Killers (survivors welcome too) what do you do when a survivor is obviously giving up?

If it's the start of the game, i ignore them. If they're being particularly persistent then I'll slug them. They usually start playing normally after that. Less often they'll DC. If it's late game and they've clearly lost then I'll hook them so they can get to their next game

Ignore them, usually. If they keep getting in my way I'll slug them. If this person is doing this early enough in the match for it to be a full-blown throw, I'll give the best player hatch (literally just got out of a match like this, with one dead at 4 gens, two throwing, and one juicer continuing on, who got hatch.) If multiple people come to me to make a visual appeal about their bad teammate, I'll let them all go. I don't like free stuff, especially when one person causes others to fail. And there's zero sense of accomplishment in such a match.

I don't want to reward bad sportsmanship by giving them what they want and leaving their team mates in the lurch. I'm also giving them a grace period to get over whatever their issue is and get on board with playing the game with the rest of us. In my experience, the vast majority do end up playing normally after that small bump, so that's why I continue to do it.

For me, it's a few things, and it also depends on circumstances. I almost never have people try to die at start (I don't play Ghoul), it's generally once the match has immediately snowballed in my favor, particularly if someone DCs after going down 15s into the match.

Sometimes it's compassion. I play about equal parts both roles, and I understand that survivor has zero comeback ability past a certain point and I know that hopeless feeling. So I try to get them to re-engage. Other times, it's the opposite of compassion. If you're throwing in a match that's still winnable, you're screwing over your team, I'm not just gonna set you free. Get your penalty if you want to go, but you're ruining the match. I don't slug repeatedly either.

I don't necessarily think people should be punished though. I never know if it's regular behavior or if they're just at their wits end. Even if I don't do it myself I know how aggravating this game is.

I simply just unalive them in game and move on to the next game.

It's not compassion, it is spite. These types of killers think the people who want to leave because 4 slowdown blights have already sacrificed a survivor at 5 gens are "ruining the game" and so they will hold them in the lobby to flex the fact that killer has all the power in determining who gets to stay in a match, as well as morally grandstanding. Also some killers just do it because they know they are further ruining someone's else's time, and some killer mains get enjoyment out of that.

Ignore them first time I see them, kill them if they're still giving up the second time I see them. I think that's a good balance of giving them an opportunity to lock back in whilst not making them stick around in a game they clearly don't want to be in.

Not "rubbish" at all. The killer knows the survivor wants to leave because their build is either completely oppressive or designed to be miserable. Telling them to "take the DC penalty" when a killer can hold a survivor soft locked into a match if they so choose out of pure spite is definitely an opinion of all time.

"The killer knows the survivor wants to leave because their build is either completely oppressive or designed to be miserable."

Not always. I play a lot of games when I go for two hooks each and let them leave and I still get players who want to throw a tantrum. I don't bring oppressive or miserable builds - very memey. The ones I find that do this the most are usually the ones that are hooked first. They don't even know how the game is going to go at that stage.

This is exactly what I mean right here. People think they're holier than thou by trying to punish survivors or "teaching them lessons." As long as the killer approves of your fun it's okay!

That's funny because I've had many a killer player tell me that this game is a 1v1v1v1v1 and not a 1v4. I guess it's only a team game when the killer says so, but it's an every man for themselves when it's convenient for them huh?

Just play the game.

If they DC or die early match by throwing I'll go easy on the rest and wrap it up as quickly as possible.

I generally go for option 2 and in some cases this instead makes them so hellbent on punishing me for not pandering to their sad wishes that they actually play as sweaty as they can, sometimes even making the survivor team win matches that would have been lost had they DCed or bled out. My naive hope is that those matches will make them less likely to give up in the future but we all know that's unlikely.

I'm just saying that there's an incredible double standard between survivors wanting the game to end versus killers. You have killers making forum posts about being able to abandon when 5 gens are done, but you have people in THIS thread who are wishing for the removal of abandoning when someone has been slugged for 3 minutes or downed at least 6 times and not hooked.

You are one person. Your individual view on how abandons should work is not how the majority of killers see them. That's just how it is.

And still you are generalizing to try to make a point. You belittle my statement but same time raise up the statements that you need to defend your viewpoint. You have no proof that is the majority you just pick the claims you want and use those to drive your point forward. You are just making it more clear that you are driving your own agenda here and not really wanting to have a conversation of the matter. You have your viewpoint I have mine but yours don't make mine invalid by you disagreeing or bringing up things that have nothing to do with my statements. Everyone can cherry pick posts to fit their narrative.

I just kill them. Leaving them slugged or ignoring them the team is still down a player. I don't know headspace survivor is in from previous matches, what they see their teammates doing/not doing when they go down, or whatever other multitude of reasons they could have for giving up that match. It's just a game, if someone decides they don't want to play that match oh well, I'll take the BP.

I do find it funny people say how they need/want to tunnel out first survivor as fast as possible for easier match but if a survivor gives up it turns into a need to slug to punish them instead. It feels very much like "I want you to die quickly! No, not like that!"

As a rule if they do it super early, like too early to tell if the game is won or not I ignore or just slug them. I'm not a fan of people who throw the game before it's really started. If it's late game and I'm clearly going to win I'll just slap em on hook to let them go to the next game.

But yh for me it's more about the vibe, if they're throwing I'll punish them and if it's a forgone conclusion and they just want out I'll oblige them. Or sometimes farm if they are willing and pass the vibe check.

If it’s the beginning, I leave them alone, engage with everyone else and let everyone out. That one person just killed the vibes for all of us as far as I’m concerned.

Now if they were winning and then gave up as soon as the tides changed, then I’m constantly downing them so they stay in the game and then kill everyone.

I’m not letting you out if you’re trying to go next after you start losing. You could still win; try.

I don't repeatedly slug because I don't have to, as I've said, vast majority of the time they play as normal once their team mate has picked them up. I'll add that we are talking about a very rare event here. I very rarely have people ask to leave early game. So it's even rarer that they're persistent enough that I have to down them to get them out of my face. If I ever do repeatedly down them and they abandon then i think that's fine, the team gets a bot.

I also play survivor, and have done so for over 5 years. I have more survivor hours than killer. And I cannot think of any one game where I have attempted to give up at the start of the game. It is really not hard to see how the game plays out before deciding it's a lost cause. I am one of 5 individuals who are choosing to spend their undoubtedly limited free time together. Respect for each other's time is just common courtesy.