jacksgrin
-
Content Count
17 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jacksgrin
-
-
I just made a topic that kinda relates to this guys, check it out.
What?
Your thread is completely unrelated. It's about players turning into zombies after they're killed, and that subject has been beaten to death.
This thread is about reasons you should be killing zombies/ zombie killing requirements for attaching upgrades
Shoo! get out of here, thread-jacker.
-
This type of magical weapon upgrade system is what the dev team (and pretty much 90% of the community from what I've read) seems to want to shy away from, based on everything they have stated in the interviews done so far. You've probably heard Rocket say the phrase: "If players can do it in real life, they should be able to do it in game". This means that to operate or upgrade a gun or fix anything in the game you are required to know something about the procedure, so your 'requires no skill or knowledge-argument doesn't really stand. All of the tooltips in the player inventory giving information on the weapon/item being observed are probably going to be removed in the standalone, so it's not like you can cheat by looking up info in a game menu.
Again, like previous posters have stated, the whole point of this game seems to be to teach people about survival, just like Arma 2 was used in some militaries as a teaching tool to teach tactics and military theory. It's a player centric game, not a player avatar centric game.
I think you misunderstand me.
I'm not advocating a magical upgrade system -- in the SA they want to add weapon attachements, right?
I don't think that a new spawn should just be able to add an attachment if they get lucky enough to find if right off the bat. I'm advocating for a sort of...middle goal that you must achive (be it survival time, zombie tally whatever) before you can just 'magically' attach that god-tier upgrade. This simulates that the average person (who is probably a citizen) must first get used to the vanilla weapon and gain some expertise in that area before adding something that will make it easier, or more powerful to use.
-
People do that anyway. They obviously don't care about the game as much, as they're not worried about death.
I am disliking that "griefing"argument.
They're using fair means to kill you for their enjoyment. They're not really GRIEFERS, they're just sickos. I think they'd be lower, the amount of griefers.
Less griefers? are you serious?
Have you ever played one of the hardcore servers on minecraft that ban you for a week/ permanently?
They just want to ruin other peoples' experiences.
People think its hilarious to make players rage, You're suggestion would give them a golden ticket.
Edit* I do like the incentive to stay alive idea, I just think a timed ban is the wrong way to go about it.
-
The Infected/Zombies need to be the main threat. It really is that plain goddamn simple.
Its been roughly 8/9 months since DayZ first turned up hasn't it? And the Infected are still poorly implemented.
I know they have been tweaked and the engine treats them oddly etc,but really for a zombie survival game, the zombies need so major work still. Has anyone tried coding a completely fresh alternative? Might be worth giving a go.
But basically the modand standalone need zombies that are a total fucking threat, like one is enough to make you rethink your plans threat. Fuck all the crappy 'kill-em-by-the-horde' zeds that people are used to from CoD:Zombies and other console games.
Lets make them 28 days later seriously fucking deranged and bloodthirsty killing machine scary. That way you'd have a 'Zombie killing incentive', the incentive being 'Kill it before it rips your fucking face off.'
I agree 100%
But I think that there should be an incentive to pop one off if you can get the opportunity. Not because its easy mindless fun, but because takes the danger of alerting other zombies and tempts the player to risk it.
I also don't think it should be extremely loot based because most of the zombies are just citizens that wouldn't have much more than a wallet, cellphone, and carkeys on them.
Scenario:
you're in a city scavenging with a group of people you see a straggler zombie in an ally
no incentive: stay as quiet as possible no exceptions.
incentive: you need 10 zombies slain with your character to be able to upgrade you're shitty makarov with more capacity or something.
Your friend, STEVE, hates his makarov and decides to try and kill this one to go towards his personal tally.
Steve tries to take out the zombie with an axe. The zombie is alerted and all hell breaks loose. You either Run the fuck out of the city or try to hole up in a house against the horde and hope theres an escape option down the road (preferably by sacrificing steve to the horde)
My reasoning: Just finding the attachment has no amount of skill involved. If you have to survive for a certain amount of time or take out a certain number of zombies to attach it, it adds complexity to the game's progression.
I DON'T think that zombies should be taken lightly in the least. Killing one should be a serious risk. I just think that sometimes you should be rewarded for such a risk.
-
are you claiming all the people under say...18 shouldnt be allowed on this game because its challenging and you see kids crying on COD?or are you basing this of every kid you have seen in dayz?...cuz i've seen perfectly mature 10-18 year olds
Edit: also many parents would buy the kids the game themselves anyway,parents be submissive
I mean, I've seen perfectly mature 16+ year olds,
But I honestly don't think you can have a 'perfectly mature' 10 year old.
-
1
-
-
because less loot in a small area....lots of zombies carrying loot....use your fucking brain
You use *Your* fucking brain. That wasn't even a coherent sentence. How can you have less loot in a small area and 'lots of zombie's carrying loot' in the same area and have less loot?
No, more than that, How do you think that zombies without backpacks are going to fit all of this loot into their pockets? You think that's realism?
Once again, contribute to the thread logically, or go somewhere else. God forbid you put some actual brainpower into your post.
once again I'll reiterate the topic.
There is no reason to kill zombies right now. Why should I risk shooting a zombie instead of just checking apartments.
Why should I ever shoot a zombie?
What advantage is there to surviving longer than a new spawn that gets lucky with loot at a military base"
Answer key (provided for you because you can't think)
No reason.
No reason.
Trick question. There is none.
-
Had you been doing research, you'd know that Sprocket intends to make loot more scarce. Just because there are more places that you COULD find loot, does not mean you will always find loot there. If there are twice as many places to find loot, but loot is six times as tough to find, you should conclude that loot would be far less abundant.
I think you mean 6 times rarer, not 'tough to find',
but, my understanding was that the new loot mechanic meant that loot could spawn in an almost infinite number of places in buildings. Meaning you had to invest more time into searching.
this =/= making loot less common.
*edit* also, when I said research, I meant that I followed the forum rules and searched to see that my suggestion hasn't been posted elsewhere.
Even if it did, how would that make killing zombies worthwhile??
This is the main problem I'm talking about.
Why have zombies if you just avoid them.
Why NOT have a mechanic that rewards you for risking the shot on a zombie. It would add another 'oh shit I hope this works moment' and, not rewarding just a single zed kill, but an ongoing thing. Add a little more PvE to the game.
Right now, if you're a survivor and not a bandit, your main antagonist is food/ water/ shelter. Once you get those, then what? In what part does ' zombies are everywhere ' factor into the PvE game except evading them.
I think that a good mechanic to implement is a system that allows you to progress as a character only when you actually do some zombie killing.
ie. no attaching that laser sight you found until you've gotten 50 zeds or 2 humans with that weapon you got there.
-
More importantly, shooting IN vehicles.
Carjacking anyone?
1. get in car with survivors
2. b passenger
3. shoot driver while going 100km/hr
4. ???
-
It would add publisher costs to the development.
Unnecessary IMO, and I want more of the profit to go to the developers.
-
2
-
-
Anyway, I disagree with all of your points, though I respect them, I just don't think something like that belongs in a game like Day Z.
Well, technically you didn't address the last one, which, in my opinion is the most important one.
Old players have no advantage over new spawns that happen to get lucky with loot.
How is THIS realistic? Relying on the randomness of loot to determine who has an advantage in a firefight??
BUT an old player that has done nothing should not have as much of advantage as a semi-new player that goes on all sorts of foraging expeditions or has killed a bunch of zombies.
I have played the game as is, and it is far to easy to loot farm, kill players rinse and repeat.
Within a few hours of being on a server, my friends and I are at 'end game' meaning we have vehicles, tents, and more weapons than we could need. And guess what.
We don't have to kill any zombies.
BUT WE WANT TO. My God do we want to. But why should we? why should we shoot a zombie, waste ammo and alert people and the horde. Simply, there is no reason to.
Arguing that this is not an issue is pointless. Frankly it detracts from the game. What are the point of the zombies anyway? It needs to be addressed and killing zombies needs to be a risk vs reward scenario.
You want it to be about the player, but This is after all, a game. A game where you are playing as a character and, due to the nature, the survival of your character is IMPORTANT. Therefore, your character should be dynamic, changing and getting better. It shouldn't be as easy as
1. Spawn.
2. Acquire top weapon.
3. Acquire vehicle.
4.???
-
As the mod is now , resources are plentiful and zombies are a minor inconvenience , but if that dynamic was to change , so that resources were scarce , and zombies were a terrible threat , then your incentive to kill zombies would be just to stay geared and healthy .
If anything, resources will get more plentiful with more buildings able to spawn loot in SA. But regardless, when will you ever be motivated to kill zombies to stay geared and healthy? They don't drop anything really and
Everyone just avoids them or kites them until they lose aggro. Never once have I said to myself " self, I am hungry/bleeding/etc I should kill a Z" It has always been "I'm hungry/ bleeding/ thirsty, lets check that apt building"
-
The average survival time is like what, 1.1 hours? and you want to ban people for a week?
Who would pay for that game, a masochist?
I think losing all of your stuff and having to relocate (which can take in excess of 30 min) is punishment enough.
Plus nobody would be playing the game except for the people who hide in the woods like hermits. Everyone would be banned.
And everyone would go bandit. There would be no "friendly?" it would be chaos.
It would make for really boring gameplay. IMO
-
First,
Thanks for stating your objections. I see your concerns now.
Now allow me clarify what I'm saying
You wouldn't all of a sudden say "HEY A KNIFE ON ANOTHER KNIFE WOULD BE GREAT FOR KILLIN ZOMBIESSSSS" after killing 12 zombies.
-It shouldn't be about character progress, it should be about player progress.
If a player thinks "Hey, if I tape a chainsaw to this twig, I could kill ZOMBIESSSSS easier!", then they shouldn't have to kill 27 zombies to do that.
It's about the player.
-Having inventive to kill zombies just isn't realistic.
Why would anyone WANT to make contact with a flesh eating monster?
True, but all humans gain insight by experience. Sure someone may know how to install an ACOG scope and sight it for 300 yards, but does everyone?
Probably not until they shoot a few zombs and realize that their hitting higher than they aim.
Nobody WANTS to make contact with a flesh eating monster, but you're stuck in this world. Ridding the zombies should be kind of a priority, right?
And what makes you think zombies dropping cans of beans all over the place is more realistic than getting insight on how to kill them better by fighting them.
Zombies don't have backpacks and, last time I checked, fitting a can of beans in a pocket is pretty difficult.
-Grinding should not be in a game like this.
I'm not talking about grinding. I'm talking about putting a skill restriction on upgrading weapons that just happens to add a small system of reward for wiping out infected.
Do you really think that something that requires you to kill like 200 zombies or 5 humans in order to tweak your weapon into god-tier is going to ruin the game?
-It's far too easy to kill zombies.
Zombies are way, WAY easy to handle. They have low amounts of health, and it would just be really easy to get OP as fuck weapons.
Easier than, say, not having to do anything except find the parts to get OP as fuck weapons?
THAT'S what Im talking about. You should still have to find the damn parts. You just cannot use them until you get used to your freaking vanilla weapon a bit.
-
1
-
-
No.
y r u dong ths 2 me plszzzz stop
Way to contribute to the conversation.
If you have a real opposition to this, please state it logically. Otherwise, you're just being closed-minded and resistant to change.
Once again, I will state the reasons why I think this would be a good addition, or at LEAST a consideration:
Forces at least some PvE for everyone, even bandits (if you want better than vanilla weapons).
Rewards players for fighting the overall threat of the apocalypse (the infection).
Adds an element of risk (players will attempt to take out zeds, which may attract the horde and lead to their demise, shots attract bandits, etc.).
What I'm NOT saying:
herr durr add exp to the game lulz.
leik omg makes zombies dorp loot like borderworlds3
merk it an RPGFPSCOPTERLOL
Thanks.
-
I vote against. Killing zombies/infected for experience or needing their kills for professions/actions of any kind is not realistic in any way.
I only kill them when in dire need of food/drinks and no stores are nearby or no loot found in houses... hoping they carry something usefull
For the rest. They are just a part of this game....
I'm not talking about professions or experience points. I'm talking about the innovation that comes from experience. i.e. If you were to kill 500 zombies in real life, you'd probably realized a better way to do it, Like attach a knife to a broom handle.
This makes it so that not any old regular vanilla player can just find a vanilla weapon and mod the hell out of it right off the bat.
-
2
-
-
I have done a search to see if this is an original idea, so please don't bash.
Recently, I have tried turning to banditry and a player I killed asked me why I killed him.
He said "I don't understand why you killed me! Teaming up against the zombies is so much more fun!"
Before typing my reply, it caused me to really consider why I had turned to banditdom in the first place.
I told him "Because running away from zombies is easier and there is no incentive to kill them"
Now, before you cut off my testicles and say "This is a realism mod, Jack. GTFO moron!"
Consider the following.
**PLEASE NOTE**
I am NOT campaigning for an Exp system. Read my subsequent replies for more of what I'm getting at.
In every zed movie, somebody comes up with an eventually comes up with an idea dependent on 2 factors -- time and experience.
And as I understand it, the standalone will allow crafting to some degree;
Maybe... Just maybe...
CRAFTING CERTAIN COMPONENTS/COMBINATIONS REQUIRES A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ZOMBIE KILLS.
Or something. But right now I have no reason to take a shot at any zombies. I'm just gonna throw that out there.
-
1
-
Zombie killing Incentive
in DayZ Mod Suggestions
Posted · Edited by jacksgrin
True, we would be forced to kill them more.
We don't want it to be easy targets, but to add a temptation to trying to kill one, which would make, as you said, 'giving away your position' a risk vs. reward deal.
Probably, and implementing a requirement of killing a certain number of them before being able to use a weapon attachment you found would prevent new players from just getting lucky and start with the ability to use end-tier weaponry