So now you load into a lobby with all 4 survivors there already on ps4...

That's a bugged lobby and it's not working as intended.

One could join and the three at sperate times and they could all be solo or it could be swf with the server lag taking the time to load them in.

The lobby shouldn't appear until there are four survivors and 1 killer there to make it and its been this way since last year. Anything else isn't working as intended.

Imagine crying about not being able to lobby dodge

SwF iS cHeAtInG

Stopped reading at pipping at 1 kill. A low rank can pip with 1 kill, but the emblem system is often more ruthless than a woman on Black Friday. Iv had far too many 3 kill or 25K BP black pip games to count, but don't recall ever earning a pip off a 1 kill game outside of yellow ranks.

You asked me for proof. I gave examples. Now Im asking for you to do the same. That's now these things work, you gotta back up your claims with examples. Not just a "he said/she said" one line reply.

Please explain how SWF isn't cheating when if gives information Survivors aren't suppose to have without paying a cost and/or when it actively bypasses ranking and matchmaking systems.

I'm a Killer Main and i never dodge. Swf are really Rare. Play the Game for Fun. And you see the are Toxic af then Camp and Tunnel. I only do this if i see they tbaging.

1. Why does it matter if not every survivor playing with friends is a good player? In fact, why does it matter if majority of the SWF players are horrible players, intentionally or unintentionally?

What matters, balance-wise, is if the best killers playing efficiently against the best 4-Man SWF (who also are playing efficiently), and these 4-Man SWFs, on average, still have a higher win rate than the killers.

2. The only reason why voice communication isn't considered "cheating" in this particular game is because developers couldn't (or couldn't be bothered to) find a way to enforce a punishment in cases where the rules are broken. In other words, they prioritized their ability to execute rules over what is good (mechanically) for the game. Much like if the government decides one day that slavery is legal again due to their inability to sufficiently find slave-holders, then it wouldn't technically be "illegal" anymore. But is it good for the society? Probably not. Basically, all of these reasoning fall under an 'appeal to authority' instead of each individuals thinking about what is right/fair for the game/society.

That’s like me saying that they should nerf Trapper because someone like Otz is really good with him, regardless of your opinion on voice comms, it isn’t cheating and that is that.

I don't know who Otz is, but if he is one of the best Trapper players, and he goes against the best 4-Man SWF players of this world doing their best to escape, and they play hundreds of times, and the average win-rate falls in favor of the Trapper, then yes, they should nerf the Trapper. What's your point?

You're right, according to the 'authority figures,' voice communication isn't cheating. If you are the type of person to just accept whatever the 'authority figures' state to be the absolute law, well, good on you. But just realize that there are many individuals in the world who like to think for themselves about what is 'right' or 'fair' and want to make necessary changes if things are unjust or corrupt - whether it be in general society or just in games. Just differences in personality - that's all.

I don't know what they have stated about this Ruin change, the current Legion, or Freddy, but now my question to you is, "Why are you willing to accept and happily swallow what the 'authority figures' said about the usage of voice communications, but not these other things you just mentioned?"

So in your mind, SWF having the ability to have massive communication advantage over solo players and killers is reasonable. I see.

Some people do. What's your point?

Dedicated servers are online on ps4, that's why it's like this

I would say its actually impossible to punish for it due to the all the ways someone can circumvent the system. All the platforms people play on have chat and party tools built in, thousands of third party programms or using phones which have chat tools working over wifi or data.

There is also the legallity of it all. Searching someones system for a third party app that has nothing to do with the actual game and does not interact with it in any way is not information they are allowed to gather in every country around the world.

Its not about them not bothering to try but accepting from the start that by allowing players to play with friends will mean that some will play while chatting. They may have not realised the actual impact it could have on the game of course which I think could be highly possible but thats another discussion.

Oh no! now i wont be able to lobby dodge people because I am unable to take any challenge! What will I do now?

That’s why I find it reasonable.

I just like talking to friends while playing, distance based would ruin that.

So you personally don't mind going against SWF players, and therefore you find the massive communication advantage of SWF over solos and killers 'reasonable.'

And yet, you have a difficult time understanding why people who DO mind going against SWF players are players that find SWF 'unreasonable' with their ability to have communication advantage over solos and killers?

I doubt the reason swf gets dodged so often is the obvious advantages and more how unpleasant they often are, on ps4 anyway.

Are some rules more reasonable than others though? That's my point.

It is against the rules to stack perks. But SWF is allowed to do so.

It is against the rules to bypass ranking/matchmaking systems. But SWF is allowed to do so.

It is against the rules to gain unfair advantages. But SWF is allowed to do so.

Why is it that SWF is allowed to go against the rules but no one else can? How is is reasonable for the rules to be bent for them but no one else? Why can't Killers stack perks? Why can't Killers bypass ranking/matchmaking? Why can't Killers get unfair advantages? Why?! Because that is cheating.

Yet SWF gets to do all of that, and it isn't cheating because someone said so even though it fits every definition of the word. If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a chicken.

Well, hopefully I understand what you are driving at.

First of all, my emphasis was on why the developers chose to "allow voice communication." It wasn't because 'voice communication' was an important mechanic of the actual game - it was because they didn't know how to execute a fair punishment system. Basically, they chose the fragility of its rule enforcement than what is good (mechanically) for the game. So that post is mainly about how their decision about voice communication was made, not about its possibility or impossibility of restricting voice communication.

Second, even if they didn't have a foolproof way of completely restricting voice communication, they could have made it much more difficult than it is now. You're right that people will find ways around it, whether it's by using less detectable third party systems or even simply sitting next to each other on a couch. But does it always have to be 0% or 100%?

For example, let's take at the current rules about racist/sexist harassment. Much like voice communication, there is currently no way to 100% prevent the problem of racist/sexist remarks that could be targeted at another player. If they are not presented in the first-party in-game chat log, some people may instead use third-party messaging systems to make the same horrible types of remarks. Does that mean BHVR should do nothing at all? No, of course not. BHVR should do what they can on their end to minimize that type of problem as much as possible, and if needed, seek help from some third-party systems' administrators if they are willing to make some concessions and changes on that end.

Similarly, if they had simply chose to outlaw voice communication because it didn't fit well with their game intention and design, then they could have made it at least much more difficult for voice communication to occur on their end, even if they couldn't control what third party systems did, and thereby standing up for what they believe their game to be.

But the fact of the matter is, they didn't. And even despite all these years, they still have not properly balanced the game for SWF/Solos/Killers. So I can't blame anyone if they find SWF incredibly unfair to the point of not wanting to play against them - because game-mechanics wise, voice communication was unintended for this game, and only exist due to the developers not wanting to restrict what they could within the game.

I understand why people could dislike it but I’m going to defend it since I’m ok with it.

Of course, we’re all allowed an opinion.

Most games have at least 2 swf in them. If you didn't have SWF you'd have hour long killer queues.

I don't think its as simple as they chose to allow it. My reasoning is if they made the choice to allow it then why not have party chat in game for swf? I think it was accepted it would happen and there was nothing they would do to prevent its use outside of the game when they first had discussions about the implementation of adding swf.

I think any new co-op/multiplayer game in today's market has to include a mode where you can join with friends. It would be commercial suicide not too. By adding this option you then also have to assume people will use voice chat. To not would be very ignorant to the consumer base you are aiming for.

It's not really about 0% or 100% its about acceptance of what would happen. It's a business decision and one i'd say all devs would make.

If we look at the rules BHVR do have firm stances on racism/sexism and they are bannable. The chat logs in game are stored on the server so if someone uses that system they can be reported and the logs will back up the report.

The issue with banning for those issues on a third party system is that they don't have the man power or way to access the proof. We all know a picture is not evidence as these can be easily doctored. This is why it's advised to go to the third party place direct as most if not all have similar rules. Microsoft, Sony and Steam for example all have rules in place and they can access the consumer chat logs so its logical that is where it should be reported as proof is needed or we end up banning players on someone's word alone.

I really don't think outlawing it would change anything apart from initially drive players away from the game until they found out its not posdible. As I said they didn't chose to incorporate chat into the game but accepted it will be used. That is a nd always will be a business decision for the game they wished to make. I have to agree with them from that standpoint as like I said it would be commercial suicide not too.

Take MLGA as an example. It was basically outlawed but the playerbase did not stop using it as they knew for a fact its use would never flag up for a ban to happen. So outlawing it would never stop players from using it. Console would also be a topic of contention as I highly doubt Sony or MS would agree to allow any ban if someone was caught using it. At best they could ask nicely in reality.

While I agree swf can be and is unbalanced especially with really good players. I can't really see a way to fix it as punishing players is not really an option. I used to believe it was in tge padt and argued my point regarding it but after thinking about it for a long time my mind changed. I feel now the issue is more what the community want over what the devs want for the game. The ones who do seem to complain the most seem to be highly competative. The devs though seem to want the game to be fun and engaging by the wording they use and not highly competative but instead casual.

We have really no clue what they truly want for the game as visions for anything tend to change over time and turn into something better or worse as they evolve. We also have to always remember, it is just a game.

You kind of contradict yourself with this post. You state in your first post that you can no longer tell if it's swf. This says you used the system as an indicator. Those words themself do imply that if survivors joined all at once you then thought of them as swf before this change as it was only when they joined seperately did you really think of them as solo.

As I said since March last year solo could all join at once or separately. The only indication was a long time frame to be solo I agree to they but 2 or more could join with one a bit later and yes it could take 10s for the 3rd and be a 2 or 3 man swf with the later one being part of a group. It's because it's not infallible and can be connection dependent.

This still happens even with dedicated servers.