Why does winning by default exist in DBD?
3:20 into the game (yes hooked three times)
the killer got a 4k and finished the game at 18:30
why does the game design encourage this so much? winning by default shouldn't be a thing
by popular demand. the super snooze fest game
https://youtu.be/wbMT08xEE-4
Comments
what do you mean winning by default
the killer won simply because of the early kill. nothing else. the outcome of the match became pre-determined. thus the killer won by default
a similar thing could happen if the killer loses three gens before their first hook due to BNPs. no control of the outcome it became pre-determined
I uh...think you messed up posting the video.
You were trying to post a video right?
That's still not winning by default. a winning by default is the last survivor dc-ing or all 4 dc-ing or the killer dc-ing. Early kills lower the survivor chances of winning but the killer still hasn't won. You can still try to win. An early kill is not going to garuntee the killer a win.
I...don't think I understand...is this not the point though, for the killer to try and, well you know, -KILL- people as quickly as he can? I might be confused on what you're saying.
I wouldn't necessarily call 3 generators left an early kill unless multiple people were on both gens or they got done at the same time. Also, for the amount of times I've seen something like what you're saying, a team losing because someone died, I've also seen teams do better because someone died.
DBD is a giant game of freeze tag. That's the basic idea behind the game if you really think about it and take away all the horror ascetics.
I don't see how this is winning by default.
The killer took out a player to turn the game into a 3v1 which is harder, but not impossible for survivors beat.
freeze tag?
yeah. the game kids play on the playground when you have a childhood.
you can look it up if you never had that i guess
Yeah, I get that, at its core that's really all it is you're right. But with freeze tag, if you're it, then would'nt the same thing apply, where you'd want to try and tag people out as quickly as you can before they can reach safe base? I guess I just don't understand what the problem with this is, cus that's the main objective of one side, to eliminate as many of the other side as they can before they can escape.
First kill by 2 gen done and it still took him 18mins to win? He was bad and the survivor were potatoes. Also he tunneled the ######### out of that person and nobody tried to bodyblock?
I understand under winning by default when its clear from the beginning who will win. Things like a old mori, keys, some maps etc. You still can win against that but its very unlikely when both teams have the same skill level.
So killing someone early has the same effect (almost unwinnable) but its not by default. The killer has to work for it. Its easy against average players and tunneling is a strong strategy bc of that.
But against a good survivor you need a strong killer for it. I can count the matches in the last year where a killer tunneled me to death from the start and won bc of it on my tentacles and im not nemesis so i have none.
you can have the video if ya want. its not an interesting game tho
This is less a design problem and more of a match making problem as that Dwight probably shouldn't have been in your game at all.
Mind you 3 survivors vs 3 gens is still winnable albeit hard and yes I have won that against pruple/red rank Freddy/spirits before.
So... the killer "won by default" by... winning the game?
That's not a win by default. The killer very intelligently pressured the game into a 3v1 to make map control easier on themselves.
...no.
I've escaped from matches where a survivor has DC'd early in the game.
I've also managed to 4k matches where 3 gens have popped in 2 minutes.
The only time it's 'winning by default' would be remaining survivors escaping through a hatch, or a proxy camping Nurse with Devour, Starstruck and NOED, who sits on a hill with a permanently charged blink, right next to two hooked survivors and a Hex.
Hatch lets you survive a lost game, not turn it into a win. You still lost if you have to take the hatch (unless you just chose to with all gens done and gates open)
No offense but an 18 minute match is hardly a "win by default" to me. Call me back when you get a match where the killer gets a 4K in less than five. :)
Maybe if that survivor that died early had teammates to help heal them, they may have lasted longer. If you just ditch your teammates to jump back on a gen ASAP, you shouldn't be surprised when they die.
The Killer didn't want anyone else and wouldn't commit to me or David despite both of us taking hits. Just wanted Dwight.
I mean, are you talking about the one survivor being killed so early so it ends up being a 3v1? I do agree that there has to be something done against tunneling. And giving remaining survivors some form of help when a survivor dies would be a good way to go, but other things would need to be adressed as well.
It seems like they have some interesting things planned for moris, which might be the early game collapse, but it sounds like survivors will be getting another objective to prevent moris or whatever. Hopefully together with those changes the devs will also figure a way to nerf camping and tunneling and not make losing a survivor so devestating.
I mean. Survivor can genrush, and killer cant do anithing. Also in that case the game finish after few minutes. That's the game now, fast, high risk,, high reward. And I dont like It, I peefer longer games decides by skill demostrations, not with that pressure that make you throw a game after a pair of mi stakes.
I saw the clip, you didn't take a hit. You commit to a gen while your teammate was being chased and then Freddy hit you when he had an opportunity. You then sprinted into a locker to heal, taking a survivor out of the equation and leaving Freddy with one less person to chase. Of course he's going to go after the Dwight if no one makes an attempt to heal him and sprints away while he's being chased. Why would Freddy switch targets in that case? You also immediately abandoned the Dwight after unhooking him when you could have tried to find a place to heal.
Survivors just holding m1 on generators (which is what you seem to want to do) is much closer to 'winning the game by default' than what this killer is doing.
As a killer main, I wished I had survivors that would allow my games to stretch up to 18 minutes like this one did. Never have I seen a high rank game played this relaxedly.
Agreeing with the posters above saying this was not a win by default in the slightest and neither the survivors or killer really wanted to make things complicated for the opposing camp (I kinda cringed when you wiggled out of Freddy's grasp and almost did it again right after, he seemed so lost). Dwight being tunneled out was a bummer, but no one seemed interested to help him out at least delay the killer a bit.
You were absolutely not in a bad place when Dwight died. 3 generators remained but there didn't seem to be a 3-gen setup making a win literally impossible. Your team just... didn't work as a team.
Also, the Freddy really abused the map pressure he had from slugging and hooks when only three survivors are in the match.
He literally left people slugged instead of hooking just because he wanted to delay gens and knew he could get away with it.
Yeah this is why tunnelling someone out early on is so strong as Killer and it's also the reason why DS was and should probably still be a meta perk since it delays killers relying on this tactic
That being said, a 3v1 at say 2 gens isn't unwinnable but it'll be tough
a 3 v 1 at 4 gens is almost impossible though, unless the killer is really bad and commits to one person for so long and that person is a good looper.
So you're mad at the Killer for killing? I don't get it.
The Killer is not here to mildly impede your progress out of the trial, he is there to kill you all. Of course he will use tactics to delay the game and prevent you from escaping.
I mean, I managed a 4k in about 2 minutes before, but that was entirely down to the survivors failing, and nothing to do with my skill as a killer.
Having learned since then, a good killer would give survivors a chance to unhook if they were going down that quickly.
I don't meet loads of good killers, at least not many who adjust the pressure level if the team is doing poorly. I have, however, encountered a lot of killers who are good enough to give the last survivor the escape.
It's easy to go into every game in high gear because you never know if you'll be going against a highly skilled SWF who will require all the pressure you can put on them. But it takes a good killer to A. accurately gauge the capabilities of the survivors they're going against, and B. know when they have room to ease off without throwing the game entirely. Sometime it takes the whole game to do that, so giving the final survivor the escape is the fairest and most realistic gesture when you've completely demolished them.
That's an interesting way of looking at it, and I can see it as being an accurate assessment. I have to admit that the person who gave me the escape in this last match just 100 percent facecamped the other three survivors, and he managed to get two of them, hooked in the basement, within literally the first 2 minutes of the match. If that were me (I don't facecamp, but all the same) that big of a loss that quickly would really make me pump the brakes. I don't like fast games, I don't take much enjoyment in just outright slaughtering people. I'm not a good enough killer to say that I get the chance very often, but it's happened (tonight in fact, lots of AFKs and connection issues) and I just wouldn't capitalize. Sadly the guy was just as relentless on survivor 3. To be honest, had I not stopped opening the gate and bowed, nodding my head to him to just go ahead and do it, I think he would have happily killed me too. The fact that I offered for him to just take the win literally stopped him in his tracks and seemed to make him change his mind.
I don't know, when I play as killer I honestly prefer letting survivors live. I'll chase and smack and hook, yes, but I don't go for the actual sacrifice unless someone has really been asking for it, lol.
At 3 minutes 20 seconds, the gens could have been all completely finished.
That is the true winning by default. Predropping pallets, holding W, slamming gens. What you're talking about is the disparity between SWF and solo que, unfair matchmaking, and the fact that your team didn't have at least 4 gens done, as any decent team would have. Does it sound harsh? Does it sound unsympathetic? Absolutely. But blame the terrible matchmaking system that allows true potatoes and/or chill players to get matched with killers that play like that and don't get punished for it like they could and should be. Because that killer didn't win by default because of tunnelling, they won by default like a Knockout/Third Seal gamer does: by preying on people they know cannot stop them.
I feel like all this match proves is that the ranking system is totally useless. I honestly thought this was going to be a green rank lobby but everyone was red/high purple, lol.
Ditch dead hard and spine chill they are useless against strong smart killers (except nurse) Prioritize gens over totems. And friends over gens ( in most situations) good perks to add to inner strength for this, imo better playstyle, is resilience or prove thyself and a perks where you can keep track of your team.
Also I agree Freddy and 3v1s can be a snoozefest but that should incentivize you to fight back. And in the Dbd world that means changing things up.