You aren't suppose to win a 3v1

EntitySpawn

Title.

I see too often people complain that they dont win after someone gives up or quits, while its obvious to some it's not to others but YOU ARENT SUPPOSE TO WIN A 3V1.

Same as if you get a teammate not doing anything in the trial (quite common) you cant expect to win.

While you can still win you arent meant to nor should we balance for bad players like that which end up on your team. If we make it so a 3v1 can win then a 4v1 is far too easy.

Stop asking for survivor buffs, ask for a better SBMM that judges skill and not escapes, ask for a better tutorial to teach people, ask for shared tome challenges so less people throw for challenges or just moan at your team in your head and accept you cant win because of a bad team not imbalances.

HugTheHag

This is why creating a 3v1 as early as possible is the strongest strategy for killer, and why it feels very unfair to survivors since it is mostly out of their control. At this point the game is no longer salvageable, unless the team is both really good at running the killer and well coordinated.

pseudechis

@neb said:

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3224064#Comment_3224064

I'm not trying to rationalize, I'm trying to change your mind. If you don't want your mind changed whatsoever, then I suppose there's no point to responding to you. There was no point in arguing if you didn't want your opinions changed.

Not everyone arguing with you is trying to rationalize themselves because they're insecure. I argue with people so I can change their opinions, not so I can rationalize myself. I don't delete all the -reps on my profile or argue with them because I know it's a waste of time to change their minds, since most of those messages are built on rage. The reason I argued with you was because I actually have faith in forum users, as opposed to some dude who came to my profile because he was angry at me.

Seems I was mistaken though, your large ass ego doesn't do you, as well as me, any good. You didn't even ever respond to the point where I have limited time because of college. Instead you just used it to get some petty insult against me. That's enough for me to realize that this was a huge waste of time. Good luck with your future arguments I guess.

Oh my dear friend you’ve committed one of the great fallacies of debate.

The goal isn’t to change my mind it’s to influence the opinion of others.

I’m not ignoring context in the least. In fact that point has little relevance here its a good common go to though, but does demonstrate that debate isn’t your strong suit.

Clarifying your point to be it’s ok to DC if someone else DC’s because it creates an un-winnable scenario that’s not worth playing.

It’s still no different to “I feel I can’t win so I quit.” Does it matter if it’s a DC or a really early down and elimination without much gen progression?

You feel one is legit but the other illegitimate so you feel justified in leaving in the DC case?

My point is that you can still have a fun interactive game of dbd even if someone DC’s so it’s a pretty weak excuse to use to justify your own quitting.

you’ve framed it as it’s un-fun if unable to win, when the scenario is potentially winnable and involves the same gameplay, or fun, as any other game of dbd, this is what makes it a weak point.

So if you are quitting because you feel you can’t win, then that’s really lame no matter how you dress it up because the context here doesn’t really change the defeatist mindset.

I don’t like when people DC is different from I quit when people DC. The first one is reasonable, it sucks when people quit the second really makes you no better than the first person who quit. Especially when it’s possible to have a full game of dbd as a 3v1, you probably won’t win it though as survivor but that’s not reason enough to quit without seeming kinda childish.

Hence my original point in full. If you want to quit that’s up to you, but own your “hissy quit” because you are kinda lame for doing so in a multiplayer setting.