hoik

Ok - lets look at this from another angle - 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 is more of a directive for co-operation than an incentive. 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 :) .

Yeah...I know... From here I think we could go round and round on this subject and not agree - after all the idea has a bit of a hippy flavour, but I guess you have to be a hippy to really try for a sytem that will encompass everyone no matter their choices - please if you (the readers) want genuine freedom do NOT bang on about the "problem" of greifers.

Glad your tackling this problem Lady Kyrah! But I agree that the incentive should be less artifical. Really the incentive for being in a group is all the natural benifits this incures - this is my attempt to use trust as a #incentive# catalyst to form groups: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12656

Tentacle & Varulfur - both of your post are really good! On the one hand i think random atmospheric encounters would bring the world alive, but coming across them again and again would definatly kill it...Ahh. But overall I think I would have to agree with varulfur - I think players could create intresting dynamic encounter/scenarios themselves simply by playing the game, just give them the tools.

Ditto - see here http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=10295 Umm well im actually trying to encourage them in a way that will make them a valid part of the game :huh:

Really...Hollywood...this is your measure of good story telling... hahaha Why don't you take Savage_MF's advice and put a makarov in your mouth haha (kidding, settle down :) )

@ sabat "A griefer would want this, yep. That gives even more repercussion to their actions." This is the exact point. Griefers should like this, its a way to make them part of the game, part of its actual context. By making their actions (though of course its not restricted to greivers) have global concequences it will cause a communal reaction - just like all excessive antisocial behaviour. The thing is we have laws to counter anti social behavior and this game is anti-law - so we need a way to make greifers part of the game whether they like it or not, without laws but with concequences. greifers arnt interested in story creation, survival or roleplaying - and that is what DayZ fans value. So by making them part of the world contex they can still do what they want (be psychopaths...) while giving themselves value to the rest of the community by beng part of the story - that is, they are the true enemy of humanity. So heres a scenario: A group of players have become aware of the global mechanic (be it loot density or whatever) indicating a large presence of greifing (psychopaths) on the server. Greifing may not be effecting them directly but will make the whole server aware of the problem - they can then choose to try and rally in order to curb this contextual threat to their survival. @ Sabata "Perhaps some people may want to organize themselves and stop it, in a huge community like this the effort never will be big enough I think." The point is not to stop greifing but make it a motivational part of the story.

User driven story telling is my view - this can be a desire to fix a powerplant, a map on a dead player with locations where he/she has hidden some loot, user made journals etc. Want to fix the power plant so the town can be lit at night = a story Find a Treasure Map = a story Find a journal detailing another players journey = a story I understand that you want to know why this apocolypse has come about, but I dont think that that is actually where the real intrest lies :).

Yes Much more subtle - give it a try!

An invented intrinsic value - eg. all PvP deaths change some global property (like loot, or zombie spawns) that effects everyones experience be it good or bad - this promotes a culture of thought before action.

For me these are are the most important questions posed by this thread - and regardless of the solutions (I do like the ones proposed) it is the right questions that matter. Yes' date=' I think all your suggestion do lead to better gameplay - making people care about how their actions effect others is hard enough to implement in real life. Shooting someone shouldn't be causal and without concequences in any scenario - but in the gaming world it is ingrained. Not a question, but a statement I agree with - lone wolfs should expect and infact be asking for harder restrictions in their play-style - Lone survial would be increadibly hard, and only the toughest of the tough could actually do it. Make it hard as hell, a successful lone wolf should be both feared and respected - but you have to earn it. 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. ________ EDIT: Have made a post in general discusions posing this same question: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12515

This is an attempt to decide on the what are the fundemental requirements for a ballance of freedom and responsibilty in the world of DayZ. Currently the lack of responsibility is makeing the decision to murder a non-decision. Some may argue that in a apocalypse responsibily goes out the window - I would say that irresponsable individuals would not last long because this is a suicidal impulse (x10 in a survial situation), and other survivors primal instinct for survival wouldn't tolerate them. Irresponsable communities would simply self destruct. I support all styles of gameplay, even greifers since they are inevitable. If the responses could be restriced to a sentence or two I think it would help us get to the core of our ideas, making them as concise as possible. For me a top 10 issue is: "How to give individual players value that directly impacts the value of the group (on a server) as a whole." The reason: As humans our value to eachother is measured in many many ways, we also have a value as a whole - in day Z players value is measured in loot, and there is not global value. If individual actions negativly impact on the group, the group will naturally react against it. Im not looking for solutions, but the right questions that we should be asking.

Just getting the idea out there... Combine buried loot, a Marker and a Map - combine this with a dead player you stumble across (Or carelessly steped infront of your bullet...) and you have it! User made treasure maps! Heres one I prepared earlier: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=9780

Combine buried loot, a Marker and a Map - combine this with a dead player you stumble across (Or carelessly steped infront of your bullet...) and you have it! User made treasure maps! Heres one I prepared earlier: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=9780

Im just trying to create some constructive debate.

Yes I 100% agree - but the problem is that freedoms are being abusing to the detriment of the group. I would also like to point out that mechanis = rules :). Do you agree that there is a inbalance of freedom and responsibiliy? If so, would you be willing to trade some freedoms for a sence of responsibility?

@ Bullfrog RE: Debate on the fundementals (please) Authenticity vs. Realism is a big issue. "People are taking realism and putting it way out of proportion. there should be a basic understanding between the two and that the game is base on Authenticity not realism. I think forcing someone to do something is also stupid. people think the only solution is to X is Y, but there are 23 other solutions out there they could use.. Get creative! Restrictions on game play should be preventent at all cost. If it's 'Taking away the makarov', 'spider senses when you're near a bandit', or if it's PTSD when killing someone These are not good options for the game, It will push it towards more mainstream fuck up games rather then being it's own beast" Thanks for replying - but how does this impact on the inbalance of freedom and responsibility:huh:? Id like to steer away from issues with other players opinions.

Great thread with a heap of interesting ideas that I both agree and disagree with. Im totally on board with Budiak, the more dynamic the system the more intresting it will be. But the question I ask myself (in regards to a stress meter) is what is the actual purpose of stress/insanity in real life - its a coping mechanism right? So by this logic even if you are going crazy by yourself out in the wilderness, it is also helping you survive (to a certain extent anyway, running around thinking your the son of god couldn't help with your prospects...or could it?). And "Crazy" behaviour is so disturbing to others because it is a clear indicator of how far behind a person has left the social norms. So I suggest high stress/low sanity would have a larger adverse psychological effect on those around you than it would on you yourself - crazy people don't realise their crazy, infact it is a benifit to them.

see edit - this could be intesting.

This is the my third attempt at floating this idea, the reson for the re-write is to make the post easyer to get through so it can hopefully generate some conversation to help flesh it out (or just point out how im wrong). Anyway, I was calling it a "life/death calculator", but I've just realised what the idea actually aims to achive is a "Global Humanity" system that takes into account the overall actions of a servers community and effects the world accordingly. It works by directly associating the quantity and quality of loot drops to how the players interact with eachother over a time period (say a day or a week). Resources will be plentiful when there is alot of PVP action and low Co-op and scarce when there is low PvP and high Co-op. A dynamic sytem like this would cause continuosly shifting play styles. Eg. Lowest End of Scale - (Very High Death Count(Low co-op)/Low Average Lifespan) - Loot Density = 100% - High Quality Loot Chance = 2% Middle of Scale - (Medium Death Count(Medium co-op)/Medium Average Lifespan) - Loot Density = 60% - High Quality Loot Chance = 40% Highest End of Scale - (Very Low Death Count (High co-op)/High Average Lifespan) - Loot Density = 2% - High Quality Loot Chance = 100% For detail on its actual mechanics go here (Theres some *cough* math here that makes this quite feasable): http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=10295 The idea of humanity is to give a concequence to PvP play but is aimed at the individual, "Global Humanity" wouldn't replace this but be layered on top, so that when you murder a player, it has an effect on you AND everyone around you - this is how social pressures can be implemented into the game. A System like this has a huge array of effects on how people play the game, which is where I can get bogged down. For me the major benifits are: - Intrinsic value to for each and every player in the game - this is essential to impact on PvP interactions. - A way to implement social presures and cultural behaviour into the game - mostly the taboo of murder (just like in real life). - makes a "surrender" mechanic more viable. - The sytem could be implemented on a server by server basic, making it optional. - It in no way discourages solo-play, infact it favours it equally and can gives added value to being a hermit/villan. - Players actions have a subtle effect that will only be felt over time. It could ultimatly result in a dynamic cycle where low PVP and High co-op will result in a higher chance of good quality loot , but less resources to go around - a criticle point could be met where there are not enough resources to go around. Then, all these very well armed players must turn on eachother to live - PvP will rise and Co-op wil drop, sliding back down to the other end of the scale. Yes? No? Maybe? (I will bang on about this till Im told to shutup :D) As a end note, I think that DayZ's longterm prospects rely on Dynamic system keeping the game fresh, here is a good discusion on a dynamic Z spawn system: Swi1ch: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3420