Rulebook
I’ve heard about the infamous survivor rule book that everyone talks about but I have noticed a few things in endgame chat exchanges between killers and survivors (which to be fair, has surprisingly rarely ever been toxic from my own experience).
I’ve noticed this on many occasions but only posting because yesterday I saw quite a few in quick succession and it stood out.
In soloQ, had a few killers who slugged and bled out and the endgame exchange between some of the survivors and killers: (these are across different games)
1: some killers said they didn’t like that survivors had flashlight in lobby so they were gonna tunnel and slug
2: killer said they didn’t like 3 toolboxes (none had bnp) so they did it to counter genrush
3: they saw a few players with the same character so presumed it was a swf so they played ‘sweaty’ (not my words)
4. Someone did a sabo in the game so they decided to slug everyone
5. Someone used blasting so they wanted revenge on the team
6. Someone hit them with two pallets so it was revenge
7. Someone self-unhooked so they consider it unfair and so tunneled them
8. One said they needed it for a challenge
9. One killer stated they disliked that there was a map offering
10. One said they saw medkits and didn’t want people to heal up so slugging was easier
11. One said they didn’t like someone using dead hard so went after them after that
12. Several said they felt survivors were being gen-rushed (in some matches this was at 4 gens)
It was like a roll call of things killers don’t like and I’ve seen it echoed at times in the forums. I’m not someone that wants to create drama so please do not consider this a killer bashing post.
I just find it very similar to the concept of a ‘survivor rulebook’. The fact that killers can tunnel and slug as a means of ‘punishment’ and remove agency from others in their toolkit is a little dismaying.
My point is not to discredit killers or their motivations or the rights or wrongs of any play style or the above - but it seems there are two rule books. What exactly is considered inoffensive play for killers?
Comments
-
There’s so many different players that there is no answer. One Killer may want an easy game. Yet that same Killer gets angry when someone kills themselves on hook, giving that Killer what they want- an easy game. It doesn’t make sense. I don’t think it is enough to win, I think players want to dominate. I don’t like any of the rulebooks. The only thing I hate to see is the humping. It’s just so disgusting.
9 -
I didn't play then, but my understanding was that back in 2016 there were "rulebooks" for both killers and survivors. The game was so small that the community could basically punish poor sportsmanship in the next game.
So, killer camps survivor to death? Next game he's got survivors running (actual) infinites and can't catch them. The community policed itself for the most part.
But the rulebooks were things like "don't camp", "don't tunnel", "don't slug", "don't bring the mori that can be used on the first down of the game" for survivors, and things like "don't instant complete gens with bnp" and "don't run (actual) infinite loops" for killer.
The killer rulebook was technically a thing, but largely died out from conversation... Because the devs removed or dealt with it. Instant BNP got reworked long ago, and again recently, loops got blocked after 3 vaults, infinites deleted from maps, and in modern maps they just make anything loopable into a dead zone.
For survivors, I'll give credit and say that camping has had a lot of attention. Rotating hooks, AFC, base kit BT, removing hook grabs are all measures aimed at face camping.
But things like tunneling and slugging have had basically nothing added to combat them, at least nothing base kit. The solutions have all been perk-related. The closest answer here was that DS was overtuned without conspicuous actions or end game restrictions for years, but now with the duration nerf killers don't even think about it.
The "survivor rulebook" is the only one talked about, because it's the only one left with things in it unaddressed for that long.
11 -
Well in my case it's faster to tell you what I don't like:
I don't like map-offerings at all, not on my or the survivors side. I don't have a problem with getting bad maps, but I don't like to be forced sometimes 3-5 rounds to play horrible maps like badham, eyries, garden of joy. Again I don't have a problem getting them by rng, I just don't like to be forced to get them.
Flashlights with background player, and with that I don't mean people that occasionally save if they're near the chased survivor but people that literally don't do anything at all besides following me to save people. They are increadible worthless in most rounds for the survivors especially if they're bad and they just annoy me for no reason at all. I'd say I kill them quickly, but often they stack around 89 millionen second-chance perks on each other. Of course that point just gets worse the more flashlights there are, but it can also be horrible with just 1 xD
Flashbangs with background player, same as flashlights but it's worse because you can for some reason flashbang-save without any counterplay against walls, the lack of any reliable counterplay besides slugging makes them horrible to play against.
At last it's people being intentionally arrogant, annoying or just bad losers, they are often down so quickly for the fact that they were so confident before and it just hurts me to play against people like that. I don't know against what killer those people played before but i'd say very bad ones, otherwise they wouldn't think they are the best survivors ever seen. I have to admit I like the endgame-chats and comments from that people, they are often so offended that I killed them. Well they are still annoying xD
In conclusion People that just play normally are perfectly fine, I just hate people that annoy me for no reason and people that somehow think they're the best even tho they are pretty bad xD
2 -
@HerInfernalMajesty @AmpersandUnderscore @KatsuhxP
Thank you all for your replies - I totally agree and understand all your comments. The concept of ‘FairPlay’ and a ‘crossing’ of it can understandably justify retribution (not saying I would personally do so but I can understand as a concept).
What dismays me is that there are these tools on one side to ‘punish’ the other but not the other way round. You could of course say ‘well become a great looper and show a toxic killer what’s what!’ Or ‘use x,y,z perk or strategy’, but for the average soloQ survivor, this may be easier said than done.
The issue is that a killer who perceives a slight or insult for any of the reasons above (or even just to be intentionally griefing) and wants to punish one or all, they have at the very base, a set of tools to do so. Whether to all or at least one (in most cases).For a survivor, how would they ‘punish’ a killer for stuff they don’t like? (Other than bm-ing which is just going to perpetuate the cycle of hate; and of course, having the supreme skill and right perk choices to counteract - but even then for how long? If someone wants to slug or tunnel you out, they will).
3 -
yes, as I’ve become more experienced (but sadly not better lol) in the game and generally try to keep an open mind for both sides of the player base, my conclusion is to remove the concept of rulebooks and remove the agency in ‘doling out’ punishment for perceiving them transgressed.
Now, I will also add that the game should do better to avoid features and mechanics that allow or at least enable things that people have gripes with that are justified perhaps, e.g. @KatsuhxP points on map offerings (do we even need them? Let’s just play wherever we’re sent); flashbangs (adjust so it does have counter play); bming at gates (have some mechanic that teleports these people back in if the game detects a teabag actions in endgame gate ←just an idea I’m sure it isn’t easy but sure must be better than the status quo.
and so on.
1 -
The issue is that a killer who perceives a slight or insult for any of the reasons above (or even just to be intentionally griefing) and wants to punish one or all, they have at the very base, a set of tools to do so.
Yup, completely agree.
And the other issue is that the counter to those punishments, if a counter exists at all, is a perk. So if you don't bring unbreakable and get slugged, other toxic players in the community will just throw out the "JuSt BrInG tHe PeRk" as though running Reassurance, Unbreakable, OTR, DS, and an exhaustion perk is even possible, let alone viable.
3 -
Well I wouldn't say myself that I punish them directly, I just use every chance I can get more often than not. So if the team as a whole gives me the chance to end the game quickly I will probably do that, of course I'm more likely to do that if I'm getting annoyed before because I don't want to play this round longer than I have to.
The only thing I punish directly are people with power struggle and or boil over by slugging them to death if I don't get another chance to kill them because they make themself unhookable. But those people should expect that. (Well they are usually pretty insulted by that, but what exactly did they expect? xD)
(That all being said, I'm for sure not the best example for doing anything against toxicity. I tunnel and camp in any situation I can do it without losing anything no matter how strong the survivors are, I just don't force anything. I also have to say I played perfectly fair at the start and started to play like that because I was insulted often even tho I only lost because I played fair. That part is just for myself and you to make the point that I'm also not playing perfectly nice and to explain why).
3 -
My honest take on all things BM in this game is this:
This game is intensely personal in that there are continuous opportunities that pit people's reading, conditioning, and adapting skills to the test. It is an intensely intimate psychological interaction. People react differently but constantly being read, conditioned and adapted to can feel like being dominated, because in a way it is. I mean it's just a game but for many people the feelings are still real.
Anything that makes a player feel bad I believe is part of the root for why people retaliate with BM and labeling everything as BM.
A Killer player can get angry irl just because a Survivor plays the game well as intended. So what, the Survivor needs to what, lose at chase?Same stuff applies vice versa to Survivors.
I'm being longwinded but I think it's about control. If Survivors are in control, everything they do is BM. If a Killer is in control, everything they do is BM. There are exceptions to this such as bleeding out for no reason or holding the game hostage by hiding without doing gens.
2 -
@HerInfernalMajesty @AmpersandUnderscore @KatsuhxP
Thanks for your responses and thoughts guys :) Lots for me to reflect on and I deeply appreciate your takes and personal insights.
🍰✨
1 -
Of the list: as a survivor I've definitely had number 4 occur to me where I managed a sabo save and this led to the killer slugging me and ignoring everyone else.
When playing killer: there's never been a circumstance where I've ever tried to punish a player. If I see a bunch of tool boxes or map offering, I might ramp up my game a little, but that's done because I think the competition will be more intense and I need to try and win.
2 -
Sure I hope I didn't talk too much around it and you got any usefull information :D
1 -
Yes I totally understand and can accept someone playing competitively, or using their perks and builds to maximum effect - no objection in any of these cases from me. Similarly, something like body blocking, if I ever do it to protect a teammate who may potentially die, I have no qualms or quibbles if the killer then targets me - it’s a cost that’s calculated.
I just think that the ability to target based on any number of things that may or may not be obvious - for one side, is a little unhealthy.
When someone says, “I got teabagged by a toxic survivor repeatedly for no apparent reason, so I tunnelled someone out. I didn’t care that I’ll throw the match I just wanted them out” - it’s hard to argue against their motivations in a case such as this, if not the action itself,
But when someone says “I got tunnelled, slugged/camped/hit on hook by a toxic killer for no apparent reason” there isn’t the same level of ‘justuce’.
My thoughts are this creates an imbalance whereby toxic players (on both sides) exist but only one side has the tools to more often than not, exact their ‘revenge’ regardless of throwing the match or not. As you can imagine, in soloQ? Where matches are thrown on whims, it just leads to an excess of DCs instead
1 -
I just think that the ability to target based on any number of things that may or may not be obvious - for one side, is a little unhealthy.I don't disagree, but outside slugging people out for 4 minutes which has a relatively simple solution, I'm not sure how you could stop most of these types of behaviors. Most changes to try and address could easily run into other gameplay mechanics.
2 -
yes absolutely! I firmly believe this isn’t a ‘right or wrong’ thing - we all have our own/collective sense of justice and motivations. Sadly many people can and do get caught in the crossfire as a consequence so my wider wish is for the game to be as close enough to ideal for all parties. For sure that may be impossible and is subjective but hopefully!
1 -
I don't think that's really possible alone because of the fact there are people that find using gimmick-builds fun and they'll probably lose and then there are people like me that find winning mostly fun. Bhvr would have to decide which way they want to go and balance it that way, if they don't do that both parties will probably always fight.
Well let's see what they do, they did pretty interessting things in the last 2-3 years so maybe they'll actually change anything big enough to fix that issue.
1 -
Yes I agree, I know for most potential ‘balances’ there is a chance it can be abusable.
brighter and better minds than mine are probably already thinking of these balances with the best compromises.Sometimes for me it does feel like “a change might be abusable, so we’ll leave them.. where they are abusable by one side to an extent”
But sorry I think I just felt a little sad by the situation and might be a little negative - apologies for being a bit of a wet tissue! lol
and Thanks for your thoughts ☺️
🍰✨
1 -
I am a gimmicky player honestly and I’d have no objection if someone like you wiped the floor with me, I would never blame you or get salty at you for going all out (and believe it or not, even with my gimmicky build (for the people, boon exponentia, plot twist, mirrored illusion) I try my best to do well and support the team objective as much as possible).
Nothing wrong with even camping or tunnelling or whatever because these are tools in the game whether I like or agree with them or not. It’s the (and I know this doesn’t apply to everyone) whole concept of being able to punish someone for things we like or dislike being only applied one way that can cause frustration.
The solution is for sure not easy and may not even be possible in some of most cases but anything that can bridge the gap is progress.
No two people may ever agree on an approach but I respect someone’s feelings and motivations nonetheless. usually that is always my position whenever I read forum posts and opinions
1 -
Well there are quite a few people that think of it as a party game where no one is allowed to play for wins. I was insulted yesterday as demogorgon by 2 kates(or sables? Don't remember) because they just wanted to meme but I just killed them because I don't want to have meme-matches, they chose to use gimmick-builds themself and lost because of it and then got salty because I actually wanted to kill them.
That was in no shape or form meant against gimmick-builds in general or you it's just meant for people that use them and almost try to force the killer to also meme around then.
I personally don't see tunneling or camping as a thing against someone specifically, I just take who I get mostly. Of course if the survivors annoy me it could be that I choose them intentionally to have my piece for the rest of the match, but it's not meant as a attack against anyone. That's also my way of thinking if I play survivor, I don't have anything against it if I get tunneled or camped I understand that the killer just wants to get someone out and that he'll want me out as quickly as possible if I loop him for ages or I annoy him. Most people in my experience in the contrast see it as an attack against them and that's just wrong a lot of the times I think, that's sadly a problem they'd have to fix themself and most of them probably won't work on that. So that's a really big problem that's really hard to fix and a lot of misunderstanding.
1 -
4. Someone did a sabo in the game so they decided to slug everyone
Most of the examples are fairly situational, with everyone picking whichever excuse they like to justify playing scummy.
But this one…
I hate getting sabotage missions because killers in general switch gears when they see a sabotage attempt. And this is not a "I faced one player that didn't like it", it's a "Every single sabo mission I try to finish gets me slugged, camped or tunneled, hands down".
Probably my most recent example was my worst one. I had to do a sabotage mission a few days ago and a Clown got so offended, so angry, that they dropped the survivor they were carrying, went straight to kill me, carried me all the way to basement, and then proceeded to proxy camp until he saw someone come to rescue me, immediately started chasing me ignoring everything and everyone else, and once I was dead he started taunting me on the death camera.
So yeah, while most are mostly situational, "Sabotaging gets you out of the game first" is definitely, unquestionably a rule in the killer's rulebook.
1 -
General rule of thumb: killer players who unironically talk about the survivor rulebook have a massive tome of killer rules.
5 -
whole concept of being able to punish someone for things we like or dislike being only applied one way that can cause frustration.
This touches at the heart of Dbd. The fine line of how much power the Killer should have to remain a threat without being overly oppressive.
You’re right. It is very hard, maybe even impossible as you mention to implement. Another user put it really well. @pseudechis mentioned how part of Dbd’s appeal is the visceral nature of early elimination. I have to agree with her. In my opinion it does create a tension that fits the mood of the game- a Killer who will eventually get you.
But again, there’s the dark side of it. The bleedouts and all other types of BM.
I’m torn on this topic. Being a huge horror fan I love how big of a feature the Killers are in this game. It makes my imagination go wild which I love. Even dying as a Survivor doesn’t bother me because it feels like a horror movie experience to me. I think that it is hard to reconcile a horror experience with an esports type of balance.
Now on the other hand… This game is good at making you feel things. Too good sometimes judging by all the BM in the game and chat. And on this front I can sympathize. Sure I could grind my heels in and say, “You know what you’re getting into when playing this game”. But I mean, it’s a game it should be fun with some moments of stress. So when there are ways that people have created to be nasty to each other I can see the angst surrounding it. I understand this isn’t a call to give every complainer what they want, but the complaints do come from somewhere.
It’s a fascinating question, one that I’m sure Bhvr is constantly deliberating over. What a great topic. That was a fun exercise.
Wonderful contribution 💐
1 -
Killers: Survivors are saying things in endgame chat!
Survivors: This game is miserable to play.
These complaints are given equal weight by many.
1 -
Every single person has their own rules whether they admit it or not. Things that they don’t like so they will punish making it their defacto rule.
If you body block for a healthy survivor with your basekit borrowed time, I will tunnel you guilt free.
If you can’t wait 5 seconds for me to leave the area before you unhook, I will return to hook guilt free.
I could go on honestly for both sides. But no matter what happens their will always be someone who dislikes how you play and nothing can be done about it.
1 -
I'd like to see a physical version of the killer/survivor rule book made lol
3 -
Both "rulebooks" are effectively the same of "play how I want you to play". The killer feels "gen rushed" bad survivors. The killer sees a key, they must be tunneled or else (least we saw some logic in this one). Survivor crouching at a pallet, they must be t-bagging me and need to be tunneled and camped. They have a name you don't like, gonna get camped.
4 -
honestly for some killers simply surviving in a chase for more than 30 seconds is bad
3 -
Personally I burn the rule books and play how I want, I tunnel, camp and slug if the situation calls for it. If I want to use noed I will. if I want to use double iri Myers I will. I expect survivors to play how they want (and they do) and I counter it. just don't cry to me when I play how I want.
So many times I have had complaints "you only won because you tunneled" or "you only won because you used noed" um ye? That's like saying to a survivor you only won because you looped while others did gens. All part of the game, just have to learn to counter the opponents tactics.
The main issue is that people seem to think the onus to make the game fun is on the opponent. Sorry but I don't rely on survivors to make the game fun for me so don't rely on me to make the game fun for you. Somehow I don't think people are going into a match thinking "let's make this match fun for my opponent"
2 -
As you probably well know, it's down to the player's attitide, the circumstance, and the perceived reality of what is happening.
The unifying belief I have is that - unless it's for a challenge, like an Adept, or Survivors are hovering around a downed Survivor, leaving no other option - slugging is mainly use by people unconfident in their ability.
This doesn't mean they are bad, but it reflects on their perception of how they see themselves within the game. It also points out a fear of losing. Of course, nobody likes losing. However, to be unconsciously fearful of losing to such an extent, or shamed of being shown up, that someone resorts to this for the win, instead of learning to get better, is disheartening to see (even though this is very rare, as shown in comments by mods).
Ultimately, those people often come across better players much earlier than they are prepared for. Hence, why people get frustrated and end up in many losses. By trying to avoid what they fear, they ironically will end up facing their fears more often, yet not be prepared to deal with them.
1 -
- Tactical reasoning, didn't wanna have to run Lightborne or Franklin's. Not sweaty, not toxic, not a "rule for Survivors". Youcan run these, but you risk slugging if the Killer is playing serious.
- Tactical reasoning, the Killer doesn't know if you plan to genrush or sabo because Toolboxes, especially green and event ones, are currently overbuffed. Not sweaty, not toxic, not a "rule". You can do this, but just know if the Killer then feels they have no pressure they might slug or tunnel someone.
- Tactical reasoning, seeing multiples of the same character in the same cosmetic is often a cue for a SWF (you must play harder against SWFs because they could be very coordinated, you can't take the risk they are not because letting your guard down against coordinated Survs is a loss), and is very hard to keep track of as Killer in the head of the moment even on the HUD sometimes. Not sweaty, toxic, or a "rule". If the Killer can't tell between you two, how are you going to blame them for slugging the same person who looks just like you? They can't tell.
- Tactical reasoning, the only reliable counter to sabotage, which BHVR overbuffed and nobody wanted, is slugging. Sorry, but that's also not toxic, sweaty, or a "rule". If your team won't give the Killer any chance at hooking, they have to slug to get pressure - because they sure aren't getting any from hooks. You won't let them.
- Blast Mine is annoying, fam. It might be fun for you but it's really obnoxious to deal with, and unfortunately bullys exist so some Killers are sensitized to that. Is it right to slug for it? No. But there is a reason there, and that reasoning is not wanting to deal with past pain. Blast Mine is only fun for Survivor side. It's petty and obnoxious on Killer side. That's toxic to slug over, but not a "rule" - if you don't want a pissed off Killer maybe don't insist on squadding up and all running perks like this. If you want to run it, fine, but accept that some Killers will find it really obnoxious and might be petty right back.
- Killers who get this mad about pallets are probably babies, forgive them, they literally don't know any better. They'll learn. Do you get mad when a toddler throws a tantrum? This isn't a rule, this is just a player being a crybaby over nothing.
- Killers can't tell if the self-unhook is a 4% or you have Deliverance. Also, if the Killer cannot find anyone else, and they hear that unhook notification, where else do you expect them to go? That's right, where the game tells them to go - right back to the hook. It's not tunnelling if the Killer is looking for someone and can't find anyone so they check the hook again. Not sweaty, not toxic, not a "rule". It's just part of the game… but slugging over it is dumb.
- The Killer needed to get 4 kills for a challenge. That's BHVR's fault for designing it. Not sweaty, toxic, or a rule. Why even list this one?
- Certain maps are more Survivor sided than others, and that Killer could have gone against that type of play all day. You don't know. If the Killer can't do much in a certain map they have to default to basic Killer play - which includes tactically slugging and maybe tunnelling if they have no pressure. Not sweaty, not toxic, not a "rule". If you bring map offerings you know to be Survivor-favored you cannot blame the Killer for going "guess I have to play sweaty now, because they seem to be sweating." Do you play nice when the Killer brings a map favoring them? Pretty sure you play the same as usual and assume they're sweating, so why is it different when Survivors do it to Killers?
- That Killer, if not an injury pressure Killer, probably wasn't confident. Being unconfident isn't a crime, toxic, or sweaty, and it's certainly not a "rule" to not bring medkits. It could be they also had a challenge to keep Survivors injured or injure people, or they may have an injury-heavy playstyle. It's also because syringes are a free instant heal; they don't know what you have as addons necessarily, so it's understandable maybe they didn't want you to use a syringe. I still think it's stupid to slug over it though.
- The one saying this at four gens is not too bright, but for everyone else this is tactical reasoning - if you have no pressure, and gens are going quickly, and you have no kills (very easy to have happen on some Killers especially M1s) then you need someone out fast. That can lead to a slug or to tunnelling someone out. That's kind of just part of the game. It's not toxic, sweaty, or a "rule" that you can't do gens fast, but if you do them really fast you need to expect the Killer can and will step their game up.
There is no Killer rulebook for Survivors, not in the way Survivors have one for Killers, because Survivors do not control the round. Killers do. Survivors are the ones "setting boundaries and rules" because they're the ones that can be removed from the game. The Killer can't. Nobody who plays Killer actually believes any of these, it's all just people being dumb or tactics for a given situation to counter what Survivors are doing. Perceiving any of this as a real punishment instead of the explanations or dumb takes these Killers gave is a huge flaw, and does more harm than good.
1 -
Let's flip that, friend. Personally what I see way way way more often is:
Killers: I just feel that XYZ thing on Survivor side is a little unbalanced, or ZYX on Q Killer could be changed to make them a little better and more balanced.
Survivors: HELP HELP I'M BEING TUNNELLED AND SLUGGED! (they had no hooks but were chased a lot, and they got left on the ground for a few seconds while the Killer went to shoo off their friend hovering with a flashlight)
Let's not pretend both sides don't say some pretty dumb over the top things.
2 -
for me personally, i don't get offended by many things because i play much worse when i get emotional and will throw the whole match, also i want to chill and relax not to stress about the video game i want to enjoy. the only "offenses" for me when i'm playing killer are (especially extended) bodyblocks with anti tunnel mechanics and map offerings; them being broken aside, that's more of the reason i try to avoid map offerings.
also trying to get your anger out on other players in a video game sounds very silly. "punishing" survivors? come on.
on the counterability of the "punishments": tunneling is unhealthy and should be dealt with finally, camping got addressed in many ways and slugging is fine as is. game just needs to end as soon as all 4 survivors are slugged for a certain period of time but that's mostly it.
1 -
no problem, I appreciate you going through each point one by one - just to clarify tho, I wasn’t talking about nor highlighting any of these as toxic, sweaty or otherwise. I was merely noting the conversations and points killers themselves mentioned for the purposes that there are many things different killers (which are often the opinions on the forums in many threads and posts) don’t like.
In regards to whether these equate to a rule book or not, again, there is no technical definition. There are things that I personally feel are analogous in respect to people having expectations of or things they see as ideal and not, which may then invoke a reaction or response or approach be it in the game as a strategy or an action against a person or group or stating it in a forum or post. Any list drawn from either side can always have someone provide ‘mitigating circumstances’ as you have and honestly that is not even the purpose of the post. It’s more about how people perceive things and can then plan ‘tactical’ responses as you put it. But currently this is only for one side. There are deductions and perceptions happening as lots of players don’t like different things and may be the reason why they target someone or a group (as many killers themselves have mentioned in the points I made AND in the forums - have a look at how many examples of people saying “well someone bringing distortion can expect full tunnelling and slugging!” And I’m not saying this is right or wrong or toxic. I have my opinions but that debate is going to be subjective. I’m highlighting the matter of agency.
I’ll also note that these were not in a swf and not ‘me’ who had issues - I just reflected the conversations I saw in EGC. It was also to highlight that when a killer doesn’t like something they can inflict punitive actions (by their own admission as I mentioned - regardless of whether they be considered ‘punishment’ by you or I or others - this was their own intimation. Punishment here is: I didn’t like x so I’ll do such and such to that person or group. But the technical meaning isn’t so important. As I also mentioned, oft times these were at the expense of throwing a match by ignoring all other components to exact said response. Whereas there is no (barring a high level of skill and/or perks/coordination) similar concept of a survivor ‘punishing’ a killer or ‘tactical‘ planning for things they don’t like, especially in soloq unless very skilled or co-ordinated.
And to be clear, I don’t mean to say I want survivors to be able to punish killers - I’m not an apologist or manifesto promoter for bad survivor behaviour saying killers can so survivors should. I’m just saying the agency and ability to do so should be removed as much as possible on both sides and then address (or try to) the factors that annoy both sides as much as possible (in terms of mechanics, so for example, add counter play to flashbang saves as killers find that rightly unfair, and remove map offerings etc).
Killers and survivors can make a case for all their actions and deny the validity of others’ experience all we want but I personally feel it is important to strive for a positive outcome for the health of the game.
Finally I just want to add that it is not my style to enter into debates or one-upmanship (and certainly not saying that is what you are trying to do!), so I’ll end with that I respect all opinions and thoughts on this topic. I just felt it important to clarify as I may not have (and maybe even now!) articulated my intention and purpose very well in my original post.
Thank you 🍰✨
Post edited by For_The_People on3 -
thank you so much!! Also I haven’t seen @pseudechis for a while but I very much respected their posts and opinions a lot - quite often helped me understand things from a Killer POV when I first joined the forums ☺️
2 -
yes I agree - although I may not have articulated myself very well in my original post, ultimately what you said about wanting to not stress about the game and enjoy the game (whether playing chill or wanting to win) is something I very very much believe in and hope whatever changes happen help in that goal and counteract the current environment of increasing hostility on both sides which is harming the game.
1 -
please ignore this "rulebook" it doesn't exist and no one enforces it. its just propaganda, to gain the advantage. part of it is satire or trolling, but there are few on insisting it isn't. just play the game, and play how you want.
3 -
With all the DBD players out there, you are bound to encounter one of each sort. Some hate X thing while others will hate on Y thing. I think the main reason why the survivor rule book seems to be more prevalent is that there are 4 survivors and 1 killer per match. So statistically the chance that one survivor will show their entitlement is 4 times as high.
A general rule of thumb is: "As long as it doesn't make their game easier / more enjoyable, someone will find it offensive." Pretty much anything will be considered offensive by someone. However, as long as you don't go out of your way to be a dick, that's enough for these complaints to be unjustified.
Play the game however you want. As long as your motivation is not make others miserable these people are just showing their own entitlement. I'm sure all of us dislike at least one thing about the game but that doesn't mean we have any authority to dictate how others should play.
2 -
(っ'-' )╮ =͟͟͞͞ 📕📙
Jokes aside, it would probably actually make for fun and popular merch!
1 -
Id rather the Devs give Killers a crouch animation so they can T-bag instead. Heck, I’ll be okay if they got a full on twerk emote. But the walking back and forth over a slugger Survivor is sooooo cringe!
1 -
Fair enough, I wasn't trying to attack. I was trying to point out why a Killer might do or think to do certain things. It's important I think for people to understand how both sides play, otherwise you don't get the whole picture.
That's why I don't think anything in the game is toxic aside from cruelty in the endgame chat, doxxing, obvious griefing, or taking ingame grief out of the game. Tunnelling, camping, slugging, genrushing, blinds, stuns, none of that is toxic.
1 -
You might find this video funny. It is satire and covers rules similar to your experiences.
2 -
Bleeding everyone out and then saying you had a challenge is some very funny bm tbh
2 -
i agree that people take everything so personally and act out of spite, and that it creates a very toxic atmosphere. hopefully devs can get rid of the ways players can take the anger out on others, mainly imo tunneling and map offerings. of course not all cases are happening out of spite, but still.
though i don't know what they could do to make it so for example a killer doesn't see a sabo play as a personal attack
1 -
haha I love this! I saw the survivor version too and it was also hilarious lol I think we all need to watch these from time to time and see the funny side of it for sure!
1
