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!
Bots so no more dc penalty
They got to remove dc penalty if they are adding bots, plus 90% of the time they will be better
Comments
-
Why? If you DC then you get a penalty. The bot is there to keep your team going.
47 -
They have no intention to remove them and that's fine. Someone who rages enough to dc needs to calm down anyway.
39 -
The DC Bots are not meant to be a reward for d/cing. They are just there so the game isn't instantly down a person, because some people can't handle playing out games.
15 -
whats the point of the penalty then ? if you dc you get bot game carries on still 5 players game is not lost benefits the killer aswell
3 -
The point is to not incentive people rage quitting.
31 -
The point is that you gave up on your team. Bot or no bot.
13 -
You really overestimate the bots’ capabilities.
8 -
The only thing I have against them is that they can avoid a killer without even seeing him. Through walls and stuff
2 -
Bots are here so now it's time to crank up the penalty for a dc.
17 -
The dc penalty are fine if you rage quit you deserve the penalty
15 -
Agreed, looking forward to the killer bots whenever they get those working correctly.
2 -
Bots are still way worse than real players and playing constantly with AI teammates is gonna get annoying really fast.
5 -
I swear to God it's like survivors are actively attempting to drive killer players out of the game because it would make them happy to just run around and map doing generators and nothing else with no one to stop them.
9 -
Um what?
2 -
We can remove CD penalties when there's some kind of mandatory trial rejoin. So even if you DC, you can only continue with your previous game, but not queue for a new one until the former game is over. And even if there's no penalty anymore, you still lose all BP and Pips if you do not reconnect in time.
With this, a player having an accidental DC (e.g. a crash) can still try to continue with their match, and rage quitters still have their "waiting punishment". With early rage quitters having to wait longer than rage quitters at the end of a match.
7 -
I like this view ngl
1 -
No.
5 -
Nah, people will just become DC prone and essentially shop games. I dont wanna play with bots all the time.
9 -
Increase DC penalties I say
9 -
To be honest, any game that I desperately don't want to play, I just kill myself on hook. A bot still won't replace me for it, and if I don't want a penalty for not wanting a 40 minute Skull Merchant match I just have to go out the next quickest way.
While removing a penalty would probably see MORE people DC, I unfortunately don't think that adding bots is going to change the most efficient way out of the game currently.
The only problem I have with this is that the tides in DBD turn too quick for it to be effective. If you're out for 90 seconds, that's so much time that as a killer you lose a gen or more, and as a survivor you pretty much lose the match. The balance between players is pretty slim as it is and removing one even for a brief period while they reconnect would probably still not impact the match in any significant way.
0 -
Wholesale disagree.
Regardless of whether bots are there or not, DCers are scumbags and should be punished accordingly.
Suicide on hookers are scumbags too. Condemn your team cause you can't be bothered. I report every one I see, and can only hope it does something.
6 -
This pertains to a very small vocal minority of Survivor complainers. Most Survivors just want fun, fair, engaging games with both Killer and their teams.
2 -
You expect them to let people get away with being rage quitting babies just because bots are going to replace them?
4 -
If a arsonist burns down a family's home and a insurance company pays to cover the family's cost does the arsonist not need to go to jail anymore?
5 -
Unfortunately you're going to get bots in your games an awful lot, because
*The bot replacement system fixes literally none of the reasons people disconnect*
In fact, it actually gives an extra reason to disconnect (not encouraging or condoning DC's here, just discussing human nature). Anyone who would normally stick out a game just to be a good teammate... well, that's what the bot is for now. It turns a disconnect into a bullshit win-win, where that player can leave the game like they want, but the team isn't down a 'player'.
So when people get sick of losing because of bots on their team, they'll just disconnect in a cascade and make the problem worse.
This system is garbage, bullshit, and solves nothing. It's ripe for exploits and abuse by both sides, and simply leaving the player's avatar in the world for 30 seconds before having the entity take them gives the killer time to gain stacks/hooks without any option for abuse.
This should never go live in a PvP game.
0 -
There is no downsides to the bots. While there is problems with core dbd that may make people want to dc that is something they knowingly sign up for every time they hit ready.
Realistically they should have system in place that prevents people over lets say 100 hours to be generous to gain a certain amount of blood points per min while out of chase for at least 20 seconds. It's not hard to make it so people have to play the game or stop playing it. Leagues done an incredible job of preventing people from greifing in any way and negating toxicity to the point of it being absurd. Dbd's system is far too lax to say the least.
But all of you mobile/veteran players can keep spouting how dc penalties mean nothing.
2 -
Eh, I feel like people know a bot is a poor consolation prize. I can't imagine too many people will be like 'oh it's okay to leave, the bot will fill in for me.' They'd know full well people would rather play with other people. Plus the DC penalties won't be changing, and I think that's what stops DCs more than anything. Whenever the penalty is down people have a field day with DCing.
If anything I can see scenarios where the bots are left to die on hook or people refusing to pick them up when they're left to bleed out. Especially when the game isn't recoverable for survivors.
0 -
No, removing the dc penalty would only increase dcs.
On top of adding the bots, they should also prevent survivors from suiciding. Otherwise, people will just suicide instead of disconnecting.
1 -
I'll be clear here, I don't think that disconnect penalties should be removed. I disagree with op.
But I fundamentally think bots are a bad thing for the game and should never go live.
You are completely, demonstrably wrong that there are no downsides to bots. The griefing potential alone is insane.
If bots are in any way better than average players, survivors swfs could and will just grief the solo q with them until they DC to get a bot teammate. I still haven't seen and can't test if the killer is trapped in a full bot game of all 4 survivors disconnect immediately, so that is a potential problem too.
And the abuse potential for killers is insane. Bot gets stuck or caught in an infinite ai loop means the game doesn't have to end normally. A survivor slugged for the 4k can be hard camped by the killer for the full 4 minutes just so a bot can be given hatch.
I 100% would be on board with forcing a disconnected player to rejoin the same lobby until the match they left has completed. It soft raises the DC penalty, you can't just say that disconnecting is a faster way to find a new game, and it doesn't defeat the core principle that the game is pvp.
There is no competitive pvp game that replaces disconnected players with bots that I'm aware of, it's absurd. And if you play DBD as a casual player as a 'party game' there's still no reason to have bots.
Fix literally any reason that people are disconnecting instead. How about looking into the problem that if you're the first player downed you simply don't get to play that match in the overwhelming majority of cases. Let's start there instead of this bullshit.
1 -
If implemented, people will just DC over every petty issue, such as not liking the Killer, their build getting countered or losing a chase.
The only intentional DC that’s fine is if someone is hacking.
0 -
No penaties will vastly escalate the number of DCs, this is with penalties and cake!
0 -
No they shouldnt you want everyone to play vs bots
0 -
They should keep the DC penalty to double dunk on those losers who quit early, the bots are better than they are and they sit in timeout I love it
0 -
Since we only have survivor bots right now (and one trapper bot), trial rejoin would only work for survivors. If the killer dc's, the game would still be over instantly. And I think we won't get any killer bots in the near future, since you would need a bot for every respective killer, so they now how to use there power.
If a survivor dc's, a bot would take over, until the survivor reenters the trial. So there wouldn't be a player missing, just being "less effective" since it's controlled by the bot temporarily. Remember, this rejoin would primarily be for players having an unvoluntary game crash. They should be ready to rejoin a trial in a few minutes. If they were unlucky and it happened at the end of the game, tough luck, but otherwise there's a good chance the dc did not have a major impact on the game.
0 -
Tbh they need to add more dc pentalty. Imagine Having to add bots and waste money becuase people cant play a game and have fun.
1 -
We should leave it as is don't want a 2h penalty for someone having wifi issues
1 -
Keep the initial penalty, ramp up the ones that follow. It's forgivable/understandable to have one dc and then try to fix the issue while waiting it out. If it's a consistent issue, dodge high ping lobbies or play something offline until something can be done, but it's no excuse to allow salty quitting for petty reasons.
1 -
I just wanna be able to join back if the servers or my wifi boot me out of the match. Give like a 5 minute window so we can restart and join back in the game, y'know?
0 -
As nice as it would be to rejoin of you lost connection, I don't see a reasonable way to implement it considering that you could have been sacrificed by then.
Rejoining works in games where you have a respawn system. But not so much when it's an elimination game.
1 -
If you're already dead then just have it not show up. Easy.
0 -
Def. a creative approach --- though the question remains: people who DC as the ASAP way out of the match would make sure to die on hook ASAP - be that by taking chances or by playing so recklessly they get "tunneled" out of the game within a minute.
I am aware there are plenty petty reasons to dc - but there are also legitimate reasons in so far as there is absolutely no point in sticking around. These need addressing. or more like: they need to actually be identified and made tangible. Which is pretty hard, I imagine.
0 -
It says a lot about the OP that they think a mechanic introduced because people quit should reward the quitter.
1 -
Isn't that what the disconnect bans are though, originally? They start from as low as 5 minutes initially, so that window is already available. If you're being booted out regularily, then that's the ISP's responsibility and you need to raise concerns with them to improve their service.
0 -
Yep, attempting escape would also have to be restricted in a way:
Attempting escape from a hook would only be possible when at least on of the following conditions is met:
- Less than 4 survivors remaining
- No other survivor can rescue you (all others downed, hooked, killed or afk)
- You have an unhook perk ready (active deliverance or slippery meat)
With this, early rage quitting is only possible by DC, a dc'ed survivor will be replaced by a bot, and the dc'ing player will have to wait longer before getting in a new trial, since the game just started. But they can always proceed with the match.
0 -
They start as low as 10s if you rarely dc just did for th3 first time in forever because of a cheater with insta blind 12s penalty
1 -
No remove the DC Penalty. This way the killer doesn't get stuck having to play a PVE and they can still get their Blood Points and get value out of their bill. My biggest pet peeve with a survior DCing is it wastes my addons, this way I still get some use out of them.
0 -
There is no competitive pvp game that replaces disconnected players with bots that I'm aware of, it's absurd. And if you play DBD as a casual player as a 'party game' there's still no reason to have bots.
Rocket league, at least in unranked. I can't remember how it is in ranked because I only played duo with my late best friend back then.
0 -
Unranked tends to be dealt with differently in every game that actually separates the 'competitive' mode player base.
Examples of games in most familiar with personally, in Overwatch the ranked mode has disconnect penalties, a 2 minute grace period for rejoining a match with no penalty. But the unranked quick play mode has no disconnect penalty at all, as well as backfill with new teammates.
Apex has a very similar system, but with no backfill for the unranked mode.
It gets weird with DbD being asymm, because they can't really split into unranked and competitive modes. People would just default to doing what they do now, which is sweating constantly, but they'd be able to pick 'unranked' in the hope of easier games. In symmetric games, that just means you're throwing, but not necessarily in DbD, especially if you're the only player on your team.
I could see bots in some games like unranked rocket league, or even something like Mario party, but whether DbD is a 'competitive asymmetric pvp game' or a 'casual party game' is hotly debated. And honestly, even if you consider it a party game, then just like any party game it only takes a few people who take it too seriously to completely ruin the fun of the game at all.
1 -
DBD is, in my eyes, most definitely not a casual "party game". It's a semi casual pvp game, the killer is NEVER part of the party and always the antagonist.
Party games are either coop only or free for all. Everything else is basic pvp and prone to over optimization by the player over time.
DBD is and always will be a pvp game with two teams antagonizing each, only that one team is a single person. That's also the reason why comms are such a problem in asymmetrical games, they can help the group side but the lone player will NEVER gain any advantage from them. But I digress once again.
Also to your point of apex, I don't think battle royals can be compared to other team based pvp games because it is a mix of team based and free for all gameplay, partly even with mixed time size queues like solo and duo combined despite the immense potential difference due to teamwork.
0 -
You're missing the point there though.
What is the goal of all those measures? Certainly not to force people to play a match that is defeating the point of playing a game: to have fun - or to at least have a shot at fun.
There's a plethora of reasons why people have no shot at having fun in a match and thus opt to not play the match at all. There's a difference between sticking a tough match out and being a punching bag for the sake of being a punching bag. Some of those reasons are petty - the famous "bruh! Killer has Lightborn but I want to just tail people all match and fl save - ima dc now" being one of them - others are not petty but fall into the "not good for game health" category. The facecamping situation being one of them, tunneling being another (and it being mechanically possible to a staggeringly effective degree on some killers especially), and some killer mechanics / the nature of some perks/add-ons being another one. But there are too many killers and too many perks/add-ons to make any blanket statements. Some will be impossible to balance (e.g. if a perk is totally fine on most killers but broken on one or two). Which makes it incredibly difficult to separate "petty" from "legitimate". - Just forcing people to play out everything is certainly not actually gonna fix anything though.
We see BHVR trying to address some of the common, pretty agreed-upon situations. E.g. facecamping. Slugging is also up there but apparently difficult to solve; the line between slugging as a legitimate tactic to counter certain builds/being the right play in certain situations and it being unhealthy for the game is pretty thin.
TL;DR: If you want to force people to play out a match you first have to eliminate pretty much all situations in which it is legitimate to throw in the towel and end the match right then and there. (ps: I'm all for a "forfeit" button on both sides - but that's a different can of worms.)
0
