Is This Reportable?
Just wnrt against a Blight on Ormond and we were all slugged at five gens and bled out. I know that the immediate answer is that the match will end, eventually, but at what what point is this not intentional griefing or an outright refusal to play the match? Slugging at 5 gens, refusing to pick up, and just letting us bleed out for who knows what reason other than just because they can is just incredibly poor sportsmanship and is a huge deterrant to want to continue playingin the first place. Am I in the wrong for thinking this is something worth reporting, or is it just an effort in futility because ultimately there is nothing that can be done to prevent such bad behavior? I sent a report for unsportsman-like gameplay, but this is just incredibly frustrating to no one to even get to play the match because someone decided to assert digital dominance over casual players.
Answers
-
No, it's not reportable. Whether the killer incapacitated you by leaving you on the ground or by leaving you on the hook... the results are pretty similar. You are incapacitated until a teammate saves you. You DID get to participate in the match while not incapacitated and like you said, the game DOES end within afew minutes of being on the ground so he's not holding anyone hostage.
8 -
It's pathetic, tde behavior, but it's not reportable. Just go next and be thankful such sad little people are few and far between.
7 -
Sadly it isn't. The only positive side is that if they (the exact same Killer,) do(es) it multiple times against you in a row, it can qualify as targeted repeatedly (see picture).
That is how bizarre the game rules are. You are actually better off being bledout twice in a row, because now you have a case for targeted 'harassment'.
2 -
fun how even then getting tunneled doesnt qualify...
1 -
That's still not reportable. The Blight was downing the entire team, not any particular survivor. He's not going to be punished for being matched up with those survivors again.
4 -
Should it be? Probably.
Should BHVR makes it easier for the game to end in such situations? Definitely.
Is it? No.
5 -
Even though the game still technically progresses while everyone is slugged out for 4 minutes until they bleed out, once all 4 are slugged and no one gets hooked, that should absolutely be considered as holding the game hostage.
EDIT: The game progresses in two ways - survivors complete gens and open the gate or the killer sacrifices survivors to the entity. While all 4 survivors are slugged, there is no progress on any gen and if the killer is leaving them slugged without hooking, the killer is not progressing towards their goal either. Think about it this way, you can't get a killer adept on bleed outs. It does not count towards progression of an adept, it should not count as progression towards the match which takes me back to holding the game hostage.
2 -
I think this is where the spirit of the game is more important than the technical rule of law. We can defend it and try to shirk it off all we want but the most important take away from me was that the sheer injustice of it made the OP consider whether to play the game again or not. For this and other reasons I very sadly cannot recommend the game to other friends.
Rules are rules of course. But many have an arbitrary justification - you can justify almost any form of grieving if you really want to “it’s thematic to horror”.
This game is a maturing game where new players’ entry level is getting steeper and steeper and even older players will get fatigue at some point. I desperately feel the game should focus its resources on a feature to record games or triggers to capture enhanced data in moments like this to know he the overall health and quality of the game.It’s my sincerest hope that such people who do the kinds of things OP mentioned and get away with it until now can be brought to justice. In an ideal scenario there will be a meaningful anti-prolonged slugging in this fashion by virtue of being restricted by mechanics but it just simply has to go.
The ability for one side to remove agency of the other in this fashion is going to build up an imbalanced level of frustration and will divide the player base further. Things are already at a crescendo in some ways. This cannot be healthy or considered acceptable.
So no, OP, it isn’t against the rules sadly. But Yes, i agree with every fibre of my being that it is absolutely horrible and should be.
7 -
It is if you are streaming, because then you can claim they are stream sniping. You can phrase endgame chat in such a way it appears that their response would self-report ("did you bleed me out last match" "yes"). They are breaking the intentions of the rules (Intentional Gameplay Abuse would 100% fit this conceptually), and you can twist them into self-reporting to intentionally breaking rules they were unaware of/not intentionally breaking (specific targeting).
That's the flaw of the current ruleset. People breaking the spirit of the law are let off scott free, and people breaking the letter of the law (intentionally or not) are equally guilty. You have to twist the rules to apply an inaccurate 'letter' ban for accurate 'spirit' scenarios. They technically are still breaking the letter of the law, so it is a valid ban, but you wouldn't jump through those hoops against a normally 'guilty' party.
1 -
It 100% should be. But no it isn't.
Also, reporting does
almostnothing unless you got actual proof like a video to go along with it. Which almost no casual or average person will have ready or even be using any external program to capture it. Most people just load up and play. All that is captured by BHVR when you file an in-game report is the pre-game lobby chat and end-game lobby chat. Whatever happens in the actual match is lost to the void. The report system is absolute hot garbage.1 -
it's not reportable. should it be? it is refusing to participate in normal gameplay at that point but one can still argue it's a strategic decision; 4% exists. so i don't think it should be reportable especially since they can't do it indefinitely, match is still over after 4 mins.
1 -
You'd have to prove that they are showing special attention to any particular player in an attempt to ruin their day. A Killer downing survivors in general is not showing special attention to a survivor, and the matchmaker giving you that same killer is ALSO not the killer showing you special attention when they would've done that very thing had they been matched up with any other survivor team.
2 -
All you need is a "yes" to the question "did you bleed me out last match" for a guaranteed ban (and you can still send the report with legitimate cause regardless). That is enough evidence for targeting the same person repeatedly, and also a clear flaw with the rules as currently written. Intentional bleedouts 100% should be bannable, especially since hooks were made to respawn to prevent that exact condition (and yet it still happens at the same rate before and after). I would love the game rules to be fixed, to prevent cheesy technical bans, while also clearly stating intentional bleedouts are also illegal.
1 -
Nope. Being forced to indulge another player's power fantasy is a feature to the devs. Be sure to rate the match 1 out of 5 funs in the end game screen
6 -
Bleeding Out is not bannable, so someone answering yes to a non-bannable event isn't going to change anything. The category of griefing that you are pointing to is MOSTLY towards survivor actions against their own teammates. Survivors doing things like trapping their teammates in lockers by spamming the open locker action for example since there is no scenario on how that could be a winning move.
Reporting for this would be like a killer reporting for flashlight/pallet saves. It's something that no killer LIKES experiencing, but is not bannable and getting the same survivor team a 2nd time doing flashlight saves doesn't make it targeted harassment. Slugging is not some unintended feature that the devs forgot to exclude, otherwise there would be no perks for slugging nor would there be a bleedout timer.
5 -
Had some silly killer games yesterday where i just were fooling around with survivors. and not hooking / killing anyone.
One of the groups started fast vaulting make a lot of noise to annoy me after the gate is open. And i was like
"wow, i was nice and this is the response i get?" it might only be 2 minutes, but its 2 minutes with loud bangs every 0,5 sec.
- Should it be reportable? I think so, as it serves no purpose but to be toxic against the other part.
I choose to tab out and watch some videos instead of letting this ruin my day. - you can do this as well if the killer bleeds you out.
2 -
No it is not, but it does feel like poor sportsmanship. I keep seeing a forced bleed out option as a recommendation for these situations.
That’s fine but it forces the Survivors to take on the responsibility (and burden) of the Killer’s bad sportsmanship. The Killer gets rewarded for playing… mean. Which again, I get it, we’re all adults here. Of course the Killer will play mean, it’s a game about killing etc…. But… At the end of the day it does feel like bad sportsmanship.
I’m torn because forced bleedouts seem like such a metal thing to do in a Horror game.. Until you really think about what is happening. You’re making four people wait four minutes just because they didn’t play as “good as they should”. While I do think slugging during the trials is a tactic, it’s the intentional bleed outs that feel like bad sportsmanship.
A solution that pins the responsibility of good sportsmanship on the Killer would be something like base-kit Deerstalker. That way after everyone is already on the floor there’s not many reasons not to hook since you know where everyone is at. This of course doesn’t cover the situations where players intentionally bleed out because they want to deny 4% hook escapes but it’s a start.
Maining Plague has made me intimately familer with Infectious Fright. Most people know that the perk is one of the main slugging perks, since you can get chain downs through screams. It’s not rare to slug the whole team. What is difficult sometimes is finding the last Survivor if they crawled away to hide. It can seem like bad sportsmanship if you can’t find the last Survivor which is why I think base kit Deerstalker would help.
Do I think bad sportsmanship can be completely eliminated? No. Is there a difficult line of power to maintain on Killer side? Yes. Can we come up with novel solutions that work for mostly everyone? Yes, yes I believe that we absolutely can. As long as we all work on the problems together I don’t think there’s anything this community can't do.
1 -
4 minutes on the whole team is only really a thing if someone like Bubba gets 4 downs all at once. Typically, if someone wants to slug... ESPECIALLY if they brought perks for slugging, by the time the last survivor goes down, there was a whole game of picking ppl up and them going down again and those bleed out bars are pretty decently progressed. It's not 4 people waiting 4 minutes after the last chase.
As far as the countering the 4% thing, there's actually more being countered. I remember playing a game against a flashlight squad where they made it VERY difficult to hook. Had all 4 ppl slugged eventually... If I walked away from my console, the game would've been over. Turns out one of them had flip flop/power struggle and that was enough to restart everything. Am I saying ALL killers who slug are thinking of that. No... no I'm not. It sure does look suspicious though if a survivor crawled under a pallet.
1 -
You bring up good points. It’s true that the bleeding out mostly happens throughout match play and counterplay. And let’s be honest, if someone feels strongly enough about their bad intentions they will find a way. And yes, there are game-winning reasons to leave everyone on the floor.
My question to you: How do you feel about basekit Deerstalker? We all know it won’t eliminate the problem. But how much do you think it would help? How many games end in a 4-man bleedout? Do you think it would create a dent?
Despite the fact that a Killer who wants to cause bleed outs will cause bleed outs. Despite the fact that the only thing that can stop it is intervention from Bhvr, the Killer themselves, or the Survivors somehow finding some way around it; Do you believe basekit Deerstalker would reduce bleed out numbers? If yes then by how much? Insignificantly? Moderately? Substantially (lol)?
0 -
I think killers would appreciate a free buff and survivors would be against it even if you specify it's only if all 4 survivors are slugged. The amount of ppl who complain about slugging while keeping the mentality of "you wasted my time and now I'll waste yours" is astounding. That's the same ppl who would crawl to the corner of the map before hook respawns even when the match was over. Basically the same people complaining about hook respawns would be against this. At the same time, the people PURPOSEFULLY bleeding out survivors aren't going to start hooking just because of a built in aura reading. This would only help those who would've hooked people if they could just find them.
3 -
Are you sure they were trying to annoy you? I'm not doubting it, because survivors do that to taunt all the time, but if you've established yourself as a meme killer, survivors will also spam vault because they want you to come over to where they are. Like, I've followed relentless spam vaults to find bartenders and survivors on top of rock loops and item shrines before. And I've also followed spam vaults to find people bail out the gates the moment I show up, or trying to bait me into a shack chase, but in a friendly game you don't know which is which until you show up.
But to OP, unfortunately gotta echo everyone else in this thread. It should be reportable, but it is not. BHVR's stance is that as long as something ends on its own, it isn't griefing, which is a blanket which a lot of unhealthy or outright malicious behavior can hide under. I wish they would address this and I'm consistently frustrated that they will not, because even with the grey area that sometimes bleedouts are necessary or at least situationally understandable, this is an area where there are very obvious bad actors whose crimes can be tracked as data, and these players bring nothing positive to the game and should be punished for the sake of game health.
There are reasons to bleed out survivors; some killers will reach low slug timers by their gameplay, some survivors have unhookable builds, and sometimes survivors crawl away when you want to hook them. Maybe it's karmic parity and you could have hooked the survivor, but they did something to deserve some extra salt on their fries. Who knows. But the thing is, for all the reasons for them to happen, bleedouts are rare in ordinary gameplay. Quad bleedouts even moreso. Even against killers like Twins, Plague, Myers, Oni, or Infectious Fright Nurse. If you have four bleedouts for five killer matches in a row, you the player are clearly doing it to make survivors miserable. And BHVR should have an incentive to stop this, because this kind of completely helpless to someone's power trip experience is horrible for retention of new players, and readily gets vets to go "screw this game, I'm playing something else."
2 -
You bring up arguments that are difficult to refute. I respect your pov.
What’s your take on forced bleedouts?
0 -
It's annoying and I as a killer main would be completely in favor of survivors having the option to speed up bleed outs if there's no survivor up. I'd also give the killer the same points and such as if that survivor was hooked so no one can rob a killer of points by doing it while the killer is hooking their teammates.
To me, it's MOSTLY in the same realm as killers hitting survivors on hook over and over again. I'll hit 1 time to end the long screams early, but after that... it's kinda cringe. The anti-face camp feature put an end to that though. I remember when posts complaining about it came up, a solution of removing the hitbox of hooked survivors was suggested. Survivors were against that because they wouldn't be able to use their hooked teammate as a shield while most killers were FOR it because they hated someone hitting the hooked survivor and doing nothing when they were trying to hit their teammate.
1 -
I'm not sure I understand the question. Forced from which perspective?
If it's forced from the survivor perspective, as in the killer can hook the survivor and is choosing not to, that's very bad. There are times I'd consider it vigilante justice within the context of the match, like if a survivor was BMing all game or if they were trolling their teammates or if they refused to play the game and immediately ran to a hook, but on any mass scale, it's just the killer being a dick. I do not accept "I slugged everyone at 5 gens because 4% exists" as a reasonable excuse. One player unhooking themselves isn't going to save that game and it'll still be over faster. I would go so far as to say that most if not all players who claim that are using it as a shield for spiteful intentions.
If it's forced from the killer perspective, it's… I guess slightly less bad, because the killer still wins the game, just has a very annoying timewaster experience doing it. It's insult but not injury, or maybe injury without insult, where survivors get both.
If it's because of Flip Flop Boil Over, bleeding out the survivor is as much an act of karma as it is the correct counterplay for the build. In that case, the survivor chose their playstyle and has no right to complain about the consequences, and beyond chat baiting, I'm pretty sure those players understand that full well. But such games are thankfully rare.
Survivors wandering off in mass slug situations are also annoying for the killer, though I understand why survivors do it and I've done it myself - it's easy to get angry at being left on the floor, hail mary hatch aside. That's the core of the problem - nobody likes not being able to play the game and slugging is in an especially irritating spot where you don't even have the freedom to die, which makes being left on the floor even worse than being left on hook. I do like your idea of basekit deerstalker once everyone's on the ground, though.
And if you meant forced bleedouts as in survivors being able to kill themselves once certain criteria are met - I've always supported the idea, though I also support survivors replacing themselves with a bot instead to preserve the ability of killers to slug for the 4k. Some challenges are pretty obnoxious without it.
1 -
My question was vague but you still thoroughly answered it 😊
I always appreciate your well thought-out answers.
1 -
Aw, thanks. Always love seeing you around these parts too - your posts are always a beacon of positivity (and rightful babylonian queen supremacy) 💖
Edit: I just realized you weren't quoting/asking me in the original post, lmao. I think I just saw an L and went "oh hey that me." I may have just woken up 😆
1 -
This is one of the many reasons there should be a "insta-bleedout" button after being slugged under certain conditions.
If only 2 Survivors remain.
If all remaining Survivors are incapable of playing (either downed or hooked/caged).
If slugged for 2m+ (how often does anyone gets slugged for 2+ minutes unless the Killer is either slugging for the 4k, trolling, or purposefully going for a slugfest after tunnelling the first Survivor?).
Especially since the devs apparently want to encourage slugging for the 4k with their insistance on pushing the Finisher Mori system, there should be a way to go next without having to twiddle your thumbs almost every games.
2 -
Targeting implies intent. If matchmaking just randomly gives you a person whose strategy is to slug every game its not "targeted"
1 -
Going to close the thread here, as the question has been answered. But to clarify a few things:
Streamsniping is not reportable in-game, as noted here. If you suspect you are being streamsniped, the person can be reported to the streaming platform (Twitch, YouTube, etc), as it violates their TOS. Secondly, Griefing, as stated in the Game Rules, entails targeting specific players repeatedly over other Survivors to ruin their game, or they state in post game they purposefully intended to harass the player for a specified reason; such as worn cosmetics/charms, player identity, character identity, and so on.
1
