Since hooks can respawn now, bleeding out for 4 mins must be bannable
From the next update hooks on which a survivor is sacrificed will be able to respawn after 60 seconds.
There are no more excuses at this point, the killer often used the loophole of not being able to hook because there were no more hooks available nearby even though it may not have been true just to mask his toxicity.
I am obviously only talking about the situation where there are only survivors on the ground and the game is virtually over, whereas if a killer wants to slug during the game there is no problem of course.
Comments
-
Unfortunately we still have maps like badham, so being unhookable is still a thing
31 -
It not bannable sorry for letting you know.
31 -
Could just force everyone to die instantly if they don't have a way to pick themselves up.
15 -
Being slugged isn't the most fun thing in the world but it really isn't ban worthy. I've forced myself to stay on the ground for four minutes and bleed out when I really want out of a match. As someone who plays on Switch, I can tell you that it doesn't take hooks being permanently broken for survivors to be unhookable: even normal wiggle feels like absolute hell, and Boil Over can be basically impossible to fight.
10 -
I don't quite understand the logic here. There will still be situations where picking up the survivor is the bad move.
If a survivor goes down at a pallet and the killer knows there's flashlights, background player or suspects Flip Flop/Power Struggle, slugging is still the smart move.
I had a game where there was one survivor left, they were downed at a pallet and have been downed for a while. I'd be crazy to pick them up and risk FF/PS and them escaping, it's much smarter to wait till they bleed out.
9 -
Just because hooks can respawn doesn't mean there's no reason to slug people to death.
Mainly I'm referring to Sabo, flashlight, and boil over squads. If you get a squad with each member running one or more of these, slugging is still the only option really left for you.
In the endgame, you might just not found someone ypu downed earlier if they crawled away from where you downed them.
Bhvr constantly having to distinguish between that and slugging just to be toxic would require more work than just keeping slugging. Considering how they have not done that already, I'm pretty sure that's already off the list.
4 -
People aren't talking about when Survivors are all alive and threatening rescues, people are talking about the 4 slug, slug for 4k, or if someone is spinning under a hook in the Killer's face waiting for the Killer to hook them.
If Hatch is closed, and the gates haven't been touched, there is still no justification to bleed them out instead. If gates are opened, then we have EGC to end the match.
5 -
Even if Hetch is closed and the doors haven't been touched, there's at least a chance you could lose them and they get out, whereas if they've been on the ground for a while and haven't UB'd themselves up, there's no chance you'll lose them if they bleed out. It's logically the right move in that situation to bleed them out.
3 -
Sabo, unhookable builds, hook blind zones……… What lmao
7 -
Ah yet another post to ask for finisher mori and JUST for finisher mori, without any stupid unbreakable
agreed
6 -
In very specific situations and maps it will still be a thing unfortunately. But this should get rid of most of it
1 -
I'm talking about 1v1 situations where the killer stands over the survivor with the intention of not hooking them for no reason.0 -
Making it bannable is excessive, but it should be fixed.
Maybe something like when every survivor is on the ground and you have been slugged for a minute, press a button to die instantly.
Survivors die instantly when all hit struggle phase to not waste the Killers time, so why is it okay that the killer wastes survivors time?
For the people that say hooking is sometimes not possible: An option to die would still mean the survivor dies so it is the Same outcome.
2 -
I agree, when all 4 sitting at the exit gate teabagging for 2 mins is too
0 -
There's really no reason to not let the last survivor at least straight up hook themselves.
It's already in the game that the last survivor is rushed through hook stages, no chance to jump off with or without perks like Deliverance. If the killer genuinely can't find them I'm sure they'll be happy to waste less time too, and if they're actually just standing on them as they bleed out and would start 130 decibel screaming if they can just skip to the unavoidable end.. yeah, don't really care if they dislike the change in that case lmao.
And yes, I support a lever in the basement or something that ejects survivors too. I don't think it's anything but silly to directly compare gate-sitters and bleedouts (killer still has the agency to press W and make the survivors leave, a bleedout slug needs the killer's "consent" to not lay there for the full timer) but I see absolutely no issue with such a time-saving feature even though I doubt I'd ever use it personally.
Post edited by oxygen on0 -
lol no
3 -
Or pick themselves up after 20 seconds of being fully recovered. If you cannot pick someone up within 50 seconds, they deserve to pick themselves up.
1 -
So no one ever has to pick anyone up ever again, they can just stay on generators.
6 -
Then have bleedout bans just require you to show (video evidence) you died under a hook when bledout. With that standard of evidence, it shouldn't be an issue.
0 -
Then you can get cases where a killer has legitimately lost track of where they left a survivor slugged, while said survivor has crawled across the map to die under a hook.
3 -
I dunno, man. I've seen enough "just leave" kills to enjoy letting those d-bags keep it up.
0 -
I mean, you do realize it would take 30 seconds to recover to the point of needing to help yourself, and then another 20 seconds to pick yourself up. You can literally hook that survivor before you pick up chase again.
Slugging right now is basically the same pressure as hooking, without needing to spend time to hook. Allowing survivors to be able to pick themselves up means that you still have reduced gen pressure from survivors, but you'd have to slug survivors 5 times before they bleed out. OR, you can hook them and force survivors to go unhook them.
Seriously, you get them off the gens by hooking. If you cant be bothered to hook, you deserve the self-pick up. If you for some reason cannot hook (which is quite impossible with 99.9% of the current map layouts), you can come back after 40 seconds and slug them again. For every second that they dont pick themselves up, they waste a chance of another self-pickup later when they might need it.
If you want to get that same pressure, just hook.0 -
disagree
7 -
Are you one of those who like to waste other people's time because of inner frustration?
0 -
You realize AFK crows exist right? You are worrying about the .0001% chance case more than the 10% chance case to an absurd degree. Like I'd get it if it were 1% to 10%, but the vast vast vast majority of bleedouts (that you could also prove with video evidence under hook) are clearly BM that, 'rules as intended', should be bannable. With video evidence being required, do you really think enough false bans will slip through?
0 -
Maybe the exit gates should be blocked for the remainder of the game if all survivors who are are alive stand within 10m of an exit gate for more than 30 seconds.
10 -
I can't see them making it bannable but I imagine it would now more definitively fall under griefing. With permanently broken hooks, it obviously was too hard to distinguish why the killer was opting not to hook. So yeah, they might start taking action under griefing, it's possible.
0 -
but, hooking give survivers 4% chances to escape. The slugging killers want stable 4K, no hooking make match without strong perks like DH, ofc, and 4% chance.
1 -
What would be the corresponding action for the killer who is getting teabagged then? "Press button to annihilate the teabagging survivor"?
4 -
Is the killer also punished when the survivor gets burned by a flip-flop right under the palette or loses sight of Ada, who has almost no moaning?
1 -
Bleed out for 4mins, means all survivors are down and not hooked. Not 1 slugged while 3 others still stand.
Thats the difference between slug to put pressure and bleed out.
0 -
I'm seeing a lot of threads about upcoming changes. Where is the source material?
0 -
Hate to say it but bleeding out is not going to be bannable. It's in game for a reason. Stop being triggered by what killers sometimes consider a tactic. If that is how they want to play how do you know that it's not the way they want to a secure a win in their mind?
The reality is not everyone is going to have fun every game.
The killer one game gets hammered on by a SWF and they have fun, next game he bleeds someone out and he may have fun doing that.
It's the trade off.
The sooner you accept it the more you'll focus on what is actually enjoyable in the game.4 -
It is still just 4 minutes and I don't see a reason to make it bannable, I would rather have a give up function when a situation as this occurs instead of have it be bannable...
0 -
I assume you are talking about teabagging at the exit gate, @oxygen already made a suggestion for that in the comment section of this post.
If you are talking about teabagging in general: The Killer equivalent to survivor teabagging is also teabagging (ghostface, pig) or humping. If you have a good suggestion to fix both I'm happy to hear.
0 -
0
-
What’s wild to me is the finisher Mori would’ve 100% solved this problem completely along with survivors getting a basekit unbreakable and it got rejected. This is the results. Maybe you should’ve taken it and had them tweak it instead of flat out rejecting it.
0 -
That's the point, slugging (with humping or not) is a direct counter to teabagging. You can't give survivors the ability to dodge it without giving the same for killers, it would just break the game balance completely.
1 -
"my way of being toxic" is merely a retaliation to what SWF bully squads do. If SWFs have one thousand and one ways of making the life of a killer miserable, might as well keep at least some ways of returning the favor. It actually stops the toxicity from spreading too far: every survivor wannabe bully will think twice before teabagging, blinding, saboing, etc, if they know the killer has a way to get back at them. Slugging is the best, if not the only, way of self-defense for killers at the moment.
Post edited by EQWashu on1 -
SWF can not prevent the Killer from doing anything for 4 minutes.
Also, "other people are toxic and I want to be able to retaliate no matter who else is affected by it" is one of the most insane takes I've seen in this forum.
Being left to bleed out is not an SWF only experience and I think it is even worse for solo que because you can't just talk about something else in the time. You complain so much about solo que but are against changes that would help solo aswell because you are worried that you can't be as mean to SWF as you want to. Seems like cutting of your nose to spite your face to me.
Also if you against a 3man or a duo and tunnel them mercilessly the solo que players in the lobby are negativly affected aswell because it is unlikely to make it to endgame when someone dies early (not mentioning that over time there must be a decent amount of solo players that you have mistaken for SWF).
And you are not preventing anything, if anything you validate them in their toxicity.
0 -
Nice of you to completely change the subject of the discussion, but my point stands: bleeding out is the killer's reflection of survivors' teabagging, blind and stun spam, saboing and other BM, so it would be unjust to remove one without addressing the other.
1 -
I die not change the subject of the discussion.
You said that SWF are toxic and you want a way to retaliate (ignoring that there are other things that a Killer can do to be "toxic" except slugging) and I said that that is an insane take. It might shock you, but there are Killers that get bmed by survivors and are able to just continue to play normally without any BM, so acting as if you need options to retaliate for the game to stay balanced is simply insane.
You also said that it prevents BM, and I said that is not true. The survivor you BM will just feel justified in bming other Killers because "that Killer was an ass, all Killers are an ass, why should we be nice?" (You know, kinda like your justification for bming SWFs).
I added to the discussion that you understanding of justice hurts the group you claim to advocate for, but that is still related to the original topic so I don't think I'm derailing here.
0 -
You said that SWF are toxic and you want a way to retaliate (ignoring
that there are other things that a Killer can do to be "toxic" except
slugging) and I said that that is an insane take.Why? Serving toxic players their own medicine is an insane take? You want to remove the killer's ability to be toxic, while allowing survivors to continue doing it freely? This is essentially what you want to achieve by nerfing bleedout while leaving all of survivors BM untouched.
1 -
- I already mentioned oxygen's suggestion to end survivors teabagging in the exit gate and I'm generally in favour of adding such a mechanic. That means that both sided would lose a way to be toxic, pretty fair in my opinion.
- Again, you ignore that Killers have more "toxic tools" than slugging: Teabagging (some Killers), humping, hitting on hook, even tunneling/camping can be used to punish a toxic player. You can also get creative like letting the useless solo player live while killing the toxic 3man. I can tell you from experience that that works like a charm.
- You seem to thing that a player should have right and the options to retaliate against other toxic players. So let's say I'm an innocent solo survivor that gets slugged to death without any reason. What is my way to retaliate? By your logic the Devs would need to add options to be toxic in that situation.
Post edited by SunaIIanu on0 -
There is no one consistent thing that a survivor can do to retaliate in the same right. This game isn't made for the solo person in mind. It's meant to work and decide and make decisions as a team to survive. With that said, when the team works together I assure you there are plenty of things survivors can do to stranglehold the game for a killer. Spend 5 minutes on youtube and I'm sure your algorithm will be loaded with it.
As far as the game not being solo oriented. You literally have big creators like hens making videos showing how hard they have to go to get a good survival rate as a solo which further solidifies that.
Unless they develop some review system like CS had with their overwatch program where players could watch the game back which will never happen. All the in game stuff will go down as what happens in game stays in game and lets be real here. We all know nothing will be done about that but I get it wishful thinking.
As far as the post game chat. Totally different subject and that should be dealt with harshly. If something triggers you in a video game to the point that you act out like that. Probably best to go outside.0 -
facts
0 -
I think you missed my point. I'm not saying that I want to be toxic to other people and insult them in the game chat (I've removed that part of my comment since it seemed to be confusing). The person I replied is against a bleeding out change because they want to keep it as a way to retaliate and act as if they have a right to do so. So my point was, where is this right as solo survivor?
In general I don't think anybody deserves a right to be toxic back.
And that groups can be a miserable experience is a different point that I never questioned.
Post edited by SunaIIanu on0 -
Just give a finisher mori when all survivor are downed and there is no way to a pickup happen.
1 -
Yes, and these are surprisingly common scenarios. If enough flashlight/pallet saves happen in one match, meaning the Survivors have made it clear they're not going to let me actually get a hook, I often say "Fine, have it your way" and leave them to bleed out.
3 -
I didn't miss your point. My entire response was aimed stating whatever you think might be toxic, someone else might not think it is. Whatever happens in game like an example you used ghost face tbagging. It's part of their kit and to be completely honest. It's pretty funny because that's even the kind of persona ghostface has as a killer and it completes the entire image of him.
At the end of the day this game has certain aspects of it that make it competitive for die hards who will do 1v1's or team play and even casuals. It has a rank system and it has a prestige system and we even have developers that say about certain perks "I spent 4 months making salt." and ya know what? It's ok to have those aspects in the game. But the other things will come with it. It's like that in any game you make competitive. There are content creators who will go up against P400 teams and do everything they can to get the W. Up to and including bleeding out if they know they are running a ton of perks that can be countered by that. I've done it before as huntress and billy and it will continue to be part of my kit.
The post game chat toxicity is different. If you get hit on hook by a killer throwing axes at you because she's an axe throwing KILLER. If they come out and don't say anything? Then maybe just leave it at that. Because it's in the game and it's been that way for years and the reality is… it probably will never change. If they do come out and it becomes a toxic exchange of words between two people and the game is over and it becomes a flurry of insults and what not. Then at that point it's an issue between two individuals and I'm just gonna flat out say it, who can't just take the game for what it is and in my honest opinion. That has no place in the game same as any other game.
And I also touched base on your solo survivor statement but I'll say again this game was never meant to be a solo survivor experience. Most people solo Q because of one or two reasons they either a) don't have friends to play with or b) they want the challenge of solo Q because SWF always goes too well (it does). You're part of a team and your functionality is at peak when you're working as part of it and it shows because good teams will always destroy killers. If that said team survives me trying to kill them and they in excitement boop their butts across the finish line. Cool man… they can have their W.
And that said if it's a resolution you're looking for regarding all that. It's gonna take a pretty big overhaul to accomplish not only a mindset but a game issue as well.0
