Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
Survivors killing themselves on Hook
This is my solution
Self Unhooking during 1st Stage is 70 seconds and Survivors will now get 5 attempts to unhook themselves. (Was 3)
A failed Self-Unhook attempt will then cause a 5 second cooldown. 4 attempts will be a total of 20 seconds. The 5th will put you into 2nd stage so it will not need this cooldown. This way the Survivor is guaranteed to stay on the 1st stage for at least 20 seconds instead of like 5 seconds
Failed attempts penalise the Survivor by reducing the Hook Stage duration by -10 seconds each,(Was -20 with 3 attempts and Hooks were 60 seconds), thus allowing for a maximum of 5 attempts. (Was 3)
(5*10=50+20=70)
Comments
-
You can't stop someone from giving up in the first place. They need a penalty but I don't know how.
6 -
Well my solution would be to slow down the survivors killing themselves so the the survivors have a chance to rescue them before they hit stage 2 and with 2 extra attempts means 2 extra possible unhooks
0 -
You can't stop people from giving up, but that doesn't mean we need to keep a super easy way of leaving the match with no penalty.
If you remove hook suicides, people will generally be less likely to give up, as that makes giving up a pain. You'd have to go AFK until the killer killed you, and you can't immediately go into the next match.
4 -
So at the end, nothing changed? As I said, they are going to give up regardless. They made the choice already and they'll stick to it. This won't discourage giving up.
4 -
Correct, but unless you have a solution or better idea, this trumps nothing. I'd rather giving up be annoying at the very least to do than just free as it is now.
Doesn't matter if they decided to give up or not. It needs to be more painful to do so. Right now… its effortless.
3 -
Some people are going to give up regardless. A lot of people won't, though.
People generally take the path of least resistance for things. If staying in the game and playing it is easier than AFKing and giving up, then people will generally play.
4 -
At first, I thought this was a bad idea, but reading through it a few times I'm coming around on it.
I don't think increasing the amount of unhook attempts is necessary. That runs into problems that you'd have to rebalance things like Slippery Meat and Luck. Just keep the 3 unhooks, but make it a 10 second timer in between.
1st unhook: instant, timer to 50 seconds
2nd unhook: 10 real seconds past, timer to 20 seconds
3rd unhook: 20 real seconds past since hook, timer to 0 and start stage 2.
It would be better than the current situation, that's for sure.
Of course it would. Even if it reduced instances of giving up by a small number it would still be a game improvement, but I suspect it would be a sizable amount of people. The wait town would reduce the rage quit, it would give survivors time to save, being killers know that if they proxy camp they'll be there a minimum of 20 seconds would reduce that, and when people are unhooked they generally play the game.
People can disconnect at will. Why don't they? The penalty. You'll never stop it entirely, but there's a reason people prefer hook suiciding over dcing.
1 -
The same way literally every single other multiplayer game does it, you ban people for "feeding" or "throwing" the game.
- LoL does it
- DotA does it
- CS:GO does it
- Rainbow Six does it
- Overwatch does it
- The list goes on.
4 -
Those are all balanced non-asymmetrical games. Completely irrelevant what they do.
9 -
Well I thought about making the 4% go up to 5% and have an Idea for a reworked Slippery Meat.
•Increases Luck by 3/4/5% while Hooked. (Was 2/3/4%)(10% Chance in total)
•If any Survivor is hooked on the same hook, they have a 100% chance to unhook themselves. Causes the Broken Status Effect for 100/80/60 seconds after unhooking yourself.
•The Aura of the Hook is revealed in yellow to all Survivors.
(Removed the 3 additional Self-Unhook attempts)
0 -
Punitive measures never work, and you can’t mind control people into wanting to play. They’ll either AFK or just run around making loud noise notifications until they’re dead. Either way they aren’t going to spring into helping you as a survivor escape the trial.
6 -
What aspect of an asymmetrical game makes it so different that you can't punish people for intentionally ruining games?
4 -
Okay, but why?
If the main purpose of the idea is 'put a delay in between unhook attempts' why increase the number of unhook attempts instead of increase the possible timer? You're just adding complexity when it isn't needed (or at least I don't see why that part would be a benefit).
0 -
I mean I dont blame them. SoloQ survivors are just running out of reasons to stay in a match at this point.
5 -
LoL (and probably the other games as well) has a forfeit option so a team that has clearly lost can give up to stop wasting everyone's time. If dbd had a similar system, I think there would be a lot less self unhook attempting.
3 -
- You don't need your team to win. Self explanatory. A win for a survivor is not when all 4 people escape, it's when that individual escapes. Their death does not determine your outcome.
- You have to prove intention. In a game like League of Overwatch proving the difference between an unskilled player making bad decisions and a player intentionally throwing a game can be difficult. It's a job entirely on it's own. You probably think this sounds simply and easy in your head but actually take the time to think about the logistics of responding to a reported player and concluding they did in fact die on hook on purpose in a way you can prove it.
- It's not against the rules. Dying on hook is your means of forfeiting a match. You decide you no longer want to win or cannot win, and therefor choose to die. You can do that as you please.
6 -
These games have an give up button as team. As usual, you mention the same games, but you forget about this aspect. It's easy to manipulate when you only give some of the info. ;)
1 -
Of that list i can only confirm LoL does, but CS:GO definitely does not, nor does DotA and games of DotA can routinely go for more than an hour long match.
2 -
- By design you DO need your team to win as a survivor. A hatch is considered a draw, not a win, killer is by themselves so there is no other "team" there. Unless you are suggesting that 1 survivor can "Win" by doing all 5 gens themselves and escaping through the gates, which is never going to happen unless the killer lets them.
- I think it is very easy to tell when someone is throwing a match in DBD, it is no different then running yourself at the enemy base in DotA.
- I'm saying it should be.
1 -
Actually they don't all have give up buttons. DotA does not, and a match of DotA can easily last an hour. Are you saying that DbD players are so special that they can't sit through an 8 minute match they don't want to but DotA players are able to sit through an hour+ long match they don't want to play because they don't like the hero their opponent or teammate picked?
1 -
easy fix: remove 4% unhook chance. I mean, when did it actually get used for actual unhook attempt now where luck.is.meaningless?
2 -
They did it for the 2v8 and no one complain about it. Maybe they might add it to the base mode
1 -
Considering how over powered killers are, there shouldn't be a penalty. Until BHVR does something to make the survivor experience fun again, survivors should be allowed to give up or leave - it's only fair, since BHVR is okay with killers being toxic.
0 -
Personally i've never played dota so it could be lies. From doing a quick search though, several websites seem to say that there is a way to surrender but all players on a team have to do it. In public matches it can also only be after the 30 minute mark. Again, never played it, maybe it was even removed.
Something like rocket League does offer a forfeit option though. But only after I think the 1:30 mark. It also requires everyone on the team forfeiting as well. Which honestly I'm fine with. Though it means that they either want to continue trying or want to ruin the match out of spite.
0 -
If you look at my steam profile, i have almost 3k hours in DotA, i promise you, there is no surrender option in DotA. That surrender option is very specific to tournament type matches that the pros play.
Here is a relatively recent reddit thread where someone is asking for them to add a surrender option:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1clx857/dota_2_needs_a_surrender_button/
EDIT: it appears they added one but only if you are playing as a 5-man team which personally i haven't done in a while, i generally play by myself or if 1 or 2 friends:
2 -
Ahh ok, yeah I trust you there, I've seen you mention DOTA a lot. I would not think you haven't played it a lot.
I found the below but kind of questioned the websites after i read it. I imagine I would've found more from websites I know if it were really true. It also seemed to be different requirement from one website to the next.
"Play the game in a full-stack party (five players queuing together)
Only available after 30 minutes of game
You must type "GG" in all chat to trigger the surrender option
To make sure all five players agree on this, they must wait for the overlaid ten-second countdown to finish."
0 -
It's not irrelevant at all, because all of those games are matchmaking games that requires both teams to have a full compliment of players to function.
DBD is exactly the same, it needs to have 5 players to function, and actually, it's even more important for an asym game to have full teams that are both playing, because 3 players on survivor side is a near insurmountable disadvantage, whereas in CSGO for example, it is still quite possible for a 4 man team to win against a 5 man team.
So to say it's not relevant is just objectively incorrect... it's objectively more important for DBD to heavily discourage quitters and leavers, because the fundamental concept of the game breaks without 4 survivors.
The only reason it isn't enforced in DBD is there is no guaranteed method to infer intent and objectively distinguish between genuine unhook attempts, genuine suicides to help a teammate with hatch, and ingenuine unhook attempts to subvert the DC penalty.
It is why as Killer if I see a player SoH for no reason and a survivor saves them, I slug them on the floor and force them to choose between bleeding out for 4 minutes or give their team a bot. When playing survivor I always unhook a SoHer and hope the killer does the same.
If BHVR can't police it in my games, I will police it myself using legal mechanisms to discourage this type of selfish behaviour.
1 -
I don’t ever see killers slug. I see them go ahead and hook and turn the game into 3v1 then steamroll. Lol
0 -
You know what they say, be the change. 😉
0 -
They also say change starts with you. Show us how it’s done. 🙂
1 -
Simple fix, don't let them attempt the escape at all without perks related to it. They did it in 2v8, its not that hard to implement.
1 -
Personally I consider a SoH game a dead game.
Whether you win or not doesn't prove anything, so the outcome of the game means nothing. It's amazing how much more fun DBD is if you ignore MMR as a motivator entirely (especially as you can't see it, so climbing the MMR ladder is completely worthless regardless of SoH or not). I can't stand leavers when I play survivor, so I don't tolerate then as a killer either. Game is just as ruined regardless of which solide you're on.
If I did something a little nasty to make a SoH a little understandable (such as stumbled upon a survivor doing their head trap on a Jigsaw box and taking another hook), I will likely just sacrifice them.
If however someone tries to SoH but gets saved by a player preventing it, or starts spamming lockers/pallet vaults just cause I'm playing Spirit, or Pig, or Skull Merchant (especially the way I play them), I slug them on the floor and keep slugging them on the floor until they DC or bleedout.
In either case, I play out as normal going for max hooks, and anyone who wants to quit I will let quit, but anyone else who plays on I will give hatch/let repair gens and escape.
0 -
What is the point of that? If they dont want to play and their DC penalty is already too high they will just go AFK. Your "punishment" is not going to change anyone and make them suddenly realize how wrong they are, in fact it will probably do the opposite and just make them feel more justified and more likely to throw future games.
0 -
People will give up far less if matchmaking is better and if they see the killers they are playing against as more fun.
2 -
Remove M1 in Stage 1
0 -
Simply remove the ability to try to unhook yourself unless if it's for the anti-camping feature or Deliverance.
Also remove the skill checks from 2nd stage. MAYBE give a prompt if you want to ######### if two other survs are already dead so you can die faster to give the last surv the opportunity to get the hatch.
This way the baby cannot kill him/herself on hook.
It's that easy.
Also it get's rid of the stupid 4%
Is idiotic to have something happen that benefits one side and screws the other literally by pure luck.1 -
What's the point of crushing the group of players who want to play because they got a baby on their team?
The SoH player ruined their game and mine, so yes, every inconvenience I can exert on them, I will take, if for no other reason than for the catharsis of irritating them as much as they irritate other players, and the satisfaction of knowing they can't immediately rush off to ruin the next game for somebody else.
I consider it a community service, and I encourage everybody to do the same. Leave the baby slugged and let them choose between wasting 7 minutes of their day between lobby time and a 4 minute slug, DCing and eating their penalty, or playing the bloody game that they agreed to play when they joined the lobby.
You'd be surprised how many players after being slugged for 2 minutes and realising I'm not letting them off the hook easy start playing again.
Post edited by UndeddJester on0 -
Choosing to do a reportable action (AFKING) seems like a really stupid idea to me. But hey if they'd rather get reported than just leave or play the game they signed up for that's their choice. Hopefully they just end up banned and they can't grief people anymore. If you leave enough to build up the matchmaking penalty you clearly shouldn't be playing the game in the first place.
2 -
No one is going to get banned for afking while they bleed out lol. Some of the people that play this game are so self righteous its hilarious.
1 -
A lot of my issues as a SoloQ survivor are caused by people leaving the game early.
Identity V has a system that punishes people for giving up early/idling in matches. You get stacking matchmaking bans for going AFK or throwing, and eventually your currency gain is heavily reduced as well.
If you rack up a bunch of severe violations, you can get permanently banned. (Not that I think permabans for giving up should be a thing in DBD, but you wanted an example from an asym game).
They also don't have the option to give up early in the chair (the IDV equivalent of hooks).
1 -
you can't have fun experience in any PvP game if you expect that you can meet both "being bad" and "winning" conditions :D
0
