Out of curiosity, who is holding the game hostage?
A Michael Myers with Judith’s Tombstone or the last survivor in a locker preventing themselves from being mori able?
Comments
-
Yes
Both are now banned!
8 -
Survivors are supposed to survive, getting out of the locker means dying.
Killers are supposed to kill, and can automatically shoulder a survivor by pulling them out of the locker, I would put it entirely on the killer imo as one is asking the survivor to surrender and die, which would fail their objective, the other is simply hunting for an achievement or is just wanting to mori everyone but still has the option to hook from a locker grab.
31 -
It's bad sports on the part of the survivor to deny the achievement, but the game rules are not about being good sports. If they were, plenty of BM iterations would be bannable.
Killer could absolutely end the game, but chooses not to.
So my guess would be it's on killer.
11 -
I have VSed many myers who are infinite tombstoning and upon checking their achievements already have it, this is why I use lockers now, because more often than not they aren't doing it for the achievement, then again - I've never been allowed to do anything to get my achievements.
I think it's simply unfair to assume it's to "deny an achievement" nobody knows if the survivor is trying to get an achievement or if the killer is genuinely after it as well.
6 -
I'm sorry my mind went there, in that case.
0 -
The Myers in that case. A survivor hiding in a locker and a Myers standing right outside of it, can't progress the game w/o coming out and just accepting death. When their goal is to survive.
A Myers can progress a match by opening the locker and killing the survivor but aren't because of an achievement or just b/c they want to get the mori. Their goal is to kill, so kill. The obligation falls on them, not the survivor just doing what they can to survive.
14 -
The Survivor does not have to kill themselves. Their goal is to survive. The Myers on the other hand can easily kill the Survivor. Yes, they wont get their Achievement, but they can end at the game at any time.
So yeah, the Killer is holding the game hostage.
22 -
I assume you mean both the tombstone and infinite tier 3? Otherwise I'd find it laughably weird and entitled to complain about a survivor waiting out the tombstone enhanced T3 before coming back out of the locker, but I assume you mean the classic double iri combo here.
The survivor is in no way preventing the Myers from killing them, he can just grab them out of the locker and hook them. And in the weird edge case of them being in a locker where the Myers can't get them to a hook, he can grab them and drop them until they bleed out if he really wants to.
And yes, I do agree the achievement is pretty stupid. If someone decides to help someone with a suspected achievement attempt that's cool, but expecting it or shaming someone for not doing it isn't a good mindset.
7 -
Myers can open the locker and hook the survivor.
I wish they'd remove the addons so they could remove the stupid trophy. If trophy didn't exist this wouldn't be a complaint.
5 -
Both or neither take your pick of which you prefer.
Most people blame the killer alone, because they can just grab and hook the survivor, however that is only correct in a vacuum of the other things in the match.
Depending on the experience and knowledge level of the killer, going for the grab could lead to essentially giving the survivor hatch or a free shot at a door play and cost them the 4k.
Before anyone asks I will give examples of this.
1. The locker in question being in a hook deadzone.
2. Survivor may have head on and hit with a stun and get away to hatch or also if they have low profile dissappear and set up at a door while the killer has to go find hatch for an easy escape.
3. Survivor could have a key, which can be hard to see and not really something killers look for very much anymore, and if they do get off and manage to hide during the stun the killer has to close hatch or risk an escape and then the survivor can get out through hatch while killer is patrolling doors.
Point is if the killer has the survivor pinned in a locker they can actually be justified in not going for the grab and waiting it out.
Since neither one is progressing the game they are both holding each other hostage equally, and either one has the ability to try and end the game at any time.
I will also say that if the hatch wasnt a thing in the game then it would be mostly on the killer because the probability of the survivor escaping through the door is much less likely unless the 2nd last kill happened during endgame and you are dealing with a 85%+ door, in which case it would go back to a 50/50 fault.
1 -
Lol case in point, just happened to me.
Already has the achievement and is still running infinite tombstone yet a survivor would be shamed because they hid in a locker bc "muh achievement"
3 -
Neither is holding the game hostage. That would imply that one of them is preventing the other from progressing the game, of which that applies to neither person. The killer could just open it and end this and the survivor could just exit the locker and end this. Either of them could end the match right now if they wanted to, they aren’t stuck.
10 -
It's just two stubborn fools who refuse to let the other win, yeah it sucks if you're the killer or survivor, but just give up first and go next, you're not being held hostage at all, because at any time you want you can just press the space bar.
3 -
But the survivor wouldn’t end it actively by exiting the locker. The killer has to still do it anyway, either locker grab or mori. The survivor isn’t completely innocent, but the killer is the one deciding not to end it.
1 -
Nobody is holding the game hostage here. The survivor can leave at any time, and the killer and grab the survivor too. They both have a choice.
4 -
This situation is no different from a hatch standoff, and the devs said that those didn't count as hostage situations because both players were choosing to continue and refusing to forfeit. Hostage means one side is being prevented from participating in normal game play and there is no active timer.
1 -
Technically wouldn't that mean both are just as guilty then? Either has a choice.
1 -
There are no rules that prevent the Killer from killing the Survivors in any fashion so long as it doesn't involve the use of cheats. The same applies to the Survivors trying to survive. In the instance of "The Killer knows the Survivor is in a locker but wants to tombstone", sure the Killer is deciding not to end it by hooking; but what happens if there are no hooks around, the Survivor has Head On or Boil Over? There are many factors that are hidden to the rest of us.
In any case, if the Killer wants the game done by mori'ing then they can't complain if the Survivors deny it. Same as if the Survivor wants the game to be done but won't leave the locker and get mori'd.
It's a case of Shrodinger's hostage.
1 -
Sad thing it's an achievement to kill everyone with tombstone....now it's tricky cause the killer is just trying to get his achievement think it's called pure evil. I don't blame killer for waiting it out. It's a really tuff achievement to get cause survivors run to a locker...either survivor is dying on hook or to tombstone. So at that point I'd say survivor is holding game.
0 -
They should just change tombstone so if it's a locker grab and your their 3 it's a Mori.
1 -
Agree with this. They're both making a choice. Killer doesn't want to end the game with a hook, while the survivor still wants a chance, but that chance requires the killer to try end the game on a hook. They're actively *choosing* to remain at a stalemate at this stage. They can waste an hour together.
4 -
That’s not what holding the game hostage means. It would be preventing the other person from moving the game forward. Ie if the survivor was in the corner of the map and the killer was standing there blocking him from moving while refusing to hit him but also refusing to move. In this case the killer is holding the game hostage because there is literally nothing the survivor can do to move the game forward without action from the killer. That is not what is happening here. The survivor can move the game forward by exiting the locker, he is not being prevented.
1 -
Neither is holding the game hostage here.
There are currently 3 common scenarios that can be considered holding the game hostage:
- A killer or survivor body blocking a survivor in a corner and keeping them there indefinitely.
- Survivors just hiding and refusing to do gens to try to draw the game out as long as possible.
- Somehow this happens a lot when 2 survivors are left as they try to outlast each other for hatch and somehow that's perfectly fine.
- 3gen scenarios where the killer only holds the 3gen and refuses to hook survivors.
4 -
The most logical move is to take the survivor off from the locker and put him on the hook, then get the deserved victory (4 kills)
Killer, while winning the game (by contrast to survivor: if he goes out of the locker, he just dies), decided to extend the game
By his stubborn choice (my guess, related to the success), the killer is 100% responsible of the unnecessary prolongation of the game
These are facts!
6 -
The Myers using Tombstone isn’t holding the game hostage, but he is using the lamest and most unfun add-on in the game
0 -
Why is it bad-sport to not want to lose the game?
Think its poor sportsmanship to expect someone to throw their game and lose their MMR for someone else and their achievement.
1 -
Neither. Apparently they are both enjoying the game. Hostage would mean that ending the game is beyond the control of one player and completely in the control of the other. That is not this scenario.
5 -
Mikey could end the game with a hook…so to answer your question; Micheal is. Just didn’t go the way Mikey wanted it.
3 -
Neither is the holding the game hostage. It can end whenever either role decides to stop their repeated mess. Myers can hook or survivor can stop going to locker.
2 -
TBH the game just needs a set timer for a match 45 minutes or 60 minutes. If the survivor doesn't escape. The entity should take them and the match should conclude ^_^.
2 -
Uh, because if Mikey is standing outside the locker you're in with infinite t3 and tombstone, the survivor is already dead. Unless the map spot they're in is really favourable to wriggling free, there is absolutely nothing to be gained by squatting in the locker indefinitely. It's bad sport because there is a chance that the Killer is going for the achievement for shanking four people in a single game--something that can't be done if they're forced to hook the last survivor.
Anyway, to answer the actual question: neither is holding the game hostage, but they're both being kind of stupid. OTOH, the Killer does have two iri addons in play whenever this happens and there's an achievement for it, so they at least have an incentive to do it (after all, you can't make infinite attempts because it hinges on those addons). Survivors that do it when there's no hope of escape (like in the shack when basement spawns there) are just being weird.
1 -
"Man, I can't believe how entitled survivors are, wanting me, the killer to play a certain way that benefits them!"
"Man, I can believe how entitled survivors are, not wanting to play a certain way that benefits me!"
Killer mains.
8 -
Michael.
Survivor's main 'objective' is to survive: they're in that locker to avoid dying.
Killer's main 'objective' is to kill: he knows where the survivor is and he's just standing there.
1 -
The game will automatically end after an hour
4 -
It really is neither. Both sides know exactly what's happening and are fine with it.
Killer wants the mori, survivor wants to stop it. It's a stalemate until one of the relents.
5 -
If they are outside the locker and have already found you, you’re staying in there only because you’ll feel like they “won” by mori’ing you…even though they already have. So you’re doing it to be hateful. I think it’s bad sportsmanship on the survivor’s part.
i recently had a Steve do this to me at Midwich and it was so annoying. Probably he had the same mentality as you, it’s cool though I just grabbed and dropped him a couple times until there were no lockers for him to run to, and then mori’d him 🙂
1 -
"They're just trying to survive!"
"Whether they leave the locker and get killed or stay in and get hooked, the killer has already won!"
Survivor mains believe both of these at once. If the alternative to leaving is being hooked, it means there is already no chance of surviving. All you're doing is trying to prevent dying in a specific way to spite the other player.
3 -
The guy in a locker, if you're the last guy you're screwed anyway, just take the alternate death animation
If it was with everyone alive its on the mookel
0 -
The killer is holding the game hostage
3 -
Survivor - Survive
Killer - Kill
The survivor is surviving
The killer is not killing
1000% the killers fault.
5 -
1000% incorrect.
Survivor - escape
Killer - stop survivors from escaping
The survivor isnt trying to escape.
The killer is preventing the escape.
1000% survivors fault.
5 -
Matches already have an hour time limit where survivors are killed if they haven't escaped yet.
0 -
Neither in my book. It's not much different from before the Hatch could be closed. First one to make the first move "loses", but nothing is stopping either one from making that move. It'd be hostage holding if either the Survivor was hiding endlessly from the Killer or if the Killer was bodyblocking the Survivor such that they can't do anything except DC. Neither one is happening, so it can't really be called hostage holding because both parties have the means to end the game right then and there without having to DC.
1 -
Neither are holding the game hostage. The killer can just pull em outta the locker and hook them. The survivor can leave the locker and accept their fate.
Both sides have things they can do to end the game.
4 -
They already have that. 1 hour and the match ends and the killer wins.
0 -
Nobody is holding anyone hostage, both parties can end the problem in less than one second.
Holding the game hostage means putting someone in a situation where they cant end the game by their own means or a timer and their only way out is to disconect.
Holding hostage doesnt mean "Im in a position where Im going to get a non desired outcome", which is where the Killer and Survivor are in Tombstone/Locker standouts.
3 -
It would not be consider game hostage, because both sides have a clear way to end the match, it would be consider as if both of them were AFK.
1 -
you guys throw around words like hate far to easily, honestly why would I let a killer insta mori me who has just killed my entire team in the same cheap way. Either way they still get the kill whether I hop in a locker or not.
2 -
why wouldn't you?
What are you actually achieving by denying them the kill that way? "Hah, ######### you!" is a terrible reason to do something in a game, and it's at best petty. It's outright spiteful if you're willingly disregarding that they might be after the achievement (after all, I haven't tried to get it yet, so that'd be on my mind if I was playing Myers) and force them to choose between wasting their time or having to do this again to a different team
Seriously, unless there's a very strong chance that the hook layout will let them escape and find hatch (rarely the case), there is absolutely nothing a Survivor stands to gain from this situation except maybe ruining someone else's achievement. Kind of pointless.
2 -
They can hook me, they aren't being denied anything, I'm always going for achievements in matches, why aren't the killer being nice and letting me do them instead of tunneling me out?
6
