Are Disconnect Penalties Really Necessary?
I've played hundreds and hundreds of matches since the DC penalty was added, including the "giving up" penalty if you AFK or purposefully get killed as a survivor. I've found that in both my killer and survivor games it hasn't reduced the amount of people disconnecting at all. In fact, it seems like there are more disconnects in my matches than ever before.
If BHVR refuses to balance the game properly, and is going to keep adding unfun and tedious events that are easy to abuse by problematic players (SWFs), and make solo-queue players get curb stomped, why even have the penalty? It's just slowly killing the playerbase by making players who DC just go play a different game. In my opinion, its like putting stitches on a papercut. If enough players disconnect from games eventually they'll probably end up quitting DBD outright, or eventually finding themselves in a state where they won't be so frustrated. They'll at least feel like they have a choice whether or not they have to play the game they queued for. This is a casual game for crying out loud, not Counterstrike, not Valorant, not Rainbow Six. Not everyone wants to play like their whole family is on the line every match. Ultimately, they will disconnect either way, the penalty is just encouraging them not to boot the game back up.
I sometimes have the most miserable matches ever as killer, 15+ minutes long of grueling sweaty nonsense where I either barely win by a hair, or lose abysmally. After eating a third dead-hard and a second decisive strike, on my 18th pallet kicked, all on a C tier M1 killer that has zero map mobility or ranged ability, why can't I just give survivors the win and DC? Is it really necessary to take my rank grade a full level down and give me an incrementally larger cooldown? I mean I'll give them the BP I don't care, I just want out at that point, but they keep the game going no matter what. I've seen numerous killers I've faced just go AFK at that point so they can't be farmed for BP. But when the roles are reversed, and I obliterate a bully squad in the first 5 minutes because they misplayed their flashlight or pallet saves, they just DC anyway and the one or two randoms in the lobby are stuck with bots. How is it fair that people who abide by the penalties have to suffer because the penalties do nothing to discourage the toxic players these changes were intended for?
If people don't want to play, I say let them not play. At least then I can play against bots, or go next as killer. Until they create a proper MMR system or get some real balancing in the game's current meta, nothing will change, penalty or no penalty everyone is rage-quitting left right and center, and I can't blame them. There's nothing currently to enjoy in the game on either side. Killer's either get bullied, or survivors get steamrolled at 4 gens.
And before you downvote me I'm asking a serious question, I've always been a fan of MintSkull and he basically released a statement today that he's stepping back from DbD because of almost all the reasons I listed here. Poor balance, monotonous meta, entitled survivors that DC either way. I want a genuine discussion here, because I'm on the brink of quitting the game myself.
edit: got stuck in the ground while i was typing this, 10/10 event. How is this acceptable for the 10th anniversary of all years? I also just played a Knight game just now and halfway through the match (was unbreakable pallets as the modifier) my guards just became unable to walk through downed pallets and would just walk into them until their chase timer ran out. I wonder how many DC penalties are being handed out just from bugs alone this event
Comments
I don't think their should be DC penalities but I also basically never DC. I can count on my fingers how many times I've DCed. But what you say here
How would free DCs change this? People like me, who simply don't believe in DCing as a personal stance, will still be stuck with bots. Probably even more than now. There are already enough free outs with the abandon option. What the game needs is a way for sure loses to still feel worthwhile.
Content creators aren't a good example of anything in this game. They do it for a living and they invest too much into it. Most people get stressed at work.
What is casual though? If you truly have a casual mindset, you shouldn't be nearly so stressed if you lose, nor should you be inclined to sweat for wins. More and more, I feel like "casual" means still wanting to win but with less effort. Sometimes I "casually" 4k at 5 gens. Didn't feel causal for my opponents though, I bet. So what does casual look like for each role when neither wants to sign up to lose?
How will it change? I doubt it would for you at all. But for people like me, when my teammates inevitably DC like they do now with the penalties, I’ll also be able to DC freely if I choose to do so. The truth is I don’t think the penalty stops anyone anyway. Most players stay to get their blood points, the cooldown doesn’t stop these kinds of players because they already have p100 and don’t need the BP. They lose nothing other than a little bit of time taking a break before getting back on to do it all again it seems.
Sadly the only way to make sure losses still feel worthwhile is if the game was properly balanced. The current meta is geared around 5 basically uncounterable perks designed for niche uses but survivors can easily force you into those otherwise niche scenarios. It creates a lose-lose situation that’s so far out of your control it removes all sense of responsibility for your loss of the match. Which of course creates frustration. It’s the “losing to perks not players” feeling I’ve heard some content creators express.
Also I do have a casual mindset because I truly don’t care about losing. But my escape rate on survivor has dropped from above 60% to under 25% since the event started, and my kill rate on killer is above average, so if I truly cared about winning and winning alone I’d just play killer. My point though is that even wins can feel frustrating because of the way the current meta plays. I don’t enjoy playing against survivors that give up at 5 gens, but I also don’t enjoy having flashlight saves 18 times at 5 gens just for the survivors to lose the game. If they’re going to win, win normally. Same goes for losing. I don’t go out of my way to tunnel and facecamp but half of my games in this event have been 3 people constantly harassing me so I can’t get a single hook, all just for them to lose the game in the last few minutes because they couldn’t just do the actual objective. Maybe other survivors just like losing, I don’t mind it at all, but when I’m suddenly losing 16 out of every 20 matches on survivor it gets to me a little. Like I don’t even get to play the game most the time, it’s just 2 minutes on hook, at max 3 minutes in “chase,” maybe about a minute healing or doing gens, and that’s it. Half my match almost is just dying on hook or the ground and the other half waiting to be tunneled out when the killer inevitably finds chasing a new survivor to not be a winning strategy.
I feel forced to bring decisive strike but I rarely get good use out of it, I’ll always get double-tapped anyway because I don’t have teammates that coordinate around it. But when I play killer I’m basically forced to slug or tunnel, or else I’ll eat every DS and DH on all four survivors just to get 4 hooks before the gates are opened. Kicking gens and playing a normal macro game feels like a distant memory now, playing killer now just feels like a never ending chase, which tires me out, regardless if I win or lose.
I would say (as someone who sees the data) yes Disconnect Penalties are definitely necessary, whenever penalties are switched off the DC rate increases vastly.
Hell yes proof!
Idk about you, but I prefer playing my PvP game against actual Players, not bots.
You're probably right, I don't doubt it reduces the amount of DC's overall, but is it even possible to account for players who play sloppy on purpose, just give up? I know it was a monumental and nearly impossible thing to implement as a feature, tracking and punishing players who give up instead of disconnecting. I recall when it was first implemented it was giving false flags. But in my matches I legitimately have at least a disconnect every four games. And the ones without disconnects some players just give up. Maybe I was just lucky back then but I don't remember seeing anywhere near as many players disconnect in my matches before the penalties were added.
Maybe a solution could be to allow the abandon option to appear for the survivors if one or more teammates abandon? Could counteract people trying to "abuse" it by making it contingent on if the survivors are queued together or not.
And I prefer to play my team based game with real people and not bots, it goes both ways. Don't know why I should be forced to play a heavily losing match to potentially an excruciating length just because an entitled teammate decided he'd rather go make a sandwich during his disconnect cooldown than to play the rest of the match out. I've had teammates DC numerous of times in a match that we were actually winning in, and manage to escape or get very close to it even with a single bot. Two bots though, the game is just over. There really might as well be an abandon option for that.
Also if I'm playing killer I'd honestly rather play against bots than players who are just giving up and refusing to play, but maybe that's just me. If you really don't like playing against bots and getting the free BP, then there's an abandon option currently active if the survivors are all bots.
So you end up with a situation where basically every match is all 5 players DCing. One does it, then they all go like dominoes after that. There would be no game.
"Properly balanced" is, like "casual", this very vague idea that everyone views differently. What does it look like? You have killers with drastically different kits on maps with drastically different structures, plus RNG, and then a simplistic MMR system that's hard to improve because what do you accurately factor besides kills and escapes? You also have different playstyles and perk synergies and anti-synergies. I feel like losing to perks is too simple. You're losing (or winning) to luck, randomness, and opponenet choices. Soloq is always random because of teammates. There's no fixing that. If Blight wants to tunnel the weak link at 5gens it's gg. Both sides have quick slants in one direction that have so much momentum they can be impossible to stop. That's beyond just balancing. That's the entire game.
Try something else? People never seem happy with these obligatory perks. I chew right through this DS as killer and hardly ever get tunneled anymore running other stuff (until Jason anyway). Also, maybe find a SWF if you want that sort of coordination and team play.
The one thing I will say is I feel like I almost always go agaiant people better than me in both roles. But i imagine that is because I also maintain above goal numbers. I think the way you feel is the price you pay for those stats.
without DC penalties the game would turn into PvE pretty fast. Wrong killer, wrong map, fast first down, fast first gen.
in fact DC penalties should be harsher if anything. 1st First DC 5min, 2nd DC 15 min, 3rd DC 1 hour, 4hours and so on.
At this point im not sure if mmr even accounts for just wins and escapes anymore, I must've hit some kind of mmr level that you can't derank from because despite dying like 80% of my matches for the past 5 days, its not getting any easier.
Also finding a SWF kinda defeats the point I'm making. I solo-queue, that's what I do. And as an asymmetrical game, if 1 out of 5 players don't want to play, it can ruin the entire match. Even if I find 2 friends to queue with, that 4th random could still disconnect. I'm just proposing that the penalties don't seem to mitigate it meaningfully, at least in my experience. In fact, it just makes me feel obligated to play miserable matches that were basically over 5 to 8 minutes ago even when I've hit the max on bloodpoints or rankup pips I can get from that game. Making so that maybe if 2 out of 5 players leave, that the other 3 can decide to go next. Because you're right that people would leave like dominoes in some matches, but there are a lot more players like you and I that would still at least try with a bot on the team. I don't think the option to abandon once a single player DC's would cause the abandonocalypse, the driving factor of this game right next to fun is bloodpoints, and you get a whole lot less of those if you leave the match too early.
It's BHVR's fault for not punishing players who grief matches because they can't d/c. Doesn't change that the d/c penalty is needed.
But you realise that by removing DC penalties, you're going to be seeing even more bot teammates, right? You're just exarcebating the problem.
I'd just leave too, that's my point. I see the bots either way, I just don't want to play with bots anymore.
I was using DC penalties as an example for the discussion. The abandon feature exists, why not extend it to those kinds of scenarios? You can keep the penalties, in fact go ahead and triple or quadruple the amount of time the disconnect penalty is for. But allow other survivors to choose whether or not they want to keep playing.
As for killer, its harder to say what the solution would be. Killers really can just effectively go AFK if they decide the match isn't going their way, as I mentioned in the main post. So the DC penalty kind of just prevents them from getting into another match immediately. Perhaps the killer abandon/disconnect conditions are fine how they are now.
But for survivor I think the enjoyment is too dependent on your teammates thanks to the asymmetrical nature of the game, and being able to abandon if someone you aren't queued with decides to ruin the fun and leave could alleviate a lot of frustration.
Before the penalties happened I would say about 20% of matches at least one surivor dc'd on either the first down or first hook. The ammount of people who got hooked first who were using Deliverance was quite common and seemed to be the only real reason why they disconnected at least for my matches.
DC penalties are needed as it was really annoying to queue in the match and be basically 1v3 after first down like every fifth match. People disconnected for the most petty reasons and it was also quite common of people doing the "I don't feel like playing anymore so I disconnect and go do something else" in the middle of the match. People kept doing that quite much even after the penalties were added as they started right after the DC so they could just ignore the penalty as they were not going to play anyway. Now as it starts when you next time press ready to queue into new match they at least need to do that before to not get the match making ban next time.
I mean, I believe you that the DC rate goes up when penalties are off. That is probably true.
But that kind of misses the point people are making. Nobody is really saying “remove the penalty and everything will be better.” The issue is why so many people feel like DCing in the first place.
Like okay, penalties make people stay in the match more often. Does that mean the match is suddenly fun? Does that mean the solo survivor who had two teammates DC is having a better time because now they are stuck with bots? Does it mean the killer in a 15 minute sweatfest against a coordinated group is suddenly enjoying themselves because they have a cooldown hanging over their head?
I am not saying people should just be allowed to DC every time they get downed first or do not like the killer. Obviously that would make matches worse. But acting like the penalty being statistically effective means the system is fine is a gross oversimplification.
The penalty might lower the number of disconnects, but it does not fix the reasons people are disconnecting. It just punishes people for getting to that point.
And honestly, stats alone are not enough for a game like DbD. You can look at DC rates, kill rates, escape rates, whatever. But those stats do not tell you how a match actually felt. They do not tell you if someone got tunneled out at 5 gens, got left with two bots, spent most of the match slugged, or had to deal with a coordinated team making the game miserable even if they still lost.
So yeah, penalties are probably necessary. But that does not mean the current system is good, or that it should be the end of the conversation. The real question is what is making people want out of matches so badly that a cooldown is the only thing keeping them there.
There is no singular reason that people d/c and I wouldn't want to see the game be balanced over people who rage quit.
DC penalties are necessary, BUT they need to come with guardrails that prevent the need for them. That includes both technical stability where the servers won't spontaneously disconnect you because of the tiniest hiccup somewhere, and a game environment that does not put players into miserable and inescapable situations where DCing and accepting penalties is a better choice. BHVR has done an awful job at creating such an environment, both through allowing extremely broken and uninteractive mechanics and strategies to foster, and not addressing toxic, unsportsmanlike actions. Codifying SOME disconnects as being okay when put in those situations by Abandoning only reinforces the belief that sometimes it's okay to disconnect while not addressing any of the underlying issues.
My guess is there's either a base MMR that can't be dropped below or it takes hundreds of matches. I wouldn't expect changes that quickly. There are only four brackets. You likely stay in one for awhile. The amount of MMR you lose also depends on your opponents' MMR.
if that's the case then the penalities don't need to go away, they need to change. But I personally think it's the way the game feels that's the issue.
I believe this game's biggest attitude issue is the lack of killers feeling rewarded for anything but sacrifces. If The Entity wanted blood instead of death and it was gained through unique hooks, I think this game would do a 180 in player sentiment. As it is now, you can have an 8 hook game, but without kills you're rewarded with "the entity hungers", a 0k on your stats, and tbagging at the gates. If killers could still feel accomplished by filling a blood meter or something instead, they wouldn't feel the "need" to tunnel or 4man slug, and then those could also be addressed mechanically too.
I disagree with that. I'm one of the very few people who won't even use the abandon feature. Almost everyone else does the moment it pops up. If DCs were as free as abandons I think the game would cease to function.
I think the driving factor for everyone is different. For me, it's unfortunately numbers. For many, it's winning. Fun is pretty abstract and I can't say I have much of it. Maybe in SWF or in customs. That's probably the only fun I have, and it's essentially external to the game itself.
Where did I say there was one singular reason people DC? There obviously is not.
That is kind of my point though. “The DC rate goes up when penalties are off” does not tell us why people are DCing, what state the match was in, whether somebody had already left, whether the player was being tunneled, whether the event or perk meta was making the match miserable, or whether they were just ragequitting because they got downed first.
Nobody is saying BHVR should balance the entire game around people ragequitting. That would be ridiculous. But acting like disconnect behavior should be ignored completely because some people ragequit is also a gross oversimplification.
The penalty can be necessary while still being a bad or incomplete solution. It clearly makes some people stay, sure. But does that mean they are actually participating? Or are they AFKing, giving up on hook, griefing, or just making the match worse for everyone else because they feel trapped?
You literally said BHVR should punish people who grief matches because they cannot DC. That is what I mean. A penalty does not automatically create a healthier match. Sometimes it just changes the way people check out of it.
So no, I do not think the game should be balanced purely around DCs. I think BHVR should look at DCs in context instead of treating one overall statistic as proof that there is nothing else worth addressing.
I rather have them than have them not. I DC very rarely (last time when 2 teammates DCed, I did not want to play with 2 Bots, so I DCed as well. Did not get a penalty, since it was the first DC in a very long time), but I have the feeling that there would be way more games with DCs if there would be no penalties.
But I hope that they improve Bots at some point. Because as one of the Survivors still in the Trial, it makes almost no difference if you are one person down or have a Bot, they are really THAT useless.
Yeah, I would say make the first DC penalty really light, and maybe the second (in case a person is having network issues), but escalate dramatically beyond that. Basically, make it so habitual offenders end up with the entire day(s) off if they can't control themselves.
Like 60 seconds for the first, 2-5 minutes for the second, an hour for the third, four hours for the third, 12 hours for the fourth, etc.
If people consistently hit the daily cap, hit them with like a 48-72 hour penalty.
If people are just chronically DC'ing, they don't need to be allowed in to public lobbies.
Or axe the penalty and make a "quitters queue", where people who DC too much can ruin each other's matches and not the rest of ours until they knock it off.
If you’re not enjoying the game, then don’t play it. Allowing people to ruin others’ matches consequence free is not the solution here. Plenty of people are having fun with the game, evidenced by the all-time high player count. People who are not enjoying it are either burned out (which is fine, I get it) or just have unrealistic expectation relative to their skill level.
Yes, this.
There seems to be this notion among some people that because they aren't having as much fun as they would like, they're entitled to express their displeasure by DC'ing. Some of these people also seem to think that this is an effective way of demonstrating/illustrating issues with the game to the devs (spoiler - it isn't). Or that it will stop other players from using the killer or perks they don't like (it won't).
The only people getting punished are their teammates. As long as you're logging in, BHVR is getting what they want - engagement with their product.
There is only one way to effectively send a message about the game state, and that is no not log in.
And you say that if people aren't having fun, they shouldn't play; and that's the rational, obvious best course of action. It's what I do when I am really turned off by this game or any game.
But I'm increasingly convinced some people would rather be miserable so long as they can make other people miserable as well than to just do something else and actually have fun.
Beyond actual game rules, operating in online game communities entails something of a social contract, though many don't seem to agree, so they just say screw the rest of you, I'm gonna make you sit in my poopy diapers with me.
Short answer yes. Long(er) answer being like Mandy said, every time the DC penalties were turned off the DC's would vastly increase leading to the game being in a horrible state. Literally any little thing people didn't like they would DC to. This community has proven time and time again they can not handle penalties being off. Like sure SOME don't abuse it but unfortunately it's a "they ruined this for everyone" type situation.
Last time I remember DC penalties confirmed being off was post Nemesis release when his tentacle would crash console users and I legit had more matches with DC's than without.
It would be pretty stupid for them not to take note of these trends. If something is despised in the game by a large number of people in a trackable way it should be looked at and adjusted to be less detestable.
How do they know what to fix if people just stop playing? There are zillion potential issues.
Thr problem is everyone has a different idea of what's in that contract.
Thing is, if you're not enjoying the game, the best thing is to simply not play it.
Players need to realise they're addicted, and that they can break that addiction.
"This is a casual game for crying out loud, not Counterstrike, not Valorant, not Rainbow Six"
Says who? You can apply this to literally any game.
"I want to troll in rainbow six siege, this isn't league of legends! Lol! Stop Sweating"
"I want to troll in valorant! Why are people mad, this isnt rainbow six siege?"
"I want to troll in counterstrike, why are people mad at me? This isn't league/rainbow six, stop sweating!"
If you argument is "Game is not X it's Y!" You can apply that to literally anything. at Its core DBD is a pvp game which means people will take it seriously, if you disagree that's more than fine but to act like "ITS CASUAL LOL ANYTHING GOES" I mean at that point why even balance the game at all? Bring back old CoH, bring back old gen kick meta, bring back old ruin, bring back old brand new part and ebony mori? Who cares, it's casual right?
The problem is also that people DC for a million different reasons, any reason you can imagine; I'd wager far more reasons than people will stop playing for. People have always DC'ed and will always DC, and will do so in trends that are predictable even when the reasons aren't good (like pretty much after every killer release or meta shakeup, good or bad).
DCs are just a constant, annoying statistical noise, there's not really ever a reliable signal in it.
Hitting them in the player count is what really sends a message, but like we're seeing now with this garbage tier event and the great cake fiasco, there is no meaningful action because people are signing on in record numbers. It's why the ghoul is largely unchanged, and why Nurse is still a thing. DCs don't hurt BHVR so long as you DC and keep playing.
A huge dip in player count after a change is a much more reliable indicator of community wide displeasure because people always DC, people stopping playing en masse is a much less frequent occurrence and easier to directly correlate to.
I don't disagree with DC penalties per se, but I do disagree with how they're currently implemented. 20 games to reset a single penalty point is a lot of games to play through (a months worth really, if you don't play that much). And taking a sensible break for a mental reset isn't possible any more either because your penalty doesn't decay over time like it used to. So when you do return, you know you've got that sword of Damocles hanging over your head whenever you do decide to play again. DBD is one of those games that just rubs people up the wrong way more often than not and that isn't ever going to change. The fact that the DCs apparently sky rocket whenever the penality is turned off says a lot but I don't think BHVR are going to do anything about that. The game is fine and dandy. It's just wasted energy to argue against the status quo most of the time with this game.
If I'm not in the right state of mind or I have any doubts about loading up a game these days, I just don't.
That's true, but there are trends when you have a million matches worth of data. If Ghoul has drastically more DCs in the first 20s of a match than any other killer that's a concerning trend. You can also compare trends to feedback. The thing is, both are kinda weak on their own. People are complaining about the event and cakes but, as you said, they're still playing. So do they care that much or is whining online just easy? We have endless complaining about the event for killers yet the killer queue remains higher. The message being sent right now appears to be that the majority are satisfied, regardless of outcry. But the player counts also don't tell us everything. How many are new players that will drop off? How many are playing customs with friends and avoiding the suffering of pubs? BHVR has way more data than our crumbs. They just have to combine it all and do something useful with it.
I think with this game it's kinda hard, with the nature of the roles. Most people seem to play both. Usually there's one I'm happier with at any given time so that's what I play instead of just not playing at all. It's unlikely a change would be big enough and global enough to impact both roles enough to make the whole of the playerbase check out. Cakes are a global problem but they clearly weren't enough to be an issue for BHVR.
I mean, that's kinda the whole point of this discussion. When I play survivor, people leaving is what ruins my match. I don't want to stay in a match where the killer will just slug me for the 4k or tunnel me out because someone ragequit and I'm left with a bot as a teammate who refuses to unhook if the killer is within 40 meters of the hook. I think it'd only be fair that if one, or maybe to be more modest two players quit, then I should be able to abandon.
The problem with your argument here is that, as someone who has played all of those games (other than Valorant), the comparisons made don't really work. Who is trolling in Competitive mode on CS or R6 and not getting flamed, kicked, or teamkilled by the randoms on their team?
The whole point of that sentence from my post is that I didn't sign up to play competitive Dead By Daylight when I clicked the play button on the menu in the normal gamemode or the anniversary event. And yet people will rage quit at the first sign of the match going sour. They don't even wait to see it play out, if their teammates can recover for them by doing an extra gen, getting a good save, and what not. I've seen people get downed, disconnect before the killer even picks them up, just for the bot to then get flashlight saved. No amount of disconnect penalty can truly prevent them from being that entitled and easily angered. The more you increase the penalties, it'll just mean the less they'll play the game. Which hey, maybe in the long run, that will be the healthiest thing for the game. But the other side of that coin is killer matches where survivors do the objectives at the slowest speed possible and basically just 3v1 you in chase for 10+ minutes straight to make you miserable and ensure you can't play the game normally, since the killer objective is hooks. Killers are the center of the match's flow, they determine everything and survivors merely react to it and have to play around the killer. So if the killer is not having fun, the game is just over. Hence why BHVR hasn't added killer bots to the main game yet, just 2v8. It would be more or less redundant in normal pubs.
It's probably a big ask, but if there were a proper implementation of a not abusable surrender feature/condition of sorts, for killer and survivor, like when teammates DC or as killer when you haven't gotten a single hook in about 5 to 10 minutes, you'd be allowed to abandon, I'd feel like I have more control over my enjoyment of the game. I wouldn't feel so contingent on getting teammates or opponents that are good sports and aren't just going to hold me hostage or sabotage my chances of escaping.
You will almost never get to actually play the game if the dc penalty is off. Sure if someone dcs then so can you but what happens when that's practically ever game? This is what it would look like load into a map survivor doesn't like said map dc. The. Everyone else dcs and you q up again then you do it again 5 more time and if your luck everyone is happy with the map and the killer and the perks each side brought oh never mind someone dc because one surivor brought urban Evasion.
I mean, you're not wrong at all. And I don't support removing the DC penalty entirely, my questioning of it is completely hypothetical of course. I wanted to spark debate on the topic in general. But honestly, I think part of the reason the game is in the state its in gameplay wise is because with the DC penalty we feel expected to tolerate so much more than we used to before the penalty was added. You don't just feel an obligation just to your teammates, the offerings/items you brought, or the killer, but to yourself, as if you quit you don't get to queue again right after. It does create a conundrum though, how many survivors would permanently ban the Nurse, Ghoul, or Jason from being played against ever again if there were an in-game option for it? How about a map ban option, would anyone willingly play Badham Preschool again?
If the DC penalty were gone, BHVR would have a plethora of statistics to look at, for better and worse. Wouldn't be great for the quality of your individual matches, but you'd definitely be able to see what trends appear in killers/maps that make people disconnect so early.
The problem is that anyone will disconnect for no reasons I've had survivors get hit because they ran into a way then dc more often then I would like to admit. Plus you would have massive survivor dc compared to the killer because there's more of them.
I feel like it would be pretty much pointless because of how skewed the data would be
okay this is just ridiculous, same map, same killer, same bug. gotta be a pattern. and i cant even disconnect
Since this is a PvP game, there are four other players on the other side of the screen. While everyone has their own opinion on whether a match was a good or bad experience, I believe that disconnecting and leaving—which significantly impacts the experience of the other four players—is behavior that should be penalized.
Do you feel the current system is fair? Because I've never seen another PVP game hold on to a penalty indefinitely so that it can count down in real time (akin to a time out) and tell players to spend over an hour minimum playing through 20 rounds to even see their record go down. Especially for a game that is not ranked and doesn't have very stable solutions to issues like camping/tunneling/slugging. It seems more designed to cultivate frustration and fear, and maybe maintain the aforementioned data, than it is to improve the quality of the game.
Likewise, why would the heavy penalties toward DCs need to be implemented but the Surrender mechanic is fine? Is that data retained while DCs are not? I don't know if it's ever been specified before.
Bring back old nurse!
And suddenly most "casual enjoyers" will demand harsh regulations and strict balancing.
Take it from someone who remembers the days before DC penalties were a thing, YES WE NEED SOME FORM OF DC PENALTIES. They used to DC for the most frivolous of reasons EVERY DAMN GAME! You think it's bad now, BY THE ENTITY, every game used to be ruined by the first downed.
maybe a half way house to mitigate the sentiments for what @Cornil is saying could be if, when let’s say two people DC and there are bots (and they get the dc penalties) the remaining two survivors and the killer, could have the option to exit the match without penalties if for example it is still at 4 gens or above.
I’m pretty sure stats would probably show that games with two bots at 4+ gens is going to be an exercise in futility. Maybe only at this point, the game could give an in game voting system where everyone or the majority can elect to abandon without penalties?
probably still has flaws but just throwing it out as a possibility
Because DCs will increase to insane levels. You said yourself you don't want to play with bots and should be allow to DC if other players DC. A lot of people already DC and just take the penalty. It would increase massively if dc penalty was removed.
As for game balance, it has always, still is and likely always will be an absolute mess. An asymmetric game will always be impossible to perfectly balance. So saying the devs "refuse" to balance it is a bit unfair. Doesn't help they churn out a new killer and new survivor perks every months, but have to keep that money rolling in. Unfortunately it's just something qe hsve to tolerate of we want to play.
I do get the frustration, believe me. Dbd can be a very frustrating game when you're on a loss/death streak. As killer I find myself having to either play constant meta builds and strong killers, or play like scrub and hardtunnel/proxy camp to win games with less meta builds or weaker killers. But that is the nature of the game. You really don't help yourself by only playing soloq. Soloq is famously bad for survivors, no communication plus random often useless teammates means you'll die in the vast majority of your games. Swf would be much more pleasant, find 2 or 3 friends to run with and you'll have better luck and probably more fun, having ppl to chat with makes losses a bit less unpleasant.
All the people who say DC penalties aren't need in shambles
This is going to be fixed next patch
https://app.betahub.io/projects/pr-5642738318/issues/4597
"why can't I just give survivors the win and DC?"
I like how you start by saying the penalty hasn't reduced the amount of DCs, then say the penalty stops you from DCing lol
Well it was interesting him to state after @Balrog told him the reason that he does not think it effected the overtall numbers when told by mod that it indeed effects numbers so it then effects overall numbers too as overall numbers include all DC's. I also don't get what other DC's he thinks there is as any other form of DC that can happen is server crashing. Like it just seems to be the classical denial when told person is wrong they try to downplay it to make themselves feel correct when normal person would take the information and realize that their statement is wrong.
I’m not entirely sure if this is what you’re referring to, but it’s false that you have to keep the game running to make the penalty go down.
You do need to ‘activate’ the penalty by attempting to queue before it starts ticking down, tho.
I don't think its unfair to say "refuse" when we haven't had a meaningful perk rework or balancing change since the Trickster chapter refresh, and that was just a handful of perks from that chapter basically. One of which was entirely problematic and had to be reworked again, and another one of which a lot of players still complain about (self-preservation)
We wouldn't need to work the game around disconnect penalties and abandon options if the game were in a healthy enough state for the average player to not become miserable or bored in the middle of a match. Eventually it happens for so many games in a row that they just want to Alt-F4 and play something else. That's all I'm saying. The balancing will never be perfect, but I can literally remember a time not so long ago where there were not this many disconnects in my games. Even going as far back as before the penalties we have now.
You can have a casual game with strict balancing. No one booting up Call of Duty Black Ops Zombies back in 2011 was sitting there complaining that there should be disconnect penalties, or how you should get a temporary ban for throwing a game, going afk, buying the wrong door at the start of the game, or anything else. I'm sure you'd agree to define CoD Zombies as casual. Okay, now imagine all of the balancing decisions that actually went into making the gamemode by Treyarch and Activision. There's a point system, getting normal kills or knife kills gives different point amounts, every weapon has a different point purchase value, every gun had to have a different damage value that wasn't just copied and pasted from the campaign or multiplayer. Thousands of different possible influences on the flow of gameplay. Many guns were made purposefully bad but had unique uses when upgraded. Its a great example of the intricacies of even a simple, casual game.
Balancing is just as important in casual games as it is in competitive games. Not in the same seriousness and nature of a competitive game, where the goal of balancing is to make a fair playing field of opportunities, kinda like a game of chess. But in the nature of making the experience and interactions of your opportunities equally viable. I've complained numerous times that the main problem of DbD's "metas" throughout its history is that the pool of viable perks was always infinitely smaller than the actual ocean of perks we had. Currently we have over 170 survivor perks and you're lucky to see 20 unique perks used in 20 different matches. There are already categories of perks (aura reading, exhaustion, action speed, etc), the goal of balancing DbD should be on making all the perks in these categories equally powerful in whatever their given use is, of course depending on if its niche or general. If every perk had close to an equal value across the match dead hard or decisive strike both bring, then maybe you'd see a lot less decisive strike and dead hard. Monotony is the death of fun. Just ask anyone who has a "two week minecraft phase" lol, even something you absolutely love and enjoy can quickly grow old if you hammer at it long enough with no variety.
May have to agree to disagree but I think it is unfair. Perks get tweaked and reworked regularly enough.
Dead hard, distortion, eruption, hex:ruin, hex:TOTH, deerstalker, sloppy butcher, boon circle of healing, made for this. These are just the ones that I can think of offhand that have been reworked to be improved or nerfed.
For a game that has been going 10 years and adds 3-6 new perks every few months the balance is going to be an absolute nightmare. That goes double for an asymmetric game.
And again, you play soloq , there is no theoretical way that bhvr can balance the game to be fair for soloq survs and not ruin it for killers up against good swfs. And vice versa.
To put it simply. Do we need a DC penalty? Absolutely. Are there reasons why people DC and that we should address those? Also absolutely. Are those reasons to DC an argument to loosen or drop the DC penalty? Absolutely not. Realistically, it's simply unfeasible to address every single pain point that players have with the game and using it as a means to stop DC's is just silly. Eventually people are going to have to understand that Dead By Daylight at it's core is kind of a frustrating game.