Nekriist

Fuck up with my web browser. My bad. Looked as if i'd been culled. I firmly apologize to the admins. My screw up. Sorry guys.

There isn't a problem with banditry in the game. You're going to encounter it. And you should. That's how it works. There will always been an element that preys on the "weak" for their own survival. I think what you aren't doing, is distinguishing between PKers (Griefers) and bandits. Bandits are one thing. Griefers are another. And it is not the fault of bandits. It's the fault of the dev(s) taking a lazy approach to developing the mod by stating they won't trying and "balance" things (Either because they aren't creative enough to figure something out, or they're honestly too lazy. If they had an ounce of real sense, and if they wanted to ultimately make this into a standalone game with a shot at any success, they would do something. Instead, all that seems to be given is condescension and half assed explanations for not doing anything. Take that as you will fanboys.). Bandits aren't the problem. They're there for adding another facet to the experience. The problem is CoD and BF nut sacks that spend their time killing (Without even bothering to looting) and camping spawn spots. I've seen videos of earlier builds of this alpha, where legitimate bandits made their living. I was amazed,and incredibly impressed by roadside robberies (That didn't end up in the victim being executed), and other such similar things. That is how the game is meant to be played. But lazy developers and braindead "yes-man" fans make any sort of changes impossible. Thus, you will only get the experience you get now: A watered-down semi-realistic zombie survival mod that fails to capture much of an experience, because it caters to people who abuse the bandit name, and the lack of skins to simply grief, instead of trying to play the game as a survival. A bandit is not a griefer, but a griefer is a bandit. You can see how it goes downhill from there.

Fix? Give bandit skins back. Bandits spawn in competely different areas. The fact of the matter is that there are a large portion of players using the lack of distinction to troll everyone else, ruining everything for both bandits and players alike. So someone is given a debuff for trying to protect themselves, and a debuff for trying to murder everyone? There's no winning in either situation. Instead, it would be better to buff and debuff for either case. People who don't murder get certain buffs to certain things, but certain debuffs to others. Same goes with bandits. The point is that anyone who is an "honest" bandit ought to be angry at player griefers who just PK for fun. Because that isn't what being a bandit is about. Camping the coast or Cherno and sniping unarmed noobs isn't banditry, that's just being a CoD player. I support returning the bandit skins, but only insofar as bandits and survivors spawn far enough away that both can stand a chance before meeting in the "wasteland".

I'm quite fascinated by this thread. So much so, in fact, that I created an account to share my own thoughts. I am a potential new player. I have been monitoring the forums for a couple hours now, trying to get a feel for the community--because let's face it, as per the creator's statements, we build the story. If the community is generally inclined towards one frame of mind, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that it will be the prevailing mindset in-game. First off, I am in no way against PvP, but you must understand that the thought of entering the game, only to be shot upon spawning is a bit demoralizing, and does nothing to encourage people from trying out the game. People, who would otherwise probably like the game, but cannot, because they cannot get far enough past spawn to really experience and enjoy what this "simulator" has to offer. That being said, the lack of government, the lack of law enforcement would be reasonable excuse for many to start doing things they never would have dreamed of under normal circumstances. However, I pose this question to you. If we build the story, and no balance is attempted, because the creator would rather that we relied upon our sense of humanity, our morals to decide how to act, how would this system ever become something other than mindless player killing? There is a disconnect between video games and reality, and a disconnect between the internet and reality. In real life--since so many like to rely on this as the logical base for their arguments--we have what we call a conscience. Whether this is because of moral upbringing, or simply a fear of retaliation (That whole thing of 'I won't do that, because i'm afraid the same will be done to me."), conscience, humanity is what keeps people from mercilessly killing everyone else. There are exceptions to this rule, of course. And I don't pretend that the circumstances present within the game-world wouldn't warrant an alteration of conscience, but for everyone to be bereft of it? Completely? This is why the argument of "People would do that if this happened in real life." isn't a stable base of logical reasoning. Because this is a game, and because it is an online game, it is logical to conclude that anonymity and the lack of real mortality/danger/damage done will never generate the emotional response and the logical actions I believe the creator of this game really wants. He wants social interaction, to achieve a game-world that gets as close to reality as possible. And that's a great idea. But since you have no need for a conscience in an alternate reality where no one is really hurt, killed, or robbed in any permanent way, what's the point of having such goals. From the videos i've seen, the threads i'm followed with much interest, and the statements made by the game's creator, it seems like the only way to approach some semblance of reality in a post apocalyptic world is to offer an "artificial conscience" to the players. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you exactly how you would go about that, but it would certainly approach the realm of "balancing". In a game meant to have you think about your actions, on moral grounds or not, you need to provide the player with a conscience of some sort, real or otherwise. Without that, you will only have KoS, rampant PKing, and no alternative to thievery with mandatory execution. A movie that people love to reference--particularly in response to people like the OP--The Road, I recall a scene (Or rather several that seem to follow along the same lines.) where a man attempts to rob Viggo Mortensen's character, and his son of their supply laden pull cart. Granted, the child is who we see as the conscience of the pair, but the ending of this scene is remarkable enough. He doesn't kill the robber, he simply punishes him by taking all of the criminals possessions instead. Or how about the scene where instead of killing the old man, they feed him? Or at the very end of the movie, a family offers to take care of the now-orphaned child? Even if you could argue that Viggo Mortensen's character has no conscience, his son certainly does. As does the family that approaches the child at the end. More or less every post-apocalyptic film or piece of literature I have read possesses these characters. So it's unreasonable to assume that no one would possess humanity in decency within this game, which is no more real than the films or literature I mention. To truly make people think, you have to give them a conscience. Otherwise, you're all just fodder for PKers. Thanks for anyone who takes to time to read my rather long winded post.