frozzenk
frozzenk
About
- Username
- frozzenk
- Joined
- Visits
- 219
- Last Active
Comments
-
"BUT MY 4%!"
look inside to see it's really just an exploiter under the mask
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
if the first game released in cereal boxes in the 90s i think us oldies would be nostalgic for it
FNAF released when I was a teen and I thought it was stupid back then. I cringed hard at the forced youtube videos of people older than me. This sort of argument is so shallow. You can be from the time something was released and still not be a drone.
-
Same time half the 1y+ Nurse bugs are fixed, and all the audio bugs that have been here for longer than some people are alive are also fixed.
And don't forget to post on the bug forums so BHVR can ignore and pretend it's alright! Or just straight out delete your post because of some arbitrary rule that gives them an excuse to ignore bugs even harder!
-
Good. Need less survivors trolling. For every killer bodyblocking I got 50 team of 2 survivors who decided they didn't want to do objectives anymore. It's not even in the same ballpark of frequency.
-
@Poochkips said:
It's literally the main/only objective to do in the game for survivors next to unhooking and totems. Having an issue with survivors Gen rushing is like telling them not to play the game. Yes, it sucks to watch 3 gens pop in a singular chase that took you longer than you would have liked to finish, but…..it's….the point of the game….I really don't understand why people get so bitter about it.
This is a legit question. No bitterness, just intrigued.
Survivors and Killers both make some arbitrary rules towards one another and what can constitute as "Toxic behavior". Just curious why this is even one of them.Same way survivors complain about tunneling or whatnot (and they do it FAR more than genrush complaints let me tell you that): Because people are whiny, entitled and immature. Opening a game where you play against someone else and complaining that they are doing their objective is absurd.
-
It's actually surprising and concerning that the word "Nurse" is not present even a single time in this post considering the absurd amount of bugs with the killer right now.
-
5/19/2025 still an issue.
Behavior do you care?
-
Just like to point out that this is still an issue. Behavior refuses to acknowledge that audio is plagued with issues. Everyone knows. Everyone experienced it. Countless people have taken the time to gather countless pieces of evidence over the years. But Behavior is silent about it and lets YEARS go by without doing anything.
It's like they're trying to gaslight us into thinking there are no issues. Don't let Behavior gaslight you. THERE ARE AUDIO ISSUES and I'll keep coming back here to not let people forget.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928865#Comment_3928865
Maybe I’m just not understanding correctly, let me try to work on it. It seems that you are insisting this is about equality, and I am saying that the results are not equal. Giving killers the same option to abandon the match does not do the same thing as when a survivor abandons a match.
When a survivor quits, the match continues. When the killer quits, the match ends for everyone.
That’s not equal. That’s not perception. Thats not opinion. That’s objective difference.
To say that there is no difference between a DC that results in 4 players still being able to play and a DC that instantly ends the game for all 5 players so that nobody can play, is objectively not true.
Now, I’m positive you’re aware of this, and not trying to insist that there is no difference between the two. Which means that maybe, are you saying that while yes, it does do different things, but that it simply doesn’t matter? That if someone who is playing the killer wants to quit, it shouldn’t matter that the game ends for everyone. Wouldn’t true equality mean that if a singular survivor quits, that the game would also end for everyone? That even regardless of role, if 1 player quits the entire match should end?
I’m genuinely trying to understand your perspective. If the text comes across as condescending or anything it’s not the intent, tone is difficult to convey through message sometimes. I’m trying to get to the absolute bare bones of the differences of opinion and why.
When the killer would abandon in this scenario, the match would then end for everyone WITH THEIR VICTORY. Which you oh so very conveniently forgot to point out. They won. What are you complaining about? In all truth, they had already all but won anyway, the victory just came faster in what was already a near victory scenario. And if the killer wants to try to revert that near loss scenario, they are free to simply not pick the abandon option. It is an OPTION, after all.
Like I said before, that is even *better* than forcing the winner to have to stomach a bot interaction to secure their already earned win. Pretty much no one is playing a multiplayer game for bots, so it is only natural to feel like being forced to interact with them is almost like you're being punished for winning.
I'm sure that in your eyes, you're not the villain. While you argue so very hard to deny others a benefit you're getting. It's okay for you to have it. It's not okay for others. But in your eyes, you must be just, huh? Try to understand this. I sure as hell can't.
-
"that gives toxic players a free pass to spew garbage in chat without accountability."
Not it doesn't. Accountability is getting banned if they broke any rules. It makes no difference to accountability whether or not you can see who they are.
What, did you want to go to their profile to spew toxicity back? If so, then you're just as low as they are. And this is not accountability, that's just 2 toxic people at each other's throats.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928841#Comment_3928841
killers to defend them not having an option that you DO HAVE,
Since this is directed at me, and you aren't pinning me in it, let's talk about that.
The entire reason that abandon when all survivors are slugged exists is what you said here: there is no option like the killers have. Slugs can move at the slowest base speed of the entire game, and that's it.
There's no way, base kit, to speed up that bleed out, or get yourself out of that situation, no recovery. And in the case of bad actors, you do have to suffer 4 minutes of toxic behavior. That's true even with the abandon mechanic, since they can just leave one person up.
In the case of exit gates, killers are not in that position. They have agency, and can, by the core game, go force survivors to stop the toxic behavior and speed up the close of the match. It's even possible, that doing that forces errors, and the survivors can still die. I think punishing the toxic behavior through actual gameplay is a good thing.
But, if you take that option off the table, and completely refuse to do anything about it with your core tool kit (as the person I was responding to did), then you still have agency and options to ignore them. Again, that option is not available to a slug being humped.
If you are saying that you refuse to use the core kit of the game, which completely resolves this complaint, then walking away isn't just an option, it's the correct option, and the healthy option. If it bothers you enough that you have to take an extended break for your own mental health (as the person I was responding to said they did) then prioritize your own well being IRL, and maybe this game isn't right for you. I can't believe I'm being misrepresented in this thread enough that people think that taking a break is somehow toxic.
Additionally, the post and most everyone in it is expecting that the killer should just be able to abandon when the gates are powered, which is cutting out an entire phase of the game. That seems both rather excessive of a response (especially since not every survivor is going to linger and tea bag), and an over simplification.
Even if we gave people that option, truly toxic squads would find a way to finish a gen every 9.5 minutes and just bully as much as they want, and then the goal post moves again.
You have the agency to go eat toxicity as you push them out. And you have agency to not go eat toxicity at the gate, but still eat toxicity anyway as the toxic winners wait until the last second on EGC just to waste as much time as possible and spam sounds with fast vaults and whatnot. No matter what you do, you're having to eat toxicity. Don't defend it.
"ignore it". Do you see me here saying survivors should "just ignore it" when they're left to bleed out just to extend their loss? You don't. Because that's a terrible argument. Nobody should have to hunker down waiting for the rain of toxicity to pass while they pretend it's not happening.
The difference here, is that you seem to agree with me only for survivors. For killers, you say things like "you can ignore it" and "be the bigger person". Can you see now why I classified this as "hypocrisy"? Should be pretty clear.
Meanwhile, I think it should not be acceptable for either side, and if you're giving one side the option to bypass it, which is welcome, it is in all fairness that you should give the same to the other.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928845#Comment_3928845
Nice try, however logical fallacy is not the issue here.
I play a lot of DBD compared to most people (when I am not taking a break from burn out), according to Steam I have 112 hours on DBD in the last two weeks. I see Huntress fairly often and usually it isn't Were-Elk.
So it seems to me that it is odd I see a very high number of Were-Elk players out of nowhere, the minute it goes public that the skin is broken again and gives a massive unfair advantage.
Not the issue on your say so, huh? Impressive.
It is a logical fallacy to imply every huntress using a high quality and popular skin is doing so for a bug. "These people know what they're doing". Do they really? All of them?
Confirmation bias is one hell of a drug.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928841#Comment_3928841
I think where they may be a disconnect is here: I’m all for equality between the roles, (for the most part. I do think killers should have a higher win rate than survivors) but “one button for both sides” only makes sense when the outcomes are actually comparable.
What happens when a survivor abandons?
The survivor is replaced with a bot.
The rest of the match is still playable by both the other survivors and the killer.
What happens when a killer abandons?
The match instantly ends for everyone.
These outcomes are completely different. It’s 2 different game states entirely. The only way this would be a comparable outcome is if when the killer abandons, they are replaced with a bot.So if this is about creating the abandon button after killer bots are implemented— then yes, I would 100% be in support of it. I have been very vocal about killer bots for a long time, as survivors have no way to practice against killer bots in customs unlike how killers can practice against survivor bots in customs. So rejecting this particular suggestion isn’t “wanting only one team to have an option.” It’s saying the proposed “option” doesn’t give equal results.
If the goal is less BM, (which is great) we should address BM directly (faster collapse if survivors idle in the gate, clearer penalties for extended slug bleed‑outs) not introduce an immediate eject button that ends the entire game for everyone regardless if they were even in the gate at all.
And just for clarity sake, I do not agree with the way the current abandon system works as it gives draws. I feel that any abandon, no matter which role does it, should count as a loss. Not a draw. But BHVR did mention they understood the abandon mechanic can use some better improvements, so hopefully this will be changed in the future.
We are talking about the option for abandoning matches on defeat. It does not matter if bots are left or not. The match is over. There are two sides in this match. One of the sides has thrown the towel. Therefore, it is over.
If anything adding bots only makes it worse. What's the point of artificially extending a match in which one of the teams has thrown the towel? Let me repeat this: If there are only two teams in a match, and one of the teams has given up, the match is over. The other team has won. Any extension of this is almost as if you're punishing the winner by forcing them to deal with bots in the dead, rotting husk of a match that is already over.
So no. There is no disconnect. This is simply a matter of people wanting more quality of life for themselves while trying their hardest to deny it to others. It just hurts to admit it, so they'll pretend to be fair.
A truly fair person would argue for the option for BOTH sides. And you know it.
-
Sounds has had all sort of issues in DBD for a long, long time. They just don't care. Which is crazy when they have a killer that needs sound to operate, and somewhat recently released another killer with a transformation that operates in much the same way.
Footstep sounds are extremely inconsistent by survivor to survivor, and by map to map. If they're running on snow/sand like Eyrie, you will often not hear footsteps, as if they were levitating.
It's a real shame because I think Spirit is an amazing killer conceptually. But the game is not up to it and playing Spirit is just an endless source of headaches.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928822#Comment_3928822
It may well be a nice skin, I don't like it but each to their own.
But out of the blue, suddenly every Huntress has decided they also like this skin by coincidence and for no particular reason? I think it is incredibly disingenuous to suggest that these Were-Elk fans all appeared purely coincidentally at the same time as a bug making it an exploit reappeared in the game.
These people absolutely know what they're doing.
Do you know what is confirmation bias?
I've seen plenty of huntresses not using the skin. I do not play huntress myself and neither do I own the skin, but if I did, this would definitely be my most used skin as it is my favorite among the bunch. Maybe tied with the chain one from the last rift. Were you to then see me in a match, you'd be in here complaining that I'm "suddenly" using it just because it's bugged. You would be wrong, of course. Just like you likely are wrong about some of the huntresses you're currently accusing.
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3928823#Comment_3928823
I have this post bookmarked, and there have been a small number of comments attempting to reasonably consider solutions.
But for several days now, I've seen a bunch of people accusing 'one side' or 'the other side' of not seeing the real problem or of being biased. Personally, I think there's much too much 'us vs. them' going on here, and maybe some perception of an 'us vs. them' perspective when it might not be present in some people even when their opinions appear biased. Don't get me wrong; some people do mainly play only killer or survivor and do have biased opinions. But I imagine that might be fewer people than it appears. Anyway, this paragraph feels preachy... sorry about that. But I think it's true that there's been a bit of that divisive talk in this thread.
@hermitkermit has proposed a pretty decent idea, suggesting to shorten the egc or make it more dangerous to stay in the gate. I think I've made a decent suggestion as well, that once all survivors are in an open gate for a short time, an abandon option for the killer would be fine. I'd be interested in seeing more solutions proposed :D
I agree that we shouldn't just end the match once egc happens. That takes away a critical part of the game. But I do think it would be great if we find a way to decrease toxicity in the community. Personally, I think the DBD community is much more positive than certain other online gaming communities, and I'd be happy to see it improve more. Maybe more of our games can end with ggs and glnm!
There is absolutely no reason to NOT seek equality in this other than bias. It's not a perception of it. It's great that one team has the option. The other team should too. Both teams should have the option. This is what a fair person would argue for.
Disagreeing with this means you only want ONE team to have it. That is bias by definition. No matter how fair you think you are, if you are in here defending that one team should have an option while the other team should not, then you are part of the issue. This is a general "you" not a specific you to your person, by the way.
And if you're in here typing stuff like "be the bigger person, just go deal with it" at killers to defend them not having an option that you DO HAVE, like someone literally did earlier in this thread, you are committing hypocrisy to an absurd degree. These should be called out. These people are the rotten apples of the community. This community needs far less hypocrisy than it currently has.
-
- Survivors about survivor toxicity: Killers just need to take it, "be the bigger person". Just deal with it.
- Survivors about killer toxicity: What the #########? Let me abandon this is toxic!
As someone who is genuinely pro equality, sometimes it's hard not to see survivors as the most entitled group in all of internet. It's pretty simple. Give killers the same options survivors have. They may take it if they choose to. It's an option.
Being against this is just hypocrisy to such an extreme point just "entitlement" doesn't cut it anymore. If you're against this, congratulations. You're the worst this community has to offer.
-
It's one of the best, arguably the best Huntress skin. Pretending like it isn't and there is 0 reason to use the skin other than bug is just disingenuous.
-
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand they didn't fix nurse's blink being a russian roulette. Or any of the other nurse issues. Some of them here for OVER A WHOLE YEAR. Somehow they thought it was preferable to focus on fixing a skin for a killer that feels like ######### to play because it is suffering from 200 bugs.
But hey, at least you can now feel like ######### without being affect by the skin! -
Don't see the point in arguing about it or talking about possible compensation, if at all any, before we know exactly what we're talking about. We don't know anything about these changes yet.
If it's something absurd like any downed survivor instantly gets up if not picked up within 0.5 seconds then this conversation becomes one. If it's something more reasonable then this conversation becomes another. But as we don't know anything yet then this conversation is just moot imo.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3924203#Comment_3924203
I was just answering your question. Nothing more. Sorry that the correct answer to your question is not the one you wanted. I try again:
The Devs are super survivor-sided and want to torture Killers.
Better? /s
Whoa, you might be one of the most toxic people I've seen in this forum. Wouldn't surprise me if you were the sort of person who let survivors bleed out and refused to leave at the gates.
That's not "the correct answer" that was just your argument. You do not own the truth. And I pointed out how your argument was flawed. To which you did not defend, you just decided to be toxic. Maybe when you have an argument we can try this again, until then, work on becoming a better person.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Simple - because some Killers decided that it is funny to let Survivors bleed out for 4 minutes, while Killers always had the option to a) start the EGC (which is 2 minutes instead of 4 minutes) and b) to force Survivors out of the Exit Gates, meaning they have an option to end it quicker. Survivors not.
And because those Killers thought it was funny to slug everyone until bleedout, Survivors are now allowed to skip waiting around for 4 minutes.
That's a silly argument when we both know toxic people do it on both sides.
Seriously, what compels a person to actually start typing a post with the intent of defending unbalance? How does one fall so low? Like is that really what people are proud of? Defending unbalance? -
You know what's funny? This thread is from over a year ago.
THEY STILL HAVEN'T FIXED IT. What other game allows bugs to go on for so long without doing anything? You're just spitting on the face of the consumers.
-
@Shirtless_Myers said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3924168#Comment_3924168
If Behavior were neutral, they wouldn't allow Nemesis to be 130%+ movement speed the entire match and wait days to weeks to kill switch it.
Bugs are bugs, they are not by design. Nemesis is not even the only bugged killer this patch (FAR from) and the majority of the bugs are harmful to the killer player. Yet you deemed worth it to write that post about one of the few cases in which it's beneficial. That's just selective mentality.
Either way, bugs are not intentional so they are not in the topic of this thread. BHVR is bug incompetent for every side.
-
@UndeddJester said:
While I get losing as killer is frustrating, especially against Survivors who think they're hot ######### even when all they did was gen rush a meme build Trapper with BNP Commodius' while running Lithe, Windows, Syringes and every second chance perks under the sun... I've never really found myself too put out by survivors hanging around.
To play devil's advocate, EGC is 2 minutes instead of 4 minutes, and if survivors are in gate, there is nothing to stop you just slapping them out of gate to end their BS. Its especially funny on someone like Twins or Houndmaster who can actually injure and down you before you can leave.
I don't really let either gate teabags or slugging/humping bother me really. I almost never run meta, so it doesn't prove anything for me to lose against someone going hard. It's like good job Blight... you caught the no item Kate running Tenacity, Soul Guard, Plot Twist and WGLF... good for you. 😏
Same of course when you get rolled as a meme build killer... like who cares honestly? This way of playing really does make it much harder to tilt... 😁
It's not really all that relevant if you personally are upset by the toxicity or not. That's not the point. The point is how it seems unfair to give one team something and not give the other team the same courtesy. It seems unbalanced.
BHVR is supposed to be neutral, right?
-
The worst part is how some of these bugs are not even new. They just don't fix them and they start to accumulate. Some of these nurse bugs have been there for longer than some people are alive.
I'm starting to leave a negative review on DBD everywhere I can now. The lack of consideration from devs is starting to reach absurd levels.
-
He actually wrote a "no you" level of argument, after one of the cringiest posts in the forum listing a bunch of bugged killers as "fine". Impressive lack of self respect. Keep on keeping on. You're getting somewhere.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
Trapper, Wraith, Billy, Huntress, Meyers, Hag, Doc, Freddy, Bubba, Pig, Clown, Spirit, Legion, Ghost face, Demodogo, Vecna, Dracula, Xenomorph, Chucky, Unknown, Artist, Slinger, Trickster, Dredge, Oni, Ghoul (haven't seen any bugs but don't know for sure), plague, Pyramid Head, Blight, Nemo, Wesker, Cenobite (hopefully, same as ghoul), Sadako, Knight (also hopefully), Merchant, HUX.
Lord has there ever been a more uninformed post in this forum?
-
M1 killers are just way too bulliable and in their majority are way too weak. I wouldn't have an issue playing them if losing in this game didn't mean having to eat 3 tons of toxicity from survivors.
Maybe if the community was better we'd all be fine playing weaker killers more.
-
This has been an issue for almost a month now. But they just close every thread talking about it and direct people to the "main" thread that's been up for a month and not once has BHVR said anything about fixing it.
We'll see 2026 with nurse's blink still being a complete russian roulette.
-
The bug is still a thing. Still happens. If anything it's more frequent now. Is BHVR trolling?
-
@Laculan said:
Is there any update on this? The nurse has been bugged for so long, it's really sad.
Please BHVR fix the nurse!
It's still a thing but there is a patch in a couple of days. Hopefully they address it.
-
All survivors are down and this becomes a draw? What? How did NO ONE on the team immediately look at this and pointed it out as #########? Is DBD developed by bots?
Look, I get that bias is a thing but mother of holy. The catering to survivors is starting to enter bizarre territory.
-
Having the same issue…
-
Kaneki players playing the most no-skill killer in the entire roster complaining that his nerfs are too much.
You can't make this stuff up.
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3874563#Comment_3874563
That is all fine if survivors can counter it. They can't.
Are you seriously saying there is no counter to slugging? Is this a joke? I swear some people just want the game being played for them at this point.
-
@fixblitzskin said:
true talent is doing nothing but slugging in every video with knockout because hooking isn’t worth it and choy a smaller dbd youtuber also said he isn’t going to hook anymore and just slug. Is 4 man slugging the newest trend in content creation for killers?
"new kid on the block" that has been on the block for quite a while, the meaning of "new" is really being stretched here
-
Nurse's blink is absolutely all over the place. It's crazy that BHVR cares more about keeping forum standards than fixing their own game.
-
Do you still wanna play survivors VS killer or do you just want a BP pinata? Press a button and BP showers down on you?
The event is nice for BP but end of the day you're still playing a match VS someone. They have their objective and you have yours. Are you going to make a thread asking BHVR to "disincentive survivors from doing generators"? Thought not. Double standards much?
-
You said lag benefits the killer. I play killer. I am lagging. I told you what is happening and asked how is it benefitting me, as you said it was.
Now you're saying "I never said your issues with nurse were beneficial". Make up your mind friend. And telling me this is "unrelated" is absolutely crazy. Is it only related if it supports your narrative? Holy entitlement batman.
-
@Nicholas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3912195#Comment_3912195
I might add that your reply is unnecessarily reductive and reveals a lot about you. There is something wrong and sinister when someone posts a verbose tirade while misinformed. I implore you to educate yourself before posting; it will spare you blushes. For the record, the lag does favor The Killer, hence the name 'Favour The Killer.' The devs have written extensively about it, including how hits are handled on The Killer's end. Good luck!
It's kind of funny you wrote "There is something wrong and sinister when someone posts a verbose tirade while misinformed." and then proceeded to not actually address anything I said. You didn't even so much as mention nurse at all. You completely dodged it. I guess I can see why.
Let me ask the question again, in the hopes that a second time might trigger you to actually address arguments, as opposed to just writing a kneejerk "NO YOU!" post: How on earth is the situation I described benefitting me, oh victimization expert? By all means, feel free to call behavior for them to help you answer.
Assuming, that is, that you'll actually address arguments which doesn't seem to be something you are very keen on doing.
-
God forbid Kaneki players have to actually play instead of just getting everything for free.
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3854153#Comment_3854153
Look, I've been incredibly polite with you. If you want to go around accusing people of being upset, entitled, unable to articulate their thoughts, confused, folding under their own opinions, and more, please do it to someone who's not being nice to you. I've written my statements with smiley faces and use friendly language in nearly all of our interactions. I have absolutely not been passive aggressive, but I'm certainly getting tired of the accusations I'm receiving. In any case, I won't be accusing you of any of the sort of things you've accused me of.
With that out of the way, here are my thoughts on what constitutes bad manners in this game:
From survivors, bm is mainly in the form of teabagging and participating in bully squads by targeting the killer more than they target generators.
From killers, bm is mainly in the form of tunneling, camping, aggressive slugging, and that W+D thing whose name I don't write for fear of running afoul of some filter or rule.
Generally, bm in the game on both sides can be placed into two categories: (1) taunting (which includes teabagging and that W+D thing) and (2) anything that dramatically prevents a player from being able to participate in the match.
The things that fit into (2) are bully squad behaviors (excessive stuns, blinds, or other actions done solely to annoy the killer instead of trying to do gens), and a small set of killer behaviors that can force a single survivor player to be unable to participate in the match in the expected way for anywhere from several minutes to the entire match. As mentioned above, those killer behaviors are primarily tunneling, camping, and needless aggressive slugging. Here are a small set of explanations regarding why those are able to prevent a player from participating in a match in a meaningful way:
Tunneling: The killer is always able to tunnel a survivor out of they want to. There is almost nothing a survivor can do to last an entire match against a killer who's set on taking that one person out. If a killer wants just one kill, they can down a survivor, hook them near some gens they can guard and proxy camp while patrolling those gens. Early in my time playing the game, I got annoyed when people would flashlight blind me at every pallet and tunneled some of them out. I remember that one of them escaped... ever. And that player did not get to participate in the match except to be chased and only got out with the help of their entire team. I can only imagine how hard it would be for someone to escape at my current skill level. It is trivial for a killer to tunnel a survivor and make them unable to play the game. A tunneled survivor would be right to wonder why they even started up their match.
Camping: This is actually less of a problem except when paired with tunneling. But a lot of killers will engage in proxy camping because it makes it trivial to prevent one survivor from being healed and gives the killer the opportunity to chase the unhooked survivor or the rescuer. The problematic part of this is that it's a trivial strategy that solo queue survivors have little means of countering if they're not very experienced. I'd argue that camping could be considered by experienced survivors to be not much of a problem since the counter is to get multiple gens done while the killer doesn't do much about it. But this approach to the game is easily coupled with tunneling to make a survivor completely unable to participate in the game except to be chased. And once a 1v3 is obtained by tunneling and camping, the survivors are likely to lose if there are more than one or two gens left. It is a cheap move that easily tilts the match in favor of the killer, but which requires the entire survivor team to know what they're doing to counter.
Needlessly Aggressive Slugging: It is possible for a killer to put survivors on the ground and force them to bleed out for several minutes, unable to participate in the game while doing so. Honestly, four person slugs should almost never happen because survivors shouldn't let it happen, but killers are increasingly able to do it. But the thing I think is really a problem is slugging for 4k. Slugging for 4k causes two people to wait for up to several minutes in a nearly impossible situation. The last survivor has essentially no hope of escape as soon as the third survivor is slugged. Forcing such a situation in a game is already unsportsmanlike. But beyond that, the third survivor has to wait on the ground for up to several minutes. And if the fourth survivor heals the third one, the killer can easily slug one of them again. It's practically a guaranteed fourth kill, even though the last survivor may have outplayed the killer the entire match, with the killer just ignoring them until the end. All this can go on for several minutes, wasting everyone's time when hatch was literally implemented to prevent this scenario.
Tunneling, camping, and aggressive slugging that leads to bleedouts are strategies that require very little skill and often make people wonder why they decided to play the game since they often make it nearly impossible to participate except to be chased and eliminated. Likewise, bully squads and teabagging are things that make the game and community worse, and should be discouraged.
We are playing this game with other people, so it is necessary to consider the experience of those other people when we play. That means that survivors shouldn't be teabagging or bullying, and killers shouldn't be tunneling, camping, or slugging for 4k. I'm not saying that anyone is forced to act well toward other people, only that they should.
I'll likely not write such a long post again, but I wanted to give you the courtesy of answering your question.
****** I apologize to anyone who had to scroll past all this.*****
You are not even realizing that from the get go your entire argument is based on the assumption that the killer doing their objective is "bm". Tunneling, camping, aggressive slugging. As you called it. These are all tools that can be implemented in order to fulfill the killer's objective. Which is to kill. If the name didn't make it obvious. Some exceptions apply, such as the one I already mentioned about letting people bleed out for no reason in the post I explained my personal opinion on the subject. Opinion that which you just ignored, by the way.
Meanwhile, at no point in the survivor list of "bm" activities did you list legit things that are part of completing theirs. I suppose an argument could be made for teabagging in order to mentally destabilize the killer, but that's less of a game thing and more about just trying to be so toxic you get in the person's head. Wouldn't explain teabagging at exit gates either.
So we're back at the "the killer fulfilling his game objective is problematic, but the survivor fulfilling theirs is not" stage. What is it that you call this situation? When someone does something, but has an issue with someone else doing the same thing on the opposite team? Oh, yes. There is a word for that! What would that word be, I wonder?
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3852559#Comment_3852559
How would it be possible to make tunneling impossible without having serious balance problems by telling 1 survivor "You are untouchable"?
Well it wouldn't.
Anything survivors are given they just abuse. Survivors body blocking out of the hook abusing the immunity they get is not new by now. Mind you I don't even think this is a bad play from the survivor. They are abusing something that was supposed to make it so they aren't tunneled immediately off the hook in order to purposefully get in the way of the killer, sure, but also, it's what behavior implemented, so you can't blame them for using it for their advantage.
That said, it does serve as an example to show that you shouldn't be implementing too many mechanics to help and handhold people with the assumption that they will use it for its intended purpose instead of milking it for every possible unintended advantage they can.
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853783#Comment_3853783
I didn't say any player shouldn't do their objective or follow 'arbitrary rules' :)
You disagree that survivors wanting to do their objective but being upset when killers do theirs constitutes hypocrisy, which means you think it is justified. Thinking a mentality that is clearly unbalanced and biased like that is justified constitutes entitlement. You seem very confused, sort of folding under your own opinions. I would suggest making up your mind.
Perhaps you could focus on what you are trying to say more, and less on the passive aggressive emojis? Writing an empty post that provides 0 argumentation whatsoever and just comes out as snarky really doesn't do you any favors. If you have an actual argument, by all means, do use it. Otherwise the empty snarkiness gets you nowhere. As an example, I am explaining, by their definitions, exactly why and how I think something qualifies as hypocrisy or entitlement. I'm not just dropping empty statements without any explanation or justification and then a smiley face. That would be silly. The fact you are not managing to do the same is worrying, at the very least.
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3853607#Comment_3853607
Well, it's clear we disagree about this :)
I was trying to be polite when I didn't quote you in that last response. Someone else got annoyed at me once when I kept replying to their comments that quoted me, so I tried to consider whether that was what you wanted :D
In any case, I promise I'm quite genuine in spite of what my people are known for. (That last sentence was is of course meant to be a bit playful :)
Disagreeing about it means that you think survivors should do their objectives without any checks while killers should have to follow several arbitrary rules when completing theirs.
That is, by definition (if you are going to be upset by what I'm about to say, please be upset at the English language, not at me) entitlement. I have heard the sentence "entitled survivors" before but I have to say, I don't actually see it for myself very often. But here it is.
And as for my personal opinion, it is this: Survivors should do their objectives. Killers should do theirs. No crying about anything that is done for the purpose of fulfilling the objective, unless it's some cheat/hack in which case hopefully the person gets hardware IP banned and never comes back. And if the survivors are better they'll win. If the killer is better he'll win. Match over. Go next.
And the reason I specified "things that are done for the purpose of fulfilling the objective" is because there are things people do that have no actual purpose and are just to be a jerk. Like letting the last survivor bleed out instead of hooking/mori'ing for no reason. Waiting for the killer to see you teabagging at the gate on the way out. So on. These things fulfill no purpose, they are just people being toxic.
-
@smurf said:
@frozzenk
Since you didn't quote me in your response, I won't quote you here so you won't get a ping. But I'm really not being disingenuous. I very much believe that survivors can't do much to ruin a game when I'm the killer. The worst they can do to me is escape, so they're almost completely unable to prevent me from playing the game as I expect to. They do gens, I chase them and put them on hooks. The outcome depends on how long it takes me to find and hook survivors vs how long it takes them to do gens.
Bully squads are usually easy games. If they're doing non-stop attempts at flashy saves, flashbangs, get head-ons repeatedly, I'll just start slugging and stop caring if they get tunneled. If they want me to be unable to play the game, they can get the same treatment they give. But bully squads tend to be rather awful at escaping since they spend their time trying to harass the killer instead of doing gens. It's usually a slugfest. So generally, I don't think bully squads are a real threat to my ability to play the game. If I recall correctly, a bully squad got two out on me a while ago, and I was kind of impressed.
In contrast, I think survivors have a reason to complain about killer behaviors. If a killer wants a particular survivor out of the game, that survivor will have almost no chance of getting out without the help of most of their team. Tunneling ruins the match for the targeted survivor, and I'm really surprised there aren't harder restrictions on that behavior. I think it makes sense that we see these complaints :)
It makes sense because people are hypocrites. I already said this 3 times. Survivors are fine doing their objective, regardless of what the killer may think. They are not fine with the same thing from the other side. At this point I think there might be some language issue here if you cannot comprehend the hypocrisy. It is pretty damn clear. Or maybe you do… you're not very genuine so I guess it's possible you do but you just ignore and/or pretend you don't see it. Otherwise it makes no sense to actually move your fingers on your keyboard to… defend hypocrisy. What sort of person does that?
Also, if bully squads are "awful at escaping" that says something about the level you play at more than it says something about bully squads as a general thing. Regardless, the quality of the player doesn't matter. We are having a discussion exclusively about mentality.
Also what's with the extremely petty reply thing? I didn't click reply that one particular time cuz yours was the latest post in the thread and I was in a hurry. Some people really take the small nothings and turn into some petty hit back lol. I didn't think it would be a big deal but apparently it was. Some people…
-
@YamamuraVideoRentals said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3852544#Comment_3852544
It's not like adding 10 more seconds per hook state was crazy. I had actually suggested something like that in a whole post full of changes dbd needed. All that bit of extra time does is hurt the camping/proxy camping strategy a bit more. I think it's well deserved.
It's not just that. The game is accumulating reason on top of reason for killers to stop hooking. I stopped playing survivor because of it. Any single reason alone might not be enough, but when you add everything up, hooking is just a bad idea for killers. When you just keep mindlessly nerfing and hurting hooks over and over and over and over then people tend to turn to other things like slugging.
-
Please, stop being disingenuous repeatedly. Survivors do a lot more policing on killers doing their objective than the other way around. You know this, I don't understand why do you act as if you didn't. You see a killer here and there complaining about gen rushing every once in a while, but compare that to how often you see someone complaining about tunelling or slugging or whathave you. Case in point, what thread are we at right now? Survivors can do a lot to "ruin" a killer's game. Bully squads would never have existed otherwise.
The nuance here is this: Hypocrisy. Survivors are fine doing their objective, killers be damned. But if killers do theirs, suddenly the argument of "think of the other side's fun!" shows up. If you don't think this constitutes hypocrisy, I would suggest a dictionary.