http://dbd.game/killswitch
Comments on developers QoL upcoming changes from 9k hours player: 'Go Next' Prevention
Hi everyone, i wanted to share my thoughts on upcoming changes presented by developers. I have 9000 hours, tournament experience and have been playing this game almost continuously since 2016
Go next prevention
What does go next imply?
- Short chase, meaning short time span between two hits
- Kobeing from hook
- Failing skill checks on 2nd stage
Firstly, i wanted to give you some recent examples of teammates going next.
- Yui was playing on Lery Map and was in a chase vs Pyramid Head. She got downed quickly from his ability and died. She then killed herself on hook. The question i have is: was she given enough by the game itself to counter Pyramid Head? What survivors have right now are windows and pallets, both are countered by his ability
- Survivor was trying to save me from hard camping Nurse. She kicked a gen next to me, revealed him with perk nowhere to hide. Quickly downed him and left to slug him and camp me in the meantime. Was it his misplay? Or were it developers giving killers an ability to reveal location of survivors in sometimes very dire situations?
- Huntress took Midwich map offering with addons: iri head+fox (basically she has no terror radius all game, 1 hatchet that insta downs). She found a random, instadowned him (using the perk revealing survivors aura by opening lockers) and then random killed himself
The question i have is: were these players given enough resources to work with and counter killer strategy? Can we assume that they 'went next' because they are toxic ruining players and should be punished for it. To me it seems that the issues the game currently has are mostly caused by the lack of balance and developers ignoring how overpowered some of the perks and killers are! There are overpowered killers as nurse, blight and billy. Overpowered perks like nowhere to hide, dead man's switch, scourge hook pain res, addons. Unbalanced maps! You want to remove map offerings, fine they do skew balance towards some sides. But, how will survivors play on Borgo maps? Yamaoka maps? Coldwind farm maps? Badham preschool map is so overpowered for survivors yet no changes for two years! You want to force survivors to play matches where they are already in a disadvantage and then blame them for such behavior.
If you are worried about survivors having an ability to kill themselved and go next perhaps you should remove this mechanics right away. What is the point of skill checks on 2nd stage? What is the point of giving survivors a change to unhook equal to 4%? What to do instead:
- Unhooking yourself is allowed only if it is guaranteed: 4%, deliverance, wicked
- Hitting skill checks on second stage grants you survival points, failing them does not shorten hook stage and does not get you killed
This way no one gets even an opportunity to throw a game, aside from dropping pallets and failing skill checks on generators. What can you do if survivors try to sabotage the game by doing something inappropriate? Introduce behaviour score system. Failing each skill check, dropping a pallet while not in a chase (or close to killer), not repairing generators etc, figure it out yourselves, result in reduced behavior score. Additional reports reduce behavior score. If it falls under certain threshold introduce BP earning penalty and longer queue times.
Comments
-
I wouldn't criticize based off speculation and wait until they give us examples. Don't want to bang down the door just to realise it's the wrong house.
8 -
I've said it almost every time I see the "go next" problem discussed, but honestly nothing will matter until they address the actual reason why it's occurring.
Sure, some people are petty, but it's not like people have become more petty - And enough to make it an epidemic. It's a game health issue.
Imo, the main reason "go next" had gotten worse is that for most survivors the game is over in a losing state insanely quickly. Got found first? Looks like you're getting camped and tunneled out for 5k BP and you don't get any challenge progress. Getting slugged at 5 gens? Better tab out so you have something interesting to do for the next 4 minutes. Riveting gameplay.
And if they're already talking about anti camping, anti tunneling, and anti slugging in phase 2, then those measures could be enough to fix this problem.
15 -
Lets look at what happens with your proposed system.
Pros
- No need to balance making the system effective against ensuring no one is every falsely banned.
- Reduces slugging for the 4k since Killer can hook for their aura perks and the Survivor can't die for hatch for a set time.
- Isn't a measure taken retroactively after the match is already thrown, is taken proactively to prevent it before it happens.
- Allows you to wave on hook to indicate you have Wicked/Deliverance to your team in SoloQ.
Cons
- Inability to attempt to save yourself if the Survivor team doesn't move to save you.
- Inability to die to try and give hatch to the last survivor.
- Inability to try and unhook yourself if the killer is excessively slugging around hook and/or preventing trades.
- Turns being hooked into the same (actually worse) scenario as being slugged, where you have literally 0 agency or actions you can take.
Other Considerations
- A required complete rework of the Luck mechanic, offerings and Slippery Meat/Up the Ante.
- Since the survivor objective is to try and save yourself to climb MMR, you become 100% team reliant on your team unhooking you to complete your objective. While in hook, you have no say at all.
- Betrays the theme, since if you were stuck on a hook waiting to die, you'd at least try to save yourself. Now you just sit there to die.
- The loss of stage 2 skillchecks getting harder and harder also diminishes the theme, and makes stage 2 a boring wait with no tension at all.
Maybe the Cons and considerations are worth those Pros... but there are elements of the game we lose here.
2 -
I believe they're very intent on keeping that 4% chance mechanic, and will try pretty much everything else first and only as a lost resort will finally ditch it.
Part of the reason no doubt is all the connected game elements that would have to be messed with in doing so. The time and resources that would be needed to do that is not negligible, and then there's the problem of related challenges and in particular Achievements and Trophy's.
0 -
I meant that you can still unhook yourself, but only if the unhook is guaranteed. Say you are hooked, and the system rolls a dice (sort of). If you get 4% you are granted the right to save yourself. Also if the anti camp bar is filled you also have the right to save yourself. Now most of the things you mentioned before dont make sense. You get 4% chance like once in 20 matches. And you should always wait for a team to unhook you, because even if the killer is camping by 'attempting' to unhook yourself you waste precious seconds for you and for team. He is hard camping and they are doing gens? Fine, you are helping team
0 -
So you mean thatat basekit whenever you get hooked for the first time, you get automatically given a 4% chance to get Deliverance with no requirements?
This is effectively the same thing as everyone trying to unhook themselves for free whenever they are hooked is it not? Meaning the killer is randomly punished approximately every 25 hooks with a free unhook...
I was merely pointing out the pros and cons my man, your proposal as I understood it wasn't necessarily bad, but it did have downsides... maybe the pros outweighed the downsides...
However this proposal of yours though has a downside that is pretty bad... why should survivors be given an automatic unhook 4% of the time for free?
-1 -
I really wish BHVR would make a public announcement that achievements and trophies will never ever take priority over game balance decisions.
0 -
I don't think most players are even aware that they simply cannot change them until they become completely unattainable.
0 -
In my experience the go next has nothing to do with being in a losing state quickly. The vast majority of people that go next in my matches is due to either they they don't like the map (they bring offering, I bring offering, if it selects mine they go next). Many times they go next in loading screen so I'm happy they will be hiding map offerings to help prevent that.
Another reason they go next in my matches is because they don't like the killer, so many times I have tier up once with Myers and the survivors just run up to me and want to go next. They even say post match they find Myers boring. These 2 reasons are usually the cause of at least 1 person going next, when 1 goes the rest follow suit.
I don't see any way of solving that reason for going next other than give survivors what they want. Give them the map they want and the killer of their choosing. Obviously that won't happen tho.
3 -
There is a laundry list of reasons why "go next" happens and most of them are petty. A stricter system in place will prevent that.
When BHVR shows people its not cool to mess up other peoples games by adding in what they said they would such as;
*Dc Penalty applies upon going next.
*Deranked upon going next.
*A loss of all your bloodpoints for going next.
People will take it a lot more seriously.
People most of the time go next over the most silly reasons.
4 -
I can almost guarantee that will make the issue worse if we do not address why people want to go next.
5 -
How do you address the reason why they go next if the reason is simply they don't get the map they want or they don't go against a killer they like? Give them the option to select map and killer? Make all maps survivor sided? Make all killers so bad survivors don't mind playing against them? The reason can't be addressed, so penalties and incentives are the way to go.
7 -
Treating a symptom instead of the disease.
1 -
Would that not be what the second half of the roadmap is for? Addressing slugging, tunnelling, and camping seems like they're tackling all the unpleasant balance stuff that can lead to miserable games.
What would need to be done, separate from the context of that roadmap, is a combination of stricter penalties and addressing common complaints— you can't just cherrypick the reasons for going next that are worth talking about when so many instances are just giving up because the match didn't immediately go their way, after all.
1 -
I just got today three survivors pointing at hook because I canceled their maps offerings with a Sacrificial Ward. We ended playing Ormond, totally unacceptable. Yes, let's address why they want to go next.
0 -
While it's true that we can't address those kinds of reasons, another big reason is because of how easily Survivors lose matches (i.e. if a Survivor dies at five gens). No Survivor will want to continue in a game that's already lost, so they'll want to go next. If we can address those reasons, it can go a long way in reducing the "go-nexts".
1 -
Those aren't the real reasons.
Players do that, specifically, because they feel the game is no longer worth playing, in your example. Killer brings a map offering to stack the odds in their favor, Survivor brings a map offering to stack the odds in their favor. As of right now, the game is Killer-favored and a lot of Survivor players are struggling, both to escape and to have fun. Killers don't seem to be struggling to kill, but I have seen a lot of general burnout from them too.
Look at it this way. As a Survivor loading into a match, you see a Killer map offering to go to a strong map. What are the positives in going into a game already stacked against you? Brownie points for losing? You won't get any BP, you'll lose rank, probably no Archive progress and the game will be frustrating and make you not want to play.
At least for Killer, you'll probably get BP and Archives done. Not much better, but it is something, at least.
As for your solutions…most maps are either Killer-sided or neutral. Making maps larger and giving Killers a speed boost (ala Blighted Serum) would be preferable to me.
Unfortunately, the Killer issue will not be going anywhere. There are a lot of unpleasant Killers to face and that has little to do with strength. Sure, a god Nurse is not fun, but neither is a camping Bubba. Slugging Twins, microboxing Pinhead, etc etc. There's just a lot of unfun Killers and there's nothing to really be done about it.
6 -
Maybe but I think if a survivor dies at 5 gens then the decision to go next was already made. To get chased, downed and hooked for the full length of time to actually die and not 1 gen is done?
I think the issue in that regard is the mentality of "can't win, go next". Even if I know I can't win as survivor I go for BP, totems, see how far I can go... Sometimes I get lucky and escape. It makes my survivor matches way more fun. Personally I think it should be a case of how long can I last while trying to escape instead of I want to win and if I can't I go next.
1 -
That's the issue right there, struggling to escape, struggling to have fun. It's supposed to be a struggle, that's the point to being survivor. People only have fun when they escape and when they don't or know they can't escape they don't have fun. They are happy to sit on gens all match even tho they find it boring. They are happy to go in circles around a pallet all if it means they win. They will do the most boring things possible if it means they win and they find it fun because they win. That's why they want specific maps and specific killers, they want to win.
I think survivors should have that "win" goal removed so they can learn how to enjoy the game. Instead of playing for the win maybe play to see how long they can last while going for a particular objective or go for BP. I can play 20 survivor matches and not escape once and still have fun because I don't go into the match with the "I want to win" mindset and I don't go next.
-2 -
I'm talking about the matches where the Killer spreads so much pressure and we're constantly having to save one another that we're not able to do gens. It can happen for all kinds of reasons. Maybe the Killer is too good, or maybe we suck, or maybe the Killer is running four slowdowns, or maybe the teammates are too busy bullying the Killer, who knows? It doesn't always have to involve someone "going next," but I don't blame anyone if they decide to go next in those circumstances.
2 -
You're never going to fix people wanting to go next. There are too many reasons why a person would want to go next. Maybe they don't like the map, Killer, their teammates, equipped wrong perk, their mom told them to get off, they got caught playing at work, they just feel like it, etc… Obviously they actually can't solve the overarching problem with a players mentality where they feel they just have to d/c for whatever split second reason during a game.
These are the same people that won't be stopped when it comes to disconnecting. Ah, they can't kill themselves on hook anymore..? Now they'll just press "Esc" and d/c. Wait..now they can't press "Esc" and d/c anymore..? Time to just Ctrl-Alt-Delete to end the process. Oh shoot…now BHVR somehow implemented a way that they can't press Ctr-Alt-Delete anymore in this alternate reality..? Looks like it's time to just unplug the CPU power cable from the wall and throw it in the street.
You can't make people do what they don't want to do and if the amount of people that are "Going Next" is a big enough chunk of the DBD fan base, I'll be in the background ROFL while watching BHVR try to fix something that simply can't be fixed. Hopefully the amount of players that do it is moderately low.
2 -
You realize that whether you hit the end game button, unplug your router or whatever else... it's still a DC and the game counts it all the same. That part is already in the game.
0 -
You don't have to stop it outright, you just have to make sure that whenever someone leaves a match early, they get the DC penalty.
Eventually, that'll mean leaving the match prevents you from "going next" because you can't queue up again, meaning people will be at least a little bit more discerning about when to leave.
0 -
You did not get me. The mechanics is still the same as it has always been, when you attempt to unhook the game calculates your chance and either lets you kobe or reduces your hook timer. It is still standing, however what im suggesting is instead of trying to kobe the game calculates your chance to unhook yourself 3 times, if 4% procs then you are given the right to unhook yourself so m1 button appears. If it does not proc you can not press m1 to unhook yourself. Nothing changes except for the fact that you are only able to m1 if 4% procs. Do you understand or not?
2 -
Well your experience is irrelevant. Yes there are people ruining the match for no reason. And there are people refusing to play already lost game due to balance issues. Punishing everyone without looking at the reasons is inadequate
0 -
It is not about eliminating those people, its about providing players a proper balance and afterwards punishing those who are throwers because they are unhappy with something. Regarding things you mentioned people get DC penalty so im not sure why you listed them in the first place. Are you sure better balance will not reduce 'go next' players count?
0 -
Well we waited for at least 4 years for them to balance nurse, then we waited for 3 years for them to balance blight. Killers waited 2 years for them to balance overpowered maps such as Badham Preschool and Eerie Crows. How long do we need to wait? They released a HUGE post saying we are going to fix long standing issues within a game and mentioned NOTHING about the balance. Are you sure its worth waiting?
1 -
Now it's confusing... can I attempt to kobe without losing my sacrifice bar or not?
What I understand from you now is I press my kobe attempt, and I get 3 automatic attempts calculated behind the scenes (11.5% chance to succeed) and if I succeed I can press the button to kobe... if I fail I lose progress on my hook timer...
How does this address people going next at all? The result is still me suiciding on hook, or if I don't lose progress, I get a 11.5% chance to get off hook for absolutely free... I'm not trying to be difficult, but I really don't understand what you're trying to suggest here my guy 😵💫
0 -
Whatever they do, go next detection should disable once a certain amount of time or objectives has passed. Sometimes if it's a 4 man out, and the killer was having a rough time, I'll offer myself up if everyone else is clearly escaping as a sort of "gg, have some extra BPs for the match on me" type of thing. Would suck if the system detected that as goo next since I'm walking over to a hook.
4 -
You can not kobe, you can not press m1 unless its guaranteed by a system. So a person can not even press m1 on hook unless system allows him from deliverance, wicked or 4% chance. So a person is hooked, system calculates his probability of an attempt to kobe, if kobe would be succesful he is allowed to press m1 and escape. If not then you are just on hook waiting for your team to save. So a person if presses m1 will always kobe succesfully under this system, unlike now where you just spam m1 three times reach 2nd stage fail skillchecks and die
0 -
Fun is very subjective though. And what you might not find fun, others might. Of course there are certain killers with certain strategies that almost everyone deems unfun, and it would be nice if BHVR addressed those issues, but often people just quit out of the game because they simply don't like a killer personally which others might like. Or because they were found first. Or whatever petty reason.
I see no reason to act like there aren't a lot of petty reasons why survivors quit matches sometimes. The go next prevention might cause some frustration at the beginning, but that will hopefully become better with the anti-tunneling, anti-camping and anti-slugging changes. But it will also improve the game already for survivors, not having teammates that give up because of some petty reason.
Also, the game has a lot of balanced maps if you ask me, and some maps are still survivor sided as well.
1 -
But if that's the case, then every time a Survivor is hooked, the system calculates whether ir not they get their 11.5% escape chance for three unhook attempts, and then grants that player a free self unhook...
- If it doesn't grant it them, then they don't get the prompt
- If it does grant them the unhook, they get the prompt and can unhook when they wish guaranteed.
This means greater than 1/10 of the killers first hooks can unhook themselves for free, and is in effect exactly the same as letting every player attempt to unhook themselves for 0 penalty... you can't jusy hide the prompt either because you may as well press it anyway, it costs you nothing, and if you got it, hey thats a free self unhook.
You might as well just say you get 3 unhook attempts and it costs you no sacrifice bar to use it... which yes prevents people SoH, but now everyone gets to try and unhook themselves for free every time.
0 -
I'm saying specific people will never care about it either way and I hope BHVR realizes they can't fix those people. We can only hope the # of folks that d/c just for the hell of it is not a decent chunk of the DBD community or hope they end up changing their ways assuming a proper fix is implemented. =P Giving extreme examples is fun for me.
0 -
Glad they added the downvote thing so I can just break neutral, and pick neither. I agree that we need to stop the constant giving up, like taking away the self unhook attempts and 2nd stage skill checks. I don't agree with punishing players for simple things like failing skill checks or dropping pallets out of chase.
0 -
Blight wasn't balanced. He had fine add-ons nerfed because PC flicks made him too strong, and that's still in the game. So all they did with that was nerf console killers.
Badham and Eyrie have in no way been fixed. It's almost a guaranteed loss on those maps for killer. That's how behind the times you are.
I will wait for these changes because they could be good, and when there's been so many bad ones, it's something to look forward to.
0 -
There are petty reasons to leave, but most people are not like that.
If they are like that, this system could kill the game.
I believe that most people DC or suicide because they view sticking around to have no positives, only negatives. I certainly, in all my time in DBD, have felt the same. Someone's dead at 4 gens? I mean, I'm not going to DC, but I'm also not going to sweat my ass off for a lost game. I wouldn't expect anyone to continue to try to win in such a scenario.
Let's face it, Solo Survivor is the most popular role and it sucks. Your odds of escaping are low, you don't get any BP to help with the insane grind, no Shards, limited Archive progress and it is often an immensely frustrating experience. There is functionally zero reward for people to play out matches that are lost. Lost matches are, objectively, a waste of time and can cause faster burnout.
On the flip side, it isn't fun as Killer either. My view is colored by the fact that I've put far too much time into Killer. Certainly though, I can recall going to release Garden of Joy or Eyrie via map offering and not being happy about it, even knowing I was probably going to win.
Addressing map offerings is a good change, for both sides. I can imagine the average Killer hates going to Eyrie still, lost matches as Killer are more profitable in an economic standpoint but can be worse from burnout. You don't really have an option to leave, unlike Survivor.
If DBD actually wants to address DC's, they need to look at making matches less one-sided and have more rewards.
8 -
The game is not supposed to be a power fantasy simulator for Killer.
Games are supposed to be enjoyable for both sides.
There is nothing enjoyable about losing due to no fault of your own. That is what I ultimately hated about Survivor, and why I could never get into the role fully. It doesn't matter how well you play, you could play perfectly, if even one of your teammates is subpar, you lose. I enjoyed that, as Killer, my fate was my own. True, some matches were unwinnable back in the day, but even there I always felt competitive.
To me, your statement is almost silly. "Survivors should not escape, they need to learn how to just accept losing constantly and be happy with their meager BP gains"
8 -
The concept of fun is subjective, and I've already said how I find it fun that requires no win or loss. And like I said I could lose 20 matches in a row and die 20 times in a row and still gain plenty of BP, still complete my challenges, still enjoy they match. See how long I can survive. Survivor should be a struggle to survive and escape which it is. Makes no sense to have 4 man team that doesn't struggle to escape a killer. Where is the urgency, the fear, the feeling of dread as a survivor if they ascape frequently? It has to be a less common occurrence to escape to have the feeling of overcoming the odds, to feel that sense of dread when attempting to evade the killer. That's what the survivor role is supposed to be, not this warped version that people seem to want where survivors can escape frequently, loop the killer with ease. They literally expect and often do walk up to the killer drop a tbag and run away so they can loop a pallet. In what world should survivors feel that fearless against a killer? This is what survivors want, this is what they find fun and this is why they go next when they come across a killer they know they can't make a mockery out of.
Perfect example, is when im Myers. They hate it that I stalk and don't chase, they hate it that they know they can't chance getting in my face to drop a tbag in front of me because they get a Mori if they try. Same goes for nurse, they know they don't stand much chance against a nurse if in a chase and can't drop tbags near a pallet as easy so they go next to go against a killer they can make a mockery of.
-7 -
Once again, it sounds like you just want to fulfill a power fantasy as Killer, not play a game.
Fun is subjective, but it is clear what is normal and what is not. Nobody likes to win or lose all the time, people enjoy being challenged every once in a while.
Survivor has never been what you described, except in very early 2016 before anyone knew what they were doing. It will never go back to being that way, and that is a good thing. If DBD had been that way, the game would not be here, nearly ten years later.
6 -
Not at all, I have barely played killer the past couple weeks, I been playing survivor and I stand by my view. Killer is power role, survivor is the underdog. I understand these differences. Shame others don't and want survivors armed to the teeth to go toe to toe with a killer.
-4 -
I think most people leave because they THINK the game is unwinnable but really it isn’t and make themselves believe the game isn’t worth playing before it’s even begun because of a snap judgement they made based on a single aspect of the match. Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of times a game is unwinnable from the start (Nurse on Midwich for example…) and honestly in those games I can sympathise with the leavers and don’t blame them. But in my experience from both sides, those games are the minority.
- People leave when they are downed first and then think “I’m gonna be camped and tunnelled better leave” but when in reality they probably weren’t.
- Or the killer used a map offering, it’s game over better leave… then it turns out the killer is running a meme build.
- It’sLegion/Knight/Trapper/Ghostface/Freddy/etc - so they leave because they have a pre-made judgement against the killer already based on who they are playing.
- The killer outplayed them/they messed up. They think the game is over (or maybe rage quit, IDK) but really one single play doesn’t mean the game is over, especially if the killer just got lucky.
I can’t count the amount of games that I’ve lost as survivor that would’ve been an easy 3-4 man escape had someone not left because they thought it was unwinnable or because they threw a tantrum. Instead of a fun game, it becomes miserable for everyone because someone thought the game was already over or because things weren’t as easy as they would’ve liked it to be.
1 -
You are right. There are different cases and scenarios and obviously go next players shall be punished. However, the point of a post is kind of like: you have a bad balance, so punishing everyone altogether without improving the game balance is a terrible idea. Look, i am playing survivor and yesterday we were chilling without map offerings: yamaoka (2nd oni map with no pallets), toba landing with insane triangle, decimated borgo (both lich map and knight map) and shelter woods. We literally had 0 chances to escape vs Killers as the spawn is unpredictable and number of pallets is scarce. So i got reminded why i am forced to play eerie crow, badham preschool, etc. And then we pick it to counter endless number of overpowered killers and stupidity of randoms (we play duo), and we get a chilling pig hating on us because we brought such overpowered maps. At the end of the day most of the matches are about one side suffering and loosing because again the balance is skewed. Now they will rework map offerings and force people to play the matches that are already lost due to balance issues. I do not see how this is helpful
0 -
'A lot of balanced maps' , could you name some?
3 -
I am sure that there have been so many posts regarding Nurse, Blight, Eerie Crow map, Badham preschool, Singularity and other imbalanced issues. I would not call it 'cherry picking'. I would call it 'doing one's job'. And at BHVR no one seems to be into doing one's job. They will do a bad job at balancing and then punish those who refuse to commit to playing against broken addons and killers in solo q. How is it fair? Those players have not been given an in game opportunity to counterplay the opposite side, and on top of that they will be punished for not pretending to play
3 -
You are correct they should balance the game to reduce these frustration, I never said they shouldn’t. And they are doing so luckily with some of it like tunnelling, camping, and slugging changes coming up eventually.
But I agree completely with you that map designs are a huge issue and in my opinion honestly should be one of the main priorities right now. It’s not a single sided issue either, some maps pretty much decide who wins as soon as they load in (Badham for survivors, Borgo for killer, etc)
If people need to rely on map offerings to win, then that shows that the offerings and maps are an issue and give way too much of an advantage to one side. Changing the offerings is good for both sides and hopefully will let the devs figure out which maps are problematic and address them.-1
