hoik

Yes please, this is definatly a good way to add more depth to the world.

I agree with SLASH-7, really do appreciate the effort and obvious thought you have put into them, but feel like they approach this game (in their current form) from a fairly standard view point. The perks make perfect logical sence, becuase we are all different and would take different skills into a survival situation - but like SLASH-7 for emersion they would have to be implementated very subtly - If you could do this I think it would give the game another layer of authenticity. (Maybe have the perks linked to momentos of your pre-apocolyptic life, they give you buffs but subtly without telling you percentages etc?) Weapon skills make perfect sense to me - but may make players feel to "safe". What if you got better with your chosen weapon etc (just like you say) but there is variable that determins your "confidence". So you might be comming to terms with your situation, getting more confident that you can handle yourself - then you get in a massive shoot out and you are rattled to your core! Your confidence gets shattered and so your precision, reload etc also gets effected? Not sure about the ammo - I can understand that you want loose bullets of different calibers that you can choose to put in any gun (of that caliber), but 300 seems a bit much...

My question: "Would players having a global value (so that by killing one person it will effect everyone, not just you and him/her) be a way to reduce thoughtless PvP?" The reason I ask: It seems obvious that in real life we value eachother as a whole (whatever the reasons for it), even in a apocalypse our primal survial instinct would give stangers some value even if all morality went out the window.

Firstly, thanks alot for all your replys - I was at the point of dispare and frustration trying to convince people (on other threads) that hard and fast rules are not neccacary (infact I was at the point of defeat :dodgy: ) I agree that there are alot of players who dont care about anything but killing, and in no way do I want to stop them playing. Im not overlooking this behaviour but trying to change it - and where thats not possible integrate it so that it is a valid part of the game. I posted this elseware, this is basicly how I think of greifers/high kill bandits: "Being a dick is actually the infant stage of a gamer (thats why I find "time out" suggestions so funny - it is a direct indication of what type of players grief), we need to encourage these people get beyond this and join the community at large, so they can enjoy a more mature appreciation of the many other possibilities this game has to offer aside from murder" I find it more helpful to think of this play-style not as a user created problem, but as a core mechanic of the game (implemented by a sadistic genius) that can not be changed. @ Strategos " I was just discussing this idea and it dawned on me that , if people are restricted by resources, all they need to do is server hop get what they want and come back." This is definatly a problem - it would be great to discuss this further :) . (I do like sabata's suggestion here hehe: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=13622 ) But for me, the biggest issue (not just for this concept, but in general) is if you want the players to be able to police themselves (if they choose to) they need a way to be able to identify each player in the game (on sight) as INDIVDUALS just like we can recognise individual faces- this is vital so that everyone can be held accountable for thier actions. There are two ways to go about this: The hard way (prefreble but unlikely to happen) - make 50+ highly unique skins that can be randomly assigned to one individual at a time for their lifespan. The easy way - on spawn every player is assigned a unique - randomly generated number. This simulates the subtle uniqeness that every human naturaly has (feature wise), and can be used in the same way to identify individuals. I THINK this could work (can it?). @ harrumphicus "However, I do think some of the expansion ideas are pushing a little too far into MMORPG status. It's still a first person shooter, it doesn't really need to go that far. I think just adding this calculator to a server would be enough. " The calculator is all that is required for the expaansion ideas to occur, as the choice on how "far" to take this system is up to the players - those that want a MMORPG will strive for it while those that prefer somthing simpler will pull in the oposite direction and this is what will actually make this system work! (that literally just occured to me). Personally I want to push this game right through MMORPG into something that hasn't even GOT an acronym yet - this mod has so much potential I dont think we should restrict ourselves to pigeon-holes, esspecialy when all we are doing is theorising. @ Cheekorobbins "Also, say a group form and they control a large amount of resources in their camp, then go on killing sprees. When availability is sparse, does that hinder the solo survivor because they are alone and lacking in resources, or does that actually strengthen them because it gives them a united cause to band in numbers against those who have means?" Very interesting to think about! lastly I want to point you to this very cool idea by Swi1ch ( http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3420 ) on dynamic zombi spawning, I think these two ideas combined would = my ideal verson of this mod :) .

IMO classes are not the key to co-operation - I appreciate the thought and time and effort you have put into your idea, but really what is original about it? This is the way that video games have been FORCING players to co-operate for as long as I can remember. If you geniounly want to solve the peoblem of how to promote team play dont take this post as dismissal of your opinion but as encouragement to go back to the drawingboard. A question I ask myself is how can I make a "free" gameworld based on rules whos only function is to promote thought. Your idea promotes thought but is in no way "free".

This is my default reply to threads on class systems :P : I agree a class system does make sense in terms of story (you dont wake up not knowing who you are and you would have certain skills based along those lines) but its is ALSO a archaine mechanic that needs to be left behind. For me the soulution is simple - compile a list of start items that the players can choose from. He/she can then select the items that will best reflect the play syle they like. Or for random character creation just spawn with a random set of items that are geared towards one play style or another - but people are going to gravite towards their own play style anyway. A label is not required to give a player "character" - they can use their own imagination :)

Hehe - that is a great solution IMO, very original!

My first post on this subject was one of my first post on this forum - so I really didn't realise how "on the pulse" many of your statement were.

This is a GREAT idea (mostly because its one I'v had myself :P ) - it could translate into making contact in many situations less high risk - see here for my take on it: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=9891

Hehe - yeah your totally right - all the perks are 100% in the bandist favour. But what they dont seem to realise is that they are "punishing" other players all the time without ANY thought to it at all - rules should be implemented not to stop bandits but make them think about killing someone, weighing the concequences and then taking the action that makes most sence in any given situation. BTW, nobody has actually answered the original question :P . I belive it could, and this is how i see it being implemented: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=10295

I definatly like the first idea on "eternalising' your character - its like a gravestone! As for the second part - I've also realised there is a problem creating cohesion within a group. This is my very simlpe solution here (the first part of it): http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12656 . It tries to fecilitate cohesion/trust by making individuals have a "stake" in the group as a whole.

My issue - you can not tell a persons "morality" simply by looking at them, I know this is a game and that to translate real world "intuition" (or whatever you may call it,) is hard. IMO you have gotten halfway there - more skins will help identify individuals, but its not neccecary to link these skins to a "morality" meter. Whos to says just because your a doctor or a soldier that you atomaticly have an afinity for your fellowman? I mean a grisseled hillbilly could have just as high a moral code - if a person proves themselves as having high "morality" their unique features will atomaticly be associated to it regardless of their appearence. This can be applied both ways. The key is to be able to identify EVER player as unique so that their actions during the game can be directly linked to them as individuals - regardless of their appearence. The hard way (prefreble but unlikely to happen) - make 50+ highly unique skins that can be randomly assigned to one individual at a time for their lifespan. The easy way - on spawn every player is assigned a unique - randomly generated number. This simulates the subtle uniqeness that every human naturaly has (feature wise), and can be used in the same way to identify individuals. ______________ EDIT: just to clarify - I think rules are neccecary, and am in not way against them. But that doesn't mean they need to be so Black/white so they simply TELL us at a glance what the situation is - make rules PROMOTE thought.

Communication is a problem, and there have been many threads on how to solve it - arm bands could work as a means to help identify who has/hasn't murdered (See Sui's suggestion here: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=10885&page=9 ) if it is implemented in a smart way, but I agree it is a cheap solution and there are much better ways - holstering or putting your arms up are the most obvious (and probably the best) ways to indicate your intent but requires an eyeball on you and makes you very vulnrable - but without risk where would be the fun, right? In your scenario a simple item like this: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=9891 could've let you signal your presence AND intent from cover, guage the other players reations and then react accordingly. @Scerun "People often ask that on a bandit, there should be blood, raggedy clothes, pale skin - something to visually distinguish a bad-guy. I feel this is a very bad way to go, because it does indeed punish a particular type of play." I agree that such black/white solutions are uneccecary - not because they punish a play-style (Bandits/kill-looters punish other play-styles all the time and yet are the biggest whingers when they percived they are having their "freedom" encroached appon) but because it is a lazy solution based on a lifetime of being told what to do by video games. Unfortunatly there is a general push towards them. In the end I dont think you have to worry if better communication will be implemented - it will, just hope that the developers choose one that is inovative and asumes the player has a whole brain and not half a one :) .

Wow *tear* total validation. Seriously, it is so good to hear someone agree - Thank you.

This is based on alot of good ideas I've read here - and for all those complain it is unrealist or imposess on your freedom of choice, take a deep breath and just try to let it slide. Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand - we goven ourselves with laws to curb our selfish impulses. Sermen over :p This idea is to create trust within groups and make "backstabing" a challenge for bandits. The only thing it would need is a single large backpack and a group of +3, so here goes: When a group of players decide to form a group one of them can designate their backpack as the "Shared Backpack" this increases the holding capacity of the backpack - but also makes it heavier (there has to be a trade off - this will also encourage a team mentality as the person with the shared backpack is now more vulnerable). Now everyone who wishes to join the group has to put a stake (an item) in the "Shared Backpack" to be consided trust worthy - the larger the stake the higher the trust. Dont contribute and you ARE NOT welcome. For simplicity, everyone can access the "Shared Backpack" by aproaching the holder and directly accessing it, but ultimatly I think it would be better if everyone could access it at any time from a window next to your own inventry when you bring it up (Though this would require some sort of list of who has access and might make things too complicated) Now the group has an invested value without imposing any artifical rules. It will require a significant investment to make people trust you (either time or items) - this makes "backstabing" require alot more tackt. It lets you have a trust sytem based on items that can range form 0 to 95% according to the items value (There is no such thing as absolute trust) Thinking about it, you could implement this system yourselves right now - a larger backpack with more weight just adds another layer of group cohesion. ------ "You'll have to pry it from my cold, dead, hands..." This is a second idea that has cross ties to the first. On spawn players have two (or so) of their items designated as "in yor death grip"(symbolised by a hand icon). This means that the only way others can get their hands on them is if you put a bullet in your head. Any item can be re-asigned your deathgrip at anytime. With relation to the "Shared backpack" this can be a way of putting an item in the shared backpack but indicat that it is still yours - other players can not remove it form the back pack (till you die). I think this idea could impact on different areas of the game in many ways, from a mechanic to make negotion a possibility in a surrender situation, to a chance when you get murderded your "death grip" items have a chance of being stuck in your death grip and therfore unlootable - and because your death grip will always be on your best items this will make murder a vey large gamble (you should be able to see it but cant loot it :) ). These are very solid solutions (IMHO)

Funny - I posted at the very start of this thread and a bit inbetween, then by round about ways made it back here via Sui without realising it - By the content of these last couple posts I had no idea it was the same one. I mean, african tribes...WTF?

A lot of people are posting about ways to incentivise co-op (myself included) when I think what we really want to incentivise is not being a dick. It might sound like the same thing but its not... Essentialy what I think we want is a way to give everyone responsibilty for their actions - this way even greifers will contribut to the game in a way that everyone can appreciate even if thats not their intention. How? Some sort of global mechanic (think of it as passive - without imediate repercussions) that takes into account PvP actions and ties it to things of value in the game (loot - its the one thing that most greifers care about, aside for the thrill kill itself). This is an attempt to teach greifers that everyone is a part of the game - soloist, team players, bandits and yes even greifers. Hopefully this could draw greifers into the game as it gives their play style validity within the world - they might start caring about the world, and by extention the other players. More than anything this is about using social pressures rather than mechanics to bring a sense of morality to the game. Whether you act moral or immoral is upto you - but you have to care either way. Being a dick is actually the infant stage of a gamer (thats why I find "time out" suggestions so funny - it is a direct indication of what type of players grief), we need to encourage these people get beyond this and join the community at large, so they can enjoy a more mature appreciation of the many other possibilities this game has to offer aside from murder. __________________________________ EDIT: Or...just find a good server :P

I love the simplicity, so let me paraphrase so you can see if I've read this right. The armband is optional on spawn as a "white flag" to let others know that upto that point you havn't killed anyone - and because its optional, even if you kill someone and lose the band it wont flag you as a murderer - but as someone who should be aproached cautiously as you have opted out - genious! The thing is this could be so EASILY implemented for a trial run - just have an equipable item that CAN be dropped but NOT picked up (this is how you opt out) and is destroyed when you comit a murder - it could even be a white flag (Or a sock, or a onesy :) ) When you come across a player just demand to see their white flag to gauge the level of trust you can put in them. You should definatly make a thread on this subject Sui. Please have a look at my thread here: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12656 I've tried to use the same simple logical resoning to create trust within a group and ways to test newcomers loyaly.