zipper

No you can not.

I heard punishing PvP is very high up on Rockets agenda. Willing to bet this is going to happen in the next couple of patches. From what I understand it was along the lines of, if you kill someone you get a timer, once that timer reaches zero you explode. Ways to increase the timer are bandaging and blood transfusions. This is just what I heard though. I could see this as being fair, as long as the timer has enough time to give people an opportunity to help others. If it is too short, I could see some problems with this idea...

Server hoppers spawning in an already cleared area and shooting you from a location that is supposed to be secure is not fair. Yes it can require a bit of luck on their part to not spawn in front of someone, but it is still isn't "fair". Other than that, you are correct.

Don't really see how this will be any different from the original bandits skins. The game still cannot differentiate between killing someone for fun and killing after being shot at.

I used to agree until I realized how easy it is to cover the entire map with a small group of people. Until the unlimited sprint is taken away, or the map doubles in size, people should be able to park them wherever they like, including off the map. It is far too easy to run into the woods and find a camp. Only a couple of the vehicles are even camouflaged, the rest stick out like a sore thumb. I agree that vehicles shouldn't be allowed off the map, but players also shouldn't be able to run 200km in 30 minutes. It appears to me that one is a tradeoff for the other. Walking into the woods and looking for enemy camps is far too easy right now, and it should be a much bigger and life threatening decision people should have to make.

There are plenty of reasons to not kill someone, you just don't want to be bothered by them. There is a gigantic thread discussing the details that a group of people have put together for secure trading in DayZ. I believe its the freeside trading company. Regardless, people have found ways to accomplish what you are suggesting "fixes" for without the Devs coming in to fix the game for them. Maybe you should try to do the same. You appear to be butthurt about being killed by a bandit. Welcome to DayZ. If it isn't going to change PvP, why are you suggesting it?

You misunderstand what I am saying. I am well aware that games check what I am running. However they do not force 3rd party programs I have installed, separate from the game, to do certain things. Scanning and monitoring are two completely different things. I could care less if programs like Battleye or PB scan my computer. But forcing your 3rd party VOIP programs to be heard in game means they have access to those programs, and can manipulate them as needed. They can currently NOT do that. This is why there was such a big stink with EA's Origin. It goes well above and beyond what is needed.

Are you? Did you not read the part where Rocket said he would never do this? Did you not see the interviews where he said he would not do this? Did you not read and see Rocket say that players are going to be a bigger concern over zombies in terms of survival? It isn't going to happen. The man who is in charge of putting this feature in the game said no. Yet you continue to ask for it over and over again. No means no.

Would love to see the alt+f4er banned. Doubt it will ever happen but it would be nice. Whoever was using the overlay to see the players and vehicles should be banned too but again, doubtful it will happen.

The minute DayZ has allowed and monitored access to other programs running on my computer is the minute I stop playing. You have no idea what legal ramifications the game could open itself up to by even attempting to implement such a feature.

VOIP is not new at all. Welcome to PC gaming.

Dead people cannot get together to discuss where they got shot from and who they got shot by. The idea you present is no different from hackers knowing the location of players. We should not be encouraging cheating. -1,000 x 16

Why is it so difficult to understand? The creator of the mod said this would never happen, on several occasions. If you remove PvP from DayZ the game goes to crap. I'm glad you people think you know better than Rocket, but this is his mod, and he will do what he wants with it. He is not going to implement something that will destroy what he created. Argue all you want, petition all you want, bitch all you want, complain all you want, it isn't going to happen, the creator said no. If you can't deal with the PvP in this game, go play something else. There are literally hundreds of other zombie games out there that offer MUCH better PvE experiences. @StrengthAndHonor - You're right. The guy who created a mod from scratch and currently has almost 1 million people playing an alpha version of his game, which is full of bugs, lacks any real content and depth, is obviously the wrong man for the job. I really hope you aren't put in charge of hiring anyone for any company in the near and distant future.

I think people who want to make the game into something the game creator doesn't want, and has repeatedly said he will not change, are idiots. You have been posting on the forums for a bit now. You cannot tell me you haven't seen the countless video links and quotes from Rocket saying he would never punish someone for how they want to play the game, and yet you still make a suggestion that does so. And on a side note, if people want to play the game just to kill players, that is their choice. Why you think you have the only right way to play the game is beyond me. You sound like a whiny 4 year old. "Mommy, Tommy shot me and took my beans! Ban him mommy! Ban him!" I'm not sure what you expected when you installed this mod, but this is a FPS. You are either new to these types of games, or oblivious to how they work. Friendly fire isn't on so we can all sit around a campfire and hold hands. You need to adapt to the way the game is designed, not the other way around. FYI, Zeds made a great point the other day in a post almost as whiny as this one. There is no such thing as killing for survival, or as you put it, killing for in game reasons. Any situation you put yourself in, there is always a better option for surviving aside from killing. So using your logical post, anyone who ever killed someone in game would be banned. Your idea would kill the game population from around 950k to about 5k in a matter of days. Thanks for suggesting an idea that would destroy the game. The rest of us appreciate it.

Congrats???

We need a bit more than this. It would be great if the Devs came out and pointed us in the direction they intend to take the game. Ideas that they like and are considering, ideas they don't, etc. I know Rocket has done a lot of interviews, but it seems to me that everyone is always asking the same questions. There have been thousands of ideas presented in these forums, and the only one I have seen that got immediate attention is the reason you have "Woodland Warrior" right above your name. The game has a solid foundation, but is lacking as a finished product. We need to know what he plans to implement in the finished product so our ideas might actually be helpful. Some of the biggest problems might not even be an issue once the game is released as a finished product, and were going to have to wait until the game has proper funding to be released as a stand alone game until we will know what issues we think he should be prioritizing.

You misunderstand the difference between adding more weapons, and making more weapons spawn. Just because there are more varieties of weapons does not mean there will be any more high end gear. It would, in fact, make finding that M16, or whatever your favorite gun is, an actual challenge, just like you want. If there were only 10 different types of weapons that can spawn in the barracks, increasing that number to 75 makes it much more unlikely that you will get your gun. I also do believe there needs to be more places high end gear can spawn, like adding a barracks at the NEAF, and maybe a police station in a couple of the smaller towns, but that is a completely separate topic.

Options can also destroy the core mechanics of the game. Being as there are already over 900,000 people playing the mod, I don't think he will have a difficult time selling finished versions of the game.

Then you don't love this game.

What gameplay is currently being penalized?

I love when people say stuff like this. THIS ISN'T REAL LIFE. THERE IS NO REAL ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE. You also have NO IDEA how you would react in a situation like this. None of you have seen your friends ripped apart and eaten alive by zombies. Fucked up situations do fucked up things to peoples minds. And unless you know someone who has been through a real zombie apocalypse, you do not have a "professional" to consult on the matter.

Not sure how difficult it is to get a firearm where the game is based, but the more difficult it is, the more likely you would be to find military weapons everywhere. If this was taking place in Arizona or Texas, I could understand the call for less military and more civilian weapons, but this isn't the case. If anything, it is somewhat unrealistic how FEW places you can get military weapons. Outposts would literally be everywhere. Roadblocks, checkpoints, temporary bases, and fortified bases would be all over the coast, and inland. I personally think the game is backwards. People would be trying to get to the coast in a survival situation. Water can do amazing things. The mere fact we start at the ocean and are supposed to be running directly away from it takes away a bit of the authenticity for me. Edit: didn't mean to derail the OP. +1 The gun should be in the game. I don't think it should come with ghillie camo though. I think that should be something the has to be found, and could be used on all guns (AR's and sniper rifles).

The problem is all your post does is bump the countless number of threads people have already replied to with both positives and negatives regarding your idea. Now you expect everyone to waste their time and do it all over again. It is annoying to say the least. Because this thread has been covered on several occasions, you are more likely to get troll posts that are of no use to you or the idea you presented, further wasting everyone's time by having to read through all the BS replies you receive. Eventually your thread will die and not get any attention from people who actually can fix issues within the game. If you had, along with everyone else who created a post revolving around this idea, replied to the first thread that was relevant to what you are suggesting, that post would probably have over 200 pages of replies right now, would remain on the first page as a hot topic, and would likely get the attention it deserves from the dev team. All you have done is make it more difficult for the devs to track the pros and cons from removing, or reimplementing your suggestion. Additionally you are bumping suggestions posted in the forums farther down the list, some good, some bad, but all trying to make the game better. Some great ideas may have been bumped just far enough that they will not be read at all, and now the standalone/final version of the game will suffer as a result. Thanks.

The mere fact that you think there is a difference in people that kill on sight for game related, and unrelated purposes is a joke. I never said you can't play the game, I said if you can't figure out how to solve the shoot on sight problem by yourself, you don't deserve to be playing. There is a difference. It is also my opinion, and I am entitled to it. If you don't like it too damn bad. This is not real life. This is a video game. If you have such a GIANT problem with people shooting on sight, go play something else. You want to BAN people that shoot on sight. How many times has Rocket himself said he will not punish people for playing the game how they want to? And you suggest an idea that these people be banned? lol wtf. And you call me a jackass haha. This is a FPS with zombies. If you want happy go lucky co-op fun go play vanilla Arma. Bandits are a part of the game. Just because they don't fit into your play style doesn't mean they should be banned. Open your eyes to the fact that this is a completely open game with no rules. Of all the ideas that have been presented in this forum to fix the shoot on sight "problem", this is by far the dumbest and most extreme idea yet. Rocket: I don't want to punish people for playing the game how they want to. Sol: People who don't play the game how I want them to need to be banned. You see the problem with your idea yet? Edit: Just realized it isn't the dumbest idea. Someone presented an idea that would make people wait 20 minutes per kill once they died. That has to be the dumbest one yet. This is still up there though.

And fixing the zed spawn range is a simple fix. Fixing server hopping obviously is not. So just because one problem exists the other should as well? Your logic is terrible. Zed spawn range should be set to 1800m minimum, and if people are within 1800m from any direction in a town or city, they need to spawn in the entire town or city. The way it is set up now is beyond boring. Wait for the zeds to spawn and then start looking for people. Also don't forget the drive a vehicle into a town and loot everything before zeds have an opportunity to spawn strategy as well. Increasing the range to 1800m+ would be a major game change that would be welcome among most that have a clue how to survive in DayZ already, while having no negative effect on the newer players joining on the coast. +1