anonymousplayer457

If you are going to call this system a dictatorship, then you might as well call every society a dictatorship. We have laws for a reason. Given, there are many laws that need to be removed.

No, because if the person you speak of was the one to make the first shot, then they would loose karma, not you. You could easily kill them and not worry about it. The only problem is the range of the gun that was shot by the first person. If that is too small, then this system would be ineffective. If they shot a makarov for example. But that is why there is a buffer on the karma system. If you were to loose 20 karma points out of 100 but then to give that player a blood transfusion and morphine, your karma would be increased again, removing the penalty. Thank you for taking the time to list a valid problem with this system. This is the type of criticism I am looking for.

The karma system does not prevent RDM. It tries to stop it. But unfortunately, it isn't doing a very good job since the penalty isn't feared. I'm also not suggesting for this to replace Humanity, but to run alongside it. Here is why I oppose the people that kill for fun. If you were in a DayZ like scenario, would you be happy to finally see another un-armed/defenceless person. Or would you end their life for the giggles. Not to mention that in a real life scenario, you would value your ammo a lot more and wouldn't care to waste it on killing somebody.

Believe me I can take criticism, but I also encourage others to give constructive criticism so that we don't have people wondering what is wrong with their suggestion because a ton of people (for example) have said "this sucks I don't like it". You can't develop an idea with non-constructive criticism. Which is why I don't encourage it.

I'll be heading off to be for now. It's too late. Feel free to continue posting with your questions and CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.I will attempt to answer all questions when I wake up. it's 00:27 where I like right now. Good night all!

"1. You cant ban people for their playstyle, if someone would like to be homicidal maniac he should be able to." It wouldn't be such a problem is not so many people did it. At least on the servers I play on. "2. How do you track things?" Already answered this. "3. Killing for self defence without possibility to loot the other guy huts your karma? Groups fighting each other?" The person who fired the first shot would be the one at fault. Anybody who shoots after that within the radius of the range of that persons gun would not have their karma dropped. So if somebody with an AS50 shot somebody from 1000m away and missed a group of players, then the actions that follow from those players would not degrade their karma. "4. What the difference if you call it karma or humanity? Same basic idea, only the word changes and you start to ban people.." Karma in the way I'm suggesting it to be implemented is more like enforceable rule whereas Humanity is more of a deter ant. That is why I suggest they stay separate.

"killing people just because you think they may kill you IS valid" I agree with this. If I might add, I don't have a problem with people killing others due to the fear of their life being ended. Something similar happened to me when I was faily new to the game. --BEGIN STORY-- I was in the super market of Elektro one failful night and was digging through all the loot, obtaining what I needed and such. Suddenly, a road flare is thrown in my direction and before I know it, I'm dead. Not many days after this incident, I was in that same supermarket doing the same thing. Suddenly, a road flare is lit in my general direction. Remebering what happened last time, I kill the player who through the flare. Not because they had fired upon me, but because it triggered a memory of my previous demise and caused me to panic. --END STORY-- The karma system should not be around to ruin the atmosphere or have people go against what they might do if they were to encounter such a scenario, it's just there to keep the game as realistic as possible.

Congratulations on 'throwing the first punch'. I must disagree with you in saying that the reason DayZ is so great is the freedom. i'd say it's more about the fact the it's the most true-to-life zombie survival what with the perma-death and all. But in order for DayZ to stay true-to-life, the players would have to start thinking in a more realistic manner. "I think what the game actually needs is more incentive for people to co-operate with strangers" So this karma system isn't an incentive? We've already tried the 'bandit status' and humanity. Both of which have failed. So unless you are willing to provide your own solution to this problem, then don't go and knock those who have though of a possible solution. There is no point in giving criticism if it isn't constructive. Please, don't be that person who turns down every idea without even trying it and not even contribute to any of them or come up with your own.

I'm fairly sure that humanity is not damage if the first shot came from another player. You would just need to transfer that over to karma.

There should be a fairly easy way of having the game check if the killer looted the body and if the kill was justified in the first place. How would you do this. Firstly, you would need the game to check the players inventory to see what they have and categorise them into different categories. For example, water bottles, beans, meat and soda would be put under the food category. Once this has been done, the game needs to check how far away a player is from a loot spawn and how much hunger and thirst they have. If they player is 5kms away from the next food loot spawn, has little to no food left and has a high hunger and/or thirst and kills a player, then that kill would not decrease that players karma as the death was not in vien. That's how I would set it up any way.

I have already mentioned Humanity and the poor job it is doing. With this thread, I focus more on how the realism of this game is effected by RDM. Killing people because you need the resources would make sense in a real world scenario. Wouldn't you group together with the few people not infected by this disease and not kill them for no reason? If you want to kill other players, why not just go and play Counter-Strike?

What if DayZ had a karma system similar to that of Trouble in Terrorist Town? One of the problems I find in DayZ is that people kill each other for no apparent reason other than the laughs. So what if for every innocent person you killed in DayZ and not do so for supplies, you lost karma. Say for example you started with 100 karma and for every person you killed meaninglessly, you lost 20 karma. Once your karma hits 0, you would be banned for a day or so (keeping you items/gear). You would also receive extra karma for helping out other players. Yes, I am aware that a similar system is already in place (humanity), but humanity acts in a slightly different way. To quote Barbossa: "the code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules." Swap 'the code' with humanity and you've basically explained how this system is failing some of us. Why the karma system? Well, if you were in a zombie apocalypse grossly outnumbered by zombies and only saw a survivor once every 1 or so, would you be going around killing the few people you met, or joining forces to try and survive? While I do understand killing other players if you are low on supplies (particularly food, water, medical supplies and weapons/ammo), I see way too many people killing for the shits and giggles. Not only does this have a negative effect on the direct victims, but also on those who seek to kill for a legitimate purpose. Say for example you were in the heat of battle with another player. You're being constantly (and blindly) fired at by the other player and faint. After recovering, you manage to lay a hit on the other player, breaking their leg, but they disappear into thin air. In other words, they've just aborted the game. While this issue is mainly caused by an attachment to ones gear, it may also be because people are loosing their gear to players who may not even loot your body. because of this "I don't want to loose my gear to some asshole" mentality, people are aborting their game in fear of death. If people thought that they were being shot for a legitimate reason, they MAY choose to stay and take the death. However, whether or not the player chooses to stay is more dependent on what kind of gear they have and how well they are able to find items. Just a thought. -Anon