Purposefully bleeding survivors to death should be a punishable offense.

Options
Optx
Optx Member Posts: 50
edited January 7 in Feedback and Suggestions

I understand it's a hard thing to police but, why is it permissible at all?

Anyone could stream themselves purposefully bleeding survivors to death for weeks freely. Potentially even getting other players banned for harassment in the process, given players tendency to react to blatant toxicity. Is this really only absurd to me?

edit because nuance is hard: There are obvious exceptions, of course. I'm solely talking about situations where blatant toxicity is at play.

Post edited by Optx on
«1

Comments

  • LeFennecFox
    LeFennecFox Member Posts: 1,232
    Options

    It's because the game will eventually end so it's not holding the game hostage not that it's a good mechanic you're forced to afk for a few minutes. This would have been mostly solved by the I'm guessing cancelled/postponed endgame mori mechanic they were probably scared of nurse/blights playing for that outcome. It's a pointless petty thing for killers to do, but why is it even possible in the first place?

  • meowzilla69
    meowzilla69 Member Posts: 408
    Options

    I do that of 4 flashlights are in the lobby. It rarely happens so I don’t do it because no one often brings 4 flashlights in the game.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    There are obvious exceptions, of course. I'm solely talking about situations where blatant toxicity is at play.

    Bleeding survivors out because you couldn't pick them up and had to leave them slugged is boring, but fine. Bleeding survivors out explicitly to upset them is not.

  • LeFennecFox
    LeFennecFox Member Posts: 1,232
    Options

    Yea very exciting gameplay get slugged 2x games in a row by the same doctor vpning from south america

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    Edited the post. Felt like common sense to me some situation would make it justifiable. Hopefully this clears things up.

  • Dream_Whisper
    Dream_Whisper Member Posts: 732
    Options

    If by chance I am making survivors bleed out intentionally, as killer; more often then not... they forced me into that predicament and abused bad map designs. I had a game in which I play the new alien map as Chucky, and I had a squad whom was abusing sabotage /can't hook me builds for every Survivor in that team. They were not caring about winning but more on teabags and making it impossible for me to hook everyone, especially with how bad the hook spawns in that map particular; in which they used purple hook distance offerings and how they can nearly shut down any hook potentially. It not exactly easy for me to hook everyone in time without them getting off with power struggle, boil over, that perk that allows a fellow teammate to get off faster, etx. So yes had to play different and pretty much slugg most of the time until they were out of unbreakable and I was lucky enough to hook kill two survivors while the rest bleed out for being slug too long and that the closet hooks were to far apart foe me to successful eliminate them. I could have been the generous Killer and risk the Survivors breaking free; but I was simply trying to win a adept challenge then, so I simply couldn't risk it.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options
  • Dream_Whisper
    Dream_Whisper Member Posts: 732
    Options

    Trust me, I don't really encounter as much toxic by killer unless they are really having a bad day and had play too many killers games and lose too many times to a bully squads/swf/experience Survivors abuse maps and stacking meta perks to give themselves too much of a advantage to make their life miserable enough to commit to slugging until they bleed out intentionally. Normally killers don't do that when they don't get much BP, Joy in entertainment/killing, out of intentionally slugging to death. I don't play that way when I have a bad day, I simply swap killers or go play another game; or try a meme build or go for a specific challenge to grind for.

  • BooperDooper
    BooperDooper Member Posts: 266
    Options

    The fact that knockout still exists is insane

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    I think this would be a justifiable argument were I asking for something outrageous, but I'm clearly not. I don't expect killers to play in the nicest way, only not to purposefully waste my and others time for literally no justifiable reason.

  • ratcoffee
    ratcoffee Member Posts: 1,178
    Options

    I would say a good start would be to look for instances where the killer frequently changes between walking forward and backward while in close proximity of a downed survivor while also on close proximity of a hook

  • ratcoffee
    ratcoffee Member Posts: 1,178
    edited January 8
    Options

    [edit: my current frustrations with the state of the game, the toxicity of the player base, and BHVR's apparent apathy to these problems aside,] i was simply explaining how one might go about detecting the most obvious instances of killers intentionally being toxic. i would imagine that "humping" a survivor who is well within range of a hook for an extended period of time would qualify as intentionally toxic and is not something anyone would do accidentally in the course of simply trying to play efficient

    Post edited by ratcoffee on
  • Bran
    Bran Member Posts: 2,096
    Options

    Might need a fact check. But I think bhvr counts trapping survivors in a corner as holding them hostage if it isn't egc, even if there is another survivor who can unlock the gate or do gens.

    At that point the only difference is how long it'll take.

  • Chaosrider
    Chaosrider Member Posts: 489
    Options

    If bhvr would be going back to their own wording, it actually would be an offense as its "refusing to participate in normal gameplay". But like always wording by bhvr is more tricky than a lawyer handbook.

  • AncientSunGod
    AncientSunGod Member Posts: 3
    Options

    It's permissible because it would be nearly impossible to police. It's also permissible because of things like Boil Over. I have a strong disdain for boil over users who go to a dead corner but I wouldn't call for a ban because they use the strategy. Imagine asking for a boil over ban because they go to a dead corner. What should they do to not get banned as they are obviously going to this corner to not get hooked/cause frustration. Ban them all unless they crawl to the nearest hook? Bleed outs should be permissible no matter what.

  • Unknown2765
    Unknown2765 Member Posts: 1,994
    Options
  • cipherbay_
    cipherbay_ Member Posts: 379
    Options

    The devs just need to add a surrender button for the survivors once everyone is slugged on the ground and cant get up. itll end the match so you can move on to the next like identity V does.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    Not sure what being provoked has to do with anything. I believe it really is that simple.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    You can push survivors out, you can't bleed out on command.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    I'm not sure that's relevant. The killer could stop wasting their own time at any moment.

  • Unknown2765
    Unknown2765 Member Posts: 1,994
    Options

    Stop pushing blame for the survivors actions to the killer - thats toxic.

    Also, there are perks that can get you up from bleeding if thats a big issue.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    When and how did I push blame for survivors actions onto the killer? Elaborate

    The ability to equip specific perks, not to increase your chances to win or for fun, but in order to attempt to prevent outright toxicity does not make the latter justifiable. Not to mention it's not a fool-proof plan.

  • Bafugaboo
    Bafugaboo Member Posts: 406
    Options

    I believe the point is that you should not have to bring this anti-slug perks. Also if they are a newer player and perks are the answer they may not even have access to them.

    I believe the game should do a similar end sequence if all survivors are down and cannot get up as to when the final survivor is put on a hook. This way it takes the purposeful time waste away. That way if it is a players tactic to down all players they are not penalized for their chosen play style. The toxic player that just lets them sit there loses a way to waste people’s time.

  • Dionysusdog
    Dionysusdog Member Posts: 130
    Options

    It's DBD. If they banned every killer/survivor that played toxic that would be over half the community. Some play toxic all the time...some have bad matches are rage into the next one. Online games can only do so much to manage toxic players.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    I was replying to your comment explicitly stating bleeding survivors out is "just like exit gate camping". I was not shifting blame, only pointing out there's a simple and consistent solution to one, but not the other. If survivors are sitting by the exit gates, you can push them out and move on with your life. If a killer bleeds you out, your options are limited to dubious preemptive measures.

    If this resembles in any way "pushing blame on the killer" to you, you're an hypocrite. There's an obvious disconnect here. You're either missing the point or arguing in bad faith.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    "Online games can only do so much to manage toxic players."

    I'm suggesting they do the bare minimum.

  • MechWarrior3
    MechWarrior3 Member Posts: 1,625
    Options

    I giggled when I saw the title of this post. While it’s frustrating, it’s part of the game. It’ll never be punishable.

    sometimes that’s the only only option the killer has.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    No offense, but did you read the post to completion? I'm aware bleeding survivors out can be necessary. This is not what the post is about.

  • o7o
    o7o Member Posts: 335
    Options

    Shame seeing some people justify and downplay getting slugged out of BM in here.

    So, an Onryo bringing Knockout, clearly has 3 hooks and basement near, but slugs everyone trying to just play the game and not “bully” the killer at all and stares at all 4 survivors on the ground for 4 minutes until they all bleed out is fine? Never used their power, didn’t care if they were getting looped, they down someone, slug back & forth and just stand there until the survs bleed out. There is no excuse for that type of gameplay.

    I had 2 Onryo’s do this. 1 on Coldwind and 1 on Swamp.

    The 1 on Coldwind never used their power, they just slugged with Knockout, I get downed and get humped and the Onryo spams M1 over me, however this Onryo did hook as I got hit on hook.

    The Onryo I got on Swamp brought Knockout just to hit & run and watch everyone bleed out.

    You cannot tell me that type of behavior is justifiable because “the killer was probably having bad games” or “they’re just trying to win” or “it’s part of the game”.

    Slugging for the sole purpose of ill intention should be punishable, and there should be a bleed out option for the survivors if x amount of time has passed. The slugging mechanic also needs a rework, hence bad actors abusing game mechanics.

  • MechWarrior3
    MechWarrior3 Member Posts: 1,625
    Options

    Yes, I did read all of it.

    The most toxic situation that can come of this is the killer bleeding you out for four minutes while teabagging you, it’s no different from survivors teabagging in the killer every match.

    Either way the game moves on. Yeah it’s not fun, but there’s anything that can be done.

    Its part of playing an MMO.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    "it’s no different from survivors teabagging in the killer every match." Of course it is. One gets to play the game, the other does not. It's a glaring distinction.

    "Either way to game moves on." is applicable to practically every current punishable offenses. It's a demonstrably terrible argument.

    "but there’s anything that can be done." Unless you can back that up with something tangible or an official statement, I wholeheartedly disagree.

  • wydyadoit
    wydyadoit Member Posts: 1,137
    Options

    If you don't want to be bled out then bring no mither. There is a strategic reason to bleed out survivors.

    The reliance on perks or others to get back up is a balance decision. If it seems unhealthy then it can be changed, but that means the entire game has to be rebalanced. Which could take years.


    If you don't agree that perks like no mither should be required to get back up on your own then perhaps it would be better to suggest an alternative to the mechanic.

    Like maybe getting up on your own takes more time and you're forced to be broken for the rest of the match unless you have bill's unbreakable.

  • Unknown2765
    Unknown2765 Member Posts: 1,994
    edited March 12
    Options


    Thats are pretty accurate, also try checking my post history. - you will see that im a survivor main.

    Also, its really rare, that im getting bled out, its not even 1/10 games.

    Its kind of tireing that a lot of survivor mains think its ok, and even (as you do now) are trying to downplay it, everyone playing know the facts, i even think BHVR have the stats. - But as soon as it is survivors that are the victim of toxic play all hell is loose, no matter how rare it is.


    Tunneling and Camping (especially by stealth killers) are a much bigger issue, and should have all focus on how to encurage killers how to play in different ways.

    • And as i already told you once - If this is such a big problem, then there is perks to counter it, and if you dont want to "waste" a perk slot for that, then the problem isnt really that big that you make it sound.


  • LeGranEmi
    LeGranEmi Member Posts: 80
    Options

    mostly when we slug and let them bleed to death it is either because they are being very toxic or they are premade that came to troll

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    I don't know how to get through to you. Conversations are meant to be genuine back-and-forths, I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.

  • Unknown2765
    Unknown2765 Member Posts: 1,994
    Options
  • kit_mason
    kit_mason Member Posts: 255
    Options

    There are no situations where blatant toxicity is in play, though. Killers will always have deniability. It goes beyond being a difficult thing to police and it becomes fully unenforcable if you need there to be zero doubt at all - "I felt it was the best way to secure the win" isn't blatantly toxic and can be argued by every killer that has ever slugged in their whole lives.

  • Optx
    Optx Member Posts: 50
    Options

    Right. Let me give that a try.


    Again, "It's uncommon, therefore it's not as big a deal as you make it out to be" is a non-argument.

  • PogbertChamperson
    PogbertChamperson Member Posts: 134
    Options

    i think they should instead soften the pain of being left on the ground. Let there be an option to just bleed out faster. Hold down the space and you'd bleed to death in 1 minute instead of 4. having to wait on the floor for upwards of three minutes while the killer 'humps' me shouldn't be in the game.

    Bleeding out faster could potentially be used to try and get out of the game faster, but survivors can already do that on hook. The game could/should just auto conclude once everyone is downed, so there is no chance to bm.

  • TragicSolitude
    TragicSolitude Member, Alpha Surveyor Posts: 6,849
    Options

    The staff members who handle reports already get a ton of reports about people who don't break the rules. If bleeding survivors out were a bannable offense in some situations, the number of reports for non-bannable instances would outweigh the number of times where it broke the rules. And BHVR would have to decide in what instances exactly it counts as bannable. They'd have to explain it without being so specific that people can use BHVR's definition to skirt the rules (they already do that in multiple instances, for example not explaining the math behind incremental ban timers for disconnects), and still people would not understand it, there would be a million arguments between players what's okay and what's not. This would be a huge headache for BHVR's team, it would cost them a lot of man hours (paid man hours) to deal with a few instances of someone being left on the ground for four minutes, something that can be a normal part of gameplay.

    Just go AFK and get a snack or watch an advertisement on YouTube or something if you really can't stand to sit there and watch yourself on the ground for a few minutes. Don't get riled up over something so ridiculous as a game, just be quiet about it and move on. Even when I had PlayStation messages on and someone messaged me after a bad match to either taunt me or rage at me, I either ignored them or was super polite in response. Man, some of those people said some quickly-banned-by-PlayStation stuff after my polite responses. Toxic people hate it when they can't get a reaction out of their targets.

  • Unknown2765
    Unknown2765 Member Posts: 1,994
    edited March 22
    Options

    its facts, let me translate it even further "No, your arguments are wrong, here are some accurate numbers"

    So, im saying that what you say is wrong (because it is)

    Im also telling you that you have the perks to counter this playstyle, if you think its such a big issue

    Why is that a non-argument?