bbilbo1

I've been out of town for a while, so it's been some time since I updated. It's good to see (mostly) positive reactions to this proposal. Keep the feedback coming, folks.

Um, no... Read my original post, and try again. Not at all what I'm talking about.

That's why I said "qualified" adults. I know that reaching a certain age just not instantly make someone ready to handle responsibilities. But seriously, I really hope there's a minimum age requirement to buy/run these servers.

That's an obvious mechanic meant to punish one particular play-style. Rocket is against that.

This system wouldn't "make" anything. It simply enhances the decisions that players are already free to make. You are entitled to your opinion. However, it's a bit over-reaching to say "being a Douche makes the game fun." Many folk would tend to disagree. But again, it's all opinon. Everyone individually decides what makes the game fun. "Punishment" and "reward" are terms that would insinuating players are doing the "correct" or "incorrect" things. Not so... That's not what this proposal is about. This is about enhancing the world to give consequences to all actions. That's a completely different thing from biased punishments and rewards.

Not really, As I explained in my post directly above yours.

I think I see what you're saying. And I think you bring up some excellent points. These points are the result of not being as detailed in some areas of my proposal as I should have been. Let me correct that right now: One thing I think I failed to mention in my proposal is the numbers and scale to which my proposed system would be in place. To be clear, I'm not saying 1 player kill would spawn a swarm of zombies. Nor am I saying 1 or 2 backpacks full of bloodbags and transfusions would make the region friendly. That notion is way, WAY, too small-scale for what I had in mind. What I'm talking about here is VERY LARGE NUMBERS. How large? My idea is that it would take a community of players working together (one way or another) for an extended period of time to influence the region's environment positively or negatively. That means one or two players spamming an action couldn't, practically speaking, be solely responsible for influencing an entire region. In order to min/max my system on a solo, small-scale, you would ultimately need to repetitively collect incredibly massive amounts of resources. Ultimately, increasing your chances of encountering other players and taking those resources just to spam actions for ridiculously extended periods of logged-in time. In short, players wont actually see their actions influence a region on a solo-minded scale. Only in cases where there's an strong overabundance of positive or negative Humanity actions, whether that be the result of player cooperation and teamwork, or a more passive, "Everyone ends up doing 'X' here" activity. Thanks for showing me where I need to clarify and elaborate on my proposal. Being as descriptive as possible helps me put my vision out there. EDIT: I have updated my original post to clarify this.

I came to DayZ expecting this: This game ended up being this:

inB4 Hookers and Blackjack...

Are you proposing, say, a line-of-sight rule for determining if someone can steal from your bag? I can see that making sense, then.

Rocket has said PvP and baditry are acceptable playstyles. There is no reason to put a balancing mechanic into the game that punishes a specific playstyle. Hacking is a security issue, not a gameplay issue. Irrelevant.

Thievery should be a perfectly acceptable playstyle. Any attempt to curb that seems unnecessary and doesn't fit with the "can you trust this stranger?" feel to this mod.

I see what you mean. I was wondering the same thing, myself. I do realize that the system spawns zombies only in areas where players exist to ease stress on the server. But here's ultimately where i think the same thing can be accomplished. -Players continue to be "servers" for the zombies that spawn in the area. But before that action is taken, I think the player data should query the region's humanity rank to decide how many zombies should appear. -Servers/The hive already tracks and logs (or at least should be) many, many player actions and data anyway. I don't see utilizing that data to cause more strain on servers. Of course, I could be wrong. - As you stated you worry that players going to an area simply to loot and leave would cause a unreasonable zombie spawn rate? I feel like a designated Max-Cap to spawn would make that a non-issue, if I understand your sentiment correctly. Also, it's worth mentioning that this game will constantly be optimized and streamlined. We're nowhere near a final product. At least, I hope we aren't. :-/ -I *don't* think the constant threat of the loss of hard work such as "securing" a region is outside the theme and feel of this game. do you? :-) Especially if it's all player-driven. -Tell me exactly what you mean by "spamming an area into a friendly zone?" I really don't understand how this would be done. At least not practically. Also, I would like to remind you that as I originally posted, no area would be completely safe. Thanks for your input.

Questing, and game-generated objectives are kinda "gamey." And doesn't fit Rocket's feel of the mod... But that's okay, because you don't need a quest system to actually to do that! That would be completely player-driven. Maintenence and policing are things players would opt to do if they feel like it, and want to maintain the relative peace.

Agreed. It all comes down to the fact that the only thing in this mod that is marginally fleshed-out is PvP Combat. Add more to the rest of the game, and some issues of boredom are lessened.