http://dbd.game/killswitch
I lost a grade as punishment for being tunneled to death
I started a game as a survivor against a blight and got tunneled to death at 5 gens. After the first hook, I ran away and tried to survive, but he was back on me at the speed of, well, blight. After the second hook, I managed to get a very fast heal from a teammate but the killer hit me immediately after and I couldn't make it to any pallet and I died.
After that I was informed that I lost a grade for dying on purpose. Which is great because now on top of being tunneled out of the game I also get punished by the game itself for not surviving a tunnel long enough.
Comments
-
welcome to dead by daylight
23 -
'Welcome to Dead by Daylight. Get out.'
18 -
This is absolute nonsense. You think the killer not being able to face camp helps them? Because of the gen changes like ten patches before that system was implemented?
-12 -
The duality of the DBD forums
(Sorry that happened to you mate, they really gotta stop trying to punish people from trying to go next because although it is annoying and sucks, they're not gonna be able to make a system that doesn't punish innocents)
22 -
Please let a dev/mod see this so the system gets killswitched again never to return.
12 -
Their are some killer player trying to do this to surivours like this is redicliois this system n3eds to be scrapped and also u need this system for killer if they tunnel then they also loose a grade
15 -
The system is meaningless. While you cannot facecamp anymore, facecamping was never good to begin with. And even with the AFC you can be so close to the Hook as Killer that you are easily there before the Unhook happens to at least get a trade.
17 -
We've had this debate before, but this is the first time I've seen this point made in this way...
Isn't that the intention though? Cause the problem of face camping was that in a fair number of scenarios it was impossible to even trade, including various Iri's, and characters like Bubba and Billy. This is what the AFC addressed and was successful at doing so... it is rare that Survivors don't get a trade now against a camping killer.
So I am genuinely curious, what do you want exactly from an anti-camp system?
I'm not a killer who camps as a rule, and I mostly play Survivor, but I am aware that camping is a possibility and I actively take it into consideration with my decisions. A camping killer is actively sacrificing gen pressure for a hook stage, which now takes 70s instead of 60s. I will exploit this to get as much time on gens as possible, especiallyif I see no one repairing on the HUD.
With this in mind, do you want no camping at all? What if I have a 3 gen as killer and the Survivor makes a mistake and gets downed in that 3 gen, and I then hook in the middle of it, which is logically what I should do? Does the killer now have to leave because of a Survivor mistake?
The killer already has a 16m zone they have to steer clear on in this scenario that limits their ability to patrol said 3-gen... what range wpuld you propose that solves the problems of camping you perceive and doesn't punish the killer in this scenario? Or do you think the killer should be punished in this scenario?
-9 -
Fine... it was originally called Anti Camp, and changed to Anti Face Camp... I'm not disputing that point, but I'm pointing out that Anti Camp is not failing to do it's job, Anti Camp does not currently exist, and it serves no purpose debating about a hypothetical feature that was never implemented.
So the AFC not addressing camping is completely expected, given it was changed to Anti Face Camp, and it allows you to trade much easier and prevents the killer from effectively defending the hook than it does without it, which is why the feature is banned in competative play.
But irreapective of what the AFC does or doesnt do, my question is the same... what exactly do you want from an Anti-Camp mechanic? If you intend to stop the killer from camping, what do you propose with consideration to the situation I have highlighted above? Is the killer forced to place all hooks outside of a 3 gen, because an effective anti-camp system would mean that hooking a survivor inside a 3 gen would mean they can no longer defend that 3 gen, without also allowing the survivor to unhook themselves.
What is it you want from an Anti Camp feature IF it existed?
-2 -
I already opened thread about that after twd chapter and no one cares and Jocelyn DM-ed me that team enabled go next prevention so not only you lose grade you also get 1 penalty point :))
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/453210/go-next-prevetion-yet-again-sucks-why-are-you-enabled-it#latest
6 -
100% agree lets punish killers too, give them penalty points just like to us and grade reduction
7 -
same with dc penalty it should be limited to 5 min max, dbd is not serious comp game, it's semi-casual, no need new nonsense system here let people chill a bit…
7 -
what exactly do you want from an Anti-Camp mechanic?
I want the devs to be consistent with whether or not a player standing still is considered participating or not.
Because, for survivors, we got "anti hiding" which hard punishes you for doing so, and crows were launched so broken that you couldn't even sneak. Both of these systems, even right now, evaluate if they consider the survivor to be "playing the game" and, if not, punish them with either a waiting period, or giving away their position in the match.
For killers, standing around at a hook, for up to 70 seconds at a time, is somehow different. This isn't gameplay either, and, honestly, the killer determines the gameplay. But this is somehow defended ferociously by the community, and "ok".
What you need, is a system that says "go chase survivors". Go play the game. Go create the gameplay. Don't just stand there and admire the furniture.
And you can't do that with incentives, they tried. Gen kick meta brought about more camping and tunneling because killers had more time to waste doing nothing. Slowing down gens did the same thing, only led to an increase. There is nothing within the match that can incentivized people to stop standing around doing nothing at a hook and calling it "gameplay".
The only incentive that might help is extrinsic, or outside the match. Basically, make the old BBQ BP bonus base kit for hooking multiple survivors, which doesn't impact the match or balance, but rewards the killer outside the game.
So, personally, I expect "anti camp" to mean "the killer leaves the hook and goes to pressure the map", and is punished somehow if they don't do that. And AFC does not, in any way, make this happen.
14 -
Sure, fair enough, those are admirable goals that I don't disagree with, and is generally how I do play killer myself...
However, you do also acknowledge that there are scenarios where the killer has no reason to leave an area right?
As a simple example, if one Survivor is hooked and the other 3 are all lingering the area, then the killer doesn't need to leave hook. You might say "well leave hook and commit to the chase", but why? No one is progressing gens, the Survivors are on the clock here, not the killer. They have to get by him, and by staying near the hook, the killer can potentially get multiple injuries, maybe even a down without even a trade being made, massively increasing their pressure to snowball the game.
Another more realistic example is the Killer may have found a Survivor as they left hook, and that may have tried to loop near the hook and got downed trying to make the trade... in this scenario the killer through simply making logical choices(and through faults of the survivor) has 2 survivors down/hooked, one nearly losing a hook stage, and another survivor slugged on the floor... the killer should camp in this scenario, because a third down gives them immense pressure, and maybe even wins the game outright.
If the point is the killer should "leave hook and go pressure the map", what if the the killer is able to generate the greatest pressure in the map is by camping? Isn't such an Anti-Camp mechanic effectively forcing the killer to lose the game?
This is what fears around camping prevention centre on. Often there are situations where camping is outright losing the game, but there are conceivable scenarios where camping is the best course of action, and a good number of them are Survivor induced....
So I'm raising the point, how do you make an effective anti- camp system, that doesn't punished the killer for camping when camping is the logical and sensible choice for winning the game?
-2 -
The AFK Crows got massively nerfed, and I’ve literally never seen a survivor with 3 crows, since the nerfs happened.
And I’m still dealing with survivors excessively hiding. They’re just bypassing the AFK Crows, since they are so weak.
-11 -
However, you do also acknowledge that there are scenarios where the killer has no reason to leave an area right?
Yes, I've said before and will continue to say that camping, tunneling, slugging, and stealth should be used situationally, and none of them can be outright removed from the game. It's really only the excessive use of any of these that becomes problematic.
If the "strategy" is to always, in every situation use these tactics, then that's a problem to be dealt with. As far as stealth goes, there was a good reason to try and prevent excessive hiding, where survivors aren't touching gens for 10+ minutes at a time. Unfortunately, BHVR's initial attempt at dealing with that also basically removed stealth from the game. It's less punishing for reasonable stealth now, but still has issues with the "slug for the 4k problem", which has been made actively worse in its current state.
As a simple example, if one Survivor is hooked and the other 3 are all lingering the area, then the killer doesn't need to leave hook. You might say "well leave hook and commit to the chase", but why? No one is progressing gens, the Survivors are on the clock here, not the killer.
The problem with this is that you're describing what I generally call "the survivors panicking and falling apart". The survivors have literally no reason to have everyone at the hook, even when the killer is hard camping. This is a tactical mistake, and as much as I hate to go this route, after survivors figure out that this is a tactical error, they will send, at most, one person to trade and let the others do gens.
So the common scenario is a killer standing at the hook, waiting for the survivor team to fall into this trap, and if the survivors are in any way experienced and/or coordinated they will just do gens and let the killer stand around doing nothing.
So once it becomes "only one person shows up" the killer is actively spending 100% of their effort and attention on the only 2 survivors in the entire game who are not progressing gens. The other 2 (or 3 if they're being greedy) are doing gens for free. This is where a lot of "gen rushing" complaints come from. Also unfortunately, instead of recognizing that it might actually be better to pressure the survivors on gens (and prevent the gen progress), they stand still and wait for the panic moment that may or may not ever happen.
If the point is the killer should "leave hook and go pressure the map", what if the the killer is able to generate the greatest pressure in the map is by camping? Isn't such an Anti-Camp mechanic effectively forcing the killer to lose the game?
The problem is that many of the arguments I see about "I need to camp this hook" are self-fulfilling prophecy. Most people argue this from a standpoint of "I have to camp my first hook of the game, since 3-4 gens are basically already complete", then they continue to stand around doing nothing and allowing the gens to finish. They then feel justified that "look, I had no chance" even though they are literally wasting time doing nothing at the hook.
Killers in general, simply don't look at their own gameplay. They aren't getting into chases quickly, can't find survivors (despite dozens of information perks and distortion being deleted), and are largely just waiting around the hook. Killers should feel pressure to keep survivors busy, which may be in chase, or could also be rescue/recovery, killer powers, perks like devour hope. Instead they feel so at ease they can stand around and scream at the devs to make gens slower.
So I'm raising the point, how do you make an effective anti- camp system, that doesn't punished the killer for camping when camping is the logical and sensible choice for winning the game?
Hook donation system. Each survivor can choose to donate their first hook stage to a shared pool that is consumed first before any personal stages, and the stages are refunded, in order, either at end game, or once a certain threshhold of gen progress is finished (say, 400%, which could be 4 complete gens, or cumulative partial progress to prevent 99-ing).
The late/end game doesn't change, it should not be that hard to get 4 hooks in a match. So "resorting to" camping and tunneling is untouched.
Early game camping and tunneling is largely nerfed. The game becomes (or goes back to) "how fast can you burn through hook stages", and the killer needs to basically always be in chase to get that done. They can just stand around the first hook of the game, but they'll be there for about 6 hook stages and automatically lose. So they will leave the hook, go chase someone else, and the gen progress slows down automatically.
The game goal of "getting someone out as fast as possible", which is the modern DbD meta, doesn't change. It's how you get there, by spreading pressure, and spreading hooks. If the survivors all swarm the hook, or trade, then you still burn through hook stages, but any time waiting around for them to panic is wasted. You need to be in chase as much as humanly possible to speed through hooks. This also creates pressure and slows down the game, and doesn't impact end game or scenarios where the survivors are making a mistake for you.
5 -
I had a Mikaela who decided they were going to play for Hatch. While I was hooked I could see they were just running in circles in the corner of the map. The entire 140 seconds or so while I was on hook I don't think they got any crows. The AFK is definitely flawed.
-3 -
She doesn’t even need to run. She could just crouch walk, back and forth, in a small line. And it would take 510 seconds (8.5 minutes) to get 1 crow.
And opening a chest completely resets AFK points, so a survivor could crouch walk for 8 minutes, open 1 chest, then crouch walk for another 8 minutes….. and effectively be hiding for 16 minutes with 0 crows.
-3 -
Not sure if you're being sarcastic but the match went from a 3 Escape to a 4K because she decided to play for Hatch after the first person got Sacrificed.
-5 -
This is what I feared for the go next prevention that it was gonna punish players for actually trying to survive. This has to be addressed.
11 -
This is why implementing a system that tries to interpret what someone is trying to do and punishes based on if the games thinks you are being "naughty". It should never have been put in the game in the fist place.
9 -
No, not being able to face camp doesn't help them. What helps them is the complementory buff given for the "inconvinience" of not being able to do that. It's as if I destroyed your house and I gave you $1 billion. You'dd still profit or in the context, gain strength from the change
2 -
Been pondering this a couple of days cause it's a solid response, and a lot there I agree with
I would largely agree that those complaining about gens speeds while camping are indeed being Clownish and arguing in bad faith. I generally think players and BHVR don't take such arguments seriously.... though gen speeds aren't inherently argued from a camping position though, walking speed does playback huge factor in a killers ability to exert pressure. Telling Blight or Wraith to leave hook and chase far afield and don't come back is fair enough (and they often do with BBQ), but saying the same thing to say Ghost Face or Hag isn't quite the same bag.
There are also plenty of survivors who will complain about camping and tunneling, while also looping the killer within 20m of the hook, unhooking less than 10 seconds after the survivor got hooked, and survivors who run through the killer to trade when there is.no logical reason to do so... again, I believe the community at large and BHVR don't take these people seriously.
This hook pool system does have a couple of niceties, first and foremost it would prevent camping.... also it'd be nice that if a survivor does dumbhook me, it's the team who suffer, not me directly... lord knows 95% of my rages on DBD are caused by teammates being collosally cowardly/stupid/selfish... there aren't many times its actually the killer who makes me mad (barring a few recent exceptions, such as Kaneki at his worst and Clown).
The only concerns I have with this hook pool system are: -
- It greatly favours map mobile killers who can traverse the map and get to other survivors quickly, giving even fewer incentives to play less mobile killers. Slower killers don't have the threat of tunneling to generate pressure... a bad survivor unhook still results in 1 more hook off the pool. I can genuinely see higher skilled players taking faster unhooks because "its Legion, so who cares? Just unhook".
- Not do sure it solves tunneling, because nore mobile killers can also reasonably expect a fast down with time to run back to the hook and take another hook stage off the injured survivor, this is something that a slower killer can not do... so it would likely mean tunneling is a privilege of the S/A tiers.
- It makes tracking hook stages muddy for killer if adding to this pool is optional. I do like to take 2 hook stages off of everyone whenever I can, and especially if someone DCs cause I'm playing well, I like go take my hooks and let them go... this could be/couldn't be split hook stages muddies that whole thing, where in some situations I can't kill someone I need to kill (like a flashlight duo going down under pallets), and in other situations I accidently kill someone I don't intend, cause if the opportunity presents itself and I'm trying to chew through hook states, but don't know how many have been given up to the pool.
- It so seems to favour SWF more than Solo survivor inherently.
But interesting to think about.
0 -
The funniest part is that you literally cannot leave the trial on purpose anymore unless you DC. It's impossible without the Killer interacting with you (unless you can bleed out with Plot Twist—I don't remember). So the wording doesn't even make sense.
4 -
Happened to my friend. She got tunneled at 5 gens, and I purposefully gave myself up to the killer. Guess who lost a grade.
Clown system.
3 -
AS A KILLER MAIN I MUST SAY
tunnling sux so does camping and full disrespect to those who do it right off rip
BUT if peeps bin toxic or theres zero win chance if you dont then eh its up to you but i still dont like it
1 -
I recently (like a week ago) watched an Insidious Bubba camp basement (yes, in the year 2025) from just outside the anti-facecamp radius and my teammates just throw themselves into it repeatedly.
The best part was that the very next match was against the very same Bubba player and my new solo queue teammates fell for it the exact same way. The best part was in the second game I was hooked first and was running Kindred + Open Handed and they still came for me, which of course got us both hooked, and then it happened again.
So in a world where most games have teams at least partially comprised of solo queue survs, one could still get decent returns camping. Even facecamping could be effective for this reason.
I think we can all agree the anti-camping measure is useless against good killer players. Proxy camping has always been the way to go, and unfortunately that's probably too complex to address.
2
