logan23

Actually, groups are more likely to kill other players since there is less of a risk. The group has nothing to gain and everything to lose in interacting with a stranger or lone wolf. I play as a lone wolf and have never killed another player. I do watch myself with other players and have interacted with other players with no combat happening. I will admit there are some players who go out and kill or mess with players but these same players will do the same in a group as well. Social interactions is not the key to stopping players from shooting on sight. Social interactions are great to allow players once talking/interacting- build friendship and trust. To solve the shoot first ask questions later is to make a random stranger/player have the possibility to be more valuable then a friend that's in your group. Lets say a groupA or a individual playerA is walking through the woods and see another player in the distance. Usually the thought is: If he has good gear= kill If the player is unarmed and didn't see you = let them pass If the player is unarmed and sees you = Kill or let pass But if the stranger could have something that could be a value/talent/skill to you or your group (not counting an extra body or gear) might interact from a distance or defensive position and see if they are good at fixing cars or etc. These extra moments will humanize the stranger and playerA/groupA might work with them, or do a trade, etc. Once there is some communication, the guns will still be aimed for defense but you will at least look for a reason to shoot them verse shooting them on sight. In history many groups fought wars where they didn't talk to each other, didn't understand each other,..but once they did interact then they saw each other as fellow humans who have disagreements which can be looked at and solved. No interactions allows the other player to cast upon what ever image/view they want to- to justify killing a player who is an active unknown and could easily be a possible ally as well as a threat. But with casting your image that they can't be trusted and kill them- you will feel less remorse since you feel that it was to protect yourself, but this is rationalization. Classic case of rationalization in action- I must kill other players on sight now since I have been killed by some other players. This feeds on the domino effect where you simply spread this method of thinking - like a disease it will turn players to simply killers. I have been killed by other players and I will still not kill another player unless he is firing on me. I will stand against this thought since i know if I'm friendly and helpful to another stranger then they might do the same for another- Do you feed the Chaos or do you stand up against it.

I hate to burst you bubble Original Poster but the player characters are immune to the Infected/virus. Rocket already confirmed that your immune to the virus.

I understand you want to add more group play and social aspects but you have to be careful to not create in MMO terms a 5 man dungeon -where you need a team to complete a task like fix a car. Everything needs to be able to be done by group and lone wolfs but I understand that lone wolfs will have harder time with some tasks but they can do them. Another issue is the players making a party/ group and still kill strangers- you ideas above don't touch on this topic. To solve the issue with two strangers or a group taking in a stranger- you must make the individual character valuable in a way that can't be matched by the other player's basic new spawn friend/party member. There must be something that stranger could possible provide other then another body or gear. If you can answer this then you have something that will get players who are strangers to interact more verse just killing.

Yeaaahh, that's not happening. DayZ SA is built like an MMO, and MMOs don't have mission editors. There was talk of modding DayZ SA- but thats way later. What your asking for fits with the DayZ mod not the DayZ SA. I'm sorry

Interesting Post- I like the idea that the longer you live, the player has a higher chance on not getting sick from certain diseases or the player will just have a chronic condition verse death. With the concept of doing something-bandage or fix a car can increase a factor related to the action. To make this work what you do is say Bandage 5 times will increase the action in some small way but you can't increase it more until you are on your 3rd week alive. This will keep players from shooting each other a then bandage after, plus your idea of a wound has a chance of infection- this will keep players from shooting each other to get this increase. I can see this also working with the cars but I don't like the idea that fixing a car can get you injured, its like running on stairs can lead you to falling down them. I agree that non of these should touch the area of combat. I can see the main focus is to see that having a player who lived for 4 weeks as a valuable asset since they have better skills in certain areas due to the fact they have been out here living/surviving longer then a fresh spawn. These should never be something you can actually track in a menu just that the player will see/notice them getting faster at bandaging or cutting out better grade of meat from the Cow/animal.

I like the idea. You just need to make sure that the stances are close enough to each other so players need to be close to that other player to determine what stance. It wouldn't be good if the stance can be seen or determined from a far distance without a scope-

Cannibalism is something usually done out of desperation but we know players will simply use it as another reason to kill a player or get a few extra points to their blood. Cannibalism needs to have a heavy penalty like getting a disease Example: "Kuru is an incurable degenerative neurological disorder (brain disease) that was probably transmitted among members of the Fore tribe of Papua New Guinea via cannibalism. Kuru is a Fore word that means 'to shake' People with Kuru tremble and shake" http://en.wikipedia....iki/Cannibalism "Kuru is an incurable degenerative neurological disorder that is a type of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, caused by a prion found in humans.[1] The term "kuru" derives from the Fore word "kuria/guria" ("to shake"),[2] a reference to the body tremors that are a classic symptom of the disease; it is also known among the Fore as the laughing sickness due to the pathologic bursts of laughter people would display when afflicted with the disease. It is now widely accepted that Kuru was transmitted among members of the Fore tribe of Papua New Guinea via cannibalism.[3]" So if DayZ had Cannibalism there could a virus meter/number count of pathogen. When this numbers get to a certain count you start to get Kuru, which you can't cure. the shakes would be every so many minutes but heating human flesh to many times = constant tremors. This means players would only do this- only when they are actually starving.

There is a reason why removal of Friendly fire is not a good idea. From past arguments on this topic, it comes down to a player wants to have it their way- plain and simple. The player wanting an easy mode might like to sugar coat it but it's plain and simple- I want it to be easier for me to play. I hear the - if I buy a private server then I should get to set it up the way i want to. No, you don't have full range to alter the game just because you bought/rented a server. DayZ SA when it goes to Private server rentals- DayZ Devs will give you a small amount of options based on their testing of the game. You are renting a server to run DayZ SA (a game) not something you can reshape into what you want. DayZ SA is not DayZ Mod. Players seem to get this mixed up that the structure of Dayz SA is different- It's a Game , not a mod. If you want a large amount of freedom with servers then just have the DayZ Mod. DayZ SA needs to be balanced and tested which means an easy mode would conflict with this. As for Private Hive and servers- We won't see those for awhile. Remember the goal of this Alpha/beta release is to help get the game to a finish state not asking for a redesign of the game. The removal of friendly fire is similar to those who want an Easy Mode, they touch on the same points- I want to make the game less punishing so I can run around with God mode on- basically. Even though DayZ has elements of a FPS, it's designed to function as an MMO- by looking at the new Architecture for Servers/clients.. From what I have researched- BF3 does have options like the friendly fire but BF3 is a different game then DayZ SA. One is a quick deathmatch or conquest which focus on strict combat while DayZ is a survival game where combat between players is optional. What BF3's server options don't have are options to change the game's mechanics or it's over all rules.- what you experienced when playing it. Now let's look at MMOs, Planet Side 2- This is a FPS MMO which has friendly fire. There is a reason why it's there- If players had FF turned off then players can go into combat spamming attacks not caring if they run in front of their team mate's gun fire. The purpose of Friendly fire in PS2 is to make player's fight with caution and tactics. You remove FF in PS2 and the game's design and mechanics have been changed. Imagine if Guild Wars 2 gave players in main game the ability to attack each other? This would go against the design of the game- GW2 is designed for players to team up and work together. Having players be able to kill each other would change the whole dynamics of the game and take all the effort of the Dev team and throw it out the window- breaking the game. Getting back to DayZ SA- anyone who has been around the DayZ Mod from the beginning or before it blew up can see where Rocket wants to go with the DayZ game. DayZ is a game meant to trigger emotions/ reactions from the player but this is only possible when the game is harsh but fair- meaning the game gives you a bunch of tools in this sandbox to play with, from guns, food, barbwire, traps, etc. DayZ wants you to play in this world and create your own stories but also to invoked the fear of death and make the player feel tension. A removal of FF would break this core design principle. These two ideas would remove tension in the game- it's core. This is like taking out all the curses in a movie that's meant to be edgy, think pulp fiction. Yeah you have an idea what they are actually saying but the removal and replacement of the original content and editing just water downs the movie experience. When your playing DayZ SA- it's and experience created by the difficulty and unpredictability of it's world. It's harsh but will keep you and your friend's at the edge of your seat due to the unpredictability each time you jump into the game. You never know who you might bump into or what gear you will find. Removal of FF would destroy this. I know some players will say but it's not doing any harm, but i say yes you are- you are damaging the core of what Dayz is. You want this mode for personal reasons not because it would make the game better. And if you want to alter this- why not alter perma death or amount of damage Zeds do or etc. Just a bad idea- play the game as the Devs intended - like you do with every other game you play.

There is a reason why Easy Mode is not a good idea. From past arguments on this topic, it comes down to a player wants to have it their way- plain and simple. The player wanting an easy mode might like to sugar coat it but it's plain and simple- I want it to be easier for me to play. I hear the - if I buy a private server then I should get to set it up the way i want to. No, you don't have full range to alter the game just because you bought/rented a server. DayZ SA when it goes to Private server rentals- DayZ Devs will give you a small amount of options based on their testing of the game. You are renting a server to run DayZ SA (a game) not something you can reshape into what you want. DayZ SA is not DayZ Mod. Players seem to get this mixed up that the structure of Dayz SA is different- It's a Game , not a mod. If you want a large amount of freedom with servers then just have the DayZ Mod. DayZ SA needs to be balanced and tested which means an easy mode would conflict with this. As for Private Hive and servers- We won't see those for awhile. Remember the goal of this Alpha/beta release is to help get the game to a finish state not asking for a redesign of the game. The concept of the Easy mode, and this could also include the whole debate on friendly fire since in may ways they touch on the same points- I want to make the game less punishing so I can run around with God mode on- basically. Even though DayZ has elements of a FPS, it's designed to function as an MMO- by looking at the new Architecture for Servers/clients.. From what I have researched- BF3 does have options like the friendly fire but BF3 is a different game then DayZ SA. One is a quick deathmatch or conquest which focus on strict combat while DayZ is a survival game where combat between players is optional. What BF3's server options don't have are options to change the game's mechanics or it's over all rules.- what you experienced when playing it. Now let's look at MMOs, Planet Side 2- This is a FPS MMO which has friendly fire. There is a reason why it's there- If players had FF turned off then players can go into combat spamming attacks not caring if they run in front of their team mate's gun fire. The purpose of Friendly fire in PS2 is to make player's fight with caution and tactics. You remove FF in PS2 and the game's design and mechanics have been changed. Imagine if Guild Wars 2 gave players in main game the ability to attack each other? This would go against the design of the game- GW2 is designed for players to team up and work together. Having players be able to kill each other would change the whole dynamics of the game and take all the effort of the Dev team and throw it out the window- breaking the game. Getting back to DayZ SA- anyone who has been around the DayZ Mod from the beginning or before it blew up can see where Rocket wants to go with the DayZ game. DayZ is a game meant to trigger emotions/ reactions from the player but this is only possible when the game is harsh but fair- meaning the game gives you a bunch of tools in this sandbox to play with, from guns, food, barbwire, traps, etc. DayZ wants you to play in this world and create your own stories but also to invoked the fear of death and make the player feel tension. A easy mode or removal of FF would break this core design principle. These two ideas would remove tension in the game- it's core. This is like taking out all the curses in a movie that's meant to be edgy, think pulp fiction. Yeah you have an idea what they are actually saying but the removal and replacement of the original content and editing just water downs the movie experience. When your playing DayZ SA- it's and experience created by the difficulty and unpredictability of it's world. It's harsh but will keep you and your friend's at the edge of your seat due to the unpredictability each time you jump into the game. You never know who you might bump into or what gear you will find. Easy Mode or removal of FF would destroy this. I know some players will say but it's not doing any harm, but i say yes you are- you are damaging the core of what Dayz is. You want this mode for personal reasons not because it would make the game better.

Hey, After playing some DayZ +, DayZ Vainilla, and DayZ 2017......it got me thinking there is a possible solution....to this constant argument...of player killing and how to not slap the hand of the player who like to be a bandit or more aggressive player who kills more often and the ones who wish to be able to go into a city and don't want to have gun fights unless they have too. DayZ SA could have two different difficulties which are centered around basically the time period of the DayZ Since DayZ does not have a exact day and month when you spawned,..you could have once difficult be the more DayZ vanilla/DayZ + style which would be the normal. Then have a more difficult DayZ time period that is like DayZ 2017 which is much more harsh. From my time playing in DayZ 2017, the world is more harsh where few guns and ammo is hard to find as well as other items. This makes the game harder and pushes players to interact and not shoot each other as often. There are player killing and bandits in DayZ 2017 but not as many since you can't stock-up an arsenal as quickly as DayZ Vanilla. So I say for players who wish fore more freedom and mobility in gaining guns and ammo- you have the normal setting of DayZ SA- which dates closer to the Infected outbreak then the hardcore mode/hard mode. Players who wish to not have so many players running around with no care in the world firing on other players- they can go to the hard difficulty where there is much more pressure on players to interact to survive. This Hard difficulty would be set some date after the DayZ vanilla in timeline. With this design players can get two different experiences due to the layout of the loot (scarcity levels) and other factors which the DayZ SA Team could just play with to find the right sweet spot. Both types of difficulty would have the same mechanics but how these mechanics are tweaked is what sets them apart. Plus DayZ SA Team now have flexibility- they don't need to hit the bulls-eye so every player is happy (which is basically impossible)- they can make servers which have the harsh hardcore experience which some players want and a normal which is harsh but not as much as the other version. So lets make the normal DayZ SA and the Hard version like 2017 is. Let me know what you think

The reason for the two difficulty levels/servers since it allows 2 experiences with using the same map and game mechanics, It will be hard enough for the DayZ team to find the sweet spot where players will not be complaining if its to harsh or not harsh enough. This would be for the Standalone so they could actually do this. (The grounding of the idea is that one version is closer to the outbreak date then the other)

I have played with and without crosshairs and didn't really affect my enjoyment. If the removal of cross hairs makes it harder for players to hack and easier for VAC to detect it- then I say remove it. I know you mentioned removal of the gun's ammo UI. I have no problem with this but will there be a way to take your gun and slide out the clip and check how many rounds you have. Rocket, I made a thread on the topic of DayZ SA having 2 different difficulty levels. Reason behind this is so you have a setup for the hardcore players who just want to be punished and another that is harsh just not a brutal as the hard mode/server. This can allow you and your team to use the same game mechanics and then simply change some factors on loot spawning/scarcity and etc. IE. Give you more flexibility. (Think DayZ 2017 as the hard version for example) I posted the link below- Link: http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/119901-dayz-sa-2-types-of-game-difficulty-one-like-dayz-and-other-like-dayz-2017/

Player starting with a Walkie Talkie and why…. The Walkie Talkie is the solution for players who are on a team who want to use voice chat. The concept is that when you washed up on the shore you had this walkie talkie to be in contact with your friends but they washed up earlier or somewhere else. Walkie Talkie using batteries? This is one piece of equipment that might not need batteries because if they did and the player’s batteries are dead then players will complain they can’t talk to each other and will go back to a 3rd party team speak. The Walkie talkie is aimed to allow the DayZ team to remove the 3rd party team speak and put it in game. All Walkie Talkies have the player’s name on them. This means if a player kills another they could one keep it as a way to show the number of kills and who but also the walkie talkie if picked up by the killer cannot get access to your team chat. If this happens the team can set the signal to a new frequency to remove the issue. Walkie Talkies need to be sync up to each other. This means if two players meet up for the first time then can sync them up and be able to constantly keep in contact. You can only Sync up to one frequency unless you have a second (maybe from a dead player). Hand held Radios are different then walkie talkies because Radios can use multiple channels and be able to search for signals in the area. The Radios would only be able to pick up signals- conversations based on a X number of distance. The other players who might get eardrop will hear a static which means a radio is searching the area for a signal. This static might be harmless but allows teams who catch it, to tell others to go silent. Radios would need batteries to keep running. Radios can have multiple channels locked so you can keep in contact with your clan or some friend who are not in the clan without risking security. Radios should also get tagged to the player so if they are ever found on another player then they know who killed the original. Teams should be able to sync up walkie talkies offline or in a lobby or some form of mail service. Let me know what you think, Goal is to remove the 3rd party team chat and bring it into the game from the very start of your spawn so friends can reach out to each other, after all these friends were also your friends before you ended up on the shore and if true then they would already be sync up to each other.

What I hearing is that players want to be able to destroy a base even if the player is still alive but the problem is what happens if he/she log out in their base. Solution: Imagine an underground base, a player throws a grenade or use C4 to destroy the base. The base is majorly damages, meaning all things are destroyed inside and the walls and structure are now week. If the player who started the base is dead then after X number of hours/days the complex will collapse. If the player is alive then when they next visit or spawn back into it will find all the damage and will need to brace the walls/fix a key point in a X number of hours or days before it simply collapses in. This is a win win for both since the player who owns the base won't wakeup dead and the player who wants to destroy it, can (all inside tools items etc are all destroyed) but the collapse of the underground structure happens after player is back so it's fair for all. Topic of Clan bases: This could be done by simply setting up the key owner but others can add their names to the lease of the base so the mechanics apply to all names on the base ownership. Either way players can go in and destroy all items, generators, your plumbing or what not which is part of the base development so player(s) would need to fix it of just scrap it and look for a new location for base.

Have one character would be fine but if there are 2-3 different difficulty/setups for servers where you can only hope to a server with the same set rules/difficulty then we would need more then one character. The BIG issue I foresee is server hopping. Something needs to be done in the SA, because you can't test the loot tables with players able to hop from server to server. You can't build a server community if everyone just hops around and there is no sense of home. The number of characters are not an issue if they can't be in the same server cluster. Ideally you have once character per setup/difficulty and they can only stay in their cluster of servers. So your looking at 2-3 characters. If you want more characters then these characters must be restricted to a Home Server. In this situation you can't server hop. This means if a friend is on a different server you can jump onto their server but you can't bring your character from the other server. You would have to make a new one. Now comes the issue with Server population issues if you can only have one per each server. # of characters are not an issue- it will be Server hoping since this could destroy the DayZ SA economy and community in the server. I hope Rocket addresses this after they test the Tech/Architecture of the DayZ SA.

You won't see it for PS3 or Xbox till PC's version is fully finished and they have over 1 million sales. So your looking at maybe 1 year and half to 2 years from now....and even then there is a good chance it will not be as good as Pc's- the port might be what we saw of mincraft to consoles, features are lost or limited. Plus add to it, if you have friends playing the Pc version, you will not be able to play with them using the console- most likely separate servers.

To help lock off the map from driving cars off the map, they could add signs for landmines where were put in place by the military before they left. This mine field was created to hold off the hordes of roaming Zeds.

Just don't mistaken sh*t for mud,....if you do you will be giving yourself a disease for sure in SA lol I could see a DayZ comic about this..

Leaderboards of present should be aimed at the core of the game- survival. Not killing. Leader boards could be centered around group activities - get power back to powerstation or radio station etc, or they could be how long you lived- how long did you live with a disease. Key is- Survival Someone mentioned about spawning Zeds at your last body. I like this idea, a lot. Solution for what happens if im with my friends and i die and they hover over my body? The Zeds should spawn away from the body X # of meters and then have them slowly move toward the dead body. Your friends can kill the Zeds if they want so you can still get back there but then there is the whole Disease on your body in SA if that's what killed you

If there are trains, which you can fix. I would say they should just travel to next station. Players can't control trains like cars, once you set the train to move forward- it will continue to the next station unless it runs out of gas Will Zeds be attracted to the train? If a train pulls into a station, will this cause more spawning of Zeds on the outskirts of the town location as if they came from a distance?

Is this on Dayzcommander yet?

Just hope they remember....and keep in mind Once the player feels as strong or stronger then the horror threat/Infected then the game becomes an action game and not a survival Horror game. See Resident Evil series as an example, Resident Evil 1 was scary and survival horror and now we have Resident Evil 5/6 that's more of an action game with zombies.

Yes they hit harder but there are less of them, at least from the times i played. I personally want Zombies to be very dangerous. Once the player feels more powerful then the horror threat/Infected then the game becomes an Action game and not a survival horror. See Resident Evil's games for how this is true

:facepalm: This is not a military simulator but a Zombie Apocalypse game. C4 does not add to game other then one's wanting to blow things ups. Game is about survival not war.

Go to door and ask :murder: are you friendly?