Panzerfaust (DayZ)

Role play is not necessary to experience the things Rocket wants people to experience with this mod. Any time there are actual assets that people have worked for on the line, there will be emotion, roleplay or not. You kinds of militant roleplayers who are very hard core about the whole thing do a mighty fine job of making the game feel artificial and dry for those of us who are not as enthusiastic about roleplay as you are. Everything you describe is still possible with the bandit skin as-is.

Thank God, Rocket. I think more than a few people needed to read that.

.....wat

I think that the bandit system is a good idea overall in theory, but that the current implementation is broken. Currently, a single murder is generally more than enough to put you into bandit territory. I think three or four murders is much, much more realistic to qualify for bandithood. That way, regardless of what the player has chosen to do, their past actions will still have an effect on how they are perceived by other players, and I think that's something everyone should keep in mind and is very important given the overall design philosophy with this mod.

I think you people need to remember that the devs are treating this as a societal breakdown survival sim, not some silly MMO where there's a set in stone PVP system. The game is meant to be brutal and emergent by design and if you can't live with it, then please find something else to play. Finally found the dev quote I was trying to get a hold of. The people on here whining about PVP should probably read this. Rocket on BIS Forums: To clarify: Not going to remove or even restrict PVP. The intent of this whole mod is to provide you choices, the intent of the planned change (humanity) is to provide some impact of those choices. There's not "punishment" for PvP, but doing alot of PvP will cause your character model to become a "bandit" model. This will make you recognizable as the type of role you have taken on. Your choice in the world is whether you want to retain your humanity, or whether you want to survive. The two are not mutually exclusive, but sometimes you come to a situation where you will need to make a choice. My whole intent, with the entire game mode, was to make a situation where real human emotions are forced out and experienced - both the good and the bad. My experience in the military taught me sometimes the most rewarding moments come when things were the hardest, when terrible things happened, but they were overcome. My key intention was to make something very brutal, almost cruel, for those like me (I'm the kinda guy who always turns the difficulty right up to max) who want to experience real human emotion (be it absolute frustration, defeat, anger - through to happiness and excitement). I guess what I am saying, is it has not been about "gameplay balancing" (which is not my best area), but about forcing the player to make choices, some of which are cruel, some of which are not balanced at all, and some of which can easily lead to no win situations. In fact, I didn't even intend it to feel like a game. I prefer the term "anti-game" because I've broken many of the "rules" of gameplay. But personally, I think that's why it is enjoyable even in its very broken and basic state.

Let me guess, you're some sort of failpirate, suicide ganker or gatecamper? I don't play anymore, when I did I was the type who'd probably bait and outsmart you all without stooping down to your level. In any matter, where got "arena"s from was your idea not mine, if you go back and actually read what I said no where did I say limit PVP to arenas, and if you knew how EVE was played you'd know PVP isn't done that way there either. There is ALWAYS risk inherent, but yet there isn't ALWAYS killing as this mod's pvp is turning into. Secondly consider that EVE is largely designed around PVP with environment and NPC elements merely a distraction, whereas this mod is the complete opposite: environment and zombies are the center-stage, PVP is there simply to add the dimension of surviving (but surviving PVP is not the core element). You can still have ever-present PVP risk without having ALWAYs present PVP. People will PVP in this game primarily for one of two reasons: They are trying to avoid being shot at themselves, or they're trying to shoot someone else for the gear they have; i.e, to benefit themselves. People on both sides of the fence should know this and by trying to lift CONCORD out of EVE and drop it in here by magically spawning a zombie horde anywhere there's non-consensual PVP (which from what I've read is anywhere outside of your badlands) will kill free-world PVP because there is far more risk than reward for the aggressor (an M4 isn't worth getting 50 zombies spawned on your ass if you shoot the guy carrying it) and those who wish to avoid PVP in the first place will realize that and consequently not have anything to worry about. The implication there is that if you want to PVP you go to these areas, if you don't want to you go somewhere else and you're fine. Hence, arenas. We already have what you say you want, the risk of PVP is always present, but PVP itself is not always present. I'm afraid the map is far too large for that, especially if your server isn't full. Likewise in EVE, if you ever bothered to check the Ships Destroyed in Last Hour option on the star map you'd know that as well. As for my EVE profession, I've been playing for close to three years, and I live in wormholes where people know the risk of being there and the ones that live to fly another day are the ones who are smart enough to know that simply by being logged into the game they are subjecting themselves to a certain amount of risk. As far as EVE being built for PVP, you're wrong. EVE is built to give open-world PVPers a CHANCE, not a playground. Piracy in EVE is simply one of many professions people pursue in EVE. The environment isn't just for hugs and giggles either, PI, mining, and ratting are testaments to that. In either game, the people who are not intelligent enough or not cautious enough to adapt to the risks of the game environment generally won't last long. Your last paragraph regarding this mod is ultimately subjective and the only opinion that really matters in the end when it comes to this matter is that of the people making the game. The reality of the gameplay currently though is that both elements are closely interlocked with one another and I believe my opinions are echoed by those developing the mod when I say that they are both equally important and pushing either one to the side is foolishness.

Sorry, no. I think I would stop playing the mod if this happened. You're probably one of those who makes a habit out of repeatedly dying in very expensive ships because you don't realize that EVE (likewise with this mod) is built on risk from top to bottom by design. Hate it or love it, EVE is a million times more exciting then something WoW-esque because any direct interaction with others carries an element of risk, you will lose things you worked for if you die, and nowhere, not even high-sec, is completely safe. This mod, and EVE, are best thought of as virtual renderings of Mos Eisley. It's a rough place in general, there are many bad people around, and even the nicer ones may eventually try and screw you over. This mod is currently a high-tension balance between surviving the zombie onslaught and the uncertainty of dealing with your still-human neighbors, and marginalizing either one of the two elements (as you suggest) in this equation would do serious harm to the game in my view. The fact that even a single player kill that isn't viewed as self-defense by the game can send you plunging into bandit territory has already done enough damage to the latter, and it doesn't need to be hurt any further. Reducing the PVP element to a gamey arena type system where certain areas are cordoned off so rich players with spare equipment to throw around can shoot at each other and making everywhere else Equestria with zombies is entirely against the grain of this mod and would kill all of the excitement for me (and many others, I'm sure.)

I think given the morality system's shortcomings I'd hover somewhere between shoot him immediately and give him a chance. Would I be more alert than usual when encountering a run-of-the-mill player? Definitely.

Agreeing that the morality system needs serious tweaks. You shouldn't have to wait to be shot first, which is complete suicide if your assailant is using anything bigger than a handgun. If it were up to me, I'd remove it completely. In a similar situation in real life, you most likely wouldn't be able to tell if someone is a sadistic murderer just from looking at them. I think any future stat/character progression penalties imposed by the game itself as a result of shooting people should be out of the question. Shooting at survivors is a double edged sword and has enough repercussions of its own as it is. I feel that the beauty of this mod is its lack of "gaminess", iron out the bugs, add a few more items, things of that nature, and leave it as-is: a hardcore Infected apocalypse survival simulator without very many gamey RPG elements to it is how I would do things. However, it is the developer's game and they're free to do with it as they please, this is just my opinion. Back to the specific issue this thread addresses, I can see why the morality system is needed in some people's eyes. However, as it is it's completely broken and needs to be reworked, but coming up with a viable solution is going to take some serious brainstorming. Fire away!

PvP is absolutely essential in my view. It adds a LOT of tension and atmosphere to the game (Can you really trust that guy you teamed up with?), and it provides another way to play the game (albeit a very live by the sword, die by the sword way). I think removing or nerfing it would hurt the game much more than it would help it. (I'm Caldari, HAM Drake FTW)

I think that NVGs should be very rare, very useful items. As I don't have access to the server the same way the people who made the mod do, I don't know the exact spawn rate, but I can tell you that after hours on end of searching the only ones I found were the ones I took off of the corpse of someone I shot. (On a side note, removing the M107 TWS was definitely a good idea in my opinion.) It's very difficult to use optics with them (forget trying to track a moving target at range) and the glare from a muzzle flash is blinding, even when not aiming down the sight. Plus, if people realize you have them, you're likely to become quite the target to those with a bandit streak. Although, adding night vision optics would maybe even things up for those who don't have NVGs. Make them uncommon, but not nearly as much so as NVGs are. It would give people at night something to even the playing field a bit, but you would have to constantly stop and look around with them for them to really be effective as NVGs are. There's lots of different ways to address any grievances people may have with NVGs short of outright removing them (adding batteries, etc), and I think that dialogue on that topic would be very interesting to see.