Survivors Giving Up Epidemic

If you're burnt out and pessimistic, don't play the game. Go uninstall and do something else. You shouldn't be able to leave the game early without a penalty.

Just because you don't like the killer you're matched with doesn't mean you should ruin it for the other 4 players. That's a selfish way to think.

I don't think so. Making it more difficult would deter people. There would still be people who go AFK, but I think there would be less people giving up overall.

I've had people who are currently giving up, but then I go save them before they miss their skill checks, and they continue playing like normal.

Path of least resistance, and all that.

I'm not exactly sure. I think a decent starting idea would be to halve the sacrifice penalty when attempting escape. So if you try to Kobe 3 times by default, you still have 30 seconds on your first stage.

There might be underlying issues with that idea, though, I'm not a game designer and I don't have the ability to test them.

What I will say, though, is you'd only really have to rework Slippery Meat and Up the Ante. Deliverance and Wicked could give the ability to self-unhook inherently, even if it isn't a base mechanic anymore. Kind of like how the anti-facecamp lets you self-unhook on second stage, even if that's not a thing you can normally do.

So if worst comes to worst, and they do have to remove the base self-unhook, I don't think there'd be too much collateral damage in terms of other content in the game.

But they do, though.

I see a lot of people saying that the killer should be "punished" for playing in a certain way, mainly around tunneling/camping, etc.

Measures have been implemented in order to "punish" the killer for playing in these ways. For example, you're punished for hitting someone too soon after they're unhooked, or you're punished for facecamping with a free unhook.

Are these bad measures? Absolutely not. They make things fairer in general. In game design, measures have to be taken to disincentivise certain actions in gameplay that are considered to be unhealthy. This is one of those cases. BHVR needs to take a measure to stop people from leaving the game early just because it doesn't necessarily favour them.

If playing a DBD match to its completion is considered a punishment to you, then I sincerely suggest that you do something else with your time. All that's being asked is that people play the game that they readied up for.

Maybe, but this is far less common than Survivors giving up on the hook. I don't think the Killer going AFK in a corner is good for the game either.

Even if you make it impossible to give up on hook, Survivors can still technically just stand still until the killer kills them. However, it's generally less likely to happen. Doing nothing is boring, and the human brain likes stimulus.

I'm pretty sure they also made it so that it auto-disconnects you as a Killer if you're AFK for an extended period of time. Not sure if that only applies from the beginning, though.

Going on 1st and DC is typically never the right thing to do, but I do think it’s indicative of a bigger problem with the current state survivor is in right now. Many people are quick to agree that yes, tunneling/camping/slugging isn’t fun, yes the meta is kind of stale and yes, solo is not in a great place right now but it doesn’t matter because X,Y,Z (which the xyz are often issues that killers have faced in the past or are facing now). And while X,Y,Z, (the struggles of killers) are very important and should not be written off, neither should the struggles of survivors.

We can all speculate on balance and what is “fair vs unfair” but at the end of the day it’s a game, and it’s important to consider what that game has to offer both roles. In my opinion that’s been formed from myself and others personal experience, statistics provided by BHVR, posts on the forums and the kind of discussions that happen from those posts— there does not seem to be much of an incentive to play survivor at all right now. It’s simply not as fun.

There are high chances of encountering “unfun/unfair” play styles that are used so frequently and are so impactful that perks were designed specifically to counter them, you run the risk of being much more skilled than the killer but still not surviving, your survival depends on your team but you do not win as a team, there is no comeback mechanic in place, and of course the biggest being you are statistically proven to lose more. etc.

Just like with perks, when playing either role in the game It’s important to consider the value you get out of the energy, time and effort you put in. Right now many survivors feel it’s not worth it. They shouldn’t be playing at all if they’re just going to give up. But I also think it speaks volumes that when a large part of the player base feels that not playing is better than playing, it isn’t seen as a concern—but as an entitlement issue in need of a solution that requires the survivor role to be even more restrictive.

Unfun slog is what happened now due to every Feble or Kataela player feel completely free to kill themselves on hook and go to next ruin another game, then after 10 matches like these go here and cry about poor soloq and its escape rate.
Unfun slog is when another Feng give up at first hook, then turns out she gave up to baby Doctor I run for 3 gens with 2 people on gens and we lost anyway, when it clearly could be a win even with bot instead of Feng.
This hardcore desire of die hard survivors to defend people throwing matches and continue to cry about "soloq state" is what I will never get behind.

Not what I stated. Read it again. And ready follow up comments if you still lack clarity.

I don't think anyone knows what you mean tbh. Why would anyone ask for the game to be worse for themselves?

Killers are going to ask for more punitive action because its the only realistic option there is. Changing and balancing game mechanics on the whims of people who clearly dont want to play the game and quit for literally the most pettiest of reasons is a silly idea.

The post above by fussy pretty much sums it up perfectly. Its a survivor attitude problem.

I remember when dc'ing didn't have the penalty and I saw it far less than I do now. The problem back then is some people would play out a full match to a win, then dc in the exit gates to drop their pips and ranking. So they could have easier matches. I don't think the pips or MMR work that way with dcs now though.

Back then just 2 survivors could accomplish too much though. With all the resources, old perks, vacuum pallets, etc… Because of that the matches didn't feel as hopeless as they do now. You could afford getting matched with a couple teammates who were lower ranked or not as skilled. As you still had a chance to win.

I didn't post anything about my escape rate or kill rate, I have my profile open, you are free to check it before starting some strange conversation with made-up information.

What about game: game no doubt changed. It became really hard for new survivors and entry threshold is really high for both survivors and killers players. It's not bad thing, and never was, because in a game where both sides compete in skill, you don't expect to win a lot without good amount of experience. But somehow people believe that they should escape a lot with only knowledge in their heads is how to run to yellow and proc Lithe.

We can go far into philosophy, reasoning why this is happening, but I think main reason is skill floor raised up a lot for survivors and many simply don't reach this level. It's good for the game health, since skill based game finally started to ask to have some skill, but bad for majority, since most players don't want to put too much efforts into this game. It's endless question about balancing between "oh party game for majority" and "game where skill matter and rewarded".

Leatherface? Everybody enjoys going against Leatherface. Replace him with Nurse.