The Amanda's Letter add-on for The Pig has been Kill Switched due to an issue with incorrect RBT count.
http://dbd.game/killswitch
Is it bannable?
A friend of mine was playing against a killer who was… toxic to say the least. The killer then took the last remaining survivor and took him next to the hatch. It was surely a bait, to hook him the moment he moved. Still, my friend refused to wiggle, and the killer refused to hook. They both waited 1 hour and the server collapse. Is it holding the game hostage for the killer and/or for the survivor?
Comments
-
If they both chose to do nothing I don't think it's reportable no. He could've wiggled and took hatch or Killer could've closed it for EGC.
A reportable example would be if hatch was open and the killer physically bodyblocked the survivor in a spot where it was impossible for him to move to force a DC or wait an hour. That would be reportable with video evidence.
10 -
I would say it's not bannable, because both parties had the opportunity to finish the game and neither did. Essentially, they were just holding themselves hostage.
An example of a bannable offense would be if the killer body blocked a survivor into a corner and refused to budge (how that would even happen though I don't know).
Another scenario that could be considered holding the game hostage is if there's a 3 gen that's very close together and the killer continuously patrols them, ignores chases and only hits survivors repairing, making it nearly impossible for them to escape.
Still, there's an option to report people for harassment, so what you consider harassment is up to you I guess.
3 -
no. Because both could have ended the game if they wanted. It’s not holding the game hostage if both of them chose to do nothing. Just like hatch standoffs weren’t holding the game hostage.
1 -
I can confirm that because he game was able to be ended at any time by both players, this is not taking the game hostage.
13 -
A killer patroling 3 gens ignoring chase isn't holding game hostage. If survivors refuse to do gens regardless of the likelihood they will be hit or hooked, it's the survivors that are holding the game hostage by not doing their objective.
1 -
They're talking more if the killer refuses to hook/down when given chances and only tries to extend the game. There's a screenshot somewhere of this, I'll see if I can find it.
Edit: I found the screenshot like a second later. It's a lot harder to do nowadays with the gen kick limit and all but it's still a thing.
4 -
Im reading that as it only applies to that method with madness T3 as it has a direct effect on the survivors ability to do gens. That would be holding game hostage as no one can do gens even if they tried and no one can be killed. But if the killer is patroling gens not going for chases and only attacks when they go on gens, that's not reportable because the survivors have to option to do gens and the killer would attack. Refusing to down someone that is capable of doing gens still not taking the game hostage, bit unnecessary but not reportable.
It's only taking the game hostage if 1 side refuses to do their objective while preventing the other side from doing theirs such as killers blocking someone in the corner preventing them from doing gens and refusing to kill them. Or when survivors refuse to do gens in 2 v 1 situations while hiding preventing the killer from accomplishing their objective.
0 -
Two players with too much pride holding themselves hostage for an hour for no reason is kinda funny lol.
4 -
Pretty much yeah, Doctor is about the only one who could do it. I think the only other scenario would be if there are 2 people left, 1 is AFK and the killer keeps grabbing the survivor off the gen and refuses to let them work on it and doesn't hook. Though that's also not really 3-genning at that point either.
I do agree everything else is fair game though. I was just bringing up what the other guy was mostly talking about.0 -
another question that is also quite popular, if we are having locker standoff between Tombstone Myers and survivor in locker, is it also considered not taking the game hostage if survivor doesn't want to give Myers a mori kill and Myers doesn't wanna grab them from locker?
0 -
why did this even happen…
0 -
This has been answered by a dev, clarifying that it is not holding the game hostage:
0 -
the survivor isn't the one holding the game hostage in this scenario, the myers is. The survivor is dead either way Myers is the one not acting on it.
1 -
You are wrong. Devs have clarified that it is not holding the game hostage on either side:
0 -
It isn't, as both the survivor and the killer have the ability end the standoff.
2 -
thanks, that's what i thought too, but needed someone to confirm <3
0
