Hellfire447

Self bloodbagging? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of what blood bagging represents?

Greetings Community! I have been reading all of your comments and suggestions guys, and I have a few rebuttals for you. First off I would like to remind everyone that this is the apocalypse. We are being plagued by an unknown and HIGHLY contagious virus/bacteria/parasite, so contagious that nearly all the inhabitants of Chernarus have died, or more so to say, all of them. (Pertaining to the fact that either the survivors are from Chernarus or are alienated to this god forsaken land). So when we are discussing the fact that the infection is too hard because it is fatal or that it is too contagious isn't being very authentic is it? If such an outbreak could easily be treated with some alcohol or some antibiotics.. we wouldn't have such a widespread outbreak would we? We are also accepting that this outbreak is also bacterial, rather than viral. Reason being is that an antibiotic is meant to fight bacteria, and the effectiveness of alcohol is only viable at contact point of the wound, it can't treat your body the same way antibiotics can, it's a solution with antiseptic properties used to kill bacteria at the source, BEFORE full body infection. If this plague truly is bacterial, it should be fatal, very, very quickly. So in aspects to authenticity, viral is really the only one that makes sense, respectively. A viral outbreak needs time, a gestation period for cells to be damaged and then used to manufacture and furthermore infect the body. When we have a cold, we take some antibiotics and/or some antihistamine (Tylenol/aspirin) because our body needs to reach a certain temp before it can kill the invasive entities, so Tylenol/Aspirin is used to help lower the temp because the body will continue to heat up the point of fatality, doing everything it can to cleans itself. So if anything we should be fighting off are temp guys, we get to hot, and we are fucked! Literally toast. The infection should be fatal ladies and gentlemen, or we don't have an apocalypse. (In regards to loot and spawn rates, it makes sense guys. Where do you think everyone went on the onset of symptoms? The hospitals, they used everything in desperation to cure their illnesses. You're lucky the devs let the hospital have the supplies that they do, and not scavenged from the outlining households that tried desperately to stockpile such luxuries. Now regarding zombie knockdown, I'm going to be interpreting this in a way that makes sense to me and through my experience in how these zombies work. This is more of a suggestion now. Zombies seem to have very acute senses during the day, sight and sound. They are very reactive and will run your asses down, they hear every, little, sound. And then on the onset of night, they are as violent as they are in the day, but with the shroud of night, people have greater chances maneuvering, undetected. I see this as a way to urge more people to play during the night, and I understand that the night in dayz is very difficult to play in because of the shear darkness it entails, but guys, it’s honestly authentic, you would not travel during the day if someone was hunting you would you? You would travel at night when the night is darkest, allowing exodus, undetected. So this being said, they are obviously stronger during the day, so a possible balance would be weaker, more docile zombies at night encouraging night play, so weaker zombies mean less knockdowns, and less infections. Everything i have said is from a purely, survivalistic, authentic perspective. Now all is left is to splice these ideals into the simulation of the game. [*]The main argument I see is that night and day cycles are far too long. yes they are realistic, and that is amazing, but we are moving from realism now and more for authenticity, we need shorter nights and days, so that these cycles are actually playable for players. I'm not suggesting one hour or two, days or nights, but a 24 hour cycle isn't entirely plausible for players, I feel that a night and day cycle would be possible to obtain if data is collected averaging the total playtime that players put into a game over an... let's say a two week period, for an example. Do players put as much time into the game as they do a work week? Do they play more in one sitting, but only a few times a week? Or do they put in long hours a few times a week and none the rest? Better yet a little bit each night and day. Especially if people would rather fight the weaker versions of zombies during the night. (This would be the suggestion aspect of this rebuttal). If you get infected in the game, you should be worried, you have what may have desolated the entire world, but depending on bacterial/Viral type. It isn't untreatable. The most effective way that we deal with Viral infections today is a far weaker, version of the same Virus, allowing the body to build immunity, but you guys, thats just it. It’s your BODY that is going to cure you. Given enough time, you get better, everyone today should know this, especially all you guys who DON'T get flu shots each year know, you take 2-3 sick days at a time waiting to get better. Those that do get flu shots usually have a more docile experience, you might not even need time off, just a small cough or a runny nose, slight fever and a bit achy. Those without the flu shot have moderate to high fevers, coughs, aches, runny noses, vomit, diarrhea, Delusions, trouble sleeping, trouble breathing. It’s all entirely based on the Invasive entity. Pick and choose but i'm sure you have all been there before. Now imagine this to epic proportions, a virus so evolved in its design, to not only kill its host but allow the virus to gain control, these symptoms only get worst with the duration, the longer you are infected, the more your body is fighting off, so the symptoms will only get worse, like the saying goes, it will only get worse before it gets better, and after you have fought off such sickness, yes you are fatigued and drained, but your body is stronger, use to use a virus/bacteria. Immunity. Is it possible that this strain was a scientific experiment gone wrong, and escaped enclosure? (Resident Evil plot) If so a cure could have been made, this would be are Antibiotics. (So far what i understand by following DayZ, the Zombies aren't zombies, they're Infected, meaning the host hasn't died; entirely. The body as degraded to a point that the Virus/Bacteria/parasite has taken control, or at least changed your body chemistry enough to turn you). I’m trying to argue most aspects the community have made, and what I have discovered is that; we are spoiled. We have experienced the zombie apocalypse far too gently, the difficulty is getting turned up ladies and gentlemen, we need to accept this and shape it. Doing away from what is making dayz, DAYZ is not the recommendation that the community should be making. Zombies are here, they are scary, and we don't want to fight them, we don't want to survive. We just want to gear up and shoot each other, that is not DayZ. It has taken a turn for the worst and has propelled that direction, but it’s our duty to salvage the wreckage. WE DO need to fight them, WE DO need to survive. We need to go back to when player interaction was some of the most suspenseful, gut wrenching experiences. How can we have this when players 40-50 at a time are vigorously running into one another with no friction to hold them back? Back in the day, you weren't meant to see players almost not stop, the player was suppose to be thee experience, when a player is spotted, it’s always; Player! Player! Everyone take cover! Weapons ready guys, we don't know what this guy wants! Not, oh look guys a survivor, looks like he found... a makarov, GET HIM BOYS! I have said a lot here guys, what do we think? I encourage a discussion, like we all use to do back in the day. Lets get this game into alpha guys, make the testing happen. -Jesse

The only question i have thus far is: If all zombies are spawned in at the start of the server, what does that mean when we kill one? Is it permanently dead until server restart? Is it just respawned in the same location? I really hope when we kill zombies there is some type of buffer time between spawns because i would really like the idea that if i'm under attack by zombies and i kill them, there will be a point that i can clear a city or a village or just an area for a small time. Not just an endless spawn fest. I don't really like shooting zombies because how i see it, we use weapons to escape danger and avoid death. Using a weapon on a zombie not only doesn't solve the problem but in actuality, just makes the problem worse because zombies will come endlessly. . Some of you might say that this makes sense seeing as when you shoot a gun the zombies are going to be attracted to it, and i can agree with this, but how it happens in the game is completely broken, shoot a gun the zombies lock onto you, which they shouldn't. They should be attracted to the sound and the location of that sound to they run to the area that the sound was in, so i shoot a gun and hear them coming and run around the corner, they shouldn't just follow and attack you like they know, because they don't. And i'm also fine with the endless amount because in a way it is endless, there will be more zombies then bullets in some situations, but as is, the game has an infinite amount of zombies, if there was a definitive number of zombies then i would reconsider killing them. and thus, they would re spawn at a later time. Not just appear out of thin air like they are all time lords. Jesse

First off I want to say that I agree that anonymity is one of the greatest factors contributing to KOS. Why should someone care if they kill you or not, there are no consequences, the FBI isn't going to come knocking. That is the entire mentality for this game right now. I know for a fact it wasn't this way in the beginning. I remember a few months back when we had a range of 40-80 servers to choose and almost all of them were full. You had to choose a server, and stay because getting your entire crew, and yourself onto one server was hard as F**K. And because of this fact, people got to know you, people remembered you and there was quite a deal of drama on side, I can still remember a specific well know bandit from a server a while back, when ever his name plate was spotted or his clan tag, it was all over side. People would flock to fight his clan or get the F**k out of town. This was the Dayz I fell in love with, you try and survive in the world, you did everything you could, but you had a personae, an image if you will; that people will remember and recognize, and due to this single fact you would adapt your play style, you didn't kill everyone in fear of constant, KOS calls on your presents on a server. Reputation is a huge factor in humanity, being held accountable is one of the greatest tools mankind as ever transgressed, whether that be through religion, law, or moral empathy. Without these factors, we are no longer dealing with humanity, we are dealing with barbarians, wild animals, running on pure animal instinct, kill or be killed, sure that is how an apocalypse would play out, but we would still have remnants of are civility, this part of human history still existed, so all of man would still be effected by this. By all means, a hyper-realistic, survival MMO simulation, cannot function, if people play as animals, and not survivors. I delved into this idea on my own recently after reading this post, I have became a true believer that this mechanic, reputation, perma-existence, what ever you may call it. It has to happen, or Dayz will never be a simulation, it will always be a death-match. http://dayzmod.com/f...y/#entry1197993 This is the post I made, all I want to say is, check out my ideas, they are similar and not nearly as thought out as the OP, and he even answers things that i could not. But the message is the same. http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/120185-standalone-suggestion-for-humanity-indicator/ This is another great idea towards how I feel the humanity mechanic should aspire to create. Kudos to the creator of this post. -Jesse TLDR: GET REAL PEOPLE, THIS IS A SIMULATION, NOT AN ANIMAL KINGDOM, WE AREN'T DOGS, WE ARE HUMANS.

Hey Herbert, there isn't any need to apologize your opinion is completely valid and i'm excited to see people actually taking this idea into consideration, and if i may i will try and put things into better perspective so that things don't seem so cut and paste, because from what i can tell, you have a pretty clear idea how this will all work out, and i just want to say that this is all merely speculation and a defined and definitive system for this is no where near operation, and with that i ask if this system could be possible, because as i see it, it isn't a system like skins where you look at someone and it's black and white, but actually more like subtle advice that your character would be able to supply to you as the player, in how you can better deal with a situation. Also with regards to the clue system and that entire mechanic, is just an example justifying how i felt the physical character would be able to give the player the information when dealing with reputation, and the reason for that is because immersion and realism make or break this game for me, and I don't want a system like the current one with only skins as a distinguishing fact for humanity, on its own it doesn't work, but if it had an additional system that would make it believable, adds to the immersion it would make sense, and i made this argument earlier when i was describing how players characters game play and choices would have an effect on there appearance and disposition, i can go more into this for the sake of making the argument if some would like this explained more, so really i was just trying to explain how such a mechanic could work because the character would have information and being the player playing him we would be able to use his knowledge. Your first point is troubling me, it's undoubtedly true that reputation doesn't make sense to be persistent over multiple lives, but that is if we are measuring actions made in each life, and this isn't a system meant to judge each life it's to judge the player, and give players clues how they should interact with each other, My points on clues and actions that you do with your character to help identify each other is just an argument and yes it has a flaw, but this flaw only exists because players can re spawn as someone new, i'm delving into something much bigger then a humanity system at this point, i would be trying to make a rational explanation to re-spawning when the process itself is immersive breaking. This point isn't over, i really like the idea you tossed here, but i need time to think, and if anyone can make a better explanation i would love to hear it, this is after all an idea to help polish or even perfect a system that could have a huge effect on the game. Will come back to this. Your third point about having previous knowledge is interesting, but is this an instant process? You would have to do more research on someone if you wanted to know more then a small description of someone or even a word. But at that moment you would only have a very restricted idea about someone based on how well known that person could potentially be, and i want to rebuttal and say that, yes you can look at someone and know there intentions, it may not be complete picture but if someone dressed in head to toe body armor jumps out the back of a car, i know that he is here ready for combat, versus someone who is in a tang-top and sandals walking around with a flashlight versus an AR, this guy is not looking for trouble, purposely :D And your fourth point is open for discussion in my opinion, the history and the world of dayz is still under development, maybe settlements ( bases?) is a possibility belive it or not but in a zombie Apocalypse there are going to be people that want to reestablish humanity, and these would be the people that would take these things into account. like i said this is all just starting to take form so to make an assertion like that is still quite ambiguous. And again for fifth point, again you are interpreting that this system is going to unveil all secrets on someone on contact, unlike the current system where the progress of someones humanity is obvious, this system is going to give subtle hints on how you carry out the interaction, all dependent on the persons reputation, if after this idea gets thoroughly picked and smashed, makes sense to be the angle of implication. Again Herbert I want to thank you for contributing to this idea, because as interesting and defensive as i am being, it's because i feel it has potential to have some type of implication on how the humanity system should function, and i'm not saying that this system is perfect or is the only way the humanity problem can be solved, but simply that as an idea that i am trying to convey, i want to make sure everyone is seeing this system as i am. And about your point above, as of right now i am going to wait and see how others might answer that, because that is an answer i can't seem to convey as i see it in my head. -Jesse

T Agreed, it's an interesting take on what they are planning on doing and that is there note system, they are planning on enabling players to be able to leave note for other players, and what i was thinking is that if a note is left behind proposing a outlook about a player, describing a description and reputation, an opinion of that player would this be a way to measure points to someones humanity. This is just one way to do this, obviously, there are many ways to communicate an opinion, so another way i was thinking to actually, realistically contribute to someones reputation is that if a claim is made to someones reputation, if the player dies with in a determined time frame, the claim is dis-noted, the rational behind this is that word of someones actions wouldn't be able to be spoken, or clues of there presents, their effect on the world wouldn't have existed, unless a note or some other discoverable clue is made, this is kinda like how when someone dies and you examine them you are able to see who killed them, this system was never perfected and thus, it never worked well, the cause of death of a player never seemed to work well for me when i tried to use it anyway. Furthermore, if a player makes a claim on someone, and are able to stay alive long enough, it could be the equivalent that you have spoken about this person and thus the ripple of communication would unfold and the possibility of the claim would be possible. Which case the claim can be made. On the note of leaving a clue about some person would be a sure way to make this claim because if someone would examine this clue it would be like if it was communicated.

Interesting, and I agree that having a tool that allows you to have knowledge of a players demeanor is immersive breaking, but to an extent isn't unrealistic, in a situation where someone is randomly confronted you both see each other, you wont have time to look these people up. thus you will be going off some type of reputation of this person as you see them, my rational for this is that word of bad people would get around, whether is from a note left in blood on a wall somewhere that is seen and perpetuated around, or is heard over a local radio broadcast, your physical character would know and you would have some type of brand appear with this player, it wouldn't be blatant as to say (player name) (Status:killer) in there name plate, but more like if this person is a huge murder(measured from a leader board) you would have some type of tip to allude to this and you can judge the situation accordingly, the more high profile; better the tip would be, simply because these people would be for lack of a better word more famous, there name, some type of symbol, ect would be recognizable to your character and would help you, and i say to your character because obviously you as a the player, wouldn't know everything about all players, as the humanity of characters would fluxuate due to players dying and there humanity for that character there reputation as you will, would be wiped clear. versus someone of low reputation, someone that is a new character, or doesn't have any bad humanity would present itself differently in that situation, maybe you are given a tip some how that this person should be trusted and then you are able to act accordingly, this is all on the idea that people in the dayz world's actions would leave a presents if you will, a history based on the fact that they have a presents left on the leader boards which you can use to help you. Now on the other hand, someone is spotted in a city and from someway you are able to find there name or something recognizable to look this person up, this isn't too unrealistic either, you can ask your friends or call around to figure out hey there is this shady guy here, i think i recognize this clan symbol or something, you have any idea if this guy is trustworthy, in which case translates too you simply looking him up and seeing, yeah this guys humanity is negative approach with caution, versus oh this guy is a saint, go give him a hug. I hope this is an acquitted rebuttal and i try to argue the subject with realism and immersion in mind.

Hey Forums, I had this interesting idea for Dayz, I was thinking of the humanity system and it's complexity and I knew that this system has a huge amount of growth possible, and also that it's incredibly difficult to measure, none the less implement perfectly, most noticeably when player interaction is involved, with voice chat, typing and even just body language, and there affects on players whether that be if someone saved you or killed you, with all those factors involved. Yes, sorry that was huge, but again that is just some of the vast complexity with the issue: I was thinking that trust and first impressions are a huge factor when meeting new people. A very realistic assumption I feel, and when applying this to a post-apocalyptic world things matter even more, so what if players are able to give some type of humanity based reputation to players that would allow for players to recognize good from evil, when actions preformed in the world become noticeable to a player they can react to the situation accordingly by say an example would be, a man saves you from starvation, you could in a way reward him with humanity in some way that can be measured , and others would be able to distinguish. The current system has difficulty when measuring when someone is shooting at you in self-defense, versus killing for your beans, so if someone is a bandit, a player can act accordingly and give that player a reputation, like is untrustworthy, greedy, ect. This system in my mind would be largely influenced by player interaction, it would be less actions triggering reward versus punishment humanity to players rewarding players for being a good person versus a guy being a backstabber. A leader board system possibly? Also this system would work largely for promoting a persons non-mechanic action, which means a more role play/immersion play style which has near no reward for. I feel the current system measures bandits (I allude to a psychopath persona for this later) and the sort well because, well; they just shoot you, and that can be easily measured, but if there is a way to measure a person's actions that wants to be a bandit, but wants to promote more interaction. Whether that would be, an example imprisonment, a shake-down situation where you spill your bag, and they take what they want and they run off. This is an especially hard interaction to measure and I feel players that are serious about taking the simulation seriously would love to do these things, and players would respectively brand them in there play style, meaning bandits would be actual bandits, people that do what they need to do to survive, unlike the current bandit that is just someone who is a gun-slinging psychopath that wants to kill everything what moves, this is not a bandit, and I’m not advocating that bandits can't kill people, but I feel that people that don't want to be branded as a psychopath murderer, but still want to play a more survivalist play style, would be branded accordingly, and this means that those KOS style players can get an entirely new persona and play style that would make them distinguishable from a bandit, who is first a survivor and second a guy looking to reestablish humanity, versus the new psychopathy KOS type that would be something entirely different, so in a way I’m advocating a new class for this kind of person. This also means that those that want to be a survivalist, but don't want to commit banditry to do so, would be are true survivors, that everyone starts as. Then there are the far left survivors that want to help everyone and go out of there way to save everyone, which people would easily recognize from the situation and then could also be rewarded accordingly. See I feel this system has potential if implemented in a way that people would participate and use, like I was alluding to before could be some type of leader board system that people could progress through to reach a deviation in. In no way am I advocating skills or out of game buffs for these semi “class” distinguishing features. Furthermore, I also not only take into account, but support that players shouldn't be skinned so that there are extremely distinguishable, this system does demote from immersion, I agree, but then again naturally poor-minded, sick (in the head), people won't look like someone who is out to save people, they would dress in ragged cloths stripped from there victims, or would have a mentality that what they look like doesn't matter much because what people think of them or how they are perceived by others isn't a characteristic they take into account. The bandits on the other hand, the hardened, survivalists that go long strides to secure and acquire a vehicle, or there large stockpiles of equipment to ensure there family, or friends are looked after by any means necessary would be completely different, they would dress to survive, any and all situations if possible, combat gear, body armor, face masks make sense, so a skin that pushes people this way would make sense. So you see I understand the argument that skins are wrong because it makes things too linear and less immersive, but the idea behind it is actually quite natural. The system needs work, and if a system that by either being close to someone and actually examining them, by example being able to hear there voice or see there face for immersive argumentation. Would allow such a reputation system to be distinguished. TLDR; Players humanity needs, not a new, but another system to help measure interaction, so that game play is as real and immersive as possible. Which is what a survival game needs. -Jesse

Prepare for the most immersive, intensifying, emotion provoking game of all time. Good luck mate, you will love it.

Greetings! Well i'm also interested in playing Dayz with fellow friendlies again. I use to have a group i ran with, but since have moved on to other things. I have been playing since June and i would love to be considered to be in your clan. I have plenty of experience as i play daily for 2-3 hours, my current lone wolf is 10 days old. Hellfire4471 is my Skype name if you so choose to accept me. I have a mumble server we can use if a push-to-talk system is deemed more necessary in the future.

So I was just watching episode 6 of Band of Brothers and all I could think about is Dayz. All the intense moments to the sad ones when your best bud goes down in combat, then also the tragedy of you or your buds dieing of starvation and all you can do is watch be cause of the lack of tools at your disposal. Those of you that haven't seen band of brothers, i suggest giving it a chance, keep dayz in your mind and it will feel just like it. Cheers Jesse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX8QeQYMpSE

I think that maybe the zombies got the killing blow on your target yielding a murder to them, thus you had no murder for yourself.

Thanks for your reply Itsmeagain, i have thought about that you have said here and i have a few things for you. Basically, this game is amazing because of the FREEDOM you have in your choices. With that being said,if a survivor is in a situation that his life is endanger, i would presume he would make any choice necessary to ensure said survivors life. Whether the choice is a good one, or a bad one. YOU are able to carry that situation anyway seen fit, so killing isn't so out of the question, but more the reasoning behind it. Also at your comment about appearance. When you think of a bandit, how do you picture them? There not going to be the type that is going to be strolling the block in a nice clean tux, right? No someone that is choosing a life of banditry is going to be rolling in the mud, crawling through fields and recycling the same pair of clothing for days at a time, and not to mention if they catch someone with cloths that they want, however they manage to take said cloths, isn't going to leave them smelling like roses. My point is a bandit is going to be obvious because that kind of personality is going to be careless and filthy, and as for a survivor, someone with civility and some kind of ethical background still intact isn't going to let themselves go and roll around in there filth are they? These people will strive to keep there cloths in top condition and there boots clean, for who knows the next time they will be able to scavenge a better piece of clothing, but as i said before it's the choices that a person chooses that makes them who they are, it may seem silly to be able to identify someone by how they look, but realistically that's exactly how it will happen. Also regarding your comment about the reward, being able to work up to starting with a gun is going to be such a reward for those that choose to work for it, and yes they will see they gun not for really dealing with zombies, but as an extra precaution when dealing with players, and since we are talking about survivors here, and have since, been working there asses off for this perk, aren't going to be the type running through elektro shooting anything that moves. It's the reward that people will be after, it we don't make something worth working for why do it is really the point. Again thank you for your comment, i hope i have made a valid argument here so that we can better develop this idea into something, more then an idea. Cheers. Jesse.

Omg, yes. That was the funniest thing i ever seen. There expressions were just amazing.

Hey guys, my name is Jesse. Today at work i was thinking about DayZ, and how i died last night. I realize that the concept of humanity is hard to distinguish and account for, and yet the idea of such a game mechanic is so essential to this game, back when there were bandit skins and such, people didn't need to have much planning to draft up a team of friendly survivors. You could simply walk into a city, and more often then not, SOMEONE would be willing to join you in your cause.. to raid a barn or kill some zombies in a fire station.. as pathetic as your mission was people wanted to get together because they saw the advantage as gaining new friends or better gear, but as the game progressed, as people learn the in's and out's of this game, and as are humanity skins wore away, the hope of humanity slowly shriveled up into a small goo of decomposing survivors. People have no reason to group up, for they can do everything alone. Need kick ass gear? Well most people know where to go and can do it themselves. That kind of mind set has taken over to the point that killing other players is the only answer because everyone assumes that everyone is decked out on gear and is out for there neck. I'm not suggesting we make the game have more coop mechanics like only other players can give a blood transfusion, that's just silly because realistically there are few things in real life you need someone else to assist you with that could apply to this game, but back to my point. The real incentive here is a REWARD. People wont go ahead and do things out of kindness or ethics because it's a video game. Sure in real life those things matter because of peoples civility and ethics, but in a video game none of that matters because there is no lasting effects for your actions. You may be thinking now at this point that i'm suggesting punishing "bandits" "and rewarding "survivors" at this point, but contrary to your question i'm not suggesting that at all my real suggesting is rewarding a play style so people have a reason to do it. Why give a guy who will kill you any moment a chance at all, you cant really gain much out of that, but if you shoot this guy, well that's hard results, the least you can get of that situation is some beans right? Okay then Jesse, your idea of rewarding a survivor for there actions is obvious, what are your ideas to carry out such a feat? The answer to this has actually already been implemented, but has thus been removed in the last few months. Think back a few months, who remembers waking up on those glorious beaches and immediately pressing "R" and reloading that little Makarov or even the Revolver? Yeah you felt great starting off. You had some food, a gun, ammo. You where set for the next half hour at least, but all for not this kind of game play was removed due to bandits and shear griefers.. I'm right so far, no? Well this is simply because bandits and the bunch had it far too easy, survivors had to run around in every city and every building interacting with other players.. very time consuming, but bandits.. the first guy you saw was loot too you. 10mins tops for a bandit to bag a kill, yet a survivor would have to use all the time given to try and acquire the simplest of supplies. So what are you suggesting Jesse? Giving starting gear again? Why yes, yes i am good sir, but not just for anyone, survivors. This is where Humanity would start to play the correct role. If your humanity falls within a specific range, you would be entitled to a survivor perk item, say a can of beans in the beginning, and let's say you stick with it and slowly raise your humanity higher, you would then enter a new bracket within the humanity scale and unlock some soda or a watch, and eventually maybe are survivors of the world will start waking up with Makarov again, and the great thing about this is that people would have to work for these starting items. Real incentive to raise your humanity, real incentive to work with others. A reason to try and survive, not take this game as BF3/COD4 with annoying food and water problems. Okay Jesse, so reward people who raise there humanity then? Well what about Bandits, are you just trying to take pvp out of the game? Actually no, this game needs pvp. remember this game was first a shooter game, second a Zombie survival mod, and yes what i have said so far would reward people for playing friendly, but with reward there needs to be punishment. If you take the route of a bandit, which is perfectly fine, some people just want to kill others, and this is mostly directed at the 4-7 player clans out there that don't need to meet new people, and with that said these kind of people will have acquired such a stock of items that if they die, a camp of items is only 2-6km out from the beach. So as for punishing bandits, and when i say punish, i'm really meaning evening the odds here. Playing as a bandit has huge advantages because if you are able to kill other players, it's like walking into any building, and having the possibility of barracks level drops, so make it difficult for them, the lower the humanity you have, the less starting gear you start out with, eventually, no painkillers, no bandage, no flashlight, no backpack even? Then on top of it all you are easily identified by your skin as a bandit. Players who choose to play a low-life, scum-of-the-earth style deserve to live like one. bandits wont just be able to run from the beach to their camps, the odds are just not with you, so bandits are going to be forced to enter cities and search for essentials just to make it back to there friends, and what this means for them, bunches of survivors with weapons right off the bat, killing zombies and ganking bandits when ever they are spotted. How it should be, no? Again i am not trying to one of those abolish PVP kind of guys, because again that is just unrealistic, if people were actually in this kind of situations, people would be very protective of what they have left, a great example of this would be The Walking Dead. Lastly, there is a bit missing like the advantages of being a bandit, because bandits are still necessary, there can't be good without the bad. I would like to thank anyone reading this because, yes this is a lot to take in, and it's very game changing and people will have to adapt to this kind of game play. So all i ask is not to agree with me, but debunk me, because the only way such and idea can be implemented if there is not a better way of handling this. Combat everything i have said so that a better, more efficient, version of this idea can be erected through out the halls and many vast fields of Chernarus. And if you do agree with me, don't say it here, say it to your friends, make them read this post and see what they think, and have them tell there friends, so that maybe, just maybe such an idea can be noticed by someone that can actually do something. Again thanks for reading. Cheers. Jesse.