[email protected]

Really? :huh:Every time I go from camo to casual duds, I'm back in my hero skin. On the subject of "karma". I don't think there should be any artificial means to judge somebodies character (eg bandit/hero). Mechanics to treat players differently based on their prior behaviour is just an extension of that. I also don't think it's suitable for DayZ. There's no reason critical damage, broken bones and zombie aggro should EVER relate to your "karma" or "humanity". It would just be an abusive, forceful game mechanic, which doesn't belong in this game and thankfully (going by my judgement of the devs' attitude) will never happen.

On the very basest level of logic, if you have created a large enough community to achieve complex goals such as, hosting a protected trading zone, you should have enough members that "safe" bases are not really needed.Timer/ownership scripts are also not necessary, and in context (authentic anti-game, remember) don't make sense. The OP and following posts make the construction and defense sound so simple it's trivial. Those who follow DayZ and appreciate the relentless struggles and unforgiving brutality we're faced with, should not want such a feature. To put it bluntly, what you suggest just sounds like cheating. Civillization is measured in the actions and interactions of people. Not indestructible storage caches. EDIT: @Sodesa - The ability to occupy functional buildings really does sound more end-game than just building bases. Joe_M and I were discussing something along these lines before, in a topic about encouraging teamwork. I can't post links in this browser. I'll edit one in later if I remember.

It's an unfortunate scenario.When DayZ was literally being killed by hackers, the private hives saved it. But now it's become something else entirely. Server lists are full of the bastard children of DayZ. There's no denying it. But if it's spoiled folks to the point where people are truly disappointed by the content of the standalone, they will still be able to carry on playing their mods.

This idea, as you suggest it, should NEVER become part of DayZ.The two highligted statements are examples of concepts contrary to the most basic point of the game. Your life and everything you hold dear should always be at risk, otherwise there is no challenge.

I think that's more of a coincidence than anything else. The slower, weaker folks tend to fall behind when it's every man for himself. It's a first come, first served (for dinner) basis.

You can buy a health-bar in the marketplace for 1000 GC.

That's a perfect reason to include them IMO.Imagine watching folks heaving a chainsaw around, only to get it caught in the cotton shirt of the first zed they attack. Priceless. Flamethrowers would be in the same boat. Zeds running like crazy, trying to rip you to shreds. You spray them with your flamethrower, thinking your cool as fuck. Then you get your ass kicked by pissed off, flaming zeds.

I picture a mess of chainsaws, shotguns and Evil Dead style FPV 180 shovel-swings. And molotov cocktails. Because zombie-apocalypses aren't challenging enough until the guys who are trying to eat you are also on fire.

That depends on the lore (when it's revealed) IF they have normal human requirements, and IF the outbreak occured some time further back than a couple of weeks, then lack of food/sleep would have killed of the majority of the zeds. I suppose they must deal with their needs. In which case it would be nice to bear witness to it occasionally. Sleeping zeds would be like land-mines if you got complacent.

I'd suggest you search the suggestion thread for "body dismemberment" :D

Another worry, If I can wax hypothetical for a while . use predefined "base" areas to store vehicles and gear and go offline for the night . others know EXACTLY where you've stored your stuff, and simply take it. Unless you have enough of a "society" to occupy your base constantly, it's better to not be restricted in placement. Even if your crew were online 24/7, do you think they'll want to be standing watch incase someone walks in and robs you? At least any invaders should have to FIND your base first. Hit the nail on the head.For trade/medical posts, you're getting WAY ahead of yourself. It's simply not feasible. How often do announced gatherings (for any reason) manage to occur without being attacked? The answer is never.

That's not a dick. That's the very definition of PUSSY. :lol:EDIT: Shouldn't this topic be 'yarded? The bandits have already been punished with having to put up with this stupid suggestion. Do the rest of us have to suffer as well?

Your point about Devils castle simply doesn't adress my concerns. What I've tried to point out is, your suggestion doesn't allow for "building" bases. Which is what people want. Freedom is an important factor. Even taking your suggestion. If barricades were handled as I suggest, there's no need for new buildings/scripts. At all. Any place instantly becomes exactly what you need. There are WAY more buildings enterable in SA, so more choice. What you've suggested, is a system of buildings where zeds don't spawn. Even in the mod, Zeds don't spawn inside, and loot wont' spawn while you're there. (zeds shouldn't either, but they seem to spawn right in front of me all the time) The only addition required is a gate, which as pointed out earlier, can be done with a bus/car. I'm suggesting a way to defend/barricade ANY PART OF THE MAP, without adding extra server-load You're suggesting adding new buildings, unnecessarily. Again, What I'm suggesting is a way to include barricades (in-world placeable objects) without increasing server-load. EDIT: I just read through the thread yet again. I still can't understand why you WANT to be restricted to preset areas. All you need to achieve your suggestion is to stop zeds spawning within close range (75-150M) of players. (which shouldn't happen anyway)

I don't think grouping can be "forced" onto players, only encouraged. Putting folks in a situation where working together would be beneficial doesn't necessarily mean they're going to cooperate, but it gives them the opportunity. Like everything in DayZ, individuals should decide on their actions without forceful game mechanics or restrictions. I wouldn't like to see any changes made with the intention of balance or direction regarding player behaviour. As Fraggle pointed out, we have freedom of choice. The best way to improve upon what we have is with greater variety and less predictability. The more difficult the challenges we face, the more likely we are to seek help.

You'll still be able to kill and die at the drop of a hat.Adding zeds and survival elements does not reduce the power or limit the effectiveness of PvP. I have no idea where you're getting this idea from. Unless you think there will be so many zombies that they somehow form a bullet-proof barrier around players. We wouldn't still be going on about it if you weren't still getting it wrong.

Nerf verb - to nerf. past participle - nerfed. Definition - To make worse, weaken or reduce effectiveness of. Nerf noun Definition -

Well, on the subject of bases, I've tried to make my opinion as clear as I can in other threads. I don't foresee us gaining the ability to rebuild towns. That's all I'll say on the subject ATM.

That's not what "nerfed" means.

@joe_mcentire In the world of DayZ, the rules of salvage outweigh any opinion of "possession". It's more of a "you snooze, you lose" economy.

If you cure, converse, interact with and receive info/items/rewards from a computer controlled character, I consider that an NPC in the style of any other game. Zeds, in my opinion, are just mobs. To kill or be killed by, and not much else.

I can't find the pic I was thinking about, but when I first saw the devblog it looked to me like they were in a bit that would be off to the right in this pic.I think the Vybor barn is the bit circled in red. It was my example for something totally unrelated. But it serves this purpose well enough. That little area carries a lot of weight in my "memorable moments" section. Note, the little tower to the right of my circle(under E in HERE!), and the long white cowshed to the left, up the hill. You can see what looks to me like the new apartment buildings to the bottom right. Obviously I'm probably totally wrong, but maybe this can explain my little bit of speculation. :P Honestly, I didn't study the video at all, I just made that assumption right off the bat and didn't think about it much after that. EDIT: I'd rather not have things confirmed or denied, I enjoy wonder and anticipation far more.

@elf cakes, Novoselki. Looks to be on the road North out of Cherno, which leads in the direction of Balota/Zeleno. Can see the little sniper tower to the East and a farm to the North in some pics.

Miss the point much?PvP will not be removed. Rather, the urge to run and gun will be tempered with more risk. Lok saying "play Wasteland" is correct, if you want an entirely PvP oriented game. Stamping your feet like a child when a title, still in development, doesn't stay exactly the same forever, is the idiotic thing. Nobody is denying the fact that killing would take place. But you seem to be denying the idea that there's more to the scenario than deathmatch.

You should be allowed to spawn with a group, but only if you spawn on fire, with broken legs. No. Seriously though, how many times has this been suggested? I don't think you're realising how much of a handicap grouping up is when you're not already reasonably well geared-up. More mouths to feed. More easliy spotted. Besides the fact that it's not very DayZ-like, it's just not a good idea.

If you suggest any scenario concerning NPCs in DayZ, don't expect a warm reception. "Greatness" is subjective. Most people won't share your opinion on this particular matter. If you'd like more information, I'd suggest you try reading the forums a bit. Folks don't like to repeat themselves, and most points you could question have already been answered countless times.