http://dbd.game/killswitch
Disincetivise Survivors Killing Themselves on Hook
It's actually getting ridiculous now. It's happening at least in 50% of my games either as killer or survivor. It is happening literally within the first minute of a match where the killer gets their first hook and the survivor kills themself. If the survivor really doesn't want to continue, why at least can't they just quit the match so a bot can replace them?
I have two suggestions to stop this from happening:
- Completely remove the ability to ######### on hook. Considering it's just a 4% chance of unhooking yourself in the first stage and the skill checks for the second stage are ridiculously easy, there is no reason to keep this ability active.
- If a survivor kills themself on hook from the first hook stage by 3 4% attempts in the 1st hook stage and 2 missed skill checks in the 2nd, then they get a 2,000,000 blood point penalty. In the likely event they don't have this amount of bloodpoints, then they go into the negative and they will have to play a lot of games to get back to the stage where they can start earning bloodpoints again.
I understand that killing yourself when there's just two of you left is a tactic to let the one unhooked survivor get hatch, but the self-killing epidemic is so ridiculous now that I really can't be bothered playing anymore.
If you're a survivor and you want to stop playing, just leave the game and let a bot take your place. Yes, it's still annoying to the rest of us, but at least it gives the rest of us a chance.
Comments
-
just remove the 4%, it's used to grief in 99% of cases and just contributes with RNG aspect even more. Make unhooking yourself only possible with perks like Deli and Wicked
0 -
Isn't it "go next prevention" right at the QoL changes?
8 -
Remove the 4%, it shouldn't exist. The 4% is primarily used right now as just a way to DC without the penalty.
-2 -
Yeah honestly, if they gonna penalize them anyway with DC penalty, I don't understand why it even exists
It's a trap
0 -
It's in there somewhere, but we still gonna to wait for its release and i don't even remember when it's coming.
3 -
I'm all for the anti go next, can't wait for it to be honest. But I do wonder what people will do. Will they just sit in the corner all match doing nothing because they know they can't go next? (Anti hiding might prevent that tho). Will they actually try to play the match? Will they take the DC penalty? I mean even when I tombstone first survivor like 2min into the match, I've had crazy amount of people just DC mid mori. Why? They rather take the penalty than sit through a few seconds of a mori, so wouldn't they do the same with matches they don't want to play?
I think maybe if the 4% was removed killers wouldn't slug the 3rd survivor to prevent hatch... I know if I'm playing killer and I want the 4k I'm not going to chance them killing themselves faster than I can find the last player.
Interestingly as survivor I have had so many complaints from my team because I was 3rd survivor on hook, first hook state and the last survivor complains I didn't kill myself to give them hatch. Hell no, I'm hooked I want saving. Don't save me? Your choice... Hope you can stay alive on your own longer than it takes my hook timer to run out. It's almost expected that 3rd survivor just ends their match by killing themselves to give last the hatch.
It will be interesting to see the anti go next tho, how it will be implemented, what the conditions will be, the consequences, what impact it will have if any on the wider gameplay.
-6 -
I wish they would look into WHY theres a "Go Next Epidemic" and make changes based on that. Nobody really knows exactly what is ahead for the go next prevention, but i know player counts will suffer on the survivor side even more than they are now.
13 -
Oftentimes all they want is easiest route, they won't afk in corner because it's boring and waste of time, and they won't hook suicide/run into killers as that will harm them, may perform some complicated griefing but that gonna get ban anyways
Basically, I'm 100% sure 60 or even 80% of survivors who previously done "go next" will just plays the game out instead, as that's the easiest way to end the game for majority
-3 -
Well, they must first remove the "go next" to properly assess the "weight" of those issues, which will then be shown in player count
If it's actually as big problem as some claims to be, it would be addressed with no question
-6 -
True, imo they player count dropping would be a good thing. I mean do we cater to hackers and cheaters to keep the player count up? Get rid of the go nexters and let the rest of us play normally, if there wasn't so much go next I would probably play survivor more. Even if q times increase it's no different to now. while I can get matches almost instantly as survivor, the go next thing means I need to q up multiple times to get a match that doesn't have someone going next.
0 -
This entire thread is what's wrong. The symptom is disconnecting, but what is the root cause? That's where the discussion should be. No game mechanic in the world can force people to play when they don't want to play. The real issue is the devs aren't trying to figure out WHY this happens! And it doesn't help when the community is determined to find ways to compel people to stay when they clearly don't want to. Make a survey on Survivor disconnects and find out why people do it. That's where you really begin to address the issue, not implementing ways to keep people in a trial they don't want to be in.
11 -
But If people just stopped playing, they're not going to know why. So how can they address those issues?
6 -
This entire thread is what's wrong. The symptom is disconnecting, but what is the root cause? That's where the discussion should be.
Not using the vote feature but 100% this.
If we remove systems people will just do something else to "go next".
Figure out why people are going next rather than dismissing them being "babies" "bad" "no reason", is what I am seeing.
There is already footage of why too:
•why would anyone want to stick around in a match when you have an afker on your team?
•why would anyone want to stick around if the killer tunneled and camped one out at 5 generators?
•why would anyone want to stick around for blatantly broken mechanical killers?
•why would anyone want to stick around when they load into teammates using a key and hiding to get hatch?
These are just a few questions that people just dismiss or purposefully ignore because instead of address any valid viewpoints, its easier to just call people names.17 -
The root cause is the game has a quick and easy way for survivors to ragequit, that bypasses the DC penalties.
And zero people are forcing you to play a game you don’t want to play. The Go Next Prevention won’t literally force you to play the game. The only thing it will do is give penalties when survivors are clearly trying to bypass the DC penalties.
-6 -
What do you mean by the vote feature?
One of the reasons I want to Go-Next is when The Killer is super laggy. Especially projectile killers, it isn't fun or fair and oftentimes wastes time. Nothing fun about getting hit behind cover, through walls, etc. You also raised some other points, and there are many other reasons for DC's. This is what the dev should be discussing with the community. We need a cure for the problem, not a Band-Aid for the symptom, and all of these mechanics are Band-Aids.
6 -
"not using the vote feature"
-The thing the forum has implemented "vote down and up" I dont engage with it.
Agreed in my response, you have to address the issues leading to the problem, not the symptom of going next.5 -
In my experience the root cause is people that don't get what they want. They want a specific map or a specific killer or don't want to be caught first. These petty reasons are what make many people DC and go next. People have gone next in a match against trapper. Why? They simply don't want to play against crapper (that's not a typo, he's genuinely that bad of a killer lol).
How would anyone solve these issues other than giving people what they want, like a killer section so they can hand pick what killer they go against?
If they don't want to stay, fine leave but keep leaving and at some point they must start to realise they just simply don't want to play the game. So don't play
-12 -
Every game in the world has a quick and easy way to disconnect, so that's definitely not the issue.
GN is about compelling people to stay in the match, the penalty serves as a deterrent. That's the whole point, to discourage people from leaving, which is another way of saying trying to keep them in the match. My point still stands: until you ascertain the why, people will find new ways to circumvent whatever system is introduced. DC penalties were supposed to remedy this issue, so players have pursued other means of achieving that goal. It'll be the same here.
1 -
This is what i said, but nobody sees the bigger picture. Forcing people to do things is hardly the answer, and instead they should look into WHY people are wanting to leave. It's 100% a balance issue, but nobody wants to admit it due to their allegiance for their side.
8 -
Oh, I didn't see that, but I did scroll up to read it, and it's a very fair point. Who would downvote such an objective point? It does seem very tribal in this community sometimes. This is why I participate less and less, but it can be very one-sided, and it drowns out any other point of view or perspective. Many threads and topics feel more like an echo chamber than an honest, meaningful discussion.
3 -
Being able to easily bypass the DC penalties, is literally why the go next issue is so bad. This is combined with the fact that the DC penalties themselves start out super low.
But that’s literally the cause of the problem. The penalties aren’t a good enough deterrent because they are easily bypassed, and they start out way to low.
-6 -
What do you mean the devs are doing nothing? They are literally giving away free draws for leaving the match now. The reason is clear, it has always been the same, even if it hurts many: sore losers.
These people have received attention they didn't deserve, many changes are being made to the game to please them, but they will continue giving up because the can't accept defeat.
-8 -
I don't think it's a side thing, as I said I'm likely to play survivor more if people didn't DC or go next. Still not sure why people go next over little things like being chased or hooked first. Sometimes the killer just needs to look at them and they DC regardless of what killer it is. They want to be able to have the match they want, killer they want, map they want, gameplay they want. That's not what the game is by its nature.
People DC when I'm myers because they want to be chased but Myers doesn't chase, he stalks. He's different to go against than nurse or huntress. Do we really give survivors what they want and make all killers the same so survivors always get the chase they want? No, it's random what killer people go against and they should role with it not keep going next until they get what they want. If they go next often enough they should just admit they don't want to play the game and just not play.
-4 -
This. You can band aid chase the symptoms, but the root cause is still there.
I've said before that they're doing this part backwards: anti camp, anti tunnel, and anti slug need to be first. These are the primary reasons many people are going next. These are the "I don't get to play the game" mechanics that cause people to consider a game hopeless early.
Sure, there are other reasons, like pettiness. But people haven't become more petty over time. The main reason we've seen an increase in giving up is balance reasons. And addressing some of those balance problems will help alleviate some of the core issue that causes this behavior.
I don't believe there's a single solution that completely solves the issue, but I don't believe that punish them all solves literally any of the core reasons people feel that games are hopeless.
(Although, I do personally find it ironic, that many of the same people who push for punish them all are the same ones who defend these tactics. "Incentivize hooks", "if you just buffed regression this wouldn't happen", and other things that are demonstrably false or have already been tried and absolutely backfired. Yet if you try to say "hey, let's give survivors literally anything to make the game not completely hopeless in the first 90 seconds" you get nothing but spewed vitriol in response.)
Post edited by AmpersandUnderscore on8 -
I think of things as I'm playing the side in question and as survivor I don't need anti tunnel, anti slug or whatever tactics nerfed to make it not hopeless because I know as survivor these tactics don't make the match hopeless. They can and have been countered. From my point of view, what does make the match hopeless is when entitled team mates decide they don't want to play on the map it randomly gave, or they don't like playing against a certain killer because they don't have the skill to loop them very well they go next and leave the rest of us handle the match at a disadvantage.
in my experience people play the game knowing it's random but don't like it when the randomness doesn't give them what they want. The only exception to this I noticed was when ghoul was released. There was no random factor it was ghoul after ghoul, I went 2 days of playing survivor against nothing but ghoul before I just stopped playing survivor. others keep playing it but go next every time.
It's a roll of a dice, people want a 6. They roll, get 4, go next, reroll... Get a 3, go next, reroll. Put in simple terms.
-2 -
Perhaps they should address common pain points…
Like how when one Survivor dies before 3 gens are done, the match is functionally over. Or how abysmal Survivor BP gains are. Or a lack of meaningful comeback mechanics.
Instead of doing that stuff, let's hardware ban anyone who suicides on hook, that'll surely solve the problem this time!
9 -
The solution is so simple in my view. Just make it to where if the first survivor that dies on hook has their blood points taken from them and distributed to the other survivors based on who spent the most time on generators, but ONLY if the dying survivor also used the "escape" mechanic on hook AND/OR didn't hit any of the skill checks on phase 2. This will punish people who don't try to survive UNTIL someone else already dies- which should theoretically allow survivors to make more progress until they can give up without punishment AND reward them for not giving up after someone else does. Then you further incentivize DC instead of escape by hook, by not putting a ban on them- but instead they also don't gain blood points BUT they keep any items that weren't used up by the time they disconnected (so if someone has something come up they aren't punished for having a life outside of DBD).
-5 -
The problem will always be, you cant make people play matches they don't want to play
I agree, I feel like if someone really wants out of a match, you cant make them have the will and to participate in a match they just want out of ASAP.
There must be some commonality with at least some significant portion of the survivors going next. I have my own suspicions but I think if the causes are ignored, no preventative measure can stop people from not having the motivation and will to continue playing a certain match.
1 -
Or in severe cases, not having the motivation & will to play the game in general like myself.
2 -
I'm all for incentivizing people to keep playing during the match but realistically if somebody dies before 3 gens are done what can you even do? Automatically end the game for everyone? Physically prevent anyone from dying before that point? It's a bit silly. Sometimes you're gonna get a quick match where you're dunked on, other times it'll be a long drawn out slog. It's kind of the nature of short nature of matches.
-1 -
Whats the point in doing so? Why shoulnd bhvr just get rid of all the issues that make survivor feel frustrated so much to DC that often? Nah, we just let them be frustrated and make it even more frustrating for them. Sigh.
2 -
Sometimes you're gonna get a quick match where you're dunked on, other times it'll be a long drawn out slog. It's kind of the nature of short nature of matches.My problem is that's its not quick.
If a survivor is quickly eliminated, whether through tunneling, survivor misreads, going next, what have you, the other three have little realistic chance of escaping. But if those survivors play it out, unhooking, healing, looping, the match can still last a long time.
All games have the possibility of mismatches. Most game styles, whether it be Team Deathmatch, Capture Point, Cart Push, by the time it becomes clear that the teams are imbalanced, well the game is probably most of the way over. Unless the survivors just give up (which is generally against the rules), the game can take awhile.
This is one of the reason I think survivors sometimes go next, so they don't have the risk of getting "stuck" in the game which is all too easy.
-2 -
I think 2 is a bad idea. A game should never punish players for something that the designers themselves put in (though it looks like we might be getting something like this).
I think eliminating hook escapes is the right approach. I don't think it needs to go that far. My current thinking is that hook escapes should be impossible for the first 50 seconds (or something like that), barring a perk or EGC. You still have the game element, but take away the possibility of the first survivor on hook just completely throwing the game.
But it shouldn't just be a pain free way to disconnect.
To idea in the thread
I do think more can be done to improve the survivor experience. I think abandon is the right direction to speed up matches were there is no chance, sadly BHVR has really confused the issue with their communication. I also think more anti-tunnel/anti-slug would both prevent killers jumping out to an undefeatable position way too quickly and remove the less enjoyable elements of the game.
On the idea that you can't make people play. As an absolute, sure, but you can always move people in a direction. It's why DC penalties work, they don't totally prevent the behavior, but they do make it less common.
-1 -
People are well aware that it is intended for ragequitting to give a DC penalty, and they are exploiting when they purposely bypass the DC penalties. People should not be defending exploits.
And there are multiple people in this forum thread that are defending the ability to bypass the DC penalties, and that shouldn't be allowed.
1 -
Rebalance the game so that a 4v1 isn't quite so against the Killer (thereby softly dissuading tunneling and removing "necessity" as a reason) and making the 3v1 significantly less Killer-sided (thereby making Survivors feel like they actually have a chance to win the game).
I believe that, coupled with BP changes, could significantly help.
1 -
Not a good incentive since no one spends ages in the bloodweb anyway. That said, even the devs "incentive" they have planned won't do anything.
The best thing they should do is not allow 4%'s until the match has hit a certain amount of minutes, only perks that garuntee unhooks would allow you to escape yourself, no 4%'s
-1 -
You are literally objectively wrong, pretty much any PvP games in this world basically forces players to stay and play for an entire match, or take DC penalty, probably some battle royale games and 1v1 games like streetfighter allows you to "go next", but they really are rather an exception
Be it csgo, lol, dota, r6s, valorant, marvel rivals, any of the serious team-based games forces you to stay on a match
on dbd, they can literally just leave the match for absolute free without any penalty, it's different
0 -
Keep the 4% but make it so it doesnt change the hook progress
0 -
lol
-1 -
People saying remove the 4% is just sad. That's been a staple in DBD gameplay since release. There is nothing wrong with that RNG.
0 -
Uh...so just 4% forever until you get it? 🥹😭
0 -
Would a permanent gen speed boost be balanced for each survivor dead? (Essentially sole survivor basekit at increasing intervals) And killers maybe have reduced gen speed when evening hook stages across all 4 survivors? (Kinda like Dying Light basekit)
-1 -
My queue times are still longer on survivor than killer.
For some reason. I have no idea why. I certainly don't want to play survivor right now with Ghoul still in an absolutely busted state.
-5 -
I've been saying this for a long time. Remove the 4% and remove the instant death on missed skillchecks. The 4% mechanic rarely ever makes any difference in a match for anything that isn't throwing the game on purpose, it's just not worth keeping in the game.
2 -
Not unless it would be a MASSIVE boost. It has to be a big enough to dissuade tunneling.
1 -
Make it 0.4% and I think it's legit balanced, lol
-2 -
literally this. And a little unrelated, but it's funny to see my comment having so many downvotes, i guess people want their way of griefing to stay in the game so that they can cherrypick their matches freely 24/7
1 -
Yeah, but the promised "prevention" is just a disincentive that is intended to detect the person who is "going next" and punishing them by removing a grade. But honestly, I don't think this is going to be very effective. It relies on the system automatically detecting and punishing someone who is giving up, which I honestly don't expect to be accurate. Plus, it will do nothing to people who don't care about grades.
This "go next prevention" is just a band-aid fix. It atempts something complicated while ignoring the most necessary fix that is REMOVING the survivor ability to bypass the DC penalty while also preventing a bot from staying in their place.
But considering how long it took for the devs to remove hook grabs, who knows how long that will take.
1 -
We know what people will do. You can see it yourself when those 4% guys actually manage to hit 4%. Sometimes they actually play out the match right. Most of the times they do 1 of 2 things - a, Stand under the hook b, chase the killer and point to hook.
Removing 4% will mostly only change the complaints. It will lessen the epidemic by a little (those people that play it out after), but it would shrink survivor pool a little too and for the majority rest cases, it will just change these forum topic to - add disconnect penalties to survivors that stay in a single spot / throw down all the pallets in game / jump windows repeatedly / chase killer…
The thing that we actually need is to address reason instead of symptoms.
0 -
True, I honestly don't understand why they took the much complicated route, maybe they want to get rid of the entire thing (intentionally working for killer) rather than fixing a single problem
-1
