match already ended. They were not even clarified, they were straight up altered. That is unethical and a completely illegitimate point to change the rules.As a former game tournament organizer, there is nothing wrong with this. In fact, I would ALWAYS put a stipulation in my ruleset that reads exactly "All rules are subject to change at the discretion of tournament officials." Because sometimes ######### happens that brings the rules into question and you, as the TO, have to make a call. Just like any ref at any sporting event ever, you do your best to stick to the rules but when there is no rule you kinda just have to make a choice that you think is fair.
Case and point, I was running a Gears 2 event one time (and if you know anything about Gears 2 you know it is NOTORIOUS for extreme camping and stalemates on some maps). I had a list of the acceptable maps, 7 of the 10 shipped ones, and would only designate the first map of the match using a randomizer. After the first match, the losing team could choose the map (or choose to be host and let the other team choose the map, but most teams chose the map). Problem was this was the peak of the stalemate meta, and Stasis was one of the absolute worst offenders. Literally you would have more than hour long matches ON THIS ONE MAP because of all the stalemates. Now as a TO one thing you need to consider is time management. You only have the venue for so much time, therefore you want to run things as fast as possible and find ways to keep brackets short and to the point with a clear victor. So halfway through the event I straight up just banned Stasis, on the grounds that if people keep picking it the tournament will never end in time. I got a lot of heat, mainly from the teams abusing it the most, and I told them straight up that playing like this is cancer and I'm not going to put up with it anymore. I don't care if it's the only way you can win, mainly because it's complete cheese in most cases AND you guys don't even end up winning the set, just that one map and only barely. Then it goes to a normal map like Pavilion and they get completely bodied. I'm not going to sit there and let you waste me time with your scrubbiness, sorry.
2 -
thesuicidefox said:
@Spudbar said:
The rules were written vaguely and changed after the match already ended. They were not even clarified, they were straight up altered. That is unethical and a completely illegitimate point to change the rules.As a former game tournament organizer, there is nothing wrong with this. In fact, I would ALWAYS put a stipulation in my ruleset that reads exactly "All rules are subject to change at the discretion of tournament officials." Because sometimes ######### happens that brings the rules into question and you, as the TO, have to make a call. Just like any ref at any sporting event ever, you do your best to stick to the rules but when there is no rule you kinda just have to make a choice that you think is fair
1 -
@Spudbar said:
Marth lost because after an 11 hour tournament he made 1 mistakeI like Marth, but he blew it. He had time to down the survivor and pick her up.
Nobody disputes that the tournament and the organizers were/are a joke.
4 -
@Paddy4583 said:
But when you make that judgment you don’t than change it again in the next round! Because then it’s not fair it’s biased, there is no point in rules if they can be changed at the whim of a host.No that happens too. Sometimes there is no precedent for a rule, and then something happens you have to make a call based on what is FAIR IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, but now that you are away of such a circumstance you can make a rule to affect everything after differently.
"Oh wait what do we do about this hatch situation?"
"Well the rules say this but it's not that clear, and this guy did this and this while that guy did that and that."
"Okay, well in my professional judgment it seems like this guy was in the right, but only because of a loophole. So let's give this guy the win (suck for that guy), but from now on if it happens again the that guy will be the winner because we don't want people doing what this guy did."I wish I could give you a concrete example from my experience, but alas I cannot remember any particular incident. However I can tell you that sometimes you let something slide because there was nothing to say you CAN NOT do that, but then immediately after you make a rule that states you cannot do that.
0 -
The "fair and square" factor is very discutable.
Community managers are looking into the matches because some factors were very weird and possibly not respected.==>>> It's being looked at right now, it's confirmed on discord by Not_Queen
0 -
@Runiver said:
The "fair and square" factor is very discutable.
Community managers are looking into the matches because some factors were very weird and possibly not respected.==>>> It's being looked at right now, it's confirmed on discord by Not_Queen
If I may ask, Runiver, which discord group are you speaking about?
You always seem to be up to date with the latest news from the developers, and I would love to know where you hear it.
0 -
thesuicidefox said:
@Paddy4583 said:
But when you make that judgment you don’t than change it again in the next round! Because then it’s not fair it’s biased, there is no point in rules if they can be changed at the whim of a host.No that happens too. Sometimes there is no precedent for a rule, and then something happens you have to make a call based on what is FAIR IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, but now that you are away of such a circumstance you can make a rule to affect everything after that.
Oh god this forum is horrible to use on mobile
0 -
@TheOwl said:
@Runiver said:
The "fair and square" factor is very discutable.
Community managers are looking into the matches because some factors were very weird and possibly not respected.==>>> It's being looked at right now, it's confirmed on discord by Not_Queen
If I may ask, Runiver, which discord group are you speaking about?
You always seem to be up to date with the latest news from the developers, and I would love to know where you hear it.
Dbd alliance.
We got 4 BHVR members on it.
I can send you an invite link in private if you want to.0 -
The definition of rule is:
one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of activity.
the definition of explicit is:
stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.
of they don’t meet these
standards then they are not rules.10. HATCH STAND OFF; Who ever finds the hatch first at the beginning of the hatch stand off, gets the point.
This was changed to be:
who ever is on it first. Then later...
Both have to be at the hatch for it to be a stand off.
then last match...
has to be open to be a stand off.
that 3 different judgments for the same situation, this is nothing like what your referring too
1 -
@thesuicidefox said:
@Spudbar said:
The rules were written vaguely and changed after the match already ended. They were not even clarified, they were straight up altered. That is unethical and a completely illegitimate point to change the rules.As a former game tournament organizer, there is nothing wrong with this.
Sorry but if in your tournaments, you decide to write down a rule, have a team follow it exactly as it is written, then change it after the match has already ended to alter the way the match would be determined - you run a bad tournament. The example you gave is much different from this however. If I were to compare this to the rules of this tournament, it'd be like altering the Overtime rules to force a quicker result rather than leaving the potential for the matches to last forever.
If they wanted to change the rule after the match, okay. But the rule was followed exactly how it was written. Then they changed the rule to alter the outcome of the match once it was already done. They added additional criteria that was previously absent, which completely changed the rule, for no reason.
There is changing a rule for a legitimate reason, that does not put either team at a disadvantage or slight them in any way. Then there is what happened here. What you described does not come anywhere close to what happened here. When you put down a rule, it is there for everyone to follow, including yourself. There is no such thing as giving yourself the power to change any rule in any way you want and getting away with it.
@only1biggs said:
@Spudbar said:
Marth lost because after an 11 hour tournament he made 1 mistakeI like Marth, but he blew it. He had time to down the survivor and pick her up.
Nobody disputes that the tournament and the organizers were/are a joke.
I should have put "mistake" in quotes, my bad. Marth did not make a real mistake here. He follow the rules as they were written. The only reason it became a "mistake" is because they changed the rule after the match already ended. They found a way to force the rematch and they went with it.
The play he made was legit and later became a "mistake" because they decided to go with a particular interpretation of the rules that required them to add new conditions. If these conditions were already part of the rules, Marth would have followed them. He would have attacked earlier if he needed to, and like you said, he would have won. Otherwise, he would have waited longer for the hatch to open to confirm him as the winner of the standoff.
To say that Marth made a mistake is simply wrong. It can only be considered a mistake if you legitimize the unethical, spontaneous edits made to the rules by Space Esports.
3 -
@Spudbar said:
There is changing a rule for a legitimate reason, that does not put either team at a disadvantage or slight them in any way.Not true. Any decision you make is going to positively affect one side and negatively affect the other. I've been in the middle of those situations before and I have to chose which side to take. I've even voted AGAINST the guys I was friends with and stuff because it was the better choice (and after I explain it to them they usually understand why I made that choice, and they know that next time I will have a rule in place to what happened to them doesn't happen to someone else in the future). There never is a middle ground, because middle ground is basically play the match over. That's honestly not a reasonable thing to do, unless it's absolutely necessary due to technical issues or something. You want to avoid having people play over if you can, because what could end up happening is the OTHER team wins now the team that originally won will cry foul.
There is often no fair solution in this situations, only the least unfair solutions. No matter what you look like the bad guy when you were just trying to make the best choice you could.
Let's just say that they decided to side with Marth and gave him the win. Don't you think the other team would be up in arms about the result too? For TO's, these are catch 22 situations. That's why you have that rule that rules can change whenever you want so you aren't locked into completely ######### someone over because you didn't have a way to deal with a situation.
1 -
@Spudbar said:
I should have put "mistake" in quotes, my bad. Marth did not make a real mistake here. He follow the rules as they were written. The only reason it became a "mistake" is because they changed the rule after the match already ended. They found a way to force the rematch and they went with it.
The play he made was legit and later became a "mistake" because they decided to go with a particular interpretation of the rules that required them to add new conditions. If these conditions were already part of the rules, Marth would have followed them. He would have attacked earlier if he needed to, and like you said, he would have won. Otherwise, he would have waited longer for the hatch to open to confirm him as the winner of the standoff.
To say that Marth made a mistake is simply wrong. It can only be considered a mistake if you legitimize the unethical, spontaneous edits made to the rules by Space Esports.
Oh my god, you guys. Just stop. If he had just played "until the whistle" we'd all be saying congratulations. He had time to hit her and pick her up and kill her.
3 -
@only1biggs said:
Oh my god, you guys. Just stop. If he had just played "until the whistle" we'd all be saying congratulations. He had time to hit her and pick her up and kill her.
Hindsight is 20/20. I can say 10,000 things about the plays made in these games looking back on the matches and say "You should have done this". Anyone can, and none of that matters.
What you are presenting is a hypothetical scenario that has no bearing on whether or not the play he DID make was legitimate. I just explained how the play was legitimate outside of the rules being changed. I don't think I have to explain again why the rules being changed is illegitimate and unethical.
If all you can say in response is how he COULD have made another play, sorry, but that is not an argument. They could have also made the rules clearer in the first place. And if under those rules he knew he had to do what you are saying he could have done, he would have done it. But he did what he had to for the current set of rules.
@thesuicidefox said:
Let's just say that they decided to side with Marth and gave him the win. Don't you think the other team would be up in arms about the result too? For TO's, these are catch 22 situations. That's why you have that rule that rules can change whenever you want so you aren't locked into completely [BAD WORD] someone over because you didn't have a way to deal with a situation.
It is a team's right to feel slighted even if they are wrong. However it is up to the casters and organizers to review the facts from an unbiased standpoint and come to the most logical, reasonable, and fair conclusion. That did not happen.
Now clearly I am not unbiased in this discussion. But all I am presenting right now are facts and arguments based on those facts. Space has been invited to speak with us over voice to discuss these issues and while they seemed willing at first, they later declined. Not them or anyone else has come up with real, concrete arguments in favor of this ruling. Just the usual "but there is part of the rule that did not exist!" etc.
What does that tell you about the call that was made? If they believe it was the right call then why is it that they are investigating it with BHVR? Why do they not just speak with us and explain it? Why do people struggle so much to try and justify this call? Why is there so much evidence that this decision was made in poor judgement?
Again, if you create rules and people follow them, and they win under the conditions you have set, you do not get to double back and start amending rules to change the final result. Especially not after the match has already ended. If you are doing this, then sorry, but that's the practice of a bad host.
5 -
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn.
That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it.
2 -
only1biggs said:
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn.
That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it.
It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########6 -
@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn.
That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it.
Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao
It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
So people are confused as to what a hatch standoff is? What don't I get?
2 -
This content has been removed.
-
TheXenoborg said:
@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn.
That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it.
Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao
It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
People in Space disliked the Depip Squad? Why? lmao @ politics and drama but I'm genuinely curious. What do THEY have against the depip squad anyway?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
@weirdkid5 said:
TheXenoborg said:@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn. That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it. Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
People in Space disliked the Depip Squad? Why? lmao @ politics and drama but I'm genuinely curious. What do THEY have against the depip squad anyway?
What or why I dont have an answer for. I'd like to know myself. I just have good reason to believe there were ulterior motives involved in this based on some talks I've had.
Yikes.
Do you also sit around wearing tin hats and discuss the time one of you got abducted?
2 -
This content has been removed.
-
@TheXenoborg said:
@only1biggs said:
@weirdkid5 said:
TheXenoborg said:@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn. That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it. Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
People in Space disliked the Depip Squad? Why? lmao @ politics and drama but I'm genuinely curious. What do THEY have against the depip squad anyway?
What or why I dont have an answer for. I'd like to know myself. I just have good reason to believe there were ulterior motives involved in this based on some talks I've had.
Yikes.
Do you also sit around wearing tin hats and discuss the time one of you got abducted?
Who's paying you to say that?
It's NOT the de-pip squad. But it may be someone affiliated with them in some capacity, but I won't tell. Based on some talks I've had. Why...? I don't have an answer.
2 -
@Soren said:
https://clips.twitch.tv/SpikyTacitVelociraptorTwitchRaidHere's the clip, for anyone who wants to make their opinion.
If I check this clip then I think the survivor found the hatch first. I think Marth made a mistake hitting the survivor and should have just waited for the hatch to open to be able to declare a standoff.
I believe the standoff is when the hatch is open and the killer and survivor are waiting on who either jumps or hits. There simply cant be a standoff when the hatch is closed because with a closed hatch the killer is free to do what he wants. This time however the survivor was extremely lucky with the opening timing and the fact Marth hit for no reason at all. Marth could have known he had to hit once more then wait for the hit animation to be over before he could pick the survivor up.
If I were to judge I would have given the win to the survivor.
5 -
only1biggs said:
@TheXenoborg said:
@only1biggs said:
@weirdkid5 said:
TheXenoborg said:@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn. That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it. Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
People in Space disliked the Depip Squad? Why? lmao @ politics and drama but I'm genuinely curious. What do THEY have against the depip squad anyway?
What or why I dont have an answer for. I'd like to know myself. I just have good reason to believe there were ulterior motives involved in this based on some talks I've had.
Yikes.
Do you also sit around wearing tin hats and discuss the time one of you got abducted?
Who's paying you to say that?
It's NOT the de-pip squad. But it may be someone affiliated with them in some capacity, but I won't tell. Based on some talks I've had. Why...? I don't have an answer.
The fact BHVR are actually doing formal investigation on this is enough to substantiate my claims without ousting someone from within Space, due to me respecting a request to not reveal who they are.
Whether you want to dismiss this is irrelevant. I dont come on this place to spout nonsense and to stir drama without having a reason to do so.5 -
Yea to me Marth messed up. The surv was there waiting for the hatch AND he had the opportunity to hit him. That's a legit escape in my eyes. Definitely a mistake.
3 -
@weirdkid5 said:
only1biggs said:@TheXenoborg said:
@only1biggs said: @weirdkid5 said: TheXenoborg said: @weirdkid5 said: only1biggs said:
@Spudbar the play he made was a mistake and has been my argument all the while. All you guys keep saying he didn't. Of course hindsight is 20/20, it's how we learn. Apparently Marth has nothing to learn. That aside, the hatch wasn't open and so there was no standoff in play. Get over it. Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmao It's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
People in Space disliked the Depip Squad? Why? lmao @ politics and drama but I'm genuinely curious. What do THEY have against the depip squad anyway?
What or why I dont have an answer for. I'd like to know myself. I just have good reason to believe there were ulterior motives involved in this based on some talks I've had.
Yikes.
Do you also sit around wearing tin hats and discuss the time one of you got abducted?
Who's paying you to say that?
It's NOT the de-pip squad. But it may be someone affiliated with them in some capacity, but I won't tell. Based on some talks I've had. Why...? I don't have an answer.
I dont need your approval nor do I need you to believe me.
The fact BHVR are actually doing formal investigation on this is enough to substantiate my claims without ousting someone from within Space, due to me respecting a request to not reveal who they are.
Whether you want to dismiss this is irrelevant. I dont come on this place to spout nonsense and to stir drama without having a reason to do so.
You are so adorable
2 -
@only1biggs I'm glad you think so, I think I'm pretty cute myself.
Now do you have actual substance or just more ad hominems to speak?1 -
@weirdkid5 said:
@only1biggs I'm glad you think so, I think I'm pretty cute myself.Now do you have actual substance or just more ad hominems to speak?
You need a life. There is no shady DBD Illuminati out to get the de pip squad. Everyone is complaining that Space Esports knew very little about DBD so I highly doubt the fix was in from them.
I heard that the Russians who won were also involved in the Trump election. I just tweeted your username to Special counsel Robert Muller, I think you are onto something, don't leak your inside source here, wait and give it to the FBI.
We will get to the bottom of this.
4 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmaoIt's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
How can there even be a hatch stand off if the hatch isn't open in tournament where everyone cannot run items, add-ons or perks?
Explain your ######### sir.
3 -
Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Not sure what part of "hatch has to be open" was made after the game was over you didnt get lmaoIt's clear Space doesn't actually know how to play this game or how it operates at all. I also have inside knowledge to know they had personal disapprovals of the Depip Squad.
Even people inside Space know Space is full of #########
How can there even be a hatch stand off if the hatch isn't open in tournament where everyone cannot run items, add-ons or perks?
Explain your ######### sir.
How can there be a tournament ran by people with less than 100 hours in the game and hosted by someone who knows nothing about the game. Not sure how no perks and stuff is even related to the hatch, but whatever you say to make yourself sound more right.Shipthebread said:@weirdkid5 said:
@only1biggs I'm glad you think so, I think I'm pretty cute myself.Now do you have actual substance or just more ad hominems to speak?
You need a life. There is no shady DBD Illuminati out to get the de pip squad. Everyone is complaining that Space Esports knew very little about DBD so I highly doubt the fix was in from them.
I heard that the Russians who won were also involved in the Trump election. I just tweeted your username to Special counsel Robert Muller, I think you are onto something, don't leak your inside source here, wait and give it to the FBI.
We will get to the bottom of this.
Something very useful in 2018.
Why do you think I come in here sometimes saying things like, "trust me, the game is gonna get better." Because I actually know more than your avergae player because I attempt to do so. Get a life? Why dont you take your own advice and stop wasting yours on a forum just like me? All to make a shitpost kek
1 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Perhaps they should have actuall specified what the terms of a hatch standoff meant before the game was over. This stipulation was not stated prior until the game was over. The rules are shady and open to interpretation from many different angles. This is indicative of a bad tourney, which it ws.Yes it was badly organised. Any idiot could see that.
How can there be a tournament ran by people with less than 100 hours in the game and hosted by someone who knows nothing about the game. Not sure how no perks and stuff is even related to the hatch, but whatever you say to make yourself sound more right.
Because the tournament had a no item, addon or perks as a ruling.
Did you not read what I wrote?
2 -
Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Perhaps they should have actuall specified what the terms of a hatch standoff meant before the game was over. This stipulation was not stated prior until the game was over. The rules are shady and open to interpretation from many different angles. This is indicative of a bad tourney, which it ws.Yes it was badly organised. Any idiot could see that.
How can there be a tournament ran by people with less than 100 hours in the game and hosted by someone who knows nothing about the game. Not sure how no perks and stuff is even related to the hatch, but whatever you say to make yourself sound more right.
Because the tournament had a no item, addon or perks as a ruling.
Did you not read what I wrote?
It wasnt until after that game was over was the NEW ruling stating it had to be open first. That was not held for any other part of the tourney. You simply can't create a new rule after the fact. What should have happened is there should, at the very least, been ANOTHER rematch since the losing match was a rematch because of flimsy rules prior.
The fact Spud also stated this is being formally investigated by BHVR leads me to conclude there indeed was something shady going on in this tourney.
Why this game attracts the most nonsensical BS around, I will never understand. But what I do understand is it continues to attract annoying and trolly members of the community that can't see past their own blinders.0 -
I mean you guys aren't even aware that the Squad was approached by BHVR after registration and were told they cannot participate in multiple tourneys, despite being on the list for both PS4 and PC tourneys.
Yet this ruling was not held for any other team, despite there being clear evidence of players running under different usernames to participate in multiple platforms. Only Depip Squad was told they could no do this.
I know this because I was going to take their place in the EZ pip squad team on PS4, since changing rosters within the team was legal until the day before.
They were registered as the EZ Pip Squad on PS4 before being replaced by another team. Again, no stipulation stating you couldn't do this.
You all are blind.2 -
Whoever said that that particular scenario was not a standoff and that "HATCH MUST BE OPEN" is an idiot.
There are 2 scenarios where you can have an hatch standoff with the hatch being closed.
1) with a dull skeleton key.
2) the scenario of that final where the hatch is about to open (so you don't have the time to hit because by the time the killer ends the post hit animation the hatch will be open).
By definition of standoff Marth there had nothing to do because as you could see by hitting the survivor he was able to jump inside the hatch (SURPRISE THIS IS A STANDOFF BY DEFINITION).
For whoever did not understod what truly happened I will let old bahroo tell you with his own words:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/276674794?t=00h11m36s
If you can't see the video quote me and copy paste it with the timestamp I put.
2 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Ok so tell me how that comes to the hatch standoff at all lmao original rules stated whoever found it first wins.The survivor found the hatch first. Just because Marth was ontop of the Hatch first does not mean that the survivor didn't found it before him.
According to the original ruling the win should have been given to the survivor.
It wasnt until after that game was over was the NEW ruling stating it had to be open first. That was not held for any other part of the tourney. You simply can't create a new rule after the fact. What should have happened is there should, at the very least, been ANOTHER rematch since the losing match was a rematch because of flimsy rules prior.
Because everyone with a brain acknowledges that the hatch cannot be used by a survivor unless it's already open. They can't even use items in this tournament.
And they did get a rematch.
The fact Spud also stated this is being formally investigated by BHVR leads me to conclude there indeed was something shady going on in this tourney.
One of Marths friends in the depip squad?
Why should I care about his opinion about whether or not him and his team should have won that tournament?
Honestly this just reaks of bias.
I didn't get first in the tournament, BHVR investigate them for being shady!
What a ######### joke.
Why this game attracts the most nonsensical BS around, I will never understand. But what I do understand is it continues to attract annoying and trolly members of the community that can't see past their own blinders.
This is coming from the guy that cannot accept the fact that his favorite team lost, because Marth ######### up.
Keep doing you kid.
5 -
It was about 3 seconds that marth did not swing if even that. You guys need to keep in mind that as a nurse he was still coming out of the fatigue animation. sure he moved to the hatch at that time but the survivor also wasn't close enough for him to hit the claudette(he also couldn't hit at that time). The nurse isn't even done with her wiping animation before the end screen happens. so if the whole animation would take 3 seconds (swinging and wiping off the blade) he would NOT have had time to pick the Claudette up at most he might have been able to take her out of the hatch and that's assuming it doesn't take more like 4 seconds of animation just to get through all that.
1 -
Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Ok so tell me how that comes to the hatch standoff at all lmao original rules stated whoever found it first wins.The survivor found the hatch first. Just because Marth was ontop of the Hatch first does not mean that the survivor didn't found it before him.
According to the original ruling the win should have been given to the survivor.
It wasnt until after that game was over was the NEW ruling stating it had to be open first. That was not held for any other part of the tourney. You simply can't create a new rule after the fact. What should have happened is there should, at the very least, been ANOTHER rematch since the losing match was a rematch because of flimsy rules prior.
Because everyone with a brain acknowledges that the hatch cannot be used by a survivor unless it's already open. They can't even use items in this tournament.
And they did get a rematch.
The fact Spud also stated this is being formally investigated by BHVR leads me to conclude there indeed was something shady going on in this tourney.
One of Marths friends in the depip squad?
Why should I care about his opinion about whether or not him and his team should have won that tournament?
Honestly this just reaks of bias.
I didn't get first in the tournament, BHVR investigate them for being shady!
What a [BAD WORD] joke.
Why this game attracts the most nonsensical BS around, I will never understand. But what I do understand is it continues to attract annoying and trolly members of the community that can't see past their own blinders.
This is coming from the guy that cannot accept the fact that his favorite team lost, because Marth ######### up.
Keep doing you kid.
Uh, items in chest are allowed. Which means you can find a Dull Key and use the hatch you numbskull LOL you asked before did I read what you said, but do you even play the game? Did you even read the rules yourself? Marth being on top of the hatch is a safe play in the event they found a key. Jeez lmao
BHVR is acknowledging the possible mishap, so they are formally investigating it. I didnt state Spud had an opinion I stated the fact BHVR is actually investigating this lmao
And no they aren't my favorite. I don't even like Marth as a streamer nor as a person. Sorry that you don't think it's possible for someone to simple believe something is amiss without needing to throw personal bias into the situation.
Also what I said before about them suddenly not allowing to be on multi platform and not holding this rule to anyone else.3 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Marth was on top of the hatch. Thus he found it first. If the Survivor found it first, he should have gotten on top of it. Or perhaps the rules should have stated and been clear in the first place. They got a rematch once, but not for the game that was stolen from themRules should have been clearer, but you clearly see the ######### Claudette 2 meters away from the hatch.
Uh, items in chest are allowed. Which means you can find a Dull Key and use the hatch you numbskull LOL you asked before did I read what you said, but do you even play the game? Did you even read the rules yourself? Marth being on top of the hatch is a safe play in the event they found a key. Jeez lmao
Did she have a key?
Lets rewatch that.
https://clips.twitch.tv/AbrasiveAcceptableAlbatrossFloof
No she had a toolbox.
So ######### are you talking about?
BHVR is acknowledging the possible mishap, so they are formally investigating it. I didnt state Spud had an opinion I stated the fact BHVR is actually investigating this lmao
Investigating in shady ######### does not automatically mean they are guilty in said shady #########.
The tournament organizer are whores for views. What else is new?
And no they aren't my favorite. I don't even like Marth as a streamer nor as a person. Sorry that you don't think it's possible for someone to simple believe something is amiss without needing to throw personal bias into the situation.
I never said they were your favorite idiot.
Defensive much?
5 -
@Mc_Harty said:
Rules should have been clearer, but you clearly see the [BAD WORD] Claudette 2 meters away from the hatch.
Marth had already found the hatch he simply had to go away to hook the second survivors (that's why after he hooked him he rushed immidiatly to the hatch cause he had already found it).
Second he still got to the hatch first and there is no deny to that.
Now please explain what he did wrong. What in your mind he should have done in that situation.
2