Losing any of the very few options Killers have, besides chase, would be devastating to Player agency. More to the point, if they were to remove even ONE of the big three, i.e. Camp, Tunnel, or Slug, it would not stop there. You and your ilk would just be emboldened by the success and move on to getting the next one removed too. :) That is also something we have seen over and over again. Player agency is a harsh mistress, you either have it or you don't. But let me echo a point I made earlier (as have many others besides me):
The DEV have already told you it isn't going to happen. They have gone five years now, so I think they are pretty happy with their final call. They experimented a great deal and came to the same conclusion over and over again. You act like these ideas you guys are putting forward are new and revolutionary. The are not. They are simply a rehash of tested notions repackaged and vomited back up with salt and angst. There isn't going to be any Deus Ex Machina. You can argue with me until you are blue in the face. It doesn't matter if you could change my mind or not, this Rubicon has already been crossed and there is no going back.
Hahaha OK sure everybsingle survivor used ds and abused it. And every other nerf out there was also to address an abuse that every single survivor was using and abusing. Funny how every killer must be a Saint and every survivor the worst human to ever live in your mind. I'm guessing that's not actually the case itsnjust the argument you have to make to support your position... maybe don't make it next time if you don't believe it
Sorry I'm having trouble following you now. We're the killers glorified bots if they loose one of those things or not? Or now is it only if they lose camping and tunneling and slugging. Could you make up your mind on what your claiming to believe real quick?
I say claiming because it seems like you don't really believe what you post you just really don't want to loose camping but I could be wrong so I'm looking for clarification
Edit sorry posted bits meant to type bots
Do you need me to use smaller words? I'm not sure where your failure to comprehend is taking place. I've already told you what I think, that Player Agency is paramount in this game for both Killer and Survivor. That means that mechanics which constrain what people can do in the match are a bad idea. I think losing any agency whatsoever is the wrong approach, and I am backed up by the fact that this has ALREADY been tested. I'm not stating anything new, or claiming divine wisdom. I'm stating the results of test after test after test. Killers must have agency to make their own choices once the match begins or the game doesn't work. You have to break some eggs to make an omelet, and thus you must take some bad for the greater good. That means that the two minutes we take on the hook from time to time is the price we pay for the game to work overall. Some of us understand that and pay our dues. Some of us are selfish little snots who think the world revolves around them and don't care about the big picture.
The size of your words is fine it's the consistency of them that's the problem. Before you said that killers would be nothing more than Bots if they lost one of 5 things you listed. Then you seemed tobl reduce those all import things to just three. So just make it simple do you still believe what you posted about needing those 5 things or the killers become little more than Bots like you said or not. It shouldn't be too hard to say yes that is what I believe that's why I typed it in, or no that's not what I really believe I just said that because I need camping in this game and this sounded like a better argument in my head than
Camping is good because I like camping don't get rid of it.
I await your clarification
Oh, I get it now. You want to play rhetorical games with me rather than answering any of the arguments I put forward. There are a couple of issues with your approach, not the least of which is that I am famous (or infamous if you prefer) for enjoying grinding people like you into the ground. The other issue is that I neither like nor dislike Camping. I consider it just a niche tool, and have no emotional attachment to it one way or the other. I consider removing Killer choices bad because as I stated:
I simply play the game to win, regardless of what role I'm currently taking on. I will happily Herd, Camp, Tunnel, Slug, and use a Mori if that is the right call for a specific match. Tactics are not strategies, and attempting to use tactics as a strategy is a losing proposition. You don't know what is the best tactic to use in a match until you arrive. By in large, I find Camping inefficient because Generator pressure is a better route nine times out of ten, to preventing the gates from ever powering up before I kill everyone. That is the same reason I rarely use NOED. I don't like to build for an End Game that I never intend to reach. You are simply barking up the WRONG tree. You are making assumptions about why I am debating with you. You assume it is because I am afraid of losing my favorite toy. Your failure to comprehend is your problem, not mine. I simply understand the game, understand the history, and know the testing. You clearly do not.
Oh no I don't want rhetorical questions I want a strait answer to my question
Your post said losing one of those 5 option you listed would reduce a killer to little more than a bot. Then you seemed to change your mind on this point. So do you believe what you posted or not?
Ok, let me try to explain this in more plain terms because I'm very consistent. I suspect I'm losing you where we come to philosophical concepts of player agency, i.e. free will. I believe removing any of them does reduce Killers to being glorified Bots. If their choices are not their own, but ordained by mechanics put in to force them to act in specific ways, there is no other way of looking at it. You either believe in free will or you do not. You either have free agency or you do not. It isn't something you can half ass. For example, the DEV clearly understand this (desire it even). Consider Totems. They could make them MANDATORY, yet another hurdle that you have no choice but to complete before exiting the match. Because they understand that Survivors should have agency, they make cleansing them optional. It is one many choices Survivors can make. Killers have fewer choices by in large, and the loss of any of them will turn them into chase bots. Without the ability to camp or honeypot as an option (taken or not) they are chase bots whose only options are who to chase and whether I hook now or slug to continue chasing. That's it. So yes, the ability to ambush, particularly in and around a hook is paramount. Will Killers do it all the time? No. They don't do it all the time now; that is merely hyperbole. But what is important is they have the option to do it. Does that answer your question?
Man it's like you took great pains to write a long post ignore the really simple question. Do you believe your own post or not
You said loosing any of the 5 killer plays would effectively reduce them to bots. Do you believe this or not?
You wrote it Do you believe it or not? Either way is fine there's no wrong answer just gotta be honest.
Edit sorry to clarify I want a strait yes or no answer because you seem to change you mind when you post large things so I'm trying to make sure I don't misunderstnd you
What part of what I just wrote do you NOT understand? I said yes, it reduces them to Bots. I literally just said it in the post you answered. At this point, I have to believe you are playing dumb to avoid the debate, because there is no way you are this obtuse.
Sorry i was editing I know you posted it but I didn't want to misunderstand becuase it got lost in the rest of your post.
So to clarify losing one of those 5 effectively reduces you to a bot.
My next question is do you play a mori offering every single match?
No, and stop playing dumb. The point is not that I use a Mori in every match (I rarely use them) but that I have the OPTION to use them. I know where you want to go with these inane questions, and it is a moot direction. We are talking about CHOICE, not application. Players must have agency or they lose interest. Whether they exercise it or not, it is important that it is an option.
While i wish they would just come to understand the very nicely laid out points you presented it seems like they wont and just want to argue for the sake of it.
Right like you said it's important to have choices. The point though about the loss of one choice invalidating all other options is where I take issue. So how is it that the loss of a single choice can be so important yet notnmatter at all when you loose one?
Bear in mind that not having a mori offering means you lost that option in the match or as you put it become become little more than Bots. But if your going to respond with well it only matters if you lose the choice sometimes becuase you can always choose to play the offering and that's OK, then I'm going to have to ask if there was an offering you could burn theb would you be OK with my proposal? After all now it's not effecting player agency to the point killers become Bots right?
No I'd imagine now there's something else that's wrong , becuade let's face it at the end if the day your real problem with it is that you are a camper.
But I'll still hear it what would be the next problem?
Lmao facts right here
Another "fix camping" post here lmao
No, the only real problem is you can't debate any of the assertions I've made so you are playing rhetorical games and trying to keep the discussion about me rather than the topic. You lost that debate hours ago. You aren't fooling anyone reading these posts, and insulting our intelligence with these pathetic attempts at misdirection is almost amusing. You lost the argument, but to be honest it was DOA. There is no discussion on this matter that has any meaning because, as has been stated by many of us many times, the DEV have already told you they aren't changing it. You are a whiner that likes to blame your personal failures on other people and/or the game. All this jibber-jabber has been about lying to us but more importantly about lying to yourself. It is far easier to try and vilify some tactic in the game or other Players than it is to accept that you simply don't have the right stuff.
Rather than attempt to take stock and learn how to improve yourself, you come here (you and quite a few others) to moan and groan and try to get someone else to solve your problems. It is pathetic. It tells us everything we need to know about your personal character and ethics. Then you compound that image we have of you by playing with rhetoric rather than honestly having a discussion about the topic. What you could be doing in a thread is asking people how they deal with Campers, what solutions have they found effective, and asking what you can do to better deal with the issue. You aren't doing that; you aren't even paying lip service to pretending to do that. Even though thousands upon thousands manage to get by just fine, you (and your ilk) pretend like there are no solutions other than having the DEVs fix it for you. What a strange, small context you live inside.
Sorry your post went on for quite a while but I didn't see an answer, or I missed it becuase apparently just getting to the point is too honest for you.
So did you say it would be OK if there was an offering that would alow you to camp? becuase now it's a still a choice? I mean then it would be no different choice wise from a mori right?
Oh and to be clear I'm not avoiding your arguments about the importance of choices I'm just going to 1 go through them 1 at a time so you can't keep changing you mind part way through, and 2 making sure you actually believe the points your making because why argue a point that no one in the argument actually believes, not much different from a red hearing at that point
Even with this latest patch they buffed BT to counter just about all forms of camping and we still get people that complain about it...like when will they be happy?
Sorry, no dice. I'm not playing rhetorical games with you. I took the time to read EVERY SINGLE ONE of your posts since you started here at the Forum. It didn't take long, but it was tedious. My assessment of you is bang on the nose. Since you like the play games and talk about me, let's talk about you. I'm going to start quoting from all your posts putting them up in a wonderful little montage that showcases what you are about EXACTLY. I was going to work on a new chapter in a project I'm writing, but I've got writer's block tonight so it is YOUR lucky day. I'm already compiling the hits; I have to warn you, when they are laid out together, it doesn't show you in the best light. If you were a character on SNL you would be Debbie Downer.
They won't be happy because they aren't really looking for solutions. They just like to complain, more than playing the game I think. They like having pity parties here. They don't want to work, they just want things handed to them. To some degree I blame canned ham games like World of Warcraft; they have brought up a whole generation of so-called Gamers who are used to simply succeeding by showing up.
More like gen rush needs to be addressed.. there literally nothing a killer can do other than camp if he get 3/4 hooks per match which is the average if you play normally. The current game state is pitiful.. its not a surprise that you get instant matchs as killer, reasons are obvious.
Fair enough I think I've been pretty upfront about what I want, to stop camping and why, becuase It's incredibly boring.
And I didn't mean to imply that I didn't read you post just that when I read it I didn't see an answer to the one question it was proporting to answer, which was and is, do you still object if camping required an offering.
As the inclusion of an offering would still comply with the not taking away player choice that you have been claiming is the reason that camping shouldn't be removed, it would seem to me like you wouldn't have a problem, unless it's not really about choice you just want to keep camping in.
So yes or no to camping with an offering like moris?
Again, don't play stupid. I've read all your posts already, and you have a very specific way of evading topics and trying to turn the conversation. I haven't commented on whether or not Camping should require an offering because that is a moronic suggestion in the first place. I wish there was a nice way of saying it. We touched on Add-on(s) and Offerings earlier, talking about how they are different from tactics. What you are talking about is not only moronic it would be so cost prohibitive to try to code that it would bankrupt BEhavior even trying to attempt it. Let me cue you in on something else, since I know you SO MUCH BETTER now that I took the time to read all your comments (and the discussions you started). Camping and Tunneling are entirely SUBJECTIVE terms in regards to this game. There is no agreed upon meaning to either. How do you code something that cannot be defined? I know how you would define it, after reading all your drivel. But you are new, and apparently cursed. The sheer VOLUME of your discussions and comments regarding weird little problems and reports you make is insane. I've never seen anyone here constantly having issues with the most basic things. It is almost as if you are just making them up for attention. If all those are genuine, you must wander around with a little black cloud over your head, and it is always raining on you.
No, I don't think Killers should have to put in offerings to practice Player Agency in the game. The very notion is hair-brained. You haven't gotten any traction in ANY of your Discussions, polls, and threads because they are full of fuzzy thinking, self-serving nonsense, and all boil down to you thinking something isn't fun for YOU. I particularly like how in one you start it with, "Third time is the charm..." and go on to blame Killer mains for your failures to get any traction in your posts. You even blame others for your failures here.
Camping it's a legit strategy.
The only thing that needs to get fixed its survivors NOT LOSING a PIP.
That's f***ing it, solved.
Yeah, I can see that. This is a constructive suggestion, short and to the point. I should take a page out of your book. I agree, people who get camped out and spend the ENTIRE time on the hook (which means waiting out Stage-1 and struggling to the end of Stage-2) should at the least, not lose a Pip.
Well see now I must say I'm confused first you said that loosing camping tunneling slugging mories or herding would reduce Killers to little more than Bots.
But you made an exception for mories because even though you don't get them in every game it was not reducing killers to bots becuase they still had the choice to play the offering or not.
From a player agency perspective wouldn't that mean that having camping function in the same way would not be objectionable from a player agency perspective, which you have stated is your issue with removal of camping.
As for the definition that is so incredibly difficult to define and program I would submit thay an easy definition would be if killer is within x of hooked survivor he is camping. Seems simple Strait forwards and easy enough to code.
I'm told that there was actually code in place to stop the hook timer but that they ran into issues when they tested it becuase survivors would force chases near hooks, hence the chase exception. Not sure how they managed such a cost prohibitive bit of coding but they apparently found a way
Sorry Herding not hearing
Only problem with that is, it doesn't solve the primary issue with camping, that is how boring it is.
I'm not opposed to the suggestion mind you. I've seen a number of posts about treating it like distracting a killer during a chase for light bringer, they make sense and tie in well
Honestly? I'm starting to wonder about you, perhaps this playing dumb isn't just an act. You honestly cannot discern different concepts from one another can you? You are so drown in your bias that you cannot look at the game objectively. You seem totally unable to follow the conversation we have been having for hours, and still are mixing different things together as if they are the same. I felt better when I thought you were playing stupid as a rhetorical trick. The other option is too horrible to consider. There is literally nothing I can say that makes you look worse than you do yourself, every single time you post. At this point, I feel like I'm clubbing a baby seal.
Sorry didn't see an answer in there? Its almost like your points about player agency were all bs, but I'll give you another shot.
If moris requiring an offering doesn't reduce Killers to bots why would doing the same thing to camping be such an issue from the perspective of your don't prevent camping it turns player into bots argument?