Roac

I don't do anything of those things, and yet I'm happy. How can you determine how and why one finds pleasure in such things? Also, coffee and tobacco can only be grown in a specific climate. Russia does not have that specific climate.

This idea was originally posted by roykingtree on 16 Feb 2013, I have my own ideas to contribute to it. Agriculture, the lifeblood of the ancient civilization. Agriculture has been an important part of society for over 12,000 years, it created permanent settlements and has lead to the development of modern society. First of all you may ask yourself, "why would I even need such a concept in a zombie killing post-apocalyptic game?" That's because the zombie killing is only the surface of the true nature of the game. The true nature of the game is to rediscover society. Living in a time of chaos, humanity strives to survive and find hope in the most impossible situations. My Reasons: -Farming leads to permanent settlements, it leads to permanent social relationships, it leads to a haven in the midst of an apocalypse. This trend has been shown in history that agriculture has lead to the development of towns, the precursor to modern cities. It gives people something to do with their time and turns the game into a social environment. -Farming IS realistic. Now, I'm not saying that everyone CAN farm or HAS farmed in the past, but most people SHOULD be able to farm if they know the basics and have the basic tools, which is taught by most schools (No matter how indirectly in Biology); if ancient people, 12,000 years before our time, can learn to cultivate plants and domesticate animals, then why can't the modern human? I find it very plausible that if someone put the work into it that they could farm. -Farming leads to innovation, ways of improving upon systems. It leads to a small community based government (very basic stuff), it leads to organization of, for example, supplies, foodstuffs, and even diplomacy between settlements. I believe that farming will reduce the KoS mentality. If permanent social environments are created, then communities will know who is a bandit and who is a stranger. It adds consequences to one's actions, it adds a reason to actually cooperate with other human beings for mutual benefit . This goes directly with the permanent user ID system that was suggested by someone.(Sorry, I forgot who suggested it) Now just how would we go about doing this? I have a few ideas. How: First, one must till the land. This is grueling, backbreaking work, but it's a computer game, and nobody actually WANTS to do that, but still, you must put effort into it, lest the game becomes too easy. So I have a solution: Once you choose a plot of land (Maybe 5x5 meters?) you must return 10 times to perform the till action, and one must have a hoe. The "tilling land" option recharges after one hour. (So, feasibly you can have a plot cleared in 10 hours.) If it has not been tilled after 2 days of the last tilling, then weeds retake the land and you must start again from step 1. (ALL TIMES ARE REAL LIFE) SIDE NOTE: I was thinking that for different environments require different amounts of tilling, so one might find that the best land to be in a plain or grassland area. Second, you must plant seeds. Now, what these seeds exactly are can be decided later, but one would to get a bag of seeds, a lootable item that can be found in barns or farmhouses. Then they would have to get a plow or something of the sort to plant the seeds. This is also labor intensive work, but much less labor is required. You would only do it once, and the seeds would be completely planted in three hours. Third, the plants grow. You must keep the land clear of weeds by clearing the weeds at least once every two days. If the land does not get adequate protection from weeds, then the crops die, and the land must once again be tilled. Fourth, harvest. I image that the growing process would take five days IRL. But, this would come with great reward, to endow those which took the time to do such labor intensive work. One would have to use a scythe (If it is wheat or grain) to harvest the crops. I was thinking along the lines of this: for every plot, you can get the equivalent of 300 (Debatable) meals with one plot of land. Grain would fill one slot in your inventory so you would have to keep coming back and harvesting. (This is a little unrealistic) I was thinking of a GUI which showed how many bags of grain are left in the plot, and the wheat remains in the harvestable state indefinitely. (Or until the amount of bags goes down to zero.) Afterwards, it returns to the tilled state, ready for another round of planting. Providing the Necessities: All farming tools should have a chance of spawning in a field, a barn, or in a farmhouse. Seeds should be obtainable from a barn or a farmhouse. -Water: Crops require a lot of water. I'm not entirely certain how to get an effective system as to get so much water. A possible solution is to plant near a source of water, or the ability to create a well. I am very accepting when it comes to suggestions to improve my idea, and I also accept critique. I will answer accordingly and change the ideas depending on the suggestions and critique. (But please don't do, "No this sucks." Or "This idea is so good!" Because this tells me nothing nor does it inform me of why it sucks or why it's so good.) Thank you for your time. :) Edit: All times are real life and are subject to debate.

As a Mormon, I must say that I am entirely against adding anything which supports alcohol usage. Also, I fail to understand the purpose of why this should be implemented.

While not in such exquisite detail, the basis of what you said has been confirmed for SA. (Pertaining to gun malfunctions) But I don't understand what would be the point in "actually" reloading the ammunition.

I don't get what you mean by, "If you want them removed; here is a list of suitable games." So, hypothetically speaking if there was an ULTIMATE-SUPER-LAZER GUN OF BADASSNESS that killed in one hit and could fire through walls, was super overpowered, and i wanted it removed: That i should play FarmVille?

"I have a shotgun..."

Could you imagine it, someone who survived the initial zombie apocalypse dies, from tripping off a rock. Totally anti-climatic, no?

Damn, what a moment!

One of the reasons this may be is because it is so easy to kill, which of course, people would take the easier route than scavenging for supplies. Now, this example has been used tens of thousands of times, but why in Minecraft do active communities (towns) develop, when in DayZ people only go solo, or (most of the time) know the person they are working with some how? What makes them so different? To be honest, I have no idea what makes them so different, they are both open world survival games. Same concept, grow, accumulate, and prosper. But what would you do in DayZ once you have the best equipment, tents full of ammo, food, and drink? -That is the wall right there, that is End Game. And there is no desire to create a group of followers, create a stable base, and watch your community expand throughout the server (That is the End Game in Multiplayer Minecraft.) Even medics, while are extremely helpful, do not actively pursue to create a group of medics, to expand their enterprise. (I dunno, a hospital perhaps?) Now this is just the Majority, there is the minority who wishes (Also i believe this is what Rocket wishes as well) to create a stable government (Perhaps not the best word?) seat in the middle of hell, to bring order to the chaos, most of which are eaten alive by Bandits. Then it turns into a vicious cycle.

I use Sony Stereo-Headset, it's good if you have a PS3.

So, I just got the new edition of GameInformer, and DayZ is ranked #2 in Top 10 Successes for 2012. (pg 60) And a congratulations to a bandit as well, ID: The Black Widow, you are ranked #4th in Top 10 Villains. (pg 50) Hopefully once the standalone is released DayZ will gain a spot on the cover of GameInformer! Good job Devs! :D

They had a 1/3 chance of hitting anything at 50m.

...What did i just read? I can literally feel my brain cells committing suicide.

You'd better dig that bullet out of your leg. Surgery, anyone?

Why wouldn't Player C just shoot Player A (AKA Shooter). And what is to stop this recognition points from occurring while traveling in a group, there would obviously be witnesses assuming that it is a bandit squad. -What is the chance that the bandit wouldn't finish the job to leave the target limping away? -Wouldn't this help snipers, since they can easy shoot survivors from a long range and according to your system they shouldn't gain recognition points; since nobody was close enough to observe them in the act of murder. I'll support this idea, but it seems to have some flaws.