Senaxu
Senaxu
About
- Username
- Senaxu
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@hermitkermit said:
I highly recommend the video Hens just posted about it. I feel the people that are belittling her abilities or strength simply don't quite understand how to play her, or they are just heavily biased. She is very strong and will likely see changes soon as she is too much right now.
I agree.
If Nurse were released today, plenty of people would complain that the killer is too weak. Unfortunately, many players expect to be getting consistent 4Ks after their first five matches at the latest.If that doesn’t happen, the calls for buffs follow.. same old story.
This killer actually has very high potential, and if things stay as they are, we’ll see it over the next few weeks as people min/max the mechanics.
-
@runningguy said:
so killers can see hook states so now they know who to tartget. off the record gets nerfed…. can even tunnel a slug to get them to abandon. another speed killer added to the roster to help hook returning to tunnel.
what exactly is this update supposed to be saying?
The update basically says: don’t play solo-queue Survivor; grab the new DLC and a couple of skins, then queue as Killer.
And, from a sales perspective, that playbook works every time. -
Honestly, I find it hard to believe that so many changes were pushed by accident. It feels more like a marketing beat tied to the new Killer… even for a non-licensed chapter.
Sales tend to take priority; that’s just the reality.
I’d be surprised if adjustments of this scale were purely unintentional.
What I do appreciate in the update: the gens look cleaner now with those yellow cones. Beyond that, not much to praise. -
This isn’t about feelings, it’s about other people’s time. In a single-player game you can rage-quit whenever.
In a 5-stack lobby you carry four other players’ match with you.
If the system is lax, it will be abused: wrong map, wrong killer, short first chase, early gen → DC, run into the killer, or suicide on first hook. We all know the script.What a sane policy looks like:
- Treat all throws the same: early DC, deliberate hook suicide, intentional match throw → same flag.
- One courtesy exception in a rolling window (crash, power cut, real life, bad day). After that, queue-served lockouts: start 15 min at the 2nd offense, then 30/60+ for patterns.
- Active countdown only (client open). No passive timeout while you play something else → that should stay that way
- Sliding forgiveness: successful completed games slowly clear penalties…earn your way back.
Protect the lobby from people who treat multiplayer like a disposable single-player run.
If that level of accountability kills your fun, that’s okay… the door is open at any point. Just don’t make four strangers pay your tab every time you “go next.”
-
Hot take: this thread is mostly role tribalism + negativity bias….
Ten smooth matches vanish behind one miserable one, and the loudest outrage sets the agenda.Let’s be honest about extremes:
- Some killer-only players would be happiest if survivors spawned slugged and only needed carrying to hooks.
- Some survivor-only players would love 3 gens at 2× speed.
Both would call that “balance” because it serves them. You can’t design for those edges and keep the game healthy.What would actually move the needle:
- Close SWF ↔ Solo. Basekit Kindred-lite (hooked broadcast), a global anti-camp meter, simple perk info of others while loading in, plus a ping wheel. Then separate MMR by party size (solo/swf) and tune KR per bracket. Stop pretending comms don’t exist.
- Punish sabotage, not roles. Early DC(chase to short, gen to fast)/suicide/AFK = one courtesy pass, then queue-served lockouts (start 15 min at the 2nd offense, escalate to 60+). Tighten AFK thresholds; right now the system is more forgiving than a year ago.
- Ship a minimal, low-abuse iteration instead of stalling months. Trim haste/anti-tunnel values (≤10%), no “crawl+recover” abuse.
- Compensate killers when Solo QoL rises. If you fix Solo parity, buff or rework the killers that actually need it. Balance the system, not someone’s favorite fantasy.
- Publish the data (KR by party size, DC rates, tunneling/slug flags). Kill the speculation loop.
Design for the middle 80%. Fix SWF-Solo, punish griefing, expose data. Not the volume of complaints matters… the content does.
-
@Birken13 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996436#Comment_3996436
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/91CKG3ADJCT7/sk-c3-a4rmbild-2025-09-05-144157.png
You uploaded the wrong one. It should be the file just called "DeadByDaylight".
Also, bug reports work better on the support site than the forums. On the forums they usually only ask for that one file, but on the support site they want every file in the folder.
You fill out a quick automated form, then a support agent replies, sometimes within hours or a couple of days.
The nice part is they always confirm by thanking you, repeating your report details, and letting you know they’ll look into it. Unlike the forums, you know for sure your report has been seen.
Thank you, I dont regually do bug reports and this one is an exception. I have edited my comment
-
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
It's such a shame. I hadn't encountered blatant cheating in months but in the past two days I've seen five :(
Two of them were the same cheater, but still. I wonder why they've decided to all come out of the woodwork now.
The cheaters were never truly gone… there’s simply no real protection in place. Sometimes you get lucky and don’t notice them for months, other times it’s several in a single day.
And pointing it out has never moved the needle; just look at the recent Walking Dead stream. An apology was made, but nothing changed.
The only thing BHVR reacts to are numbers…. when sales dip, alarms go off. Until then, complaints alone won’t make a difference. -
Appreciate the apology, but the core issue wasn’t the livestream… it was that a 2017 PvP title can still be taken down this easily in 2025. Without concrete protection measures, the next event will end the same way, just with different names in the lobby.
-
I really wanted this crossover to be a defining moment… not just for Dead by Daylight fans, but for the franchise itself. Getting Chandler Riggs (Carl from The Walking Dead) into a SwF stream with Otzdarva was exactly the kind of event that could've drawn fresh eyes, new players, and some well-deserved respect.
Instead, the lobby got DDoS’d, matchmaking imploded, and the so-called “security” blind spot was exposed for all to see. No firewall, no validation, no plan: clients, not servers, hold the keys to destruction. That’s less “puzzle game horror” and more “amateur hour network terror.”
Look, this is a game that’s thrived since 2017… with ranked matchmaking, a growing meta, but still zero reliable cheat protection. That’s not shocking. It’s tragic. It’s as if the developers need to be dragged out of denial by sheer embarrassment before lifting a finger to protect the game.
I want DBD to become a masterpiece, to grow into something players are proud of and excited to recommend. But right now, shoddy security tarnishes every content drop and ruins every big event. If even a celebrity livestream can be tanked by a handful of spectators, what chance does a normal lobby have?
Please, Behaviour: treat your players like the MMR-based system you claim to have.. punish toxicity, yes… but also protect the integrity of your game. Because right now, DBD looks more like a sitting duck than a horror icon.
-
just dont play survivor anymore. why stress yourself. Just join killer, you will be better off
-
If you've taken a break from DBD for a few years, let me reassure you… not much has changed. The anti-cheat system is still just as effective as you remember it: virtually nonexistent.
The only real difference is the volume of cheaters. They're more creative now, and apparently more plentiful. So if you decide to take another break and come back again in a few years, don't worry… you'll be greeted by the exact same experience.
Only with new skins and higher MMR frustration. -
The recent spike in killer queue times isn’t surprising. Solo queue survivor gameplay is currently in a pretty rough spot… whether it’s the overall event experience or going up against Kaneki, who still feels unbalanced and unfun for many.
Instead of addressing core survivor enjoyment, BHVR doubled down by adding more “incentives” like the final 15-trial requirement in Tome 5… after we’ve already completed the prior quest chains. It feels more like desperation than motivation.
If you’re trying to push engagement, maybe start by making the game fun to play.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3958303#Comment_3958303
And no Blight, Nurse, Ghoul, or Skully would ever get a match again. The matchmaking system is already ragged enough as it is, but as much as I like the idea (especially regarding accessibility issues like phobias or neurological issues, since many still remain in the game) even a single ban per lobby would make the matchmaking system even worse than it already is.
Just to clarify: the idea isn't to block multiple killers or to make matchmaking collapse under its own weight. It’s a personal opt-out system for one single killer per player (swf lobbies excluded). This means even if a killer is widely disliked, they will still find games… just not with the subset of players who genuinely struggle or burn out against them.
And yes, as the original post suggested, this generates valuable indirect feedback. If a specific killer receives a high volume of personal bans, that data could act as a non-verbal protest signal… very much like how ragequits or hook suicides once indicated frustration levels. But instead of disrupting games, it quietly informs future balance without damaging MMR integrity or punishing others in the match.
Plus, fallback logic would return players to normal matchmaking after a short time to avoid excessive wait times. The system wouldn't be perfect, but it could be a more respectful way of giving players breathing room while still allowing developers to monitor discomfort trends objectively.
-
One alternative to ragequitting or forced hook suicides could be a personal killer opt-out system integrated into matchmaking. Each player could be allowed to exclude one specific killer from their matchmaking pool… the one they personally struggle with the most, whether it's due to mechanics, frustration, or just playstyle incompatibility.
This would give survivors a constructive outlet rather than disengaging entirely. It also respects individual boundaries without overhauling balance. To prevent abuse in SWF, the opt-out could be limited to just one collective exclusion per group, ensuring it remains fair and doesn’t overly fragment matchmaking.
It won’t solve everything, but it would reduce burnout and give players back a sense of agency… especially during events or meta shifts where one killer becomes disproportionately dominant.
-
Even if a truly effective server-side anti-cheat were implemented… which frankly feels about as likely as winning the lottery…
I suspect the outcome would mirror what we've seen with the DC and AFK systems: a flood of complaints from players claiming false bans, simply because the number of subtle cheaters is likely far higher than most assume.At this point, cheating feels almost woven into the DNA of DBD → like rust in an old machine. You can repaint the surface, but the core issue remains. That’s not meant to sound cynical for its own sake, but rather to reflect the reality many of us see match after match.
-
@Dem34888 said:
They said on their stream before the anniversary that they are already starting/doing something in this regard, I hope that this is not empty chatter and they will really make an anti-cheat that will finally ban these bitches for ruining people's games
However, I am again wary that this does not start shooting innocent people, as they already did for the sake of the tick with the "anti go-next" penalty
The variety of cheats is simply amazing:
They can literally overload the server so that everyone's ping starts to increase 😑
Survs can become invisible (probably the cheat uses the vekna's eye mechanics)
They can take away pips from your rank 😑
They can increase your DC penalty time 😑
They can increase the surv hitbox (probably using the twins perk mechanics)?
They can start spamming an action like killing survivors with the entity, like when the collapse ends
What makes the game crash for everyone 😑
They can block the killer's hook so (s)he can't hook survivor 😑
They can increase vault speed 😑
They can insta escape
They can insta repair a generator
And a bunch more…
Basically from the list - we can state that in this garbage game there is no anti-cheat in principle, because most cheats use game mechanics for which there are simply no basic checks on whether the perk is present at all for the player or restrictions and verification with perks for the speed of vaulting for the player, as well as haste without the corresponding effectThey said on their stream before the anniversary that they are already starting/doing something in this regard
It's true that they mentioned on stream that action is being taken… but realistically, we’re probably looking at another glorified ban wave: a one-time sweep based on updated parameters, not a sustainable system.
What would truly change the landscape is real-time behavioral analysis, but that requires consistent infrastructure, competence, and long-term commitment. As of now, there's little to suggest that kind of system is in active development.Until then, it's likely just another cycle: tweak, detect, ban,.. wait for cheats to adapt → repeat.
-
Even if a truly effective server-side anti-cheat were implemented… which frankly feels about as likely as winning the lottery…
I suspect the outcome would mirror what we've seen with the DC and AFK systems: a flood of complaints from players claiming false bans, simply because the number of subtle cheaters is likely far higher than most assume.At this point, cheating feels almost woven into the DNA of DBD → like rust in an old machine. You can repaint the surface, but the core issue remains. That’s not meant to sound cynical for its own sake, but rather to reflect the reality many of us see match after match.
-
Alternative to the Current DC Penalty: Behavior-Based Matchmaking
Instead of punishing disconnects with time-based penalties, I believe the system could be improved by introducing behavior-based matchmaking.
Here’s how it could work:
- The game tracks how often a player disconnects over their last 20 matches.
- Players with a high disconnect rate (e.g., 6 or more out of 20) are primarily matched with others who have a similar DC frequency.
- Conversely, players with little to no disconnects would only be matched with similarly reliable teammates and opponents.
This would achieve a few things:
- It removes the need for strict lockout timers or queue delays.
- It naturally groups players with similar play intentions and levels of commitment.
- It protects fair players from those who frequently leave matches, while not entirely blocking anyone from playing.
The goal isn't to punish… it's to create a better experience for everyone. Ragequitters won’t ruin games for others, and reliable players can enjoy cleaner matches. Over time, this might even encourage better behavior simply by showing the difference in match quality.
I think this could be a healthier and more scalable alternative to time-based DC penalties.
-
I really like the suggestion. it highlights a broader issue in solo queue: lack of access to basic information. Letting solo players view killer builds after dying would save time and clarify what happened, especially when something unexpected throws the match. It’s not about gaining an edge, just understanding the game you were part of.
More generally, solo queue could use passive tools that SWFs share naturally → like a basekit version of Kindred to show teammate positions and the anti-camp meter. It wouldn’t erase the SWF advantage but would make solo play less punishing.
Right now, some perks like "Hex: Third Seal" or heavy stealth disproportionately hurt solo players. And it makes balancing killers or mechanics tricky, because survivors aren’t all playing under the same conditions.
If DBD wants to support both casual and competitive players long-term, improving the solo experience isn’t just helpful: it’s necessary.
-
Absolutely agree, this event has brought out some of the worst sides of the game. Tunneling and slugging are rampant, and Ghoul in particular has shown up in match after match. Whether it’s synergy with the event mechanics or just low-effort power, he seems to be everywhere in my matches right now. Whatever the cause, the fun factor has taken a serious hit… especially for solo survivors.
On top of that, I’ve noticed more killers bringing personal Bloodpoint offerings while all four survivors run event cakes. That’s... not a good look. If I see that in the loading screen, I’ll simply close the game. No tolerance left for that kind of self-serving play, especially during an event designed to reward the whole lobby. Enjoy the next 15-minute queue.
-
Interesting trend overall. I’ve mostly been playing solo Survivor during the event period, and my matches were definitely on the rougher side… especially with how frequently Ghoul appeared (sometimes 5+ times in a row). That alone can skew stats a bit, especially for solo queue.
What’s also worth noting is that the official DBD stats page records abandoned matches as escapes. So when you get slugged at 5 gens, abandon, and the killer bleeds everyone out, the stats will still show that as an “escape”… which obviously doesn’t reflect what actually happened. Internally, MMR treats it as a loss, but the public-facing number misleads both players and analytics.
That might explain why some escape rates seem inflated lately. If that behavior continues across the board, it’ll be difficult to interpret the data meaningfully… especially when combined with other extreme match conditions introduced by this year’s event.
-
@SpringMyTrap said:
Ghoul would need a bunch of buffs to make up for that, but I wouldnt mind seeing him balanced without the free tag.
Maybe instead of a free injury it's a less free but m2 hit nonetheless on injured people unless they have endurance.
But personally, I think they need to bugfix this mess of a killer first before doing major changes, we still have the hens kidnap tech working and Im starting to get worried it's actually an intended feature.
If the plan is to buff Ghoul even further, maybe we should also start prepping survivor bots for the main role… because soon nobody will be left to play it.
Ghoul shows up in 6 out of 10 of my matches right now, and unlike Nurse or Blight, he doesn’t require months of practice to be oppressive. You learn him, you loop once, you delete.
He's arguably faster than most top-tier killers, has almost no downside, and rewards aggressive play with little risk. That combo is already pushing people off the survivor role.
If that’s the intended future, then hey… maybe killer queue times will finally teach balance by themselves. -
Ghoul clearly need some buffs. double the range and instant downs. thats some start
-
@Zuiphrode said:
There's literally no gameplay reason to do so other than teabagging which is toxic behavior. I'd like for teabagging to just be bannable entirely under the poor sportsmanship report reason but that'll never happen so I'll settle for this.
Whether it’s teabagging at the exit gate or humping a downed survivor… it’s the same mental blueprint.
If that’s the best someone has to offer, there’s really not much going on upstairs.
Keeping that in mind makes it easier to just shrug and move on… you can't take people seriously who treat basic movement spam as peak entertainment. -
Cheating is a daily reality in this game (screen from today) and that’s not going to change anytime soon.
Sure, we might see occasional ban waves and a sprinkle of hopeful optimism, but let’s be honest: this game has been around since 2017, and it still lacks even the most basic server-side validation. That’s a hard fact.
Until that changes, cheaters will continue to slip through… and players will keep paying the price. -
Honestly, I feel like some parts of this community have grown extremely thin-skinned over the years. The moment consequences are introduced for behavior that actively harms others, it's seen as "too harsh."
If the DC penalty would be removed entirely, let's be real → maybe 1 in 10 matches would actually finish with five real players. Any slightly "undesirable" match condition (wrong killer, wrong map, early down, fast gen, etc.) would be reason enough to leave.
The current system might not be perfect, but it adds a minimum layer of accountability in a shared multiplayer experience. And by the way: the crow/AFK system was just adjusted in the most recent patch… longer timers, softer accumulation, full resets after interaction.
So maybe the real issue isn't how unforgiving the penalty is... but how little tolerance some players have when things don’t go their way.
-
Respectfully, I have to disagree.
Dead by Daylight is… at its core… a multiplayer game. That naturally means that every match we play is a shared experience. And with that shared experience comes a certain level of responsibility towards our fellow players, something that is often underestimated or simply ignored.
In the past, DC penalties would automatically decay over time. This led to a pattern where some players would essentially treat a daily DC as a "free pass":
- "I haven’t DC’d yet today, and this match isn’t fun, so I’ll just quit."
- "It’s getting late, I’ll be off soon anyway – no point sticking this one out."
The system was exploitable, and people took advantage of that. That’s not what a penalty is supposed to be… something that resets just by waiting.
Now, under the new system, the penalty only decays through actual participation. Yes, it’s a bit stricter. But it also makes quitting less convenient… and that’s precisely the point. You’re no longer rewarded for stepping away after a rage-DC. You need to play and complete matches. That seems like a fair baseline expectation in a shared gaming environment.
I understand the frustration… especially in edge cases, like being held hostage or facing blatant cheaters. I’ve been there myself. But even then, I personally choose to record, report, and move on. I rarely encounter DC penalties, because when I truly don’t enjoy a match, I finish it and then simply close the game. It’s okay to take a break.
If someone finds themselves frequently in matches they don’t want to finish… maybe it’s worth reflecting on whether the game is still delivering what they’re looking for. In that case, perhaps it's not the penalty system that needs reevaluation – but the relationship with the game itself.
And as a final note: if someone’s unhappy with the direction the game is heading, continuing to pour hundreds into cosmetics while simultaneously demanding reform probably sends a mixed message. Just food for thought.
-
I can confirm the issue.
On my P100 Steve, I consistently get only 1–2 event items per level 50 Bloodweb… typically a random gift box and maybe a flashlight. Bloodpoint-related items like Scream Pies seem extremely rare compared to my experience on lower-prestige survivors.For example, here’s a screenshot of a level 15 Bloodweb on my P20 Feng… already containing three different event items.
That’s a stark contrast to what I see at level 50 on Steve.
Something about the spawn logic feels skewed against high-prestige survivors.
-
The sad truth is: Cheaters exist, and DBD has never had real server-side validation to stop them.
Most actions… gen progress, healing, even parts of movement… are still handled client-side, which leaves the door wide open for manipulation.It's not a desync. It's not "just lag." It's 2025 and we're still trusting the player's machine.
And after eight years, it's hard to believe that’s ever going to change.So while we keep reporting, the only real fix would be rebuilding the netcode from scratch.
But let’s be honest… if it hasn’t happened yet, it probably never will. -
@Bad_Medicine said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3951329#Comment_3951329
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QFSTIJABF2GF/30-day-surv-stats.png
Here's from the past 30 days, and there were several days where I just didn't play because the game got so intensely frustrating, and then it was actually pretty fun on June 23rd, so I racked up 21 Survivor rounds (same with June 17th, throw in some Huntress rounds as well, but those aren't shown here).
It's just gotten worse over the past 3-4 months Survivor side, though. Sell-outs (and Killers playing to them and giving them Hatch) have increased exponentially. MMR is at the worst I've seen it since I started playing, not just between Survivor and Killer, but among your teammates. If I'm playing with my duo (which usually doesn't go much better than solo q) it's not uncommon to get a Killer that comfortably matches our skill level, but our teammates are babies who are petrified of terror radius which isn't their fault, the tutorial is buns, and this is not a new player friendly game. It's still intensely frustrating and best case scenario one of us gets Hatch. Or, we get a Killer who is obviously new, they're not comfortable with that Killer's power, they're clearly having a rough time, our teammates are jerks and bag at the gates, and my duo and I stay behind to give them Hooks and a Mori. Then we might get a game where everyone is pretty evenly matched, and things could go either way at a moment's notice, and it's tense and engaging and win or lose we savor these rounds because they're fun and it feels like they've become extraordinarily rare. Then it's four rounds in a row where the Killer's losecon is apparently 'let 2 gens pop' and everyone is dead, even without anyone trying to go next or DC, at 4 gens.
This experience is not unique to me. Not even a little bit. It feels like BHVR decided to implement this system without bothering to ask or address why people were going next in the first place because yes, some people are going to ragequit out because they don't like the map or the Killer. They're going to throw a tantrum because their first chase didn't go well. They'll quit on first hook even if it is their first hook and everyone is still alive and there are only 2 gens left and the game was perfectly winnable and now I'm screaming internally because, "Thanks for doing that, now we're screwed."
And then there are the games where I feel utterly helpless and hopeless because there is no way we are going to win. Maybe for the fifth time this month I am being punished for not maining a cute girl when the Jill/Meg/Mikaela/Sable gives their item to the Killer, sells me out, and they spend several minutes griefing me (no, I'm not making this up, it really is that bad, and I'm not the only one who's posted about it) before finally actually killing me, and then the sell-out is given Hatch.
Oh look, the Trapper brought an offering for Basement in Shack, and they're not just a Basement Trapper, they're a Gaff Trapper. Anyone who tries to come and get me is walking into more of a death trap than with the usual Basement Trapper, so I need to give my teammates no one to come and save (when you could actually go next). Cue one of the randoms flashlighting/shaking their head at me before unhooking, and then stepping in one of the string of traps the Killer set up leading up from the Basement and out of Shack while I was being 'scolded'. Soon EVERYONE is going next in the Basement!
Oh, this Knight is targeting me specifically right out the gate, Renato FTP'd me and Meg tried to take hits when he came after me right off the Hook but he completely ignored Meg and he's an Assassin spammer, now I'm deep wounded, can't Dead Hard, and the Killer brought a pre-nerf offering for his best map, I'm 13 seconds off the Hook, down again, and going to Basement.
...so, basically, rounds that felt utterly helpless and hopeless and frustrating far beyond the emotional bandwidth I have left to spare. Not a fickle, "Eh, not feeling it," but, "This is utterly miserable, I feel like I'm a plaything in someone's kill-streak and/or 'This build makes Survivors give up!' video," sort of thing.
And I refuse to be one of those jerks (and there are a LOT more of them, now, since they can't go next!) who goes around throwing every pallet in the map, so now here I am, glad I have over 200 Vigo's Jars of Go Next, and if, god forbid, I thought to bring a BP offering because there was more than a meager 25% bonus and it's another Springtrap whose losecon is "2 gens popped," I can't make myself play well that round no matter how hard I try because I know I'm trapped. No go next, and the DC penalty "overhaul" is buggy and atrocious, too.
I appreciate the depth of your reflection. You’re clearly someone who cares deeply about the game, and that alone matters.
That said, I think it’s worth distinguishing between systemic failure and systemic inconvenience. A system that occasionally misfires under edge cases isn’t necessarily broken… especially when it's designed to curb chronic, widespread behavior like early match throwing.
Frustration from being tunneled or facing uncoordinated teammates isn’t new, nor is it exclusive to this patch. But a playerbase that normalizes quitting when things feel unfavorable is new… and dangerous.
In the end, the issue may not be that the system overcorrects… but that too many players were underperforming the spirit of a multiplayer game for too long.
-
@Bad_Medicine said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3951319#Comment_3951319
I would like to ask how this system is not broken when I was doing everything right and was still punished by its shoddy implementation.
I unhooked and healed.
I was doing gens.
I engaged in chase.
I was trying to advance objectives, even though we clearly were not winning that Trial.
I followed all of the "rules". Every single one. And my "reward" for doing so was to be given the non-choice of being forced to just hang on the Hook for over two minutes unable to do anything until I died, or Abandon the match and lose progress on a Tome Challenge I had finally completed after being stuck on it for over a week. And, if your answer for everyone unfairly affected by this system is to take their ball and leave? Then you can kiss a huge chunk of the Survivor playerbase goodbye, especially those of us being unfairly punished, and you can enjoy your ever lengthening Killer queues.
Appreciate your perspective, let me offer a different experience
I've logged around 20 hours of Survivor gameplay since the implementation of the AFK and Go-next prevention update.
Like you, I’ve occasionally been tunneled early, hooked quickly, and at times had minimal time to “perform.” Yet despite this, I haven’t received a single penalty, no crows, no warnings, nothing. That’s my anecdotal experience, but it leads me to believe the system may factor in more than just one isolated match.
As with the DC penalties, which take into account a rolling window of multiple games (e.g. the last 20), it wouldn’t be surprising if the same applied here. If true, then a single frustrating match may not be the true trigger, but rather a pattern.
Was the video you shared representative of a streak of games with similarly brief or low-impact participation? And on a related note: wasn’t the “go next” penalty already temporarily disabled?
Personally, I found this patch one of the most player-positive updates since I started playing back in 2018. Bloodpoint spending is now intuitive and fast, matchmaking feels slightly more stable, and… at least in my matches, I’ve seen far fewer DCs and game throws. I absolutely sympathize if your experience was different, but I think it’s important to differentiate between individual moments of frustration and systemic failure.
Would love to hear more if there’s ongoing evidence of consistent misbehavior by the system.
-
It’s rarely the rules that break the game… it’s how people choose to respond to them."
I’ve watched the video and I appreciate that it illustrates a sentiment many have recently voiced: frustration. But I believe the underlying issue here isn’t mechanical or systemic… it’s behavioral.
When players deliberately AFK, refuse healing, or run straight into the Killer out of protest, the question must be asked: is it the game that’s failing… or is it the reaction to not getting one’s preferred outcome?
Imagine a group of students in a university course. In past semesters, if they didn’t like an assignment, they could simply skip it without consequences. Now, the university introduces a rule: if you skip work, your final grade is affected. In response, a few students stop attending class entirely, sit silently in protest during group work, and tell others the system is "unfair"… not because the new rule is broken, but because it removed their ability to ignore responsibility without impact.
This isn’t an educational failure. It’s resistance to basic accountability.
Dead by Daylight, like any multiplayer experience, is shaped not just by its rules… but by its participants. The new go-next prevention system doesn’t punish creativity or freedom; it simply asks for the bare minimum of engagement. And if that’s seen as an imposition, it might be worth reflecting… as kindly as possible… on whether one’s time might be better spent elsewhere.
Just something to consider.
-
@Oputeeva said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3950670#Comment_3950670
I'm not going to leave my PC open with the game and wait for the penalty to end, thereby reducing the resource of my PC to please the comp killer players of DBD, to whom the devs listen, thereby spoiling the game to please you comp players, take a rest please and don't create meaningless suggestions
Well, I believe we’ve reached a rather revealing point in this discussion.
If the mere expectation of staying logged in to serve a minor penalty is seen as "spoiling the game," then perhaps the problem isn't the penalty system, but the attitude toward multiplayer responsibility. I understand that Dead by Daylight isn't a traditional competitive title… but it's still a shared experience, and one's personal convenience shouldn't outweigh the experience of four other players.
So no, I don’t think asking people to remain logged in for the duration of their penalty is unreasonable. It's not about "pleasing comp players"… it's about respecting the premise of multiplayer fairness, however casual the setting may be.
And if that still feels too demanding… maybe the problem isn't the game.
-
In discussions like these, I believe it's worth stepping back and looking at the broader dynamics that shape how different game communities handle concepts like disconnection and penalty enforcement.
In games such as Dota 2 or League of Legends, there's an implicit "contractual culture" at play: when you queue, you’re agreeing to engage in a full strategic session where every player's contribution is critical to the team’s success or failure. This creates not only mechanical, but moral pressure to stay committed.
Dead by Daylight (DBD), in contrast, grew in a fragmented, exploit-prone environment. Early on, the absence of hardcoded systems to prevent behavior like slugging, infinite loops, or hostage-taking meant that many "rules" emerged socially, not through game design. Over time, this cultivated a rulebook-by-consensus culture, where players felt entitled to define what counts as fair or acceptable.
When Behavior now enforces hard systems like Go-Next penalties, it clashes with that informal social legacy. Some see it as reclaiming structure; others see it as authoritarian overreach.
The irony is: both perspectives are valid in isolation. But structurally, a multiplayer game cannot thrive long-term with optional responsibility. If exit behavior (disconnecting, sandbagging, etc.) becomes normalized, the meta collapses… not because of mechanics, but due to eroded expectations. Consistency in enforcement isn’t about punishment, but about preserving mutual trust in the match contract.
Personally, I believe stricter enforcement… like the "active queue serving" system used in LoL → may feel harsh, but ultimately promotes healthier long-term behavior. It signals: "If you choose to play, you also choose to stay."
Whether DBD remains a “casual horror party game” or matures into a truly competitive platform depends on which of these two cultural forces ends up shaping its identity.
-
@Oputeeva said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3950652#Comment_3950652
Dear friend, it's DBD, not some comp League game (but they are balanced and no bugs like in DBD), DBD was always half casual unique game for me..
Well, I respectfully disagree, friend.
Dead by Daylight is still a multiplayer game… one with a hidden MMR system and shared player experience. While I agree that the cheating issue is a serious and unique problem in DBD, that doesn’t exempt it from requiring a certain level of responsibility toward other players.
Regularly disrupting the experience for others should carry consequences, and personally, I think the idea of having to actively sit out a penalty in the queue is a fair and effective approach. That’s just my subjective opinion, of course… but I do hope BHVR also takes these kinds of perspectives into account when refining the system.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3950555#Comment_3950555
Wow. Okay, I didn't know other games forced you to keep the game open for the timer to count down. Learn something new every day.
Thank you very much for answering my question!
Just to add some perspective from other PvP games: In League of Legends (by Riot Games), one of the most popular competitive games worldwide, the penalty system is even stricter. After multiple disconnections, you're required to actively sit through a low-priority queue timer before you can play again.
For example, if you receive a 25-minute queue penalty and leave the queue even 1 minute before it ends, the entire timer resets back to 25 minutes. It gets even harsher… if you're in queue and someone else fails to accept the match (which you have no control over), the timer still resets.
Switching accounts doesn’t bypass the penalty either… the punishment remains until it's fully served, even if that takes months.
So yes, while the DC system in DBD might feel harsh to some, other games enforce even more rigid systems to discourage quitting or negative behavior.
-
Let’s take a step back here.
The original post raises some fair concerns about how the AFK system feels in specific scenarios… especially in stealth play, Grim Embrace interactions, or Head-On setups. And it’s okay to voice that. But as Mandy clarified, crows don’t spawn after just 10 seconds… that’s when the inactivity score begins accumulating. The crow appears at 60s if there's insufficient game progress, and even then, it doesn't notify the killer.This is important because a lot of frustration seems rooted in misinformation… or at least a lack of clarity. There is room to refine the system, and many (myself included) think BHVR could do a better job at explaining the underlying mechanics:
It likely works on an internal “Progress Score” that drops when you’re idle or unproductive and increases when you contribute (gens, chases, totems, etc.). That’s why even short moments of inactivity can trigger a crow if your recent activity was low. This system discourages prolonged passivity… not thoughtful stealth or rotation.We should also acknowledge that on Reddit, feedback around the crow system has been actually positive, even among survivors. Many welcome the idea in principle → they just want it tuned properly. That’s very different from the “scrap it entirely” tone that’s louder in these forums.
Let’s be real:
→ It’s not killer-sided.
→ It’s not survivor-sided.
→ It’s an iterative system aimed at improving game integrity and discouraging extreme outliers..AFKing in corners, giving up early, or hiding the entire match.Does that mean it’s perfect? No.
But constructive dialogue will get us further than shouting “biased devs” or mocking one another for liking or disliking a feature. We can all have preferences… just don’t bury the facts beneath frustration. -
-
Personally, I haven't had any issues with the new DC or AFK penalty system so far… I haven’t even received a single crow since the patch. Still, I’m genuinely interested in the topic, as I’ve seen a growing number of players reporting problems.
What surprises me is that despite so many people claiming to be affected, I haven’t really come across any solid video footage clearly showing how these situations actually unfold. For example, I'd be very interested in seeing gameplay clips that show at least 2 minutes leading up to a crow spawn… or footage just before a DC penalty is triggered.
So far, the only thing I’ve seen is that recent video by Dawko (the FNaF YouTuber), but I'd really appreciate more concrete examples beyond that. If these cases are truly as common as people say, it would be helpful to have more documented examples… both for the community and potentially even for the dev team.
If anyone here has such footage, feel free to share it here in the forum… I think it could bring some much-needed clarity to the discussion.
-
@IrisLP said:
This is the second time this story has happened to me.The randoms are letting themselves die anyway, bringing a lucky offering (or using slippery meat) and killing themselves on the hook. What happened? I'll narrate one of the games.
Situation: We were 3 left with 2 gens. The map: Forgotten Ruins.I finished a gen (1 gen left to repair). There's a survivor hanging below, but he's already giving up the game, so he uses his attempts in the first phase (he put a lucky offering and starts using his attempts to reach the second phase, and he succeeds). I see through Empathy that my other teammate is going to rescue him, so I proceed to look for another gen, but surprise, my teammate is right in front of the killer, so I CANT touch another gen. I have to go down to my teammate on the hook, but I have to go around because the chase is on the tower stairs, so I have to use the portal behind the tower to go down because there's no other way. I go down as fast as I can, because it obviously takes a long time, and the teammate still lets themselves die (the teammate failed all the skill checks in the second phase). What happened then? Not only did the teammate let themselves die, but I ALSO got a crow on my head because the game thinks I haven't done anything in 10 seconds of gameplay. I mean, running around the map, evading chase at the only entrance to the place, going through a portal to reach a teammate who let themselves die, and then a crow pops up because they think I just stood there doing nothing in 10 seconds... So... either devs extend the time it takes for the AFK Crow to appear or they add to the game that it NOTICES when a player is doing more actions (including running, which leaves scratch marks; running isn't free).
Long story short, something similar happened in the basement of Gideon Meat Plant.
I don't think it's fair that a player trying to get through the game should be punished, while the player who let himself die should be fine anyway (and even if they if they punish them, it doesn't help me at all, because I'll find more teammates like this, and that doesn't make the games any more enjoyable).
And for the record, I've said it before, those kinds of people don't care about losing BPs or ranks, they don't care about that, that's not a punishment for them.
*As a note, I did report this teammate, so I hope to see some feedback soon. But like I said, this isn't going to do any good.
Regarding the latest developments in the title, I'll simply say that I've already seen people leaving others on the hook for failing skill checks or simply not doing something they consider "appropriate" for the game. They do this because they know those on the hook can't even try to free themselves. In fact, when I took someone off the hook who the others didn't want to be taken off, it was my turn to stay on the hook because I "dared" to take down an "unwelcome" companion that previously failed a gen skill check.
I suppose this is also reportable...and then a crow pops up because they think I just stood there doing nothing in 10 seconds.
Did you take any footage of this? I'd love to see the two minutes before the first crow appeared.
I have never encountered this problem myself. -
@uveka said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3947046#Comment_3947046
In my opinion, getting downvotes doesnt mean you're right and people are stubborn. Maybe your experience is now much better than before, maybe you are playing in higher mmr matches with better teammates than most of the players, who knows. But this game have so vast playerbase that maybe are encountering the opposite effect. Getting crows playing actively is something that happened to me in a few games, especially when killer use No way out. People being afk after being unhooked, a few dc's. idk, I have 2k hours, I'm not a beginner but not high mmr also, I play casual and I had worse matches than before.
So my point is, the experience may be so different for you and similar mmr players, but what if those casual (or less skilled) players are a higher amount? You have to take into consideration too.. I just find its hard to balance this game.
And that doesnt mean their opinion is not valid.
Said this, I agree they did well doing something against the go next players, but maybe is just not well implemented.
I completely agree that new or less experienced players shouldn’t be unfairly penalized. If someone is still learning the game, making honest mistakes or struggling with basic mechanics, the system needs to recognize that… and show leniency.
This is one of the key areas where BHVR needs to keep fine-tuning.That said, we also need to acknowledge the other extreme and I think this is often overlooked. Some players don’t leave because they’re new or overwhelmed. They leave or throw themselfs into the killer because the map didn’t suit them, the killer wasn’t one they enjoy, or they went down too fast in chase and decided the game isn’t worth finishing. That kind of behavior… rage-quitting when things don’t go your way… absolutely should come with consequences.
People often forget: Dead by Daylight is a multiplayer game, not a personal sandbox. Removing the penalty (DC and bad behaviour) entirely would mean every other match turns into a solo experience for those left behind. And that’s not fair either.
Playing DBD comes with a certain responsibility. It’s a 4v1 team game, and one inactive or absent player can severely impact the match for everyone else. That’s why a penalty system is necessary → not to punish players randomly, but to protect the integrity of the multiplayer experience.
And BHVR knows this. That’s why the system exists, and why it won’t be scrapped entirely. It will (and should) be refined to better differentiate between inexperience and intentional sabotage. But for those who consistently throw matches or abandon teammates out of frustration? They’ll have to live with the consequences… and rightly so.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3947019#Comment_3947019
Yikes... it appears that claiming you're enjoying the game doesn't seem to make many friends eh? 😅
Apparently saying something reasonable is still controversial. Who knew that not rage-quitting at 5 gens would be a hot take?
But hey… if pointing out the obvious gets us downvoted, we must be doing something right. Facts don’t need approval. They’re stubborn like that. -
@UndeddJester said:
Not gonna lie, as a soloQ survivor... I'm actually really enjoying survivor right now.... just not having someone immediately throw the game at the start every few games is making life so much nicer... and it's the same on killer, actually cause I always stopped playing if a survivor threw... the fact games are actual games almost every time is making DBD much more engaging to me again.
I also never use map offerings, so no issue for menthere... though I still think they need to be made less pointless. I think they should at least return to your inventory if your map isn't chosen and/or buff them to 33%... but it's certainly not a deal breaker for me.
If I'm honest, I was getting a little fed up of DBD... but Springtrap is engaging and fun to play against, even if I don't really like the IP... and the loss of rage quitters who immediately throw games in the trash is making the game fun again...
So yeah... I'm actually putting DBD back in my main game rotation...
Absolutely agree. The difference is night and day. Just the absence of early rage quits makes solo queue feel like an actual game again… and not just a coin toss on whether someone gives up at 5 gens. I’ve said it before: when people play it through, even bad matches feel more meaningful.
The new system isn’t perfect, but if it stops people from throwing the moment things don’t go their way, then it’s already done more good than harm.
Naturally, there’s some backlash from those who used to quit without consequence… but that’s exactly the kind of behavior the system was designed to address. New or less experienced players deserve fairness, but habitual rage quitting? That should come with consequences.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946496#Comment_3946496
I don't. They need to scrap it entirely and focus on the root cause.
There is NO system that can account for everything. You cannot force people to play the game, especially when the game sucks half the time. If you, somehow, successfully salvage this system despite the tidal wave of bad press it's generating, you have now shifted the goal posts. People will now not commit suicide, but rather soft-quit. They just won't try.
Honestly, the current outrage feels incredibly inflated. I've played over 10 hours of Survivor since the update and haven’t encountered a single unjustified penalty.
Maybe I’m just one of those players who doesn’t immediately give up the moment something doesn’t go their way. Maybe I don’t ragequit the second a chase ends badly. Funny enough, I’ve also seen no issues from streamers like Otz, Hens, KL, or Ayrun. That says something.
Yes… the system clearly needs refinement when it comes to handling brand-new players. If someone genuinely doesn’t understand chase mechanics yet, there should be safeguards in place. That’s fair.
But let’s also be honest: If someone regularly sabotages matches… whether by ragequitting, throwing early, or just refusing to play → yes, they should absolutely be penalized. And frankly, the DC penalty should be harsher, not lighter. If you only enjoy 50% of your games, maybe that’s a signal to take a break. Reflect. Reassess.
Because if this community ever gained full control over the devs, we’d probably see DC penalties removed entirely… and nine out of ten matches would lose a teammate in the first five minutes. That’s the cold reality.
This system isn’t about punishing “bad” players. It’s about reducing the number of matches that are doomed from the first hook. And as imperfect as it is right now, it’s a step in the right direction.
-
Honestly, I think the system has potential, but clearly needs a bit more fine-tuning.
This particular match was an unfortunate example… Dawko is new to the game, and it’s totally understandable that a new player wouldn’t fully grasp chase dynamics or map pressure yet. Still, the idea behind the system isn’t to punish bad games… it’s to discourage deliberate throw behavior or early ragequits that ruin matches for everyone else.
Ideally, future updates will distinguish better between inexperience and intentional sabotage. Because while the execution isn’t perfect yet, the intention to improve team accountability is, in my opinion, a step in the right direction.
-
@AlreadyTracer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946201#Comment_3946201
Buddy.
You wrote “Self-Care used to be 50%” and was “nerfed now to 35%.”
I did not say it was nerfed now, I said it was now 35%. Just as gens are now 90 seconds, moris now activate after two hooks, etc etc.
You used the present tense — “now” — while replying in a thread that’s explicitly discussing the most recent patch.
*I made the thread*. This was NEVER about the most recent patch, and I clarified that in my first comment.
instead of clarifying from the start
Except for the fact that I DID, and I even quoted it for you.
STOP doubling down, dude. You are wrong, you have been wrong, and you will always be wrong. This is just embarrassing. If you're trying to save face, shutting up would be your best option.
Let’s break this down factually and simply:
- You wrote: “Self-Care used to be 50%” and was “nerfed now to 35%.”
- The thread, the surrounding context, and the timing of your post all pointed to the current patch. No clarification was given until after the pushback.
- The line “I’m not talking about this last patch…” was added in an edit… after the fact. It wasn’t part of the original message.
- You also claimed I must be a “new player” for not knowing what happened “now,” when the actual nerf happened on July 19, 2022… nearly two years ago.
That’s the timeline. That's the miscommunication. And that’s the misplaced condescension.
So no, the issue was never about whether the 6.1.0 nerf happened… I documented that clearly, with exact patch data. The issue was presenting your version of events with authority, misframing the timing, and then retroactively editing the comment to appear clearer than it originally was.
If you had simply written: “The original Self-Care nerf from 50% to 35% was a bad decision”… no one would’ve batted an eye. But you didn’t. You posted it in the present tense, mid-discussion of the current patch, and accused others of ignorance when your own post lacked the timeline clarity you're now demanding in hindsight.
So let’s call it here:
You got caught overstating something, tried to edit your way out of it, and now you're upset it didn’t land. That's not on anyone else.We're done. No hard feelings → just facts.
-
@AlreadyTracer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946162#Comment_3946162
that’s just you getting the timeline completely wrong
So where did I get the timeline wrong, exactly? Make it make sense.
You're now trying to retroactively reframe your comment into something it never clearly was.
Let’s break this down factually and simply:
- You wrote “Self-Care used to be 50%” and was “nerfed now to 35%.”
- You used the present tense — “now” — while replying in a thread that’s explicitly discussing the most recent patch.
- Then, instead of clarifying from the start, you doubled down by assuming I was “clearly a new player” for allegedly not knowing that.
That’s the core issue: You accused someone of ignorance for supposedly missing a change that happened almost two years ago — on July 19, 2022, in Patch 6.1.0 — and then shifted goalposts when that contradiction got pointed out.
If your actual point was “the 2022 nerf shouldn’t have happened,” you could’ve said exactly that. Instead, you made a misleading statement in the context of a patch discussion, got called out with receipts, and are now scrambling to reframe the conversation after the fact.
There’s no timeline error here except the one in your own post. So if you’re going to play the veteran card, maybe be a bit more precise next time… because confidence without accuracy isn’t expertise. It’s noise.
-
@AlreadyTracer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946130#Comment_3946130
Ok so this is actually just sad. Any veteran would've known what I meant the second I said "50 to 35 percent" even if the original post wasn't clear.
that it was nerfed "now" to 35%.
No, I never said it was nerfed in this last patch, which you'd know if you had even a little bit of reading comprehension.
I'm talking about the original nerf that should never have happened
Hell, I even explicitly said I was talking about the *original* nerf. Please be smarter next time, thx
Thanks for the clarification… though I’d argue it came a bit late.
You claimed I was “clearly a new player” for referencing a nerf that happened almost two full years ago. That’s not a reading comprehension issue… that’s just you getting the timeline completely wrong, while confidently posturing as the expert in the room. And that’s exactly the kind of attitude that deserved to be addressed.
You could’ve said from the start: “I was referring to the 6.1.0 nerf in 2022” and we’d be done. But instead, you misrepresented the timeline, made an incorrect assumption about who you were talking to, and tried to deliver a lecture on patch history… while getting the patch history wrong.
Next time, maybe less chest-pounding, more accuracy.
-
@AlreadyTracer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946049#Comment_3946049
Ok so you're very clearly a new player. Self Care heals at 35% of the normal 16 seconds now. It used to be 50%. Was 50% for, what, 6 years before they changed it?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3946050#Comment_3946050
It's incredibly strong if it's fast. Hence why COH was broken. However, SC took 32 seconds in base BEFORE the nerf. That's super inefficient and would never break into the meta.
I've been playing this game since 2018 and have over 4.5k hours logged. In that time, one thing never fails to amuse me: the confidence with which some players present absolute nonsense as fact… and they do it with such conviction, you'd think they wrote the design docs themselves. It's refreshing, honestly. Thanks for the entertainment.
Now, let’s talk about Self-Care. You confidently claimed that it used to be 50% healing speed and that it was nerfed "now" to 35%. And then you followed up by assuming I must be a new player for not knowing this. Here's the thing:
Self-Care was nerfed from 50% to 35% healing speed on July 19, 2022, with the release of Patch 6.1.0. That’s nearly two full years ago.
Not only that… the patch also removed the bonus to Med-Kit healing efficiency, which was another integral part of the perk’s former utility. Since then, Self-Care heals at a glacial pace: 64 seconds at Tier I, ~53 seconds at Tier II, and ~46 seconds at Tier III. Completely inefficient… which is why it hasn’t been considered meta since.
So before you try to “educate” someone and confidently declare them a new player, maybe get your own timeline straight first. Because right now, the only thing you're demonstrating is how little you actually know about the game’s patch history… and that’s a rough look when you’re trying to posture like a veteran.