Survivor Rage Quitting is a Problem.
Now as all/most of us know survivors like to police Killers on what they do, what I wish to start and suggest is that we should start Policing/shaming those survivors who Rage Quit. And yes killer too in a way but, its not quite the same. A Killer disconnects the game just ends Survivors are rewarded points for surviving/escaping like as if they has gotten out by the exit gate/hatch. if a survivors just disconnects or let themself get killed on hook it effects a lot more then that. and let me list them.
1-Morale: Once a survivor starts to rage quit out of the match. (by disconnecting or giving up on hook) that take a heavy toll on other survivors especially if the game just started or soon after. this dose have a sleight effect on killers that emphasize with this knowing that A: Others may fallow the quitters lead. or B: They may get attacked in the End game chat and possibly get reported for nothing.
2-Pressure: Now that this Survivor has left the match, this puts more pressure on the others to try and win. Being a man or 2 down. Now this is unfair to both sides, with survivors needing to do the same amount of work but with 1 (or more) less teammates, and the killer will look like a jerk for taking advantage of it.
3-Challenges: For some Tomb Challenges you may need every survivor for a better chance for finishing it. especially ones with the condition of "complete this challenge in a single trial" If a survivor has decided to quit out of the game and depending on what is needed you may not have what you need or more likely a chance to complete it. this goes for both killer and survivor.
Finally a few Solutions:
1-Extended time out: the survivor/killer meets any condition that they have Rage Quit out of a match. if all players Use what is meant to be the report option in the end game chat to well report instead of it doing nothing. (like we all believe) it will add an additional time to that player's time out timer. or start a timer if they have not gotten one. (aka die on hook) That will stack through out the day like the normal repeat rage quitter penalty. now to balance this out. so that players don't just report everyone. A: again all remaining players need to report to do this. B: For those who just give up this would mostly effect Survivors if they give up the same system that would apply this penalty would watch if the survivor quickly died. allowing them to be eligible for this penalty. as for killers when they give up most Survivor would call that a win especially being that they are not preventing you from finishing the game or impeding you in your job. C: Every account would get a hidden randomized number of Timmer tokens. (between 2-5) that would reset every day (so no stockpiling tokens) D:finally these tokens would be loaned out of your token bank and would be taken away if all requirement are meet. if the game closes and the requirement are not meet it would be returned to you this way those who truly need a time out will get it, and players are not just reporting every player they see. E: Finally SWF that are a full 4 stack would not be allow to spend these tokens. (I don't think I need to explain why)
2-Symbol of Shame: A new Symbol will appear over the head of the survivor showing how many times that day they have Rage Quit for all to see. That way survivors/killer can choose to stay in the lobby with them or leave in order not to have a bad game. As for informing survivors if the killer rage quits, a killer version would sit next to the chat box with the same indication as to how many times they rage quit.
these are just some problems I've ran into (and I bet others have) when it comes to survivors quitting in a game please tell me what you may think if these ideas to help this problems and if you have any others.
Comments
-
I'm sorry but I'm not getting held hostage again.
Also, look man, I'm against DC's on first hook but when it's a slugging agi starstruck nurse, I am gonna seriously consider whether or not it's worth it to play DBD at all. They can play the game however they want and I can find something more worth my time to play.
Ultimately, when the majority of people DC, they're just gonna move on to a different game that they feel is more worth their time investment. You'll have the tryhard SWF's DC for Hatch and this'll hurt them, but it's not gonna do anything against most of the people who DC.
Almost every time I see someone who DC's on Xbox and I check their profile, they've usually either already turned off their Xbox or moved to a different game.
22 -
You're going to get 20+ responses of people trying really hard to justify ruining 4 peoples games due to them being unable to accept any inconvenience or anything that infringes on their "fun". Then they will go off to make posts in other threads, complaining about solo queue and kill rates.
The only idea I can think of as a punishment is to basically make the next game earn no BP. The game does not award you BP until you play a match (either side) again. If you just try to rage quit/suicide to bypass, then you just keep getting more games where you earn no BP. You either play a game for no reward or you just quit DBD/never earn BP again. Problem is there is absolutely no way to implement this without it screwing over as many innocent players as guilty ones. It's not even worth considering, because there is no way to implement a punishment like that without hurting a large chunk of people who aren't doing anything wrong.
But rage quitters/Suiciders are still the biggest ruiner of my solo queue games. Not the evil camper/tunneler.
5 -
Really makes no sense when some killers try to tunnel one guy out as fast as they can so they can feel better in a 1v3.
8 -
This would probably impact on new players the most, since they are the most likely to struggle with hitting skill checks, and being punished because their team mates believed they may have purposely missed a skill check and let go on hook would probably drive them away from the game. It'd be hell for the developers to monitor. Bottom line is, BHVR are a business and want people to play the game - even the people that DC. I actually don't see too many people in my games DCing or letting go on hook thankfully. It's the exception, not the norm in my experience.
3 -
Or you adress the reason why people hook suicide. I do it sometimes, like when im on a hook, and i see one guy hidding in the celar, one guy crouchwalking around, and the guy that it chased by the killer comes to the hook to hookfarm me, all while the only gen done yet was done by me alone, while that mikalea lit a boon totem on 4 different totems, and doing nothing else so far.
I already know how that game will end. Why exactly should i stay? Me leaving have no impact on the survival of the others, because they wont survive anyway, not because of me, but because of the way they are playing.
So, can we also give a symbol of incompetence to players who dont do at least one gen in a match, or let someone die on first hook, or go down to the killer after 10 second chase? So the rest of players can choose too, like not to play with such teammates.
What about players sandbagging their team, like that guy that started fastvaulting to alarm the killer because he wanted the points for that hex totem i found and was working on. Can i get a way to shame him too?
There are people quitting out of frustration about their team, not out of rage. I never hook suicide because of the killer, if he camps and tunnels, i struggle to the end to allow my teammates to finish gens. But if noone is doing gens, then there is no point.
6 -
But most rage quits happen with no apparent reason at all. Apart from getting downed first. At least from what i´ve seen in my matches. Sure, there are exceptions, but we need a solution for this kind of behavior, that ruins the game for everyone else.
Majority of players that dc/suicide/rage quit going for a different game, isn´t something i would consider a bad thing. We don´t need toxic players.
3 -
The VAST majority of DC's I see are on 2nd and 3rd hook.
These people want to play and have fun. When they find out that isn't really what DBD is about, they quit
5 -
I don't think giving up against certain situations should be in any way punished. Because if you are going to determine what is proper and improper gameplay, then let's start banning people who do nothing but explore the map and occasionally loot.
"if they give up it affects the other players and puts an extra burden on them"
So does a crouching Claudette in a corner doing nothing. Do we ban the Claudette?
5 -
The vast majority of suicides on hook i see, happen on the first hook at 4 or 5 gens.
These people don´t want to play and have fun. They just want to ruin the game for everyone else.
2 -
Definitely not my experience. My DCs/hook unaliving typically happen on first hook, and usually the 2nd or 3rd survivor I've downed. This is on any given killer and after it's obvious I'm not camping or tunneling.
2 -
A DC is already punished by an increasing ban time - the first being forgiving because no one’s internet is perfect. I’ve been DCed 2 times since I started playing a month or 2 ago - I’d rather not rely on my solo q teammates to figure out it wasn’t intentional and not slap me with some additional time or icon over my head.
3 -
No, penalties don't need to be harsher. Literally all patches since the beginning of the year have penalized playing survivor more and more, making playing killer stupidly easy while not penalizing at all the very valid tactics of tunneling someone out of the game. This along with the garbage matchmaking system they implemented (and the explanations given by peanits in some thread a couple of days ago were absolutely embarrassing) destroyed playing solo/duo
Ultimately this game is not competitive so it should be played for fun. Killers right now are the agents that have the most control of how fun a match will be, so if someone is having a bad time it's perfectly reasonable for them to want to leave.l, especially when way too many killers are playing "efficiently"
I want to add: how is it ok for a killer to tunnel someone out to make the game a 3v1 not a problem, but when a survivor does this by himself then it's bad?
8 -
Basically me. If I DC then it's so I can have a reason to find a different thing to do for a while.
2 -
Symptom to a bigger problem.
Even then, you simply cannot force someone to play in a match they no longer want to participate in.
7 -
If see this, im out.
2 -
This game has a lot of problems. I think that those problems, however you want to define them, lead to disconnects.
1 -
Everyone wants to win, everyone will play efficiently as possible but the part I wish to talk about is the 3V1 if the killer tunnels/camps then at least that gives other survivors a chance the killer is busy trying to get 1 kill as the others can do gens. If a survivor quits out of the game all that time they would have given to the other 3 is gone. The killer is not gping to camp or tunnel them beacuae they have nothing to camp/tunnel. That's why I feel as of there is a problem with DCing, even if you die and the other 3 get out that's a 3/4 victory for your side.
1 -
People who rage-DC should eat bans ranging from a week to a month. Anything less and they're just going to keep doing it, like they already are.
2 -
Let's not pretend rage-quitting is exclusively survivor sided. I went against a Wesker on RPD before who quit seconds after their Devour Hope got cleansed at three stacks, and a failed Tombstone Myers yesterday. If anything, it's worse when a killer does it because the whole game just ends. Don't get me wrong, I don't support rage-quitting at all but a lot of nice killers will acknowledge a DC and farm with the remaining survivors so the match isn't a complete waste of time.
Whilst I understand what you're saying about shaming DC'ers, it will just create more toxicity. Plus, every time someone DC's there might be a valid reason. For example, I've had to quit a game when something urgent has come up, or my internet connection has gone down. Should people who have to do it from time to time really be 'shamed' for something out of their control?
I think it should be a 3-strike rule every 24 hours. The first DC you get a small, 10-minute ban penalty, the second should be a couple more hours, and the third strike should be a more substantial 12-hour ban. This wouldn't punish people too harshly if they have to DC for a valid reason but really punishes the chronic rage-quitters. People who DC once in a while aren't an issue; people who seem to DC every time they're online show a pattern of behavior.
2 -
And how do you propose that works, what is the difference between a rage DC and a regular DC, or an incidental DC?
1 -
After getting camped, tunneled or slugged by tryhards for sooo many games (specially after the killer buff), or just hackers, i think dc after 5 mins should be free
If you play 5 mins you can say at least you 'tried'
2 -
Starts small, scales up super hard.
If you have a terrible computer or connection that knocks you out of the game through no fault of your own, you STILL shouldn't be playing DbD. Your bad set-up is ruining the game for four other players. Stick to solo games.
Also, you can just look for the standard "I Refuse To Let You Win" survivor moments, like the first time they get downed, right before they're picked up on their final hook state, or if they've been left on the ground for more than 5 seconds ever.
1 -
And you believe a weeklong ban is starting small, for lets say a random power outage during a thunderstorm?
5 -
Wow.
0 -
I just assume that people with enough reading comprehension to navigate a forum would know what 'starting small' means.
The week-to-month would be that whole 'scales up super hard' part of the sentence you elected to ignore.
Looks like your favorite killer is the dreaded Straw Man
1 -
lmao, ######### people who don't have money am i right?
what a joke. let's not ever do that, k?
2 -
When someone DCs I just can't kill the others anymore.... So yeah, don't do it xD.
0 -
If you can't play a game without disconnecting, you probably shouldn't be playing that game, huh? There's so many others out there, off-line and on, that don't completely ruin everyone's experience if one player's power flicks off for an instant.
And if you can't afford a stable internet connection, you've got considerably bigger challenges to navigate than the ability to play a niche horror party game.
Man, it's always a pleasure to post "make the punishment for disconnects more severe" and seeing all the people who disconnect as a matter of course come out to shout down any attempt at punishing their fun little exploit.
0 -
Dying on the hook is not against the rules.
2 -
Considering how often DBD can crash on Xbox One, not to mention Switch, I agree, don't play DBD.
Done talking.
2 -
The thing that gets me about this is that people act like those week to month long bans won’t drive players away. Idk if killers think they’re the population that BHVR really needs, but survivor players spend more money. Way more money.
4 -
Yes your right but in particular circumstances like giving the 2nd to last player hatch, but dying on your first hook beacuse you gave up should be. It's not a good loop hole to have to avoid a time out.
2 -
The game doesn't need the kind of player who DC's often enough to get to a theoretical month-long ban.
Self-important jerks who disconnect the moment the game turns against them for any reason drive more players away by simply ruining the experience for everyone else in the game. Far better to lose one person in that group of five than the four who actually wanted to play the full match. If they're going to act like they're the only player who matters in any match they join, they should be playing a one-player game.
It's also worth remembering that this ISN'T Survivor v. Killer. This is Jerk v. Everyone Else. More survivors suffer from the effects of their thoughtless teammate's disconnect than Killers do.
1 -
It takes 4 minutes to bleed out when in the dying state. The minimum DC penalty is 5 minutes, and it goes up from there. So, when you rage quit by DCing, you're only hurting yourself. Yea, being slugged for 4 minutes sucks, but being unable to enter another queue for 5+ minutes, how is that not worse?
As for more punishment than there already is, I think not. The fact remains that sometimes you DC and it's not your fault. Tuesday nights when Steam does maintenance this can happen. Or another example, last week I was being carried to my first hook and my neighborhood power went out. Like, I am sure the killer and the other survivors were very annoyed with me, as they should be. They had no idea WHY I disconnected and neither did the game itself.
2 -
Not sure how they would regulate that.
0 -
The thing is the majority of DC I see on both sides are around first down/ hook. Survivor goes down first dc other survivor goes down in 30 seconds dc. Survivor gets hooked and the killer is in chase with me across the map dc.
There is a list on the forums from the devs that tells you what is and isn't allowed in game anything beyond that is just player made up BS.
1 -
So because I got hooked last and haven't been hooked yet, when I attempt to unhook myself, I get a penalty?
That doesn't seem fair.
2 -
Another vicious cycle...
We don't know what the other players last few matches were like... We don't know their life story
I look down on choosing to DC cause they didn't want to be the first one down
But then again is it worth having that player not do anything in game cause they had to deal with something IRL
2 -
If you DC/Suicide you really have no right to complain about solo queue, since you are 99% of the problem.
3 -
There is no incentive to stay in games that are a lost cause and/or unfun. Literally no one wants to play against nurse with an exposed build. Or a killer who immediately starts to ruthlessly tunnel weak survivors at five gens. No one should feel bad about trying to get out of games like that. They're only going to end one way and it's better to just move on to the next game. It's true that some people will DC against anything but 70-80% of rage DCs in my experience are justifiable. Most people are not rage quitting against Freddy and Sadako. It's almost always some lame crap that is unfun to play against.
3 -
So instead of pushing through the 'unfun' stuff and learning how to best counter these things. (if it be a build or killer the player doesn't like) or to give your other teammates time to at least have a chance to win. (remember this is a 4v1 game) its justifiable to pass on your disliking to this unfun playstyle, Killer, or build onto the remaining teammates and DC Because that player was not having fun. so what about the other 3 survivors is there fun not allowed?
1 -
No. if you attempt to unhook yourself (a 4% chance) but stick it out for the struggle phase, you would not be penalized, (or eligible to be penalized) you took a chance and failed but stayed in the game if you struggled. if you don't know will instantly die if you do not even make 2 attempts to hit skill checks in the struggle phase. missing a skill check will just lower your timer. (this is already in the game)
what I'm suggest is that if a player rage quits in a number of ways, that player is 'eligible to be penalized' again one of the suggestions is to allow the other players to penalize you, if your 'eligible to be penalized' in which certain criteria's are meet. to help keep people that are not actively quitting from getting penalized.
this is what I mean.
struggling then fallowed by allowing yourself to instantly die. = eligible to be penalized this would keelp those who quit in this way at the start of a game to be singled out as a quitter. but if you let yourself die as 1 of 2 survivors. this can be seen as a way to give hatch to the not hooked guy. again 'eligible' your not immediately penalized that's up to the other players.
Dcing there is a bit of a gray zone, I think the easy way to do it is simply, if the player themself hits the Leave match button, eligible to be penalized. There is still a gray zone here with Hackers and Bugs. But if other players see this they may find your DC understandable especially by explain the situation. and may just leave you be and not penalize you for it. But if you quit because if any unjustifiable reason then they may penalized you. this would be the simplest way for to put this.
so overall with your question if we make it so a 'referee system' in place to watch for these behaviors that I've listed and so would apply a 'eligible to be penalized' code or something as long as A: you stay for the struggle phase. B: The game auto kills you as the last survivor/all survivors are 2nd stage. C: the other survivors just let you die and you stay in the struggle phase. this eligibility would not apply and you would not penalized.
I hope I answer your question.
0 -
Exactly
If I DC out of frustration I just hop on GTA Online for a few hours
1 -
While people d/cing or suiciding on the first hook of the match is an issue and people shouldn't be doing that. I'm not going to stay in a match I have no chance to escape from. Survivor queues are quick and dying earlier rather than later still makes you lose mmr.
1 -
I think the better solution is for the devs to realize the frustrating elements of the game are not features. Actually try to balance the game competitively instead of having every trial hinge on whether or not one side decided to bring their strongest things or try harder than the other side. Genuinely, what's the point of playing solo queue against an Engineer's Fang 4x slowdown Pinhead? There are so many other things to do with your free time. Go catch up on a tv show or read a book. But spending 15 minutes on that garbage is questionable.
This game can be really fun. And it can also be a genuinely awful experience 75% of the time. It always baffles me that BHVR sees that 75% as some kind of selling point.
0 -
Players that DC often should be put in lobbies with other players that DC often.
0 -
The rage quitting is NOT the problem. It's a symptom.
Why people rage quit IS.
0
