Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
2v8 shows that the game is better without the attemp unhook
Attemp unhook its a ######### bottom, a dc without repercusions and the game is a lot better without that mechanic, the only times survivors should be able to do it is if they have a perk like deliverance.
Comments
-
you kinda forget that crucial bit where the cages work quite differently than hooks.
27 -
Unhook attempts need to go. They got rid of hook grabs.
17 -
That will do nothing. Someone who wants out of the game that bad will just either AFK or run to the killer, and get hooked again. Removing it will solve nothing in that regard and it will rendder several perks and offerings that are related to it useless.
19 -
Suicide on hook can go
But self unhook attempts need to stay
I would say keep the 3 free attempts to self unhook but they don't do anything to the hook timer11 -
That its the same people said about dc penalties and the game is a lot better with the penalty, discouraging people from killing themselves in hook is always good
10 -
lmaooo ‘but but but… my Up The Ante value!’ People legally leaving the game early by suiciding on hook is way more damaging than any tiny benefit brought by the handful of luck perks and offerings. It’s not like those things can’t be reworked.
Also, if someone has to spend several minutes AFKing or running to the killer, that is time that they are not killing themselves in another game. Why make it as easy as possible to grief 4 other people? People shouldn’t be able to quickly eliminate themselves when that is the opposite of their objective.11 -
I agree that self unhook attempts should stay, as it feeds into the theme of trying one last desperate attempt to escape, and keeps survivors able to still try to escape rather than giving up the game...
However we can't do that I'm afraid, cause then there is no reason not to attempt to unhook yourself every time you are hooked. Attempts to unhook must carry some sort of penalty.
My suggestion is to have stage 1 always take 70s to reach stage 2 no matter what, but have it where every unhook attempt costs you 33.3% of your stage 2 struggling phase meter.
If you make 3 attempts to escape in stage 1, then the Entity is summoned and pins the survivors sides to stop them wiggling and wont allow any more attempts for the full 70s... then when you reach stage 2, you basically get instant sacrificed.
This still.makes self unhook attempts a sizable trade off, but allows a last ditch attempt, without allowing a player to rapidly throw themselves out of the game…
And this way theres a decent chance they get a killer (and survivor team) who punishes them for trying to SoH.
1 -
So people are still gonna be able to hook suicide easily
1 -
It's not impossible, but it is harder with my system.
Fact is you can't make a player play. If someone wants to quit, even if you have your system, they'll sit and do nothing for the full 70s (same as my system) and then stay still under hook until the killer kills them.
If you think about it functionally there is no difference between mine and your version, except stage 2 in mine is slightly faster than the do nothing version in yours. Even if you make it so struggle phase skill checks are not a thing, you still only make it 140s to quit at best instead of 90s with the 2 failed skillchecks.
However what is different in my version is players who are actually playing, don't want to freely attempt to unhook themselves in my version, cause when the killer hooks them a second time they have a tangible penalty that puts pressure on their team.
0 -
People can also stand afk at a hook, run toward the killer, hold shift so they can't be healed and bleed out. Even killers can just go stand in a corner and AFK.
You can't fix all of these things. And genuinely, most of these are just looking to outright punish the player.
No one ever seems to ask in these threads "why are people giving up on hook more now?" People being petty has always been a thing: didn't like the killer, or the map has always existed. People haven't started being "more petty" recently, and chalking this up to pettiness in it's entirety is either bias or blindness to the problem.
Giving up is a symptom, and we need to target even one of the causes.
So what changed? Is it that 60% kill rate target is to high? Is it that tunneling, camping, and slugging are simply too strong and the tools to defend against them basically useless? Is it that maps have been converted into shoe box sized areas with mostly dead zones and pallets held up by toothpicks? Maybe going through the killer roster making most add-on effects partially or completely base kit is too much. Maybe having basically no new survivor perks in two years that aren't either completely unusable or useful for a while until being nerfed into completely unusable.
Imo, it's a combination of all of those. So if you want to actually target the root cause of giving up, that's where to start. Giving up is a sign that the game's health is not good. Those things contribute to the problem, and punishing people for a game design flaw is only going to either make it worse, or we'll just be chasing the symptom with more and more punishment over time.
Target the cause of the problem, and the symptom will diminish.
6 -
Or we could try to make 1v4 matches enjoyable enough for 80% of the playerbase that this isn't a major issue.
19 -
Easy fix: you shouldn't be able to self-unhook unless you're running perks like Deli, Up the Ante, or Slippery Meat. Just make that fix, and now the issue solves itself.
7 -
Exactly. I've been saying this for a while. We already have a mechanic that makes unhooking yourself possible even when it wouldn't (the anti-camp mechanic). Just add that to perks and remove the base-kit 4% chance unhook atempt.
3 -
It WILL solve most of the problem simply because the things you describe take longer and are punishable. Killing yourself unhook is simple, almost instant, takes action only from you and not the killer, and it's not banable.
On the other hand, AFKing is already a reportable offense and you would have to wait for the killer to come get you in order to get to the next match, potentially taking LONGER than the DC Penalty you would get by DCing normally.
And running into the killer? If a survivor does that, anyone can report them for working with the killer and refusing to participate in normal gameplay. It would also require action from the killer's end in order to be completed, they could just ignore or slug the griefer instead.
So most people who give up would mostly just DC anyway. The ones who didn't would waste a lot of time and eventually get banned.
7 -
Doesn't excuse the fact that the game would be way healthier without it
7 -
Finally something I can agree with you on as long as it doesn't drain the bar y'all can keep the attempts that was never a problem about it
0 -
Except we can or at least attempt to the root cause is truly this mechanic that is enabling survivors to be quitters yes they can do all that other things but it will be more annoying for them at least. Devs have attempted fixing this root cause y'all complain about always and it isn't working now is the time to try a different method and that's removing attempts on hook
2 -
Except you need to realize you'll never satisfied with what they do they have tried and even with 2v8 becoming completely survivor sided y'all still ain't happy it's time for Devs to get the belt on Survs and teach them discipline
6 -
Nah, that would actually make sense, so it won't happen.
9 -
Temporary event modes have no relevance to the core game balance unless they make 2v8 permanent, but if you'd prefer even longer killer queues, I'm sure the devs could give it the 1v4 balance treatment. You know, the one where kill rates are massively in favor of one side to the point killer players argue to force survivors to stay in a match rather than address the unfairness. It's not that complicated. Look at the changes that happened in 6.1. The pattern since then of making every killer obnoxiously overtuned and erasing every decent map from existence. Reverse some of that and survivors will be less likely to go into a match feeling like its a lost cause.
12 -
I've been thinking this as well. Without the first hook suicide, I've seen more DCs, but that's okay. I'd much rather have a bot than be down a player. It really feels like the mode shows that hook kobes aren't some critical element of the game.
3 -
You're not understanding. People not wanting to play the game is the symptom, and you're ignoring every single reason this could occur except the one you want (in this case players being petty). Which, as I said, doesn't account for the huge increase in this behavior.
Since punishment is all you seem to care about, how do you propose punishing killers who afk in a corner until the match ends?
7 -
It's neither quid pro quo; there are no hook grabs ergo no 4% either - nor is OP (or anyone) stating a fact when they say "2v8 shows us that 4% is bad for the game". I narrowed it down to the hook mechanic that works differently in that game mode. - But taking anything there and just using it as an argument for regular game mode isn't going to work. In that case we should also make UB basekit asap. - But we already know that that's a terrible idea (that PTB).
Wild idea: Maybe 2v8 as a game mode somehow addresses the root cause of why people want to go next asap? - Because there's a lot less afking, a lot less throwing, a lot less running into the killer to go next and a lot less screwing your teamies over in the process in general and also a lot less DCs.
— Which doesn't even mean that the change in the hook-stage-mechanic (including the removal of 4%) has nothing to do with it. Just that you can't just go and attribute the positive effects solely to there not being 4% and call it a day. It might very well be one variable. But is most definitely not the only one.2 -
I wasn’t trying to draw any conclusions like that at all. The 4% just needs to go. Plain and simple. No reason for it to stay. I only brought up the removal of hook grabs because people will cry about them removing the fun but they have already removed several fun things for killers. So it should be totally fine to remove it
3 -
Fair enough. - Given the thread title I read the lack of a conclusion/argument as you adding to OP's ("2vs8 shows…" pointing to an evidence based argument). If it's just a personal opinion it's all fair. But you'll also have to live with someone on a agree-to-disagree-basis who goes "It should stay" ; neither of you would be right or wrong.
- But you saying "no reason for it to stay" does sound like you want to convince someone of your opinion. In which case you'd need to show why it should go; since it is in place it falls upon you (/anyone who wants to see it gone) to argue why it should be changed. So why does it "just need to go" and why is there "no reason for it to stay"? Why is it "totally fine to remove it"?
For the sake of argument: even if we assumed "something was taken from killer, now something has to be taken from surv" was a valid way to go about things - why the 4% and not something else?
3 -
Rouge- same ######### different paint you'll never be happy
Hall- it addresses the major issue being able to let players go next on hook
1 -
There literally is a punishment in place for it force DCs them
1 -
… except it doesn't really address the issue.
It might address the major symptom; how the issue becomes visible in a match. Hence why I pointed to all the other ways that people use to go next also being a lot less. Deprived of their favourite way to go next, shouldn't there be at least some increase in the other ways to go next? The famous petty survs who quit at the smallest of inconveniences … don't seem to quit in 2v8; not via DC, not via running into the killer, not by otherwise getting themselves out of the match asap.
And I want to make it very clear: I don't think the lack of 4% plays no role whatsoever — but I also think that it's absolutely not the most important variable in the mix.
Personally, I don't care much if it stays or goes at this point - but removing it from regular game mode will hardly have an impact on match quality, I think. DCs might increase, players running into killers to go next might increase - and it won't fix any underlying issue and matches (esp. soloQ) will remain as miserable as they are now.6 -
Nope, sure doesn't.
And even if they added something like this, moving slightly or swinging the weapon bypasses it. There have been posts from users in other regions that talk about epidemics of afk or even afk-bot killers that do exactly this to throw matches.
So I don't believe this exists at all, but even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and say, sure it does… it doesn't work to deter people, and your point still falls flat.
5 -
That's because those bots are performing an action. The force dc only works if absolutely no action is performed from the second the trial begins.
Edit. At least that's the only time I've seen it happen. I saw a hillbilly stand in place, doing nothing and eventually we all "escaped"
2 -
Ok so, the trapper I played against once who had only 200 points from setting exactly one trap and going afk the rest of the match went completely unpunished for that
So my point stands. The person who brought this up is looking to punish survivors for "bypassing the DC system" and as an example brings up a system that is completely trivially bypassed as well.
Which is what I've been saying: a punishment will do nothing, and people who want to do this will continue to do so.
If you really want to reduce people giving up, then you have to address a reason they're giving up, literally *any* reason.
You can't fix petty reasons, and those existed before. But I also listed a variety of actual balance reasons that contribute to this problem, and those should be addressed by the devs. That would actually do something here.
His main argument continues to be "punish the player" and specifically "punish the survivor, but not the killer" since he still hasn't proposed a way to stop killers from doing this exact. Same. Thing. This current system is identical to giving up on hook or avoiding crows.
But balance concerns affect both sides, which is also why I focus there.
6 -
punishing killers that stay afk in the corner? dude that never happens like in my last 1000 games it never happened
2 -
The Eastern region, which usually almost never posts on English forums, has reported afk killer bots on multiple occasions.
But my point is, for people who are so quick to punish players who aren't engaging, it seems suspicious that every single response always boils down to "punish the survivors, but not killers for the same thing". Your post just reinforces that.
5 -
because it doesnt happen, why waste time punishing killer for things that never happens
2 -
You could play pre-nerf Skull Merchant (who was fairly balanced), and people still gave up every single game simply because they didn’t like the killer. Slugging, tunneling, camping, these mechanics are annoying, sure. But the reality is that the majority of complaints stem from that one survivor who gives up after being downed in their first chase, simply because they couldn’t run the killer for 5 gens, farm clips, and t-bag at the gates.
These players know they can cherry-pick lobbies and get away with it because BHVR has effectively handed them a free pass. It’s not about tunneling. It’s not about slugging. It’s not about camping. It’s about entitlement.
Stop enabling petty survivors to give up and skew the stats, and you’ll get a clearer picture of what the actual issues with the game are. Only then can we start addressing the real problems.
5 -
Yikes.
It does happen, and I've had it happen to me. I never said it was common in my games, although there was apparently a literal "afk killer meta" in other regions for a while.
It's also a thought experiment, and one that you are consistently failing. Do we punish players for refusing to participate or not?
Your answer is "survivors yes, but killers no". My answer is "we should fix the reasons players are giving up for any role".
You're being biased and only looking to punish survivors.
6 -
You're just projecting into the scenario.
Again, I can't say this enough: people haven't gotten more petty over time. People disconnecting in this large of numbers is indicative of a pretty big game health issue.
You're also completely discounting things like tunneling which absolutely is a factor here. Smaller maps, nerfs to survivor perks and items, base kit killer buffs, making many killer add-ons base kit, and tile and pallet nerfs all contribute to reducing chase times and inherently making tunneling stronger.
So, tunneling is meta, the game is hard designed for survivors to lose the chase, they can't choose not to be tunneled. So if you get a few games of 3k BP in a row, then yeah: what exactly is the point of playing the game? The player is being told by the devs, the killer, the game mechanics, that going next is the only way to play. And that's just one example.
And that seems wrong. There should be some hope that players actually get to play the game. When you take that hope away, then "better luck next time" is literally the message in big, neon letters.
So let's fix that. Maybe making the survivor experience not completely suck and doing just about anything would be beneficial. And I'm not taking about endurance that's hard countered by counting to 10 or a mechanic that disables of you stand 11m from hook. An actual, gameplay improvement for players.
The devs have been driving toward an arbitrary 60% kill rate for years now, and every indication of game health seems to be that that is simply too high. Most players in these forums who only play killer have no problem with incessant killer buffs and constant survivor nerfs. Some people seem to think death garden is the goal: tip the game to the killers favor so much that it kills the game.
Let's try not to get that far and fix a few things. You don't do that by treating a symptom, you fix even one of the core issues a little bit.
8 -
I personally wouldn't mind self-unhook attempts being removed, but something else I thought could be implemented is that you get the self-unhook attempts on your second hook stage, not on the first. First stage is like the one in 2v8 where you're just hanging there helpless. Second stage would allow you the current 3 self-unhook attempts with the same penalty. Struggle is no more.
I haven't given this THAT much thought tho so maybe it's game-breaking in some way lol. But it would certainly ease the early game suicides as you would need to at least be hooked twice to suicide. It would also make the early game a little easier against survivors running Deli + luck stuff, since those build would only come into play later in the game. I think. Like I said, maybe I'm missing something.
HOWEVER, I agree that, although players can be crazy petty, the suicide on hook epidemic is a symptom of a much larger issue which should be looked into.
0 -
No attempts at all, if you dont have any perks for this
4 -
Neither tunneling, slugging, nor camping justifies giving up on first hook after the first chase. That behavior isn't indicative of a balance issue. Survivors who give up on first hook exist, and denying this suggests one of two things: 1) you engage in this behavior yourself, or 2) you play in a SWF and don’t experience this issue.
Survivors who give up after the first chase would do so regardless of kill rates, killer strength, or whether the killer is camping or tunneling (they aren't in the game long enough to find out). As a Solo Q player, I’ve had teammates give up just because they didn’t get the map they wanted or because the killer brought Franklin’s. I even have a clip of a survivor giving up 12 seconds into a match because two players used map offerings, and the map ended up being the one the other survivor chose.
But sure, keep defending those players. Even if the game had lower kill rates, every playstyle nerfed, and every map rebalanced, you'd still see people giving up. Why? Because it’s an entitlement issue. Solo Q games are already challenging, but when you have teammates who actually stick around and play regardless of the circumstances, those matches are the most fun.
No one is complaining about the teammate who gets hard tunneled and decides to give up, or the survivor who gets slugged for three minutes and DCs out of frustration. The issue lies with players who give up in the first minute of the match, completely ruining the game for everyone else and walking away without any penalty. Trying to excuse this behavior is honestly shameful. It undermines the experience for those of us who queue to actually play instead of complain and go next at every minor inconvenience.
2 -
I really am afraid you're right, I mean I've heard of people DCing in 2V8 because… they got downed first. That's it. That's all. They didn't loop the Killer(s) and got downed first.
Imagine being so entitled you DC from the Survivor-sided mode because you don't get to stomp the Killers into the dirt hard enough.
2 -
Are you okay? Where did I say a word about up the ante or ANY of what you said. I said that removing unhook alone isn't going to solve the problem. Maybe instead of being a clown actually read next time, yeah? :)
1 -
It still won't solve the problem. Make it less prevalent by a bit maybe. They should add more incentives or bots regardless of what other idea they come up with, so that the other teammates aren't duped.
0 -
This.
You can't completely stop the damage caused by low constitution pseudo-players who've adopted an "I give up" mindset, but you can mitigate it.
3 -
And everytime someone says this, i respond with the simple. Easy fix, you BAN THEM. Every single other online multiplayer game has the capability to detect people who do things like "intentional feed" "afk" "give up" "grief" etc. So why is that so difficult to do here? They already have afk detection with crows. If someone gets 3 crows in a match, you flag them as AFK and punish them for it just like they do with leaving games.
5 -
So every survivor can try to self unhook for no cost? Hell no…
0 -
Or the people who don't find the game fun can just stop playing and ruining it for everyone else.
5 -
You know that they won't. They're invested. Instead of doing the healthy thing, which is taking a break.
3 -
I've heard Civilization is pretty fun.
3 -
That Piglet game that went viral recently is actually unironically pretty good, not even lying and not a "go git gud lmao" jab at all - I played it.
0
