Camping Fix

@Master said:
Lets face it guys, survivors have abused mechanics that would punish the killer for camping, so that is off the table.
The only way how to rreduce camping would be to give INCENTIVE for the killer not to camp and this has been suggested several times already (trues idea to debuff genspeed for fresh hooks e.g.)
But then survivors cried that this would be a killer buff, so we will stick to the current situation

I do think incentive is necessary, but i think there needs to be some form of punishment so a salty killer can't make it impossible to save someone. The problem is the devs didn't think enough about the survivors abusing it problem until after they tried it, and they gave up at the first hurdle. I'm trying to think of a way survivors couldn't abuse it.

@Orion said:
You want to create a situation in which a Killer is powerless to stop Survivors. This creates a power imbalance in the Survivors' favor, which is against the basic principle behind an asymmetrical game. Your idea is bad because of that.

I don't want to make him powerless, i want to make leaving a better option. But yes, if the killer in face camping with a ######### chainsaw like the game i was just in, he does need to made a little less powerful as he made the person unsaveable. You can say the killer should control the game all you like, but being able to make it almost impossible to save someone is bullshit, especially when they'd get the same amount or more kills if they just played properly. Face camping / really close camping shouldn't be an option unless survivors are swarming the hook or the doors are open, but it is and it's completely unfair on the survivor. Survivors couldn't abuse this system as i said already the idea i suggested wouldn't have an affect if you're in a chase. This means if survivors are sticking around, chase them and hit them allowing the hooked survivor to die normally while you get to kill the idiot standing around the hook, just like normal. Meanwhile if you leave the hook you get a speed boost, allowing you to catch your next victim even faster. This is a buff not a nerf, and would literally only harm killers who want to stand in front of the hook for no reason.

@Crucifixxed said:
I'm okay with your suggestion to nerf killers if they make it so that any time a survivor is near a generator, the generator regresses instead of progresses, and the only way to complete a generator is to stand inside the killer radius.

That doesn't sound fun for the survivors. Sounds great to me as a killer. It's almost like survivors aren't entitled to any more than they already have, and the fact they still want more to be done to killers should start being applied to the survivors as nerfs so they understand exactly what it's like to be so brutally under-powered that they can't win unless the killer attacks walls for the whole game.

Too many people haven't read everything I've said, or maybe i just ordered the information wrong. Firstly, i said my original idea was stupid but i'd also said it doesn't belong in the game, i made it for fun. Secondly I've changed many things that I've said in various comments, such as this doesn't happen when the killer is in a chase as far too many survivors sit around the hook, and it doesn't happen when the gates are open for obvious reasons. I also said a killer would automatically have permanent blood lust 1 when not in the area of the hook so it's actually a buff for fair play styles. People shouting this is a stupid nerf are wrong. The only time it actually makes being a killer harder, is when you're standing in front of the hook for no good reason (aka there's no survivors around and the exit gates are closed). Admittedly i still need to think of how to make it fair if all the remaining gens are in the area, so you have no reason to leave and what to do if you're a
trapper / hag. i'm not an entitled survivor as i'm a killer main, but i do sometimes play survivor and the killers seem to love camping, when i never camp as killer, I don't get the point, it makes the game harder, and less fun for both sides.

@Orion said:
So you want to create a situation in which the weak side has the advantage. This is not an acceptable option. If you can't rescue, then don't rescue. It's that simple. Just because you want to do something doesn't mean you can. You're supposed to be afraid of the Killer if he's in a location; instead you want to be able to ignore him completely.

The reason I've said countless times the idea wouldn't work in the games current state is because right now no one is scared of the killer, but if they were, camping would be broken as you could quickly secure every kill. I'm suggesting this idea in a world where killers are feared, but don't need to camp, and instead are hungry for their next kill. If the next kill is standing next to the hook, then go for them, otherwise don't stand there for no reason. If he's been sitting around the hook for no reason for 3 minutes, the entity should punish him for not finding more victims, and encourage him to look for more. I know you don't want to listen to my idea and i get why, but please try and understand where i'm coming from and understand i'm saying this wouldn't work in the game unless it was balanced.

@AlexAnarchy said:

@No_Cluie_Louis said:

@FrenziedRoach said:
So anotherwords, make Borrowed Time useless and get free unhooks (which is free points as the killer is unable to respond with the speed nerf)

That's exactly what your idea proposes the speed nerf would make it hard to defend the hook.

I'm sorry, but your idea is not thought through or fair.

I get your point, it would make borrowed time pointless and i didnt think about that. I know your saying it to insult me but honestly i wanted constructive criticism > @Orion said:

Your suggestion would create an imbalance in the game. In a perfectly balanced game, if the Killer is standing in an area, Survivors are supposed to clear out if they can, no matter what. You want to make it so if the Killer is standing in an area, Survivors can approach and ignore the Killer altogether. I don't care what rationalization you have, this is an imbalance of power.

There should never be a situation where Survivors can ignore the presence of the Killer, or an area where the Killer is punished for going/staying (i.e.: a safe area for Survivors).

You say that but there are pallets are there not? And i agree there shouldn't be situations where survivors wouldn't be scared to be in the killers presence, but at the same time, killers should never feel obliged to camp without justification therefor the situation wouldn't arise. If killers don't want to camp, then the mechanic wont affect them and survivors will continue to fear them. Killers are slower when they vault windows and there for they are less feared when going through one. This means there isn't much point in doing it unless in certain situations. Camping should be the same. People shouldn't want to camp unless it's justified, so a situation never comes around where the survivors aren't scared.

There are certain parts of the game where either the survivor or killer have the advantage and therefor choose how the game plays out for that particular part. It's usually the killer in control. For generators, it's the killer as they can stop the survivor form working on them (this doesn't mean they control whether the gens are completed or not but it means they can stop survivors working on them and there for choose which ones are completed). The killer controls who he chases, as well as the exit gates and the survivors hooked. The survivors control where their chases go and what generators they work on, as well as when they leave the trial. I think the survivors should be able to choose when their team is unhooked at the cost of the killer being stronger because of it.

Says Killers need justification to camp when devs literally camp / bait survivors themselves...

I don't really understand what you mean, however if the devs do camp, i didn't know and i have no idea if they do it without justification or not. Also, you could still bait survivors by camping, but all i'm saying is nerf that particular strategy as it is indeed very strong. However it is required in the games current state and there for would require a buff the appose it, which is why i have suggested adding that in other comments.

@FrenziedRoach said:

@No_Cluie_Louis said:

I get your point, it would make borrowed time pointless and i didnt think about that. I know your saying it to insult me but honestly i wanted constructive criticism >

You need to stop assuming we're all out to insult you. I was being candid.

Your idea is just terrible, period. Coming to the hook for a rescue should come with a risk that justifies the points and ranking the survivors get for doing so. With your proposal, that risk is gone. That basically means you get all reward with little risk.

Remember, you get
1500 bloodpoints for the rescue - that's the second largest score event survivors have.
1 whole level in Benevolance for just doing the rescue and allowing the victom to survive for 10 seconds.

All for doing an action that takes about a second of time and holding a single button. And you want to give this to them for free? Co'mon man, use your head!

The killer camping at least comes with the risk of him losing a ton of generators... if survivors would actually do what they're supposed to and punish the behavior.

Which comes back to what all of us have been trying to say...

CAMPING IS CAUSED BY SURVIVOR BEHAVIOR

Tbh man i was actually thanking you in my original comment for the ideas, i just worded it wrong. Again you're right that it would be ridiculous the make the action not scary (though i do think the high bloodpoint reward is partly to encourage and altruistic play style, as the game isn't meant to be played solo). The unhook action would still need to be scary, so perhaps a speed decrease for the killer shouldn't be part of my idea, or at least far weaker than i originally suggested. I still believe something should be done however to make staying near by less effective as it's quite boring for the killer, and can ruin the survivors game. Perhaps still reduce sacrifice speed while the killer is near, or maybe reduce the amount of points you get for an unhook. You need to remember that the benevolent emblem causes you to lose points if you make an 'unsafe unhook'. This makes me think the killer shouldn't be right there to hit the survivor after they're unhooked. Perhaps i should be thinking it the other way, and increasing the points for unhooking a teammate, but giving the saved teammate a 3 second sprint burst to give them a small chance. This way the saviour is getting a high risk / high reward. This however would affect borrowed time. There's a lot to think about as it all affects each other. However, i do slightly disagree that camping is caused by survivors, as though it can be, camping can also cause survivors to swarm the hook, as survivors get used to camping killers and there for are used to running to the hook, getting seen, but not getting chased as the killer doesn't want to leave the hook. Though it's mainly survivors fault, it's a loop and both roles are responsible. Please read all of this and give any more improvement suggestions.

@FrenziedRoach said:

@No_Cluie_Louis said:
Tbh man i was actually thanking you in my original comment for the ideas, i just worded it wrong. Again you're right that it would be ridiculous the make the action not scary (though i do think the high bloodpoint reward is partly to encourage and altruistic play style, as the game isn't meant to be played solo). The unhook action would still need to be scary, so perhaps a speed decrease for the killer shouldn't be part of my idea, or at least far weaker than i originally suggested. I still believe something should be done however to make staying near by less effective as it's quite boring for the killer, and can ruin the survivors game. Perhaps still reduce sacrifice speed while the killer is near, or maybe reduce the amount of points you get for an unhook. You need to remember that the benevolent emblem causes you to lose points if you make an 'unsafe unhook'. This makes me think the killer shouldn't be right there to hit the survivor after they're unhooked. Perhaps i should be thinking it the other way, and increasing the points for unhooking a teammate, but giving the saved teammate a 3 second sprint burst to give them a small chance. This way the saviour is getting a high risk / high reward. This however would affect borrowed time. There's a lot to think about as it all affects each other. However, i do slightly disagree that camping is caused by survivors, as though it can be, camping can also cause survivors to swarm the hook, as survivors get used to camping killers and there for are used to running to the hook, getting seen, but not getting chased as the killer doesn't want to leave the hook. Though it's mainly survivors fault, it's a loop and both roles are responsible. Please read all of this and give any more improvement suggestions.

Actually, the penalty for the unsafe unhook is more to discourage people from farming teammates off each other. For myself, I always try to take responsibility for a bad unhook by throwing myself at the killer so the wounded guy can get away.

You stated - "This makes me think the killer shouldn't be right there to hit the survivor after they're unhooked" - except the devs have said time and time again that camping is expected and allowed. In fact, they fully expect the killer to act more like a Goalie trying to block a goal. If the killer is there to hit the survivor immediately on unhook and the rescuer doesn't have Borrowed Time, then it's 100% the rescuers fault that the person gets farm.

The reason I say it's Survivor Caused is because survivors do very little to dissuade the behavior. People who "Bait" you from 20 meters by T-Bagging behind a pallet, people who won't "chum" the waters by shedding a bit of their own blood to get the predator to bite and give chase. People who sit there for minutes at a time and don't pressure the killer to leave by slamming out generators.

It takes 120 seconds for somebody to die on a hook on first hook, 80 seconds to do a generator, on first hook that's 3 hands that can be doing generators and making that killer think twice about sitting there bored the next time they get somebody on a hook. When survivors actually focus generators instead of feeding a camper, the camper loses HARD and has a very short and boring game.

A good killer knows he has a life bar - it's time. Time he loses every single moment somebody is on a generator. That's why all the high-tier killers run Ruin - to extend that life bar. That's why all the good killers leave the hook most of the time to find somebody else to chase - because chasing somebody while somebody is hooked effectively pulls THREE PEOPLE off generators and extends that life bar.

No, there doesn't have to be a penalty for camping because one already exists - it's just people refuse to use that penalty and train killers that camping is generally a bad idea.

I do get what you mean, but too many killers don't care about that life bar, and instead want to secure one kill on the guy who they're annoyed at. All i want is to persuade killers to play the game how it's supposed to be played, and protect that life bar rather than sitting around the hook. My idea probably isn't the best for doing that but i'm sure someone can help me think of one. As for what you said about survivors encouraging camping, of course they're not gonna do generators when the killer still hasn't left after 30 seconds. People have pity and feel bad for the survivor being camped for no reason. Sure, the survivors could get all the gens done and escape with 3 of them, but we're human, none of us want to just let other people die. Think how boring the game would be, 3 people staring at gens all game, the other survivor hooked all game, and the killer staring at the hook all game. The survivors going to the hook is the only thing keeping the game alive, it's the games last life on its life bar. I'm arguing for the case of the survivor who's getting their game ruined by a salty killer, not for the whole team in general. Sure they reward the behaviour by going to the hook, but they kind of have to and the killer is the one playing that way so you can't only blame the survivors. The devs said last dev stream that "BBQ and Chilie was made to get people away from the hooks and keep the game interesting, it encourages them to find new prey and start new chases, rather than standing at the hook and keeping the game bland". People are misinterpreting the devs saying camping is ok as it obviously is in some scenarios but it doesn't mean you should camp for no reason.

@FrenziedRoach said:

@No_Cluie_Louis said:

People have pity and feel bad for the survivor being camped for no reason. Sure, the survivors could get all the gens done and escape with 3 of them, but we're human, none of us want to just let other people die. Think how boring the game would be, 3 people staring at gens all game, the other survivor hooked all game, and the killer staring at the hook all game.

You are making a very naive assessment assuming it's pity. Look, YOU might have pity and there's nothing wrong with that (to which I say, learn to harden yourself for the greater good). However, I can guarantee that most people out there are doing it out of pure and unadulterated greed. Both the bloodpoints and the ranking are driving most people who would just look after themselves to do these rescues (great design choice on the devs part IMO, using player's own greed to have them take that risk)

Sure, that one person might be bored, but it's HIS boredom, not yours. If he dies on that first hook, assuming he got caught in the first minute, it's 3 minutes out of his life... no big deal. He's now free to cue up for the next game.

Hell man, I get camped all the time. No big deal for me. Just hit that leave button when it's over, get into the next game.

I once had an idea that there should be an entity cage around the hook to stop camping. But we ended up shooting it down after discussing here in the forums.

In the end, the killer's role is a power role. And any suggestion that takes power away from that role is a bad one because it takes away the biggest reason to play the role. This is why we've always focused on finding ways to encourage the killer to leave. And I think we've done a fair job of it so far. I think what we need to do now is teach the survivors to not be so suicidal at rushing the hook. And the penalty to benevolence for the instant downs was a step in the right direction. Finding other ways to stop the hook farming would be a better use of our time.

So you think nothing should be done, not even something to make the hooked survivor die slower, or have a speed boost when they're unhooked? I think it can be unfair that survivors have to run borrowed time in hopes to have games where everyone gets a chance to play. I still believe the game was designed for the killer to leave and find more prey, not stay at the hook, and i don't believe we should be saying, oh well hopefully i'l have better luck next game, as every game should be fun wether we escape or not.