schrapple

The killer should remain secret to the players, however there is no reason why the admin shouldn't have access to the information.

^ Warned you Optimist.

I think for an economy to work it would have to be a batter based economy, since as you suggest in a post apocalyptic world money as we know it would become useless. A trading point that is a cross server exchange would help a batter system work.

Get ready Optimist, you're about to get torn to pieces by the hacks and exploiters. They will begin by screaming and crying that "that's not what rocket wants" while they hack and exploit (which I'm quite sure is are two other things he never wanted but the irony of that will fly clean over their heads). What the hacks and exploiters don't want is legit players banding together clawing back at the unfair advantage they currently have over other players, which is what a safe area will help us to do. Don't take what the turkeys say to heart, just remember that these "puritans" of day-z are they very people who destroy other peoples experience and play the game in a manner never intended by it's creator. On the matter of a safe/trading camp, I would like to see something and your idea has an interesting point with regards to towns growing and coming under attack. Maybe as the town grows it could attract skilled NPC's who could repair cars/weapons, open cross server trading posts or teach new skills.

Before I start I understand that this probably isn't possible with the arma 2 engine, more an idea for the stand alone. My suggestion is to make death for real. No more gear stashing, no more saved vehicles, no more getting your stuff back from your body or having a buddy pick it up for you. Once you die you start again at the coast with only the starting items and you will be unable to pick up anything you owned in your previous life. It will really add to the desperate survival aspect of the game. Who's with me?

Thanks for the vote of confidence BazBake, you've hit the nail on the head and done so quite eloquently also. @NFK ^ this. I'll try to keep it brief and to the point. Long first posts filled with excessive detail lose peoples interest very quickly, it is far better to put your idea across as briefly and simply as possible. The fact you are the first person in five pages who has had serious trouble grasping the concept demonstrates that for the large majority the first post was adequate. As for all the other crap, as I've said creating a change to a game that is faultless is quite a substantial job, there are going to be negative effects and still holes will remain, to prevent that is a mammoth task. These changes are simple and will have large effect on game play and the only genuine problem identified so far is that you do stand the chance of legitimately coming across your old weapon and not being able to pick it up, loot is not persistent, if it was you would not be able to move in this game for spawned items, the chances of coming across your old weapon legitimately are astronomically tiny. Considering the massive effect such a change would have on the game and what a tiny chance of such an insignificant incident occurring where you can't loot a weapon off someones corpse because you previously own it is a tiny price to pay, arguing that such a change should be stopped because this insignificant event has a tiny chance of happening shows that your true motive for stopping such a change can't be mentioned. There have been no other legitimate problems put forward, just catchphrases. I openly invite all comers to put forward situations in which this system would fail or exactly how it would have a serious negative effect on game play. If your going to just spew rhetoric to hide the fact that you enjoy the current flawed system because you can exploit it, then at least be a man about it and say so.

Oh good another game designer hey? How unusual on this forum :rolleyes: . The very idea of a debate is that you put your case forward then your opponent puts his own case and rebuttal forward, you said nothing original that hadn't been raised before, you made (incorrect) assumption about what I was proposing and then created inherently flawed examples that were not inline with the original idea. If you have a specific question or if you would like to point out what you either don't fully understand or don't believe will work I will gladly address it, but you made no valid points. What you wrote had either been addressed earlier, made literally no sense or was a complete fabrication. As for a system (which is another point you have criticized while offering no examples of what you mean, just stated that it is not there), it's quite simple. Every item gets tagged as belonging to someone as soon as it is first discovered and picked up (if the item is dropped your tag will drop off after it has been on the ground for a period of time), When another character picks up an already tagged item after a period of time the ownership tag changes to the current owner. Anything you have when you die or have given to someone just prior to dying (before enough time has elapsed for the ownership tag has been transferred to them) will have been permanently tagged as belonging to you ( items will have only one current owner tag but may have many permanent tags attached). Your new character can't pick up anything that has a permanent tag on it form your previous characters. Simple hey? Now as I've already stated but feel the need to reiterate, this is not a silver bullet, it will not fix every little detail. But surely a game designer should understand better than anyone that every implementation of something new in a program will not only have positive and negative effects on game play (and will often affect every player differently) but will also have it own vulnerabilities to being exploited or abused by users.

I've got no problem with others benefiting from your death, I just don't think reclaiming stuff from your last dead body fits with the game.

Firstly, why would you write such a lengthy post without reading the thread first? Secondly, how do you manage to get through life when you collapse and throw your arms in the air at the tiniest hardship? So here are the short hand answers you should have been able to find yourself (i'd also apreciate it if in future you didn't put words in my mouth or assume what I mean). Never suggested locking people out after death. Respawning anew after death isn't resurrection, being able to return to the point you where at minutes after you died is unbelievable close to ressurection. Yes I value my character as more than a loadout, I also value the starting period where the game can easily destroy you and I love the fact that each new character is exactly that, a unique character with no ties to my previous one ( I don't go back for my old gear). Completely stopping someone from benefiting from prior knowledge would be a massive task, but just because you can't completely fix the problem doesn't mean you shouldn't do what you can about it, If someone discovered a way of curing 99% of cancers tomorrow would you speak out against the treatment because it doesn't cure 100% of cancers? Transferring loot from your dead character to your current one is a form of ressurection, espeacilly in a game that has no skill system or character development. Never said backpack should be "unlootable" Everything can still be traded, you just can't pick up something you owned at or near your time of death (once again it won't plug every hole but it's a vast improvement) "Result: The more a player collects loot and dies (i.e., plays the game), the greater the chance his future characters will run into unusable loot. If a player spent a lot of time on the same server, this problem would ramp up quickly." Seriously? loot is not perpetual in this game, if it was you wouldn't be able to move for discarded objects. Things are constantly disappearing and new gear spawning. " Tommy finds a DMR, so he gives his old AKM to Jenny. They get in a firefight with bandits and Tommy dies. Jenny then loses the AKM, because it vanishes upon Tommy's death." Really, were you even trying? Thing don't disappear out of other people's inventory because the person that found it dies. " But wait, you say, why not tag the weapon as Jenny's once she picks it up, so it won't vanish? Okay, but now we're back to friends holding a dead character's gear so the new charcater can get it later. After all, if it become's Jenny's AKM, Tommy's next life can pick it up, thus regearing and "resurrecting." No, once you have given someone something and they have owned it for a period of time it then becomes theirs and they can give it back if they wish, you would only be blocked from owning it again if you gave it to them shortly before your death,before a long enough period of time had elapsed for it to be considered as theirs and no longer yours (and no I don't have a figure in mind for that time period, if I did it would only be a guess since the game we are suggesting for (the standalone) doesn't even exist yet). "I could go on, but I think it's now obvious that making gear non-fungible introduces a whole new host of problems to the game. If you want players to care about their character's deaths, we should probably add something to the life that's not related to gear and non-transferable, and then take it away upon death." Now your talking about skills or something equavilent, that's a whole different topic and not something mentioned by me in this post. I'm more than happy to discuss and debate this idea but in future do your homework, inventing red herrings that have already been dealt with is a waste of everyones time. To completely stop someone benefiting from having played a game before is a massive task, just because this suggestion won't achieve that massive task in a single step doesn't mean it won't make a positive impact in game.

What's odd is that people want the highly popular mod to be more like the lackluster original game the mod comes from.

Agree with your character stay in game for a brief period, disagree with instant death.If your connection drops out or your game crashes and your not in a dangerous situation you shouldn't die.

I'd like to see butt stroking with rifles and pistol whipping for those desperate situations where you run out of ammo or get caught between mags. (Also please for the love of god let me drink from a lake without a bottle)

I always laugh when people don't want a mod on a game changed (not that I'm casting a vote one way or the other about the suggestion the OP made), the mod itself is a change from the original game. If people stopped rocket changing arma 2 we wouldn't have day-z.

The reason why I feel we need fewer kick arse guns is that the game loses a very challenging aspect once you get a decent military weapon, I'm not saying remove them, just limit them a lot more so they are genuinely a rare item (so rare that they might temp a peaceful player to kill someone for one) . I think the early stages of the game are far more fun and challenging than popping off zombies safely with a silenced M4.

You do realize this thread is posted in the "suggestions" section don't you? If the forum was run as you suggest the only things in the suggestions section would be a thread suggesting that the bugs get fixed. If it infuriates you to the point of typing a screaming session then perhaps you shouldn't read the suggestions, try sticking to the bug reports section for the sake of your blood pressure.

Every part of the world gun ownership can be considered rare, even the good old USA has a minority of people that own guns. The chances of me kicking a door in anywhere in NZ and finding a gun are astronomically low and if I did find one chances are that it would be a pistol, shotgun or hunting rifle as opposed to a semi or full auto. As for the military bringing in weapons it's the old balance problem isn't it, realistically there would be cars left everywhere (and even military vehicle) that you could simply use and run over every zombie on the map. You can't apply realism to games it must make way for balance or the game would be pointless. Hence the need to hand out weapons in slow trickles and not just have assault rifles lying everywhere over the place. So at the end of the day the real world influences and gun numbers don't really matter since the game has to be both enjoyable and balanced, both of which take priority over "realism".

I'm not saying there shouldn't be military gear in the game, it just makes me laugh that everyone wants day-z to become arma 2 when no one ever really got excited about arma 2 in the first place.

I'd personally like to see the high end military weapons become very rare items and the focus be on civilian weapons. More pistols, shotguns and bolt action hunting rifles.

You should probably read the entire thread before posting, getting rid of tents is the point. If you can die and two minutes later be back at the same point then what is the point of even having death in the game? There are no skill trees or the like, you don't lose anything when you die so what you have is basically resurrection. You die an minutes later your character is in the same position with the same equipment he was before death. As I keep repeating but no one has been able to answer yet. What place does resurrection have in a survival simulator? The main focus of the game is to not die so why would you make dying of no real consequence? It defeats the whole purpose of the game.

You should have to pick your favorite before you start, so if you picked pepsi over coke a can of pepsi is more refreshing for your character.

Your arguing against an idea because there are a few red herrings that won't get caught in the net? Very rarely does a fix solve every tiny aspect of a problem but that is a poor reason not to implement it. So if someone found a solution that would reduce crime by 99% you'd be against it because there would still be 1% crime remaining?

Why was arma 2 so unpopular, then as soon as someone makes a zombie/survival simulator for it suddenly everyone wants to turn it back into a military sim? If you want military gear go play arma2.

Killing people literally seconds after they spawn on the beach isn't pointless player killing?

Why is it that the most important part of being a brony is constantly drawing attention to the fact? Obviously enjoying a cartoon isn't as important to these turkeys as telling everyone that you watch it.

Firstly, paying for a new copy of the game after every death was never mentioned by me, don't try and drag this discussions down to childish exaggerations. Secondly, are you seriously trying to suggest that the biggest penalty connected to death is losing your zombies killed counter? and that your experiences in this game exists within a sprite and that those experiences and memories of the games played vanish when that sprite dies? Is this a troll?, It is written in such a serious tone that I simply can't tell.