xximrtwoixx

Do you understand that gear would never respawn in many locations because of this? Also something similar to this exhists now, look up the loot farming post. You beat it by having original player leaving new player coming in to spawn gear then you repeat... You cant stop farming with a system that spawns loot in, especially if everything is infinite. Read my post on capping items, Imo its the only solution.

Puting in more of the same loot spawns wont do anything, players will wiki what spawns are best and then farm them. Items have to be capped so the spawns stop working and the world is populated by the players. Gear will be in random locations on every server because it will be were players put it...

If the goal is to simulate your character being in game 24/7 I think a more authentic scenario can be made than secure synced storage for a player. How bout your character stays in game as AI when your not there then you can log in to a dead character instead of missing gear? I think you should learn from your experiances and come up with better places for your tent(s). Pro tip don't put vehicles near them because there are hacks to find all the vehicles on a server. I have had a tent unlooted for going on a month. Sometimes hiding in plain sight is better than activley trying to hide one, people look in the places you assume would be great tent spots.

So long as growth is not faster than the game's time cycle I'm on board with farming/growing food. I'm also a fan of foraging, I've made a post about it before. I think it would be kind of pointless unless you had a long term plan and a very secure area to farm, but I think even having the option to farm could entice players to try and set up such a scenario.

Reducing the percentage chance that loot drops would effect all locations, thus even having more locations you would not even chances of generation back out. Also this would not generate the effect you think, because a player could avoid all the travel and farm one location thus maximizing their return for time spent looting. Thus this would be rendered useless... Campsites already exhist, they are called player tents, they are usually filled with things.... I like these mini scenarios as they could be used to tell a narrative or make the player think about the initial outbreak, but IMO rational locations should still be the end all be all, especially if these isolated unique things function the way they do now, single spawn on server restart. I agree with rational locations, IMO these should be built up as there are some places you could go and nearly be guaranteed to find certain things. If you know where a military base or an armory odds are it will be filled with thousands of arms and tons of military equipment. The drawback of these locations should be the danger one faces in going to them not a stupid random chance that they are sudenly empty but will be filled if I come back a half hour later. The danger should be Z's, bandits, and established groups that have made this location their home. Why take from a military base if your group is big enough to take it over...

So what... There are no "common" areas, the whole world is your play ground and IMO you should be able to shape it to your will. Look at NW airfield the majority of it is fenced in, why not simply finish of the fence. This could also apply to the powerstation at Electro, this is authentic. If a group is large enough and abmitious enough to take over and hold an area they should be able to, its authentic. If you have a big organized group why would you raid a military base that is already mostly fortified? You would simply take it over and finish the fortificaitons/repair them.

I've never played EVE but from what I've read their system actually consists of different sectors with tolls, to get between them, I don't think its possible to have a system that does not accomplish server/instance changes in a world that big. Loading and manual login/logoff can probably be avoided, but I don't think you can just have one massive world w/no loading or transistions. Maybe there is but I couldn't tell you. T

Everyone should be equally butt hurt, if there is no punishment for immediate death with this type of system people would choose x spawn die/kill then do it again, a punishement for immediate death would resolve this. Yes lets ensure everyone is always able to do anything/everything and no one is specialized in anything. Lets keep classes/skills as items because they are easy to replace.... That is what your saying, everyone should be a SF soldier who moonlights as an ER MD and restores car's/helicopters on the weekends..... You don't spawn with your group if they are alive and your dead, or if you all decided to start new characters you would not be together. I do agree about the car/clan, but from what I can tell the grouping mechanics Rocket has talked about appear to be more in line with helping ad-hoc play than standard clan/group play. Please elaborate how these take away from the game, otherwise it simply an opinion with little to no merit, I like blue so thus red sucks.... As you said nothing can be 100% advantage free, yes there are retards who would wear bright orange by choice, but I don't think they should be catered to. This isn't really about a skill system, as it states in OP this type of character generation allows a player to have a limited amount of choice when it comes to building their character. As I stated skills deserve their own thread, possibly many one for each skill, this is about a mechanic that gives you choice at spawn in a balanced way. Survival =\= Shooter These are two completely different types of games, I'm sure you've played shoot games, they are round based, a given life/round lasts a very limited amount of time, you interact with players/world by shooting them..... Survival games are slow, there are many ways of interacting with players/world, rounds/lifes last as long as you are able to keep your character alive. I agree that its not an RPG, I wouldn't say it is a shooter either, you could play it like one because you can shoot things, but your throwing away alot of the other content that makes up the game then.

I think skin systems that are based on counters are fundamentally flawed because they attempt to track a dynamic environment and actions with an arbitrary system. I also think classes or skins for classes would never accuratley portray what a player's play style actually is, they can wear it but act in a completely different way. To avoid these issues and create a more immersive and authentic experiance I think that all gear should be displayed on the character model independent of it being active or not. This also touches on how inventory management should be handled to provide an immersive experiance and help add value to other players because you shouldn't be able to carry everything w/no sacrifices. I believe adding draw backs like weight/encumbrance and also animations with buffs/penalties for run length should be used to penalize people for carrying alot of items, but yet still allow them to do so if they want to. Players decide, but there is a price for everything. Examples of Gear on Players: Current system, you have nvgs active they show on your face, if they are not active they are not displayed on your character model. New system: Your nvg while inactive and equiped are displayed on top of your head but not down/deployed over your eyes, when you activate them they are displayed over your eyes as they are currently. Current system: You have a tool box on your belt (explain this) it is not displayed in game. New System: Tool box is an inventory item that acts as a seperate container for holding tools, when you have one in your inventory it can be tied to you pack rails if you have a modular pack, placed inside a non modular pack, or carried in your hands as an item (no attack). The "show what you are effect" can be increased with different packs that fit more of specific gear types, like a tool box for tools, a tac vest for ammo/grendades/small items, medical bags, and modular/rail packs. The "main" inventory and belt slots are completley removed in favor of representing what you would actually be able to carry on your person. To increase what you can carry you find/scavenge items that allow you to carry more. Items would also recieve realistic size/weight ratings that allow them to fit into these different slots, and they would also be able to be carried in your hands. This could be S, M, L or even be through different categories of the actual slots, or a combination of both. I favor a combination becaues it would yield the most authentic results, ie an AS50 that is not broken down would be an XL and must be carried, just as engine parts or a main rotor assembly would be an XL. Example: Current system a rifle takes 10 slots of inventory space all inventory spaces/slots are the same if you have 10 slots you can carry it. New System: A rifle with a sling can be slung over your shoulder (to a set max but more than one) with no sling a rifle takes up say 10 Medium slots. You have a back pack with 10 large interior and 6 exterior small slots so it can go inside, and takes up say 5 large slots. Current system: Matches take up a tool belt slot or 1 back pack slot New system: Matches take up one small slot, (Pocket size) and if you put them inside your pack 1 large slot is broken down into four small slots. To add value to specific types of packs and to push players into not keeping tons of small items in their pack part of the mechanic would be to add authentic drawbacks to storing items in a large pack. Like the addition of an animation where the character removes the pack and hunts through it, and the number of items increases retrieveal animation length. Additional small packs that fit more of X item and offer buffs like reducing time to deploy items from that category would ensure that people would want to use the appropriate pack for what goes inside of it. Examples: Web vest w/ammo pouches, holds 12 magazines and can have additional items attached equaling 2 medium slots (knife/grenades/sidearm holster) reduces reload time by 10%. First aid pouch 4 medium or 8 small holds 10 small slots of medical equipment that can be deployed instantly. This could also be used for packs, have medical/tool/ammo packs or have a rail system that can have different packs attached to it. This way people use the packs they want and best help them accomplish their goals. Everyone else gets to see these packs and their items so you know what someone's play style is by viewing their equipment, the most honest and authentic way of displaying playstyles. This would reduce kos because you could more easily identify people you want/need to shoot, and those people that are likley violent. Ie survivors/medics wont look like paramilitary "bandits" stocked with ammo/weapons. This type of mechanic would not nerf a playstyle or be exploitable as it simply shows what/who you are.

You can stop it, read my post, you simply dont award actions, award a flat rate for time, everyone gets the same for their play time, no grinding. You could try to afk but you have to eat, drink, etc, and you can be found. Could also fix with idle timer.

the map isn't part of dayz, it's left over from Arma and is only used because you dont make a map/textures when your doing initial development if you have a free one to use. So yes your suggestion is worse ie more unauthentic than whats been developed as part of dayz. Flimsy I think that is the greatest idea I've heatd in awhile, as long as im not putting 5 backpacks in a lounge chair. Also underground bunkers have a major draw back, if some one finds it and plugs your oxygen intake u r screwed. I do agree that constructing one in this scenario is unauthentic.

First off I agree that skills, perks, etc whatever you want to call them, something that will make your character have intrinsic value outside of their gear and will make you different from another player do have a place because it is authentic. No two people are the same and being exposed to a scenario where you survival is dependent on your ability to adapt and overcome you will get better or you will die. Lastly it is needed as a check to add value to other characters, and to influence player actions. It is unauthentic to "make it" then go look to lose it all, and thats what player actions consist of now. Specialization and improvement will add value to characters. Second off you are out of your mind if you think people won't game a system for an advantage. People will grind everything they can, and those that don't will operate at a disadvantage because they don't. This is why improve by doing or repedative action skills will never work. This is why people are against skills because it is a waste of play time to "grind" to many people, also some people don't want to deal with the butt hurt of losing such an investment an old character would represent in such a system. It's much better if they can pick up their skills off of a tool belt and be ready to go. Look at your proposal, what are you going to cap the daily limit at? The average play time, well some players play way more wtf are they going to risk everything for no reward? Set it at a long play time, well that fucks over all the casual one hour players. There is no way to balance this. Even if they capped loot and gear was uber rare people would still be farming skills, wasting ammo past the point where they know how to opperate the gun without killing themselves and can hit a man size target at 10 ft. Do you want your play session to be however long it takes you to hit your daily skill limit every day? Because that is what would happen if you put a limit in. What your saying is day in and day out people get better, they are surviving, I agree. I think the system should simply reward survival time, your alive for 1 day in game you get x points to spend. Your alive, so you did something right, thats your reward, you also aren't stuck doing stupid shit to build a certain skill like morrowing fucking jumping everywhere you go. It also can't really be gamed, if your in game you can die, I know if I came across some sob afk I would shoot his ass. I also think players should be able to pick some skills at spawn, but not just skills, whatever they think they will need to be successfull, gear, skills, spawn location, etc. Its their story let them tell it. IMO a system needs to be in place to work with skills, for instance your skilled at making fires so you can start a fire cave man style w/nothing. Another player is only a little skilled so he uses a flint/striker, another player has no skill so he uses matches or maybe even gas from a jerry can and matches. Also aiming is a deal breaker, IMO, I'm all for making it harder for everyone to aim, more sway effects everywere but prone or supported. But I'm not for random effects like spread mechanics that nerf someone because they don't have a number assigned to aiming, thats part of the players skill not the character's skill. I could see being slow to load/release a mag or not knowing the difference between 7.62x51 and 5.56, but if I'm good at aiming I don't want the game to tell me I'm not.

*Bump*

*Bump*

This suggestion applies more to future development but could be implemented/tested with the mods current state. Geographic servers - Each server represents a unique geographic area, to move between servers a player must navigate to the transition zone (edge of map) for the server. This would bring the player to next server over where they would repeat the process if they wanted to move to the next server. Your location would be saved on the server you are playing but if you try to log into a server without making the physical journey you would not be able to load into the server. Pro's - 1. Immersion- This would increase the scope of the setting; players would actually be a part of a huge world. Having to travel places would make you feel like you are in the world. 2. Better Server Performance- Content could be managed by server increasing performance. (ServerA is a city smaller in physical size to allow for more buildings and denser infected pops. ServerB is Farmland physically larger fewer buildings and fewer infected.) 3. Eliminates server hopping for looting/escape.- Players would not be able to transfer to other servers and maintain their same location. 4. Adds to End Game- Adds a sense of purpose for players/groups, they can "escape" from denser infected areas and gives them a use for cars & helicopters. Con's- 1. Less Jump in Play- Journey's, starting locations, friends to group up with, all "decisions" about playing the game are now more important because it would be much harder to group up. 2. Being alone- This feeling of being alone in the world somewhat exists now in this type of system you could truly be alone traveling across a server with few players/zombies. 3. (Future) Content- Texturing/creating the amount of content necessary to detail a massive world that maintains a player’s interest would be daunting. Implementation- Tracking- A token/pass would be attached to the player to represent what "world" they are in. This could be an invisible item or code attached to their backend profile/location. Worlds- A square of 9 would probably be the best starting place in my opinion this allows for a central zone to be fully surrounded by other zones. And if each zone comes even close to the current map size the world would be more than big enough. (For testing a square of 4 zones would be best, see below) Player Transitions- Transition areas at the edge and corners of the game map. The best solution would work something like this, Player enters transition area and his location/account gets a check that he is clear to transition to zone x. Player logs off, and logs on to next server over check if he is clear to enter into zone, if yes he is allowed to spawn at his location. Thus the transition zone is a "gray area" that exists in both zones. (Should be wilderness/empty areas) Alternatively the players could interact with objects like toll booths/gates/etc that allows them to receive new tokens and removes old tokens. Testing- This system could be tested with the current map but some modifications would need to be made and I'm not sure if any of these are possible. Also immersion could be affected because some subsystems could be changed/ruined to the point that they are no longer useful or realistic. As the current land mass on the lap is a reverse L 4 of these maps could be made to represent one massive island the only change would be which direction is N. Changing this would affect planetary positions and I'm not sure it would be worthwhile or possible to correct this at this stage in the mod. I believe testing would be of the resulting game play more than any specific mechanic. Would having to physically move your character to a different server ruin a player’s experience. TLDR: Servers represent unique geographic locations and thus force players to physically travel through them to reach other servers. Server hoping is eliminated. Adds endgame content and makes vehicles more important. Would this ruin jump in play? Would it ruin the gaming experience by forcing players to spend to much time in game travelling. Thoughts please?

I tried to address the transition zones in the crappy diagram, they would encompass the entire length of the borders of the map. When you get into those x or y coordinates you get a token/data saved on the hive that says your in the transition. You logg off, when you log in to the next server over it checks that you came from an adjacent server and were in the proper x/y coordinates ie have the token. Your spawned at the same coordinates, your character is updated w/a new server token and he still has the transition token. When you continue toward the heart of the other server/map you leave the x/y coordinates and your token or the check on your character is removed as he's no longer in the transition zone. Thus the transition exhisist in both worlds really, it could be a slim area though like 50 meters or less on the edge of the map.

I agree degredation would assist with redistribution, but so would the masses of enfield/akm/handgun/winchester wielding players who are out looking for gear/food. Redistribution by force or liberation through guile would replace loot runs to the church/grocery store.

A massive world is acheavable, a very massive world, its just that it would need to be broken into segments and each server would represent one of these segments. Travel between servers would require actual travel within the game world to the boundry area then you would be allowed to travel to the next location. This would function much like EVE online the issue is avoiding tolls/gates because those areas would be heavily camped. Here's a post I made about this a fairly long time ago, not much interest/debate, but I think it would solve the issue with gates. Having community servers makes this harder as they can drop/disappear at any time. http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/18321-geographic-servers/ I also made a suggestion for the economy, where loot would be capped at determined possesion rates amongst players/storage. I think this would create an economy that would lead to immergent play and it could also be scaled down after start up to wheen players off of pre shtf supplies toward their own creations. http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/83090-dynamic-hard-loot-caps/

How unauthentic would it be to come across a cabin/foot locker and not be able to break into it? What about not being able to take the key off the guy you just shot coming out of a locked structure? How about not being able to wait till someone finishes building a structure then killing them and claiming it for yourself? What about destroying the structure/foot locker just because you don't want your enemy to have it? Your burried treasure Idea could work as long as I'm able to come along and dig it up, it would really just be a tent that's harder to see though then. It ruins immersion to implement gamey controls locking content/items etc to players. IMO its also gamey to remove these things from the world just because someone died, if you don't want them going back to their tent/house/car etc go find it and steal it or destroy it. That is what makes storage work, the fact that it is always vulnerable to other players, that is the control that does not allow storage to ruin perma death. It takes work and planning to set up a good camp, wtf else are you going to do live hand to mouth forever or just DM? Player locked storage would also increase inflation because fewer items would change hands, thus more items would be introduced via normal spawning.

I wasn't trying to imply that they be fixed at 0 durability, I meant following your prior post that if item durability could be tracked and it persisted even after the item "respawned" via normal loot drop, that when items got to 0 or were busted that they remain busted and unrepairable even if they spawn via normal spawn. X M16's when all of X is broken they remain broken forever until entire world players/items/etc is reset. I think all of that is outside the scope of the OP though, unless degredation is a straight timer and a fast one at that players inflation will still occur and two months in everyone will have everything because they get it off of dead bodies/tents. So without caps on items you get Crap mechanic or total inflation... There is a decent thread discussing item degredation that would probably be a better location to discuss it further. I would like to keep this thread focused on capping loot and providing an in game economy that actually creates immergent game play.

If this were somehow possible and everything was set to this same kind of timer, like food running out, I think it would be cooler if items never made it back into the pool as "whole" items but instead would be the busted variant w/zero durability.

DayZ can't/won't use content from other mods, it is basically a poc of a commercial product it would open up to much liability for them to use community content in a corporate release. I don't get all the gun circle jerks, mosin/lee are close enough to the same thing that it doesn't matter. Also E Europe sucks as a shtf location, I hope they are using it just because its there and they don't want to waste time/money making their own map/world at this point. IMO standalone custom map needs to be in America where there are 12 guages and .22's in every other closet, WSSM is used on deer, and there are enough gun freaks to justify putting in just about anything.

Whats really out there for people to get? A map, where stuff spawns, whats in the game, and how much damage x does. Outside of an instanced world per server there is nothing to do about the map. Where stuff spawns is easy though, cap the loot and stuff no longer spawns where it did, it's on people's person or in their tent/vehicle. Go find it... Whats in the game can't be fixed people will look at the code, same for damage. I agree with your post, I'm just sceptical of how much Dev's can really do to fight the wiki trend. Check my post out for item caps, it explains how it would work and how it could re-locate items. http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/83090-dynamic-hard-loot-caps/

Implementing item degredation is can be "authentic" or it can be implemented in an attempt to achieve a specific goal. I think OP wants to achieve something and thus implement the mechanic as "balancer" rather than implement something that is authentic. IMO this only makes it feel gamey, forced, and poorly thought out. It can't function as the sole guardian of the in game loot economy and also feel authentic, the rate of degredation would need to be to high w/no option to fix or simply based on a timer w/no option to fix. A timer would nullify other content (Persistent Storage) and that would remove alot of the legit gameplay IMO. Even if it is implemented with a crazy rate, it still won't have an effect on the economy if there is an option to fix because people will just fix the good stuff. I would prefer an authentic look at degredation where your gun gets dirty (firing or elements), it takes damage from incoming fire, irreplaceable parts wear out (Use while dirty multiplies wear, use while clean is low wear). This would allow the player to have some control over the system, enough that they can choose/plan what to do. I also think degredation's major impact should be a value add to low tech weapon systems like bolt actions, pump actions, and revolvers. These things don't jam the way semi/full auto firearms do and they can operate much dirtier because they are sealed or purely mechanical. That would be an authentic take on wear IMO, otherwise its just a nerf for the sake of having a nerf. If you want to control the economy the first thing you have to do is actually have an economy. There is no demand because everything is infinite, even w/out duping/hacking you can spawn whatever you want in given enough time. With infinite supply there will never be demand, no demand means DM in the S coast and no value to anything.

I play with a custom face, mainly because it allows our group to identify each other easily, those stupid goggles are good for this.... I am for more weapons, but I would rather have a lower quantity of additions that are done well than a massive amount of re-skins. IMO there is no point in having a reskin of another weapon because that "slot" as far as what the weapon does, is already filled. They are tools, some are better than others at certain things, I would rather be able to have a wrench and a breaker bar than a million wrenches. This also goes effects each weapon in that the more you do the less quality each one will be, I'd rather have great audio for the ones in the game than a million with bad audio, and IMO the audio is already bad. Also if the system from arma 3 is used you will be able to customize weapons much more, though I don't see how this can/would apply to civilian weapons that don't have rails. I also agree that there should be more civilian weapons, not melee really, but more civilian guns like .22LR Pistol/Rifle, 22-250 Rifle, .45LC Pistol/Rifle, .30-06 hunting rifle, a super rare .223 WSM hunting The point being that all of these serve other purposes, you have light to heavy and fast to slow. Different tools for different jobs. I'm also for other gear but there has to be a point, like a flint/steel that is hard to start a fire with but never runs out and a windproof lighter that makes it really easy but runs out of fuel. The advantage/disadvantage should be there for different things.