http://dbd.game/killswitch
So... when is the anti-tunnel and anti-slug measures BHVR promised is coming in...?
Comments
-
They had time to gather data. It’s called a representative sample.
2 days' worth of a self-selected audience is not, in any way, representative. It's incredibly biased.
11 -
47 more posts to 300.
3 -
It's still representative of how launch day would have gone, if the changes had gone live.
The phase 2 revert was announced the first week, because there was a very real threat that the chapter launch would have been a financial disaster if the changes have gone live. There was zero chance that "wait and see" would have stopped a killer boycott, especially because the majority of people wanting the phase 2 changes to happen, play survivor more than killer.
You can't force killers to play the game, and if killers get nerfed too much, then many of them will stop playing. Even though you don't like the way the game is currently, the queue times are still mostly stable. And the only reason why the queues aren't fully stable is because there is a slight killer boycott happening because of the pallet density changes.
-8 -
It's still representative of how launch day would have gone, if the changes had gone live.
The phase 2 revert was announced the first week, because there was a very real threat that the chapter launch would have been a financial disaster if the changes have gone live. There was zero chance that "wait and see" would have stopped a killer boycott, especially because the majority of people wanting the phase 2 changes to happen, play survivor more than killer.
No, it's not. PTB was the first sentiment, the knee-jerk. Things would likely cool down after a week and you'd get more people adapting to the changes, which would make first launch completely different. But that's only if you're willing to use the PTB for its actual purpose.
Keep in mind, if they'd cancelled these changes on the tail end of the PTB, you'd have a case, but they didn't. They cancelled it after two days.
Also keep in mind that you're proving @AmpersandUnderscore 's earlier claim: Killers can just throw a hissy fit to take direct control of the game's balancing. Don't like something? Just threaten to quit and the devs will chicken out, leaving us stranded in the same situation that killers have allegedly been on the edge of quitting over.
You can't force killers to play the game, and if killers get nerfed too much, then many of them will stop playing.
Evidently, this is a one-way street, since the go-next epidemic is perfectly fine and dandy and it's good to force survivors to play matches they don't want to play.
13 -
The tunneling slugging doesn't bother me, cause I play killer myself and I know how much it is needed. What bothers me is that you get a penalty if you die to fast to them, like wth BHVR :( Like… this dude is hooking me in a deadzone and tunneling me straight of hook with intent, why do I need to get a match ban for that ><
4 -
Are people forcing you to play game you don't want to play? Is someone physically restraining you to your computer or console, and they physically glued your mouse or controller to your hands?
No one is forcing anyone to play games they don't want to play.
-9 -
Would you rather they all never queue up again and see what happens to queue times?
12 -
Did you know that "force survivors to play matches they don't want to play" and "Would you rather they all never queue up again and see what happens to queue times" are the types of things people say, if they believe survivors should be able to ragequit without penalties?
-5 -
Can you just straight up tell us what your point is?
13 -
They had time to gather data. It’s called a representative sample. You should have learned that concept in school.You must really know you're losing this argument if you are turning to insults.
1: If we're talking stats, more data, a larger sample size, is always better. Accidentally or intentionally going for a low sample size is a good way to get a bad data set.
2: A representative sample would actually need to be reflective of the the entire population set being tested. The PTB is never that as it only tests one group (Steam players) and is heavily weighted towards the players who play the game the most. In this case it was even more extreme as they didn't even get to the weekend.
Just because you can possibly test a large group based on a small sample does not mean a small sample is inherently representative of the large sample.
3: None of your argument deals with the point of adjustment. That's not even a stats argument and you are misapplying concepts.
Your argument is also inherently self defeating. If you're saying that after a few days BHVR had enough data to know they where making the right change, than basically any change they've ever made must be correct because they've always that level of data.
9 -
And the only reason why the queues aren't fully stable is because there is a slight killer boycott happening because of the pallet density changes.
You have any proof of this or are we going on vibes again?
10 -
When people say "force survivors to play matches they don't want to play", they are usually claiming that the ragequitting penalties "force" survivors to play matches they don't want to play. That implies they don't think the ragequitting penalties should exist, because they think survivors should be allowed to ragequit without penalties, if they don't want to play a game.
Do you ever have proof of your conspiracy theories? What is your proof that the game would have been fine if the phase 2 changes went live? What is your proof that BHVR didn't have a really good reason to revert the phase 2 changes?
There was so much backlash from the PTB, that it literally doesn't matter if the console players tested it themselves. Most people don't even want to bother with the PTB, and instead they would rather watch their favorite streamer play the PTB, or just read about the changes on their favorite social media choice.
Yes, a lot of people made up their minds about the PTB, even though they never played the PTB. That's how this game works.
-6 -
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-hawwwwww
5 -
You just went on about how Killers will stop playing if they "get nerfed too much," and then you pivot right back to Survivors' ragequitting. Could you just pick an argument and stick to it?
Would you actually be okay with Killers quitting the game?
10 -
Do you ever have proof of your conspiracy theories?
My conspiracy theories? You make up reasons for things about evey single topic. Case in point:
Most people don't even want to bother with the PTB, and instead they would rather watch their favorite streamer play the PTB, or just read about the changes on their favorite social media choice.
Vibes again. I watch zero streamers. I have no social media. I can't join the ptb and I want to. But you're just assuming no one wants to try it. This doesn't even sound like a real opinion. You just want to shoo away the limited nature of the ptb like it's no big deal.
And you think there's a secret cult of ragequitters trying to manipulate the penalty system. That is a conspiracy theory. You can't just keep saying NO U about all the things you do.
What is your proof that the game would have been fine if the phase 2 changes went live?
How many times do I have to say that I and almost everyone else whose spoken about this on this forum wanted the changes modified and not just scraped. Find me all these people that wanted them pushed through as is.
10 -
Do you think survivors should be able to ragequit without penalties, if they don't want to play a game?
-6 -
Are you a bot or something? You're just ignoring everything and going back to this again. This post is about tunneling and slugging.
I've already expressed my deep indifference to this topic. I don't DC and I also don't care what other people do. Punish them, don't punish them, it doesn't matter to me. This only effects me when multiple opponents DC and now I have to look at the sky why the remaining two unfortunates finish gens.
But if everyone is hungry maybe you should fix the food scarcity issue instead of making the penalty for stealing bread harsher. Killlers don't DC at the rate of survivors, therefore there's an issue amongst survivor players. You can make up whatever reasons you want for why people DC but the core reason is going to be mass unhappiness. You don't quit something you're happy with.
And that cycles us back to tunneling and slugging, because those are the issues that appear to cause the most discontent amongst the portion of the playerbase that is vocal about the game. If you really, truly care about DCing (and I don't think you truly do) then you should want changes made to tactics like tunneling and slugging.
Post edited by cogsturning on13 -
Are you a bot or something? You're just ignoring everything and going back to this again. This post is about tunneling and slugging.
That's exactly why I stopped responding. Everything feels very baity and whenever you hit a wall, the subject changes to keep you engaged.
10 -
I upvoted.
4 -
There is certainly a pattern.
7 -
You can make up whatever reasons you want for why people DC but the core reason is goimg to be mass unhappiness. You don't quit something you're happy with.
And that cycles us back to tunneling and slugging, because those are the issues that appear to cause the most discontent amongst the portion of the playerbase that is vocal about the game. If you really, truly care about DCing (and I don't think you truly do) then you should want changes made to tactics like tunneling and slugging.
based on my own experience alone, the vast majority of people DC over the smallest thing. its not tunneling or being slugged, people DC long before it even gets to that point. top reasons for people DCing in my matches are:
- Map they dont like
- killer they dont like
- teammates toxic behaviour
- first time downed
since map offerings have been nerfed and people can no longer DC in loading screen when they see an offering they dont like because they are hidden now, i have noticed a lot more people DCing over maps which are balanced pretty well. These people want survivor sided maps not balanced maps.
People dont like krasue or ghoul so they are the top 2 killers people DC against, however people have been DCing at the sight of a trapper, wraith, huntress, hag, doctor, houndmaster, deathslinger just to name a few…. doesnt matter who the killer is or what tier the killer is, people will DC if they get someone they dont personally want to go against.
there as so many toxic teammates around that will body block, work with the killer, avoid gens, deliberately blow a gen your on. when these people are spotted in a match others are more likely to DC because no one wants to be in a match like that.
many people only enjoy looping and being chased. they can be chased long enough for a gen or 2 to be finshed but the second they are down the fun stops for them. either they dont want to be hooked because its no fun being on the hook or they throw a tantrum because they cant loop the killer all match. either way going down first or even just going down 1 time is enough to make people DC.
All of this happens before a killer has had time to tunnel or slug. im not saying tunneling doesnt contribute to the DCing but the mindset of make people happy so they dont DC will not work unless bhvr provides survivors with
- a map so survivor sided they wont ever want to DC when they get it or a "pick a map" option.
- give survivors a "pick a killer" option so they can hand select what killer they want
- change players behaviours in game
- make the game so survivors cant be downed.
some things can be changed to reduce DCing but at some point people need to accept the game for what it is and need to understand they cant have it exactly the way they want it.
-3 -
All these people told you this is why they DCed? Because all I ever hear is a whole lot of assumptions.
If this was true, killers should be DCing just as frivolously. Getting juiced? DC. Load into Badham? DC. 3 gens popped with no hooks? DC. Survivors not playing serious? DC. Survivors playing too serious? DC. Mid-chase BMing? DC. Exit gates BMing? DC. Yet killer DCs are much rarer than survivor ones. It's the same playerbase, so why aren't the supposed petty reactions the same? There's this idea that the DCers are doing it all the time. More likely, they're just people who hit their breaking point at that moment. You don't know what happened in the matches before that one. Some are also accidental. I've been booted out before, often at load in—and my teammates probably assumed I didn't like the map. There's also accessibility issues. Sometimes people DC when I'm playing as Spirit or Dredge, probably because of hearing and sight issues, topics that have actually been brought up here before, unlike the post where everyone talked about how they DC if they don't like a map because it never happened.
Griefing is not that common. Working with the killler is something I usually only see if someone is ratting, which means you probably see it a lot more than I do. I've only once had a teammate who worked with the killler from the get-go to actively grief the other three players, and it's because they were tilted about a username. That's one of three matches out of thousands that I recall being griefed for stupid reasons.
9 -
a lot of the time they do admit in post match yes or on stream if they are ttv. killers dont DC as much because matches last longer for them so doing 20 matches to reset the DC pens takes a lot longer. killers cant go next and end the match in like 1 or 2min like survivors can. Killers are forced to play out the match because they get hit with the penalty a lot sooner. if killers could reduce that pen fast like survivors do im pretty sure more killers would DC when they get a map they dont like.
-2 -
Killers can do exactly what survivors do: give up. I have a ton of suicides in my killer matches. Just got out of one right now where someone did it. I also have killlers who AFK when they're losing, or become friendly. Yet I still see much less of that from killers than I see of survivor suicides, and it's penalty-free.
7 -
just because some suicide doesnt mean the killer gets to go next, the killer has 4 people to kill. getting 20 matches where all 4 survivors go next is pretty hard to find.
killers that afk are the killers that would DC if they could get away with it. killer DC twice then has to play 20 matches where the killer has to wait for either survivors to offer themselves to the killer or wait for the gens to be done. compare that to 1min of survivor going next each match. not even remotely the same, thats how survivors are DCing so much, because they can fly through the DC pens like no tomorrow. so no killers cant do what survivors can do.
Make it so killers can kill themselves in 1min to end the match 20 times and earn more pen free DC and i guarantee more killers will DC over anything like survivors do…. bad map? DC. SWF running circles around the killer? DC.
-3 -
I disagree. Killers have the power, so they have less problems worth DCing over. A match is never lost for a killler unless they give up or everyone is at an open gate. The amount of matches I've won after doing shamefully bad is staggering. The only common complaint I currently see from killers is pallet quantity, and that isn't game-ruining. I currently have no complaints myself. There simply aren't any unbeatable problems in a killer match. Parties don't scare me. Neither do the maps. Or toolboxes, or flashlight clicks, or taunts. And if I want to ruin their match, I can.
As survivor, I have no such power. The match is often decided in a minute or two. I'm tired of camping, tunneling, and slugging. These are things I can't counter unless I bring (very limited) perks, and I wouldn't know which to bring, because I don’t know which flavor of bs I'd be dealing with that match. I'll bring Unbreakable and end up with a tunneler. I'll bring OTR and get a camper. And even if I bring the right ones, my teammates might not, so it's useless without game-wide changes.
8 -
So you've gone from saying that BHVR had a representative sample, to after being shown how that was wrong, now arguing that a representative sample doesn't matter.
I'm not going to follow you down the rabbit hole of constantly changing arguments.
9 -
See, I don't think this is getting the whole picture.
I don't think anyone logs on, plays a match, and immediately ragequits when they get a map they don't like, or a killer they don't like. I wager it's usually after a couple of matches that already soured the mood that the ragequitting sets in. Someone who's had a match with tunnelling, followed by a Krasue stomp at 4 gens, followed by a slugger, then another tunneller, who then loads into a map or killer they don't like, or they're the first one down, is far more likely to ragequit than someone who's had a clean slate.
People don't come into those matches without any kind of baggage. Fixing problems in matches without ragequits can alleviate ragequitting in other matches.
7 -
without knowing the history if these players matches its impossible to know for certain what built up to the ragequit. But based on the attitude of the players that openly admit to DCing and the reasons they DC i dont think its built up. They brazenly say "i dont like this map so not going to bother". Built up frustration doesnt excuse why people DC at the mere sight of a trapper unless trapper is somehow causing major issues for survivors which that would be a first. even with SWF duos, if their buddy gets taken out of the match first, the other often just goes next so they can join up together in another match.
People are opportunists, give them an opportunity to bypass something they dont like no matter how small, they will take it. Which is why so many survivors DC. If killer had the same opportunity to quickly reset the DC penalty and go next, they would take it and DC if they get a map they dont like or they find survivors have perks they dont like.
People here wont admit to the real reasons why they DC and go next because its borderline promoting unsportsmanlike behaviour which is against the forum rules and could result in them being banned, but in the game and on stream they are much more honest and direct regarding why they do things.
Not long ago before they hid map offerings, there was a couple of SWF teams i regularly went against. these teams would DC in loading screen when they saw an offering they didnt like. they could have brought sac wards but their attitude was "why waste an offering slot when we can DC when we see something we dont like". They had the opportunity and they took it. I recently went against one of these teams since then and it was on a map they didnt like….what happened? 2/3 SWF DC instantly. the 3rd SWF player and solo player went next. Now the offerings have been nerfed and hidden the opportunity to DC penalty free has been reduced but not enough to stop them from DCing over something like a map they dont like.
-3 -
The representative sample was fine. Again, people don't need to actually play on the PTB to make an opinion, and many of the console players mind up their minds when they watched their favorite streamer, or read about the changes on their favorite social media choice. People like to take about “proof” or “testing things out themselves”, but the reality is most people don’t care about that. Most people are going off of vibes and feelings, and they decided how they felt about the PTB regardless if they played it themselves.
Also, your scenario doesn't even work. Even if there was a lot of console players that wanted to "wait and see", the Steam players that already decided to boycott killer, still would have boycotted killer on launch day, which still would have caused a financial disaster. And the Steam players did have the weekend to test the changes because the PTB was still up, so if they really wanted to, they could have tried the changes and then posted their feelings online, on whether or not they agreed with the revert decision.
And if the PTB changes went live, I literally would have boycotted playing killer. I wouldn’t have cared how the console players felt about the changes, and I would have refused to “try to adapt” to it. And many other people would have done the same. “Try to adapt” only works if people are willing to still play as killer.
You're also ignoring the fact that BHVR has access to way more stats then we do, and actually knows the average kill rate for this PTB, and the average kill rates for the other PTBs. I’m still claiming the kill rates were extremely low on this PTB, enough to be a problem. And no, I don’t need to prove this. If you honestly think the kill rates were around the same, then you obviously weren’t watching various streamers try the PTB, to see how they handled the changes. And really, watching a lot of other people play the PTB can be more important than trying the changes yourself, because it’s showing how different people, with different playstyles, are handling the changes.
-7 -
Lol, if you know that BHVR has access to all the stats and we don't, you're in no position to claim that the kill rates were low enough to be a problem. You didn't see all the matches played in the ptb either, so you don't know how low the kill rates were.
Also, if you want to boycott playing killer, you can go right on ahead. Just don't let the door hit you on the way out.
10 -
The system is another stick amongst the wall BHVR has built, perhaps if there was a carrot of buffs for hooking survivors (for example, a permament 3% haste bonus for hooking all survivors without killing any of them or having old deerstalker basekit but only for downed survivors with the lowest amount of hooks amongst the survivors who have been downed then tunneling and slugging would be reduced.
-5 -
By that logic, people are in no position to say the phase 2 changes would have been fine going live. They are also in no position to say there wasn't enough data collected, since they don't know what data was collected, and they don't know how that data was interpreted.
-3 -
They're enough, if you think you should be able to walk to the Killer's face and not be punished for it you should not be talking about game design.
-6 -
There was a carrot. Three of them, in fact. Haste, free Pop, and free aura reading on the least hooked survivors.
Also, how would a tool designed to help slugging reduce slugging?
They brazenly say "i dont like this map so not going to bother"
But again, they might've acted differently if they had better match quality surrounding that match.
To assume that that is the entirety of it is naive.
Not long ago before they hid map offerings, there was a couple of SWF teams i regularly went against. these teams would DC in loading screen when they saw an offering they didnt like. they could have brought sac wards but their attitude was "why waste an offering slot when we can DC when we see something we dont like". They had the opportunity and they took it. I recently went against one of these teams since then and it was on a map they didnt like….what happened? 2/3 SWF DC instantly. the 3rd SWF player and solo player went next. Now the offerings have been nerfed and hidden the opportunity to DC penalty free has been reduced but not enough to stop them from DCing over something like a map they dont like.
But you're referring to how many players out of the disconnecters?
And if the PTB changes went live, I literally would have boycotted playing killer. I wouldn’t have cared how the console players felt about the changes, and I would have refused to “try to adapt” to it.
Proving the same point again: Killers can just stomp their feet and demand BHVR balances more harshly in their favour.
8 -
By that logic, people are in no position to say the phase 2 changes would have been fine going live.
No one said that, though.
They are also in no position to say there wasn't enough data collected, since they don't know what data was collected, and they don't know how that data was interpreted.
But we do know that the changes were pulled after only two days, and the "data" was only collected from a single grain in the sand. As one person said above, more data is always better. We know there was a lot more outcry from Killers than there was data.
5 -
But you're referring to how many players out of the disconnecters?
This is the issue right here. People will hear someone say "I did x because of y" once or twice and now it's their permanent example. Just look here in the forum. Someone says something and you immediately see what they said being used as an indicator of a whole problem. That very thing happened with something I recently said about a friend who often DCs out of frustration at being tunneled. You can guess who used it immediately as an example of why DC penalties are too lenient, but it was missing the context of the tunneling fatigue. This sort of mass discontent doesn't spring out of one small thing. It builds up from repeated incidents.
7 -
If BHVR apparently pulled these changes due to Killer outrage, what makes you think you'll ever see them come to live?
I doubt any attitudes are going to shift.
5 -
That is the concern.
If BHVR flinched so quickly on the PTB, I find it unlikely we see anything impactful.
9 -
Which is why we have to keep talking about it and not just roll over. Changes don't even have to resemble the ptb ones but some sort of change needs to happen. They need to try again with either adjusted numbers or a new idea.
4 -
Because the actual goal here, for some people, is to keep the buffs and eliminate anything that resembles a downside.
There's absolutely a very loud group that demands killer buffs, and we've heard the idea of "just buff killers and we'll stop tunneling. We're only forced to because we aren't strong enough" for years now.
Except, when they do buff killers, it generally comes with "lul, thanks for the buffs. I'm going to keep tunneling anyway." And the cycle continues. This is attempt number, about 476 of this cycle, and the devs still seem surprised Pikachu that people don't stop tunneling and camping whenever the flavor of the month is addressed.
So I suspect that people will actually fight to keep the base kit pop and BBQ effects, and (now that it's demonstrably worked) loudly shout down any downsides in the process.
So if any "changes" do make it through, eventually, it'll be killer buffs (which, the ones we saw on ptb were fully compatible with tunneling. The only thing holding them back were the downsides of not being able to regress after a death). The "anti tunnel" downsides will be about as useful as AFC, if they implement anything at all.
4 -
The person above is wrong. Diminishing returns is a thing, and there is a point where the data is so overwhelming that it's not worth the extra time to gather additional data.
Survivors also stomp their feet and get things nerfed to the ground, which is exactly what happened to the AFK crows.
Survivors also stomped their feet until Skull Merchant got absolutely nerfed into the ground. They weren't happy with her being nerfed into a balanced state, they wanted her to be absolutely useless, and that is what happened.
-3 -
People were tunneling as Krasue immediately even with how overturned she was and people still do so as Nurse and Blight, so yeah, if you can't win with S tier killers without tunneling, the problem might be you. So killers do need updates for sure, but I agree it will stop nothing. It will always be the easiet way to win regardless of the killer. The key is to deincentivize it.
5 -
i honestly think you should take the rose tinted glasses off lol. They might have acted differently if they didnt have a run of bad matches but if you think removing tunneling will make people suddenly think "iv had a good run of matches, now i have this map i really dont like….i get DC or i can play it….ok i will play it even though i dont really want to." it wont happen. remove tunneling and people will have something else to complain about like op killers that are not really op or map designs that might be slightly less than perfect.
Its amazing how some people refuse to see how humans generally behave. people as a whole will find an excuse to DC, killers or survivors. saying its because they had a bad few matches before hand is just an excuse, one that people will always find to justify DCing when they dont get what they want. if i could DC as killer and not worry so much about a penalty i most certainly would if i got a super SWF squad even once regardless of how my matches were before hand. or if i got a big open spaced map while i was a stealth killer, if i could get away with DCing i would bypass that match in a heartbeat….makes no sense to endure a bad time if i dont have to. This is why survivors DC. yes it has increased since krasue and ghoul have come about but tunneling has always been a thing.
The theory of people having bad matches which makes them prone to DCing doesnt make sense when people DC at the sight of a very low tier killer that rarely gives people any issues like trapper or wraith or get a map they dont like. DCing against ghoul or krasue or blights due to repeatedly having bad matches, yes i understand that reasoning… but people start to lose all credibility for their reasons when they DC over something they havnt previously had issues with.
-6 -
The theory of people having bad matches which makes them prone to DCing doesnt make sense when people DC at the sight of a very low tier killer that rarely gives people any issues like trapper or wraith or get a map they dont like.
If anything, this points to this theory being correct. If they have no reason within that match to DC, then the reason for the DC is outside of it. They've already been pushed to their breaking point, decide to queue up out of habit anyway, get into a match and then realise that they don't have the energy to play anymore.
Have you never launched a game (Not a match, a game) and then once the game's done starting up, realised that you don't have the energy for it? Because I have.
8 -
The theory of people having bad matches which makes them prone to DCing doesnt make sense when people DC at the sight of a very low tier killer that rarely gives people any issues like trapper or wraith or get a map they dont like.
It's not a theory if you play in parties and have them literally tell you the reason. You also know what happened to them in the ten matches before, so you get further context of where their stress level is at. Maybe my buddy got tunneled by three Wraiths in a row, saw a fourth and just couldn't hang. That's the potential context you're missing.
What is a theory is you seeing someone DC and guessing why they did so without any information.
5 -
My point is there will always be a reason. if its not constant tunneling its killers they dont like or maps they dont like, or their SWF duo friend was killed, or a team mate blew a gen, they didnt last as long as they wanted to in a chase. These will always be reasons to DC regardless of breaking point or not. like i said, remove tunneling and people will find something else to complain about and DC over. so we remove tunneling and then people start DCing over map layouts…ok change the map layouts to keep them happy so they dont want to DC. Now people lasted 1min in a chase….they wanted to last 5 min not 1min. ok lets make it happen so people wont DC. when does it end? when is it time to say "no, this is the game, play or dont but we are not bowing down to ridiculous requests to stop people DCing anymore."
-3 -
i have already said people have outright said why they DC and its purely because they can. "trapper is boring" is one reason someone gave. really justified in DCing for that reason. the likelihood of being tunneled by a wraith 3 times in a row is very slim so its unrealistic to assume thats the case. blight…yes. ghouls? yes… but 3 of the same low tier killer tunneling the same person out 3 times in a row? come on.
-5 -
People you don't know, who may just be saying something they don't feel. "I hate this map lol later noobs" is more likely than "sorry strangers, but I'm at my breaking point." People hate looking weak. And something tells me your sample size is rather restrictive. You can only communicate with people on your own platform, and even then, it will be limited to who wants to speak, and who even sticks around to do so.
6 -
i can communicate with people on various platforms….the people that say their reasons wont admit them in places like these forums because they could get a ban for admitting and promoting unsportsmanlike behaviour. but they will be more honest when they dont have a worry of being banned. People who i dont know are way more likely to not give a hoot what people think about them, they are not thinking "i dont want to look weak infront of these random people"
-3
