@BHVR - Stop calling it "Body Blocking"
If the killer body blocks a survivor such that the survivor cannot move at all call it SOFT LOCKING.
This is a term used in other games to describe a situation where the player is stuck indefinitely in one place and the only way to get out of it is to quit the game (see Mario Maker). This would help to differentiate it between normal body blocking, where a survivor takes a hit while the killer is carrying or when the killer blocks the survivor to get a free hit (eg. chainsaw).
Honestly getting tired of seeing threads about "body blocking" where the person does not understand the concept of what is actually bannable and what is allowed. This way there is no confusion. Both actions have different terms.
BODY BLOCKING is allowed.
SOFT LOCKING is bannable.
Simple.
Comments
-
This way there is no confusion. Both actions have different terms.
I feel like you don't properly explain the difference. Based on your description it seems like if you block a survivor for any amount of time as a killer you get banned.
20 -
I'm talking about in their list of bannable offenses. They explain it more fully there but they use the term "body blocking".
"Soft lock" is a more appropriate term because that's what you are doing. This post is about the term not the definition, because the term is used in 2 different contexts.
1 -
I'm talking about in their list of bannable offenses.
That is also not clear at all. If someone reads just this thread and doesn't know the difference already then I feel like they will be very confused. I think your suggestion is good but very confusing, it would be much clearer if you specified that you are refering to the offenses list in your original post.
1 -
Dude it has nothing to do with the explanation. 🤦♂️
I'm not trying to tell people what the difference is. I'm telling the DEVELOPERS to use a DIFFERENT TERM to avoid confusion.
Post edited by thesuicidefox on5 -
This actually sounds like quite a good idea to me. I'm also getting a bit sick of trying to explain the difference to people who simply won't believe me because "it says it right there in the rules".
Honestly, I think the ingame descriptions of bannable offences in particular are far too vague, and more clarity about precisely what is and is not bannable can only be a good thing, since it will likely reduce the amount of false reports that the Support team has to sift through as well.
13 -
You're fine, I don't find it confusing and neither does anyone else. 😁
4 -
Would be a more appropriate term if you ask me. I just don't think everyone knows what a softlock is. But the same kinda goes for bodyblocking.
2 -
Basically, there are two types of bodyblocking where one type is acceptable and other is not acceptable (against BHVR rules).
The acceptable type of bodyblocking remains the same, we will keep calling it bodyblocking.
The not acceptable type of bodyblocking is now called soft locking.
Whenever the developers want to easily differentiate between the two types of bodyblocking, they can now use: Bodyblocking or soft locking.
Bodyblocking is not bannable, but soft locking is. 😁🤗
8 -
Soft lock is a term used in other games to describe a situation where the play basically gets stuck with no way to progress through the game (which is different from a bug where you get stuck, soft locks are a direct result of poor level design). It's different than a "hard lock" which is when the game just freezes, but it's "soft" because the game continues to run but effectively it might as well have frozen since there is no way out except to restart the game.
The most common game to hear this term is Mario Maker, because a level creator can, for example, put a one-way against a wall and if there is no spike or enemy or whatever to kill Mario it's called a "soft lock" because you are forced to either restart or wait the 400 in-game seconds (which is more like 8 minutes or something crazy). That's why if you ever see a spike block somewhere that seems out of place, it's for Mario to use to die so they can avoid a soft lock. If the level designer is at all competent, they would see the potential soft lock locations on the level and give you that spike block or whatever to die. Bad level designers don't do that.
3 -
Flashback to that one match I had where a Wraith trapped me in a corner with 5 gens left and didn't move at all until all the gens were done. Luckily my team of randoms figured out and did all the totems so NOED didn't pop up but wow was that ridiculous.
2 -
People who do not know the difference might read this thread. Those people are then going to be confused because you do not properly differantiate between the bannable action (trapping someone indefinitely) and the non-bannable action (temporarily trapping someone to charge a chainsaw, ...). I made suggestions to make your thread easier to understand in general. I don't feel like my suggestion is unreasonable or rude. If you disagree with it, which you obviously can, then feel free to ignore it.
What I do find unreasonable however is your response. To me the tone of it appears to be rude which is increased even by more the use of your facepalm emoji. I want to politely request that you use a milder tone if you disagree with someone else's opinion in the future.
1 -
I think we're in the process of going over the game rules to make them clearer for everyone - and yes this is one of the main ones that's on the list for me as it will make it clearer for everyone concerned about what is and isn't acceptable in game.
16 -
To make it easier for people to follow the discussion:
Game rules: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/19450/game-rules-and-report-system#latest ("edited November 28")
Relevant sections:
"THE FOLLOWING ARE NOT CONSIDERED BANNABLE OFFENSES - PLEASE DO NOT REPORT:
[...] Bodyblocking" (the ambiguous term that @thesuicidefox suggests be changed in the original post)
"GRIEFING: INTENTIONAL GAMEPLAY ABUSE:
[...] Holding the game hostage" (what "soft locking" falls under)
In the current version of the rules it is not clear at all what bodyblocking means or that permanent bodyblocking falls under holding the game hostage.
EDIT: Added clarification
0 -
The meaning of Body Blocking on both the bannable and non-bannable are the same.
The only thing that changes is one is used as a strat (taking a hit for someone, cornering you when you didn’t expect it resulting in a hit) and the other one is used to grief (A survivor/killer blocking you from doing anything indefinitely).
1 -
I don't think most people had trouble following along. More importantly, the people who this was directed to (BHVR), know exactly what @thesuicidefox is referring to. Stop derailing the thread with nitpicks and tone policing.
4 -
It would be nice to actually explain the terms better in the report section as I had someone get salty at me because I body blocked to save someone. He said I was cheating and he reported all of us. I told him body blocking wasn't cheating and his argument was that "body-blocking" is in the report section. I'm sure way too many people get wrongly reported because it's not explained properly.
1 -
Yeah, there's certain things in the rules that might leave a little bit too much to people's imaginations. Bodyblocking is one as it seems like every week there's a thread about how someone reported survivors for taking hits for eachother.
Other rules that could need more specific wording include the entire idea behind holding the game hostage (I've seen it described as "bodyblocking someone in a corner for an extended period of time" for example, which might make some think waiting out BT or something is against the rules) and especially the "Targeting specific users repeatedly in order to ruin their game experience" rule. What does "repeatedly" mean? What does "targeting" mean? Might make people feel justified in reporting someone for tunneling them two games in a row or something.
So good to hear they're thinking about clarifying rules 😄
1 -
Simple. If you're hiding in a corner and the killer is running at you, move. If you get body blocked in a corner it's your own fault. Had someone complain that I was bad at the game because they hid in a corner, I was Plague and I ran straight too him, he didn't move and got body blocked, so I puked on him and killed him.
Body Blocking is the accurate term, and it shouldn't be bannable because if a survivor body blocks a hook, then they would be banned for the same thing.
0 -
I don't get why it's even a thing survivors should just be pushed aside it makes no sense that they would be able to stop the killer dead in his tracks by just standing there it looks ridiculous.
Killers shouldn't be able to either, no reason why a survivor shouldn't be able to have some like assassin's creed passing animation that triggers no clip except for a centralized smaller hitbox so that say they are pushed into a corner they can slide past him if he isn't quick enough to react.
0 -
@BunnyTheHutt You have the wrong end of the stick here. That's not what's being discussed. If you had blocked the survivor against the wall and then refused to move, purposefully keeping them there to be a douche so the only way they can get out is to DC - THAT is bannable body blocking and what this thread is about. Or in this case the OP is suggesting to call it 'Soft Locking' so it stops confusion.
This isn't talking about general body blocking, like survivors taking a hit at the hook - this can be easily countered by hitting the survivors. A lot of players don't seem to understand that this isn't a reportable offence as its not explained properly in the report section.
The only way I can relate reporting survivors for this sort of thing is:
1. Using exploits so the killer physically can't get to them or hit them.
Example: hiding in a wall or on top of a rock that the killer can't touch them.
Survivors physically can't body block a killer so much that the killer can't move for the rest of the match. But killers can...
0 -
So if I play killer and I "soft lock" a survivor to get a free down, that's bannable, thats what it sounds like you're saying because your explanation is confusing
0 -
I look forward to the rules being rewritten, because right now they are dangerously vague and I'm sure it results in a lot of useless reports and cases of people refusing to believe clarifications (even when it's from the devs themselves) because "that's what it says in-game."
"Body blocking," "helping the killer," "holding the game hostage," and "targeting" seem to get misinterpreted constantly.
Body blocking = Soft locking.
Helping the killer = Helping the killer to killer other survivors. Not friendly farming.
Holding the game hostage = Being forced to disconnect. Includes cases where multiple survivors hide on the map instead of working on gens for an extended period of time. Does not mean hanging out in the exit gate or slugging.
Targeting = Does not mean being tunneled or camped in a match or even a couple matches. It means being aggressively targeted in like 8+ matches.
Most likely people won't be banned if they're reported for something that's not actually bannable, because the devs actually look into the reports, but all the salty posts about things that aren't actually against the rules, the angry messages after a match, and new players being scared about playing a certain way because of a vague list of reportable offenses could be easily cut down on with in-game clarification.
0 -
I don't think it's a problem players can block each other from moving. The pushing thing makes sense in some ways, but it would just cause problems in other ways. Body blocking the killer to force a hit, or body blocking a survivor to prevent them from reaching a window/pallet is a valid tactic and pushing would just remove that aspect of the game.
If anything, there should be some timer in the game where if a survivor/killer stays still for something like 20 seconds they lose collision until they move again. This would keep body blocking in the tactical sense, but prevent soft locking.
0 -
Exactly.
This thread isn't meant for the players. It's meant for the devs.
Thing is the devs have to sift through all these reports. If terminology was more direct such that we don't use the same word for what is effectively different things (just ones that use the same mechanic) then there would be less false reports and the devs can more efficiently do their job of policing actual problem players.
Excellent. I hope that includes revised terminology, because as I see the main reason these rules are vague is because the bannable offenses do not have their own terms.
Like has been mentioned, "targeting" a player isn't a very clear term. Killer should be able to "target" whoever they want, it only becomes a problem if said player is going out of their way to go after a specific person over the course of multiple games to ruin their experience. "Griefing" isn't even a good term because survivors and killers are so toxic to each other literally anything could be called "griefing". I don't know what the new term could be, but it needs to be something clear and to the point to differentiate it from other behaviors.
Post edited by thesuicidefox on0 -
This post is pointless... it can be described as killer body blocking or trolling even... Bhvr's term usage is fine and not confusing at all... This post feels like point Dexter correcting someone who abbreviates pi at 3.14 instead of 3.14159. Both answers are correct and acceptable, just one answer is more correct.
Moral of the story is if that verbiage annoys you, then you must not be a very happy person in this world.
0 -
You only have 31 posts on the forums, so I'm being nice here...
But have you seen all the complaints about body blocking and how many players think ANY form of body blocking is bannable? Because if you just type "body block" into the search bar you will get a ton of threads of killers complaining that a survivor blocked them and forced a hit, or how a killer blocked a window/pallet and got a hit from it. And then how this forum user reported this player, etc etc, only to be followed by a shouting fight where the people that understand what is actually bannable trying to explain why what the person did is not a reportable offense.
The terminology is the problem. "Body blocking" refers to two completely different things in this game, one is acceptable, the other is not. If both were/were not acceptable this wouldn't be an issue.
1 -
They already have a term for this.
Its called "taking the game hostage".Or is that not good enough?
0 -
1) That's not really a term.
2) It's not good enough because there are other ways this can be done. Therefore you need to be able to say "doing exactly X is bannable BECAUSE it is taking the game hostage".
1 -
If you have a survivor trapped in a corner and cannot move unless you hit them its bannable, as opposed to having a survivor trapped in the basement it is not bannable
0 -
@thesuicidefox so you proven my point that you don't know what a soft lock was by looking it up. Cool. Still not considered a soft lock. It's called holding the game hostage. Not a soft lock thank you for your time.
0 -
You clearly didn't read the OP and understand the point I'm trying to make.
If we call it something other than body blocking then there would be less confusion about what is and is not reportable/bannable.
You can hold the game hostage in multiple ways, so calling it that is not helping the situation. The closest game term we have to what is happening is soft lock, because if you can't progress through the game and can't die, then you are forced to quit. In other words, you are effectively soft locked.
Holding the game hostage via soft lock is bannable.
1 -
Please don't try to name and shame someone on this thread.
@thesuicidefox has brought up something that they feel in the rules is not clear - I will actually agree with them on this, because we get many, many threads about exactly the same thing. So I personally think it's something that can be made clearer within the game rules.
A survivor holding another survivor in the corner for example is classed as Body Blocking, this would be punishable as they are preventing active gameplay, they are not however taking the game hostage cos the game can still end due to EndGame Collapse. A survivor Body Blocking a killer is not punishable because there's something a killer can do to stop this.
Hence I do not believe the two terms should be used intermittently and regardless of what other terms are chosen to be used - Soft Locking or whatever, Suicide Fox has a right to make a thread about this and discuss the matter - and I suggest those who do not wish to discuss this, pass this thread along to find something that you do want to discuss.
6 -
The problem with using soft lock is it doesn't explain the exact situation.
A soft lock can be multiple issues but mostly used in games when you can't access certain features like an inventory or you spawn into a wall and can't go forward in the game or back using a save file etc.
Personally I agree with some others with the wording.
Holding the game hostage is the ban reason and all they have to do is explain in more detail to what is and isn't considered that within the rules.
Body blocking while used in a couple of ways with one such way being bannable can simply be explained better in the rules.
Saying soft lock would cause more confusion imo as its way to broad a term. I highly doubt anyone would instantly think it would mean body blocking so the explanation would have to be detailed in the rules and need to specifically mention the words body blocking since it is the actual act being done within the game.
0 -
It does explain it very well though. The only difference between body block type of soft lock and a traditional soft lock, is that the first requires the enemy player for it to occur.
As @MandyTalk said "A survivor holding another survivor in the corner for example is classed as Body Blocking, this would be punishable as they are preventing active gameplay." That means just saying it is holding the game hostage is not enough, since the killer can technically say "well the others triggered EGC and you died didn't you?" And the term body block is used to describe multiple situations, many of which are permitted, so a term specific to this type of bannable body blocking is sorely needed since neither "body block" or "held hostage" are specific enough for this event.
It's only when the player is preventing from playing the game that it would be called a soft lock. And if some other instance of traditional soft locking occurs (eg. survivor gets stuck in some object) well that's going to clearly be a bug and not the fault of anyone. I doubt anyone would confuse that type of soft lock with a soft lock purposely executed by another player as a means to prevent you from playing the game.
2 -
I think you are over thinking this.
You used the term body blocking yourself while replying to me as it is the actual act of what is punishable but only when used in a certain way.
Everyone knows the term body blocking but do they all know the term soft lock? Its not a term I have never personally used and so wouldn't immediately think of it meaning what you perceive it too in this game.
What this means is I would have to specifically read up that it would represent for this one instance and it would be the act of body blocking in a bannable sense.
Since body blocking the hook wouldnt be considered a soft lock they then have to have a detailed explanation of body blocking under the term soft lock.
Why use that term soft lock then when it still needs explained in a way to diffrenciate it from what is and isnt bannable with the actual act of body blocking itself? They could just keep what people know and explain it much better in the bannable rules making it the same without changing what it's under.
Holding the game hostage also is a wide term as a survivor blocking someone in a corner all game imo is holding them hostage and preventing play even if the egc can activate eventually.
0 -
"Everyone knows the term body blocking but do they all know the term soft lock? Its not a term I have never personally used and so wouldn't immediately think of it meaning what you perceive it too in this game."
See but this is the point.
Everyone has heard of body blocking, but not everyone understands what is and isn't BANNABLE body blocking. This is why there is confusion, because the same term applies to different situations, some where it is allowed and another very specific instance where it is not allowed.
If you don't know what soft locking is, and then see in the rules "Soft Locking is bannable" you wouldn't immediately make assumptions about what it is (where you definitely would if the rule said "body blocking is bannable"). You'd have to read further into the rules "soft locking is when the killer body blocks a survivor such that they cannot actively play the game for an extended period". There is less confusion and more people become educated about the exact bannable instance. But the term is easily understood in this context so when you see the definition you go "oh that makes sense". And since we have a term for it, you don't need to go into explaining what happened you just say "killer soft locked me". Simple and easy.
"Since body blocking the hook wouldnt be considered a soft lock they then have to have a detailed explanation of body blocking under the term soft lock."
No it's the other way around. Body block is allowed. Body blocks that are soft locks are not.
"Holding the game hostage also is a wide term as a survivor blocking someone in a corner all game imo is holding them hostage and preventing play even if the egc can activate eventually."
This would be soft locking, except done by another survivor instead of the killer.
Think of soft lock as a type of body block, a specific type that is bannable. All other forms of body blocking (which are simply referred to as body blocks) are allowed.
0 -
If a full person is blocking me, it’s body blocking, they used their whole body..... end of story
0 -
But does that body block result in you being unable to play the game?
If the answer is no and you are still free to move around, it is simply a body block.
If the answer is yes and you are basically stuck in a corner now, it is a soft lock.
0 -
i aM cOnFuSon
0 -
But the confusion only lies when some dont know about the actual rules and so need to read up on what is and isn't in the term.
If the name is changed to something which doesn't automatically imply the actual act then they would still need to read the rules too see what is and isn't and it would still have to reference the term body blocking under the banner of a soft lock.
Why change the name if it needs the players to read the rules and still need to reference the term body blocking witin it instead of just updating the rules to be more detailed so its better explained?
Post edited by twistedmonkey on0 -
Softlocking isn't a specific thing though. That is to say softlocking implies some other action is being done in order to trigger a softlock.
This is often but not always body blocking.
In otherwords body blocking and softlocking/holding the game hostage/whatever are related but not interchangeable, and the rules are clear about it.
1 -
Because not everyone reads the rules and if you say "body block" they can assume you mean one thing when you really mean another.
Specificity is necessary here to distinguish the bannable form from the accepted form.
It's like the difference between non-criminal homicide (aka killing in self defense), involuntary homicide, manslaughter, and murder. Legally these are all different terms with different meanings, different penalties, and different implications. If you just say "he killed someone" it doesn't specify the degree to which it was done, and that makes a huge difference. If it was in self defense, well the guy probably shouldn't be punished. If it was premeditated and done with malice, then hell yes lock that mofo up for life.
"In otherwords body blocking and softlocking/holding the game hostage/whatever are related but not interchangeable, and the rules are clear about it."
You are right, they are not interchangeable. Hence why we refer to accepted body blocks as just "body blocking", and bannable body blocks as "soft locking".
I chose the term soft lock because it most accurately describes the situation; you cannot continue to play the game and the only way out is to quit the game.
If you want to differentiate it further from soft lock bugs (where you get stuck in a pallet or something) call it "intentional soft locking".
0 -
That was my point.
If no one reads the rules then what would the term soft lock change?
If it's confusion over body blocking meaning more than one thing then changing it and then referencing body blocking under the term soft lock won't change anything as the wording of body blocking still needs to be present in the details.
I can't see how making it even more confusing by adding that term as it doesn't imply the act so wont stop any questions when just leaving it as is while detailing better what is and isn't bannable does the same thing but better imo.
The terms you mentioned are all fair and well but they still need people to read up on what they mean or be told. That's the main factor as without being Informed no one knows the difference and in conversation those terms would be simplified by those not in the know of the terms too "they killed them in self defense" or "they killed them by accident". They then know exactly what happened without the need to use the official term used by the law.
Using a generic terms doesn't change what people will say and I would say in this instance it would just cause more confusion as I highly doubt anyone would say after a game "you soft locked me that is bannable" as it doesn't state what they did. They would still just say "you body blocked me that is bannable".
I just don't see the need to convolute it.
0 -
changing the name and giving a new meaning doesn't change the act. if a person blocks someone with their body whether in a game or real life it is body blocking because you are blocking someone with a body. Sounds like the Devs are trying to suck up to the survivors.
They will lose business in the long run and the game will tank. I guess that's Canadian business.
0 -
Because body blocking can mean several things. Soft locking can only mean 1 thing.
You are less likely to get conversations like "the killer body blocked me therefore they should be banned" because you aren't using the same term for different meanings.
If a term is unknown to someone that's good because at least then they have to look it up. You can't mix up the term of something bannable with something that is permitted, because the only use of said term is to reference a bannable act.
If I tell you "schmiggledeedorfing" is bannable, how in the world can you either confuse this with something else or assume what it means? Worse case scenario you raise your hand and ask what it is. Since it would probably be a very specific thing now you know exactly what's acceptable and what's not.
Now I say "action" is bannable, how would you interpret that? Would you actually seek out the rule for clarification or would you just apply it to whatever you want? More than likely it would be the latter. People exploit this kind of ambiguity, either on accident or on purpose, so having more clearly defined lines in the sand is important.
0 -
I'll fix this mess of a post, who cares? If a killer blocks with their body, then tough luck, for the killer, he wasting his time, sit there and enjoy it, if your entire group is there, go and embrace your fate, if killer isn't doing anything from there, then it's an issue
0 -
I don't know why people are confused over this. First read of the post and I understood everything because I read into the fine details.
How much braincells have you guys lost?
2 -
But soft locking is a generic term which already does mean lots of things from bugs to glitches along with mechanics. It is used for many things within many games.
These things can all mean you are soft locked.
Stuck in a pallet, can't heal, can't unhook, stuck in a locker, can't pick up an item, stuck on a part of the map etc etc each bug which means you can't progress or do something that is part of the game is classed as a soft lock.
To say it only means one thing in this game wont work as what is to stop those that know the actual definition using it for other reasons?
Ask yourself why would someone would immediately think of it as body blocking? If no one reads the rules it becomes a mute point and used for what most people who know the term believe it too.
If you tell me schmiggledeedorfing is bannable then I for one would look at the rules to find out what it is but I also looked at them and know the difference as it is now.
What is also to stop someone just googling the term soft lock and seeing no correlation to body blocking in the first place and just ignoring it? Never knowing until someone states the words body blocking?
Scenario one - you say they soft locked you and its bannable, they ask what that is and you say you body blocked me, they say thats not bannable, you say the way you did it by holsing the game hostage is read the rules or explain it.
Scenario two - you say you body blocked me in a bannable way, they say body blocking isnt bannable and you say the way you did it by holding the game hostage is read the rules or explain it.
Both mean they still have to read the rules or it has to be explained but the first scenario you have to also explain what a soft lock is in the first place defining the act itself. Since that it what currently happens without the extra step what does changing the term actually do apart from make it more confusing overall?
Sorry but I just see it as a pointless change of name which doesn't imply the act itself or even reference it without being told the exact meaning.
0 -
What you’ve described as soft locking isnt actually bannable unless they’re the last survivor and egc hasn’t triggered. Lets say I soft lock a survivor in the corner. There are 3 other survivors who can do gens, open the door (triggering the egc), and leave. Then the trapped survivor dies to egc. The game still has a path of progress to end for all players
0 -
I think it is a good idea.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.bhvr.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
