General Discussions
General Discussions
Go-next Mentality
One Perspective- I feel like when you're stuck in a match where people are cleansing totems and opening chests while someone is about to go into the second hook status, it's tempting not to struggle and just let the Entity take you.
Another =Perspective- At what point does slugging for the 4K count as using the game's mechanics to hold people hostage? Killing yourself on the hook could have value beyond just moving on to the next match.
Comments
-
I truly hope the anti go next measures they introduce work. Yes soloq has players doing totems and challenges but that's part of the game and to be expected. If people want to play the game with a united goal of escape then swf is the way to go but soloq will have different types of people with different goals.
Slugging for the 4k isn't taking the game hostage in any shape or form, if it was then it would be reportable as taking the game hostage is a reportable offence. So the answer to that question is at no point.
-3 -
When aiming for a 4k, your goal is to prevent the hatches from opening at all costs. If you find yourself hooked while the killer hunts for the last survivor, sacrificing yourself on the hook isn't just a matter of moving on to the next game. It's about strategic resilience. As for the tactic of slugging for 4K, it raises questions about fairness and whether it holds the game hostage. It's worth considering if this approach should be reported.
-13 -
Well I'm pretty sure all solo survivors also have the goal and hopes to escape too.
5 -
I'm sure they do but they will be very disappointed because soloq is and always be brutal due to individual survivors having their own challenges to do. Unless BHVR stops people from doing challenges like 10 totems or stun the killer there will always be people doing them instead of gens. Good luck escaping without doing gens that's all I can say.
-7 -
Prom here is correct, sadly. Solo'Q isn't the place to be if you at all want to 'win' more than not. Solo'Q is just tossing the dice and seeing what you get. Sweaty killer? Nice killer? Challenges abound with your team mates? There's all kinds of BS that can pop up in Solo'Q.
But not SWF. And then if you do get a SWF and start doing well, you can come read the forums with how much killers complain about them.
And with Solo'Q being what I stated, can you blame wanting to be SWF?
2 -
just had a match of 2v8 where I did two gens. was hooked and left to second stage. meanwhile that entire time not a single person touched a gen or literally anything. not even an attempt to get me. so…i went next.
Post edited by bleep275 on5 -
Slugging for the 4k isn't taking the game hostage in any shape or form, if it was then it would be reportable.
See... I don't even fault people for thinking this way. I just personally think the option for you to shouldn't exist. I don't really argue the particulars of DBD. You won't find me in a convo about a singular perk being too strong... but as for slugging (for extended periods)... I cannot think of a single game I've played that mimics the sheer lack of agency for a survivor such a "strategy" creates.
I don't complain about go-next because of things like that. Dying in SnD in an FPS and having to wait until next round? Not the same. In-game timers for crafting to finish? Not quite.
I don't do that as killer. No singular match is THAT important to potentially add 4+ minutes to it for an additional kill. If you get hatch, cool, on to the next. DBD has a few rules for thee, but not for me scenarios and some core contradictory gameplay outcomes.
○ Tunneled out ruthlessly = strategy.
○ Leave early yourself = epidemic. Fun ruiner.
• "Hiding excessively" = holding game hostage.
• Letting one bleed out while you scour the map for the other = strategy.
We have to remember this is a GAME. Meaning you shouldn't be sacrificing one player's agency for another. I want killers to have fun, but not at the cost of another player needing to sit idly for 30% of the game time before dying. That's a punishment and it tilts players which ultimately leads to them playing aggressively selfish after.
8 -
You have a very level headed view and one I can agree with.
We have to remember this is a GAME. Meaning you shouldn't be sacrificing one player's agency for another. I want killers to have fun, but not at the cost of another player needing to sit idly for 30% of the game time before dying. That's a punishment and it tilts players which ultimately leads to them playing aggressively selfish after.
Survivors give you a hard time last game? New loadout and going in sweaty for the next team. All the future teams will pay for this one interaction I had!
I'm quite tired of that childish view. But its repeated everywhere here. Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining. But depending on the 'strategy', it can be quite the opposite. And dbd is one of very very few games that can keep that in the game and continue business as usual. Sad.
Good write up and ty. :)
3 -
Challenges can be distributed across different matches, which helps manage the objectives. These challenges don't seem to pose a significant issue.
A helpful suggestion would be to allow players to see each other's perks before the game begins, which would strategically benefit solo-queue players. For instance, if Adam has Deliverance, one might choose not to run to him, as he could unhook himself and avoid an awkward situation.Post edited by joeyspeehole on0 -
I agree, soloq should get what swf has (or as close to it as possible). Swf has knowledge of eachothers perks and can coordinate them effectively, solo should be able to do the same and be able to see eachothers perks. Swf often has coms, soloq should have the same thing imo. Maybe if soloq and swf were more in line with eachother it would be easier to balance the general game around survivor and killer.
That being said, I know if I'm doing survivor and I have a challenge to do then even if I have all the benefits of swf (coms, knowledge of team perks ect) my priority will be my challenge. If my goal is cleanse 20 totems I'm going for totems first and foremost. The challenge would take 4 matches to do if I cleansed every totem in all 4 matches, I'm not going to be doing gens and maybe 1 or 2 totems per match to make it between 10 to 20 matches to get the challenge done. I got killer matches I want to play too, don't want to spend all my time doing survivor so I bang out the challenge asap then move on.
Sorry to my team for not helping but I can guarantee if someone was going for adept and they were at the gates while I was on the hook they wouldn't be coming back for me. They would be out the gate like a shot lol. Same thing.
-2 -
I have to say I totally agree with this. I have at various times made similar points on the forums, though being it unable to articulate myself as well I maybe don’t land the points as effectively as this post.
I generally try to maintain a positive outlook on the forum so don’t want my own trail of messages being ‘moany’ or feeding into us v them, combined with being a forum NPC of sorts, I find myself avoiding being repetitive but honestly, I wholesale agree with all the things you’re alluding to.
The fact that mechanics exist that can remove agency is one of the biggest contributors that I have seen among my circle of friends in DBD (I run a discord of over 150 players) that has led to people leaving the game or, get gradually more and more upset and tilted.
I’ve seen people either leave DBD altogether or become so serious as to only play with the intent to maximise efficiency only and lose their ‘identity’ and personality altogether - which itself seems to be exhausting leading to burnout or, leaving the game.
Personally, it is the non-empathetic application of the word ‘strategy’. One time in the game, all 4 survivors could leave through the hatch with a key - I think that was quite ridiculous but those who used it could simply say “well it’s a strategy”. anything and everything can be wrapped in the word “strategy” and ask the ‘other side’ to accept it but the reality is that based on balance and buff/nerfs/deletion of any perk or mechanic creates a new arbitrary “is allowed so shut up and accept it” scenario.
Whatever the balance, I believe there should be none that allows for loss of agency for one side or any individual. This will inherently create and foster pent up frustration and no doubt increase toxicity.
4 -
ThIs.
I can't get behind hard tunneling, and excessive team slugging. I understand WHY killers do it. I do. I just don't support it.Ultimately it isn't healthy for the game. Nobody should have to wait minutes at a time like that. It's a unfun situation to be forced into without any counter or quit options without penalty.
Sure you have unbreakable, you get it once and it takes up whole perk slot. Not worth it. I'm a fan of the idea of a give up button but I just hope people don't abuse it.
People tend to play scummy because they have a bad match and tend to take it out on the innocent players in the future matches. I see killers BM alot more these days than I used to.
Just last night I got aggressive head nods, and slapped on hook over and over just bc I ran a Sabo play and caused the killer a wiggle off. Like... it's just a game dude it wasn't personal lol. Geeze
3 -
If I'm ready to go to the next match, I'm just gonna run and do a gen on death hook/injured. If the killer finds me, I'll do my best in chase, but if he gets me, hey, I get to go next. Or best case scenario, that leads to us winning because the killer wasted time hooking me, let me push gens injured, and didn't find me so we all (or almost all) get out.
Occasionally, and I mean occasionally, I'll just go next in the typical fashion you think of. But that's when I'm like, "Okay, these guys are hopeless." not even worth carrying type teams. And I think I'm a pretty good judge of when to do that. I'm very patient with inefficient teams, and so when I do it, it's rare.
Slugging will never count as holding the game hostage, because survivors will bleed out in a few minutes.
-1 -
I also feel tempted to let go on hook when it seems like the match is going badly. Not even out of spite — I just have a feeling like, "Oh, kill me now — I'm ready to die." However, I have a second impulse that says, "No, that's not fair to everyone else; you agreed to play the game," and then I stay in it. And, I know I've said this in other threads but, because I stay in it, I know that very often the match doesn't go as badly as I thought it was going to. Even if it starts with me going to second stage on first hook.
1 -
Yeah, I have been surprised when I've given these teams a second chance. I'm like, "These guys are doing better than I gave them credit for." It's just down to a moment at the end, usually, where you decide to risk it all for them, that decides whether you martyr, they die anyway, or you both somehow get out.
1 -
Impressive, maybe they should start penalizing players (survivors) for not actually playing the objective. I know, it sounds like an awful idea but when you have broken MMR/matchmaking that allows these kinds of matches to happen way to often it really is a huge part of the go next mentality. Really they need to award individual effort/skill with better teammates, however the devs have completely failed the solo q player base with how they choose to implement MMR/matchmaking which really did a lot of damage to the overall player base. They have been making bad decisions for years and now I really believe too little too late.
1 -
The exact same thing just happened to me. I died on the hook, watching everyone die. What's the incentive to struggle?
0
