What if DayZ had a karma system similar to Trouble in Terrorist Town

[anonymousplayer457 1]

What if DayZ had a karma system similar to that of Trouble in Terrorist Town? One of the problems I find in DayZ is that people kill each other for no apparent reason other than the laughs. So what if for every innocent person you killed in DayZ and not do so for supplies, you lost karma. Say for example you started with 100 karma and for every person you killed meaninglessly, you lost 20 karma. Once your karma hits 0, you would be banned for a day or so (keeping you items/gear). You would also receive extra karma for helping out other players.

Yes, I am aware that a similar system is already in place (humanity), but humanity acts in a slightly different way. To quote Barbossa: "the code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules." Swap 'the code' with humanity and you've basically explained how this system is failing some of us.

Why the karma system? Well, if you were in a zombie apocalypse grossly outnumbered by zombies and only saw a survivor once every 1 or so, would you be going around killing the few people you met, or joining forces to try and survive?

While I do understand killing other players if you are low on supplies (particularly food, water, medical supplies and weapons/ammo), I see way too many people killing for the shits and giggles.

Not only does this have a negative effect on the direct victims, but also on those who seek to kill for a legitimate purpose. Say for example you were in the heat of battle with another player. You're being constantly (and blindly) fired at by the other player and faint. After recovering, you manage to lay a hit on the other player, breaking their leg, but they disappear into thin air. In other words, they've just aborted the game.

While this issue is mainly caused by an attachment to ones gear, it may also be because people are loosing their gear to players who may not even loot your body. because of this "I don't want to loose my gear to some asshole" mentality, people are aborting their game in fear of death. If people thought that they were being shot for a legitimate reason, they MAY choose to stay and take the death. However, whether or not the player chooses to stay is more dependent on what kind of gear they have and how well they are able to find items.

Just a thought.

-Anon

[Mos1ey 6301]

Humanity? o.O

You can't ban people for being bandits, rofl.

Edited October 22, 2012 by mZLY

[MasterMind (DayZ) 1]

lol banned for killing ppl, nty

[anonymousplayer457 1]

I have already mentioned Humanity and the poor job it is doing. With this thread, I focus more on how the realism of this game is effected by RDM. Killing people because you need the resources would make sense in a real world scenario. Wouldn't you group together with the few people not infected by this disease and not kill them for no reason? If you want to kill other players, why not just go and play Counter-Strike?

[terrvik 2409]

How would the game know if you killed another player for the supplies or just for fun?

[Hetstaine 10852]

Suggestions..but no.

Like above, no ban. Bandit or good guy/girl, the only penalty is what happens to you in game. Sometimes your just at the wrong end of the gun/hatchet. Live and learn..what comes around goes around..wait up..Karma ;)

[indominator 95]

KOS is an artistic metaphor, its the expression of power, a non-hierachircal message against opression

we do because we can, we will only stop when we cant anymore, western mmos make plotlines for loners, meanwhile eastern make from group playstyles

[anonymousplayer457 1]

How would the game know if you killed another player for the supplies or just for fun?

There should be a fairly easy way of having the game check if the killer looted the body and if the kill was justified in the first place. How would you do this.

Firstly, you would need the game to check the players inventory to see what they have and categorise them into different categories. For example, water bottles, beans, meat and soda would be put under the food category. Once this has been done, the game needs to check how far away a player is from a loot spawn and how much hunger and thirst they have. If they player is 5kms away from the next food loot spawn, has little to no food left and has a high hunger and/or thirst and kills a player, then that kill would not decrease that players karma as the death was not in vien.

That's how I would set it up any way.

[terrvik 2409]

So a kill in self defense, where I don't loot my attacker, would hurt my karma?

Edited October 22, 2012 by Terrorviktor

[Mos1ey 6301]

You're missing the point...

Part of what makes DayZ great is the unlimited freedom. You can do whatever you want - help people, kill people, decide 'screw people!' and go and live alone in the wilderness. It's your game...

This 'karma' system is basically dictating how people should play and punishing them for not playing the way that you've decided. I think what the game actually needs is more incentive for people to co-operate with strangers, not this BS.

Edited October 22, 2012 by mZLY

[anonymousplayer457 1]

So a kill in self defense, where I don't loot my attacker, would hurt my karma?

I'm fairly sure that humanity is not damage if the first shot came from another player. You would just need to transfer that over to karma.

[rooneye 135]

In a Zombie apocalypse where people are killing each other all over the place for supplies, killing people just because you think they may kill you IS valid. You cant ban people for this. Or even people who kill for fun, this is a sandbox game where as long as people arent cheating the system thery can do WHATEVER they like, and this is what makes the game great.

[terrvik 2409]

I'm fairly sure that humanity is not damage if the first shot came from another player. You would just need to transfer that over to karma.

So the game should check thirst levels, hunger levels, amount of food in backpack, amount of drinks in backpack, distance from loot spawns, damage recently taken.

All this trouble for an idea that is not very good to start with. :)

[anonymousplayer457 1]

You're missing the point...

Part of what makes DayZ great is the unlimited freedom. You can do whatever you want - help people, kill people, decide 'screw people!' and go and live alone in the wilderness. It's your game...

This 'karma' system is basically dictating how people should play and punishing them for not playing the way that you've decided. I think what the game actually needs is more incentive for people to co-operate with strangers, not this BS.

Congratulations on 'throwing the first punch'. I must disagree with you in saying that the reason DayZ is so great is the freedom. i'd say it's more about the fact the it's the most true-to-life zombie survival what with the perma-death and all. But in order for DayZ to stay true-to-life, the players would have to start thinking in a more realistic manner.

"I think what the game actually needs is more incentive for people to co-operate with strangers"

So this karma system isn't an incentive? We've already tried the 'bandit status' and humanity. Both of which have failed. So unless you are willing to provide your own solution to this problem, then don't go and knock those who have though of a possible solution. There is no point in giving criticism if it isn't constructive.

Please, don't be that person who turns down every idea without even trying it and not even contribute to any of them or come up with your own.

[terrvik 2409]

There is no point in giving criticism if it isn't constructive.

Being able to take criticism is a quality as well.

[Zeppa 562]

I see few problems

1. You cant ban people for their playstyle, if someone would like to be homicidal maniac he should be able to.

2. How do you track things?

- someone shoots you, doesnt hit you. You shoot back and kill him for self defence. Hurts you karma?

3. Killing for self defence without possibility to loot the other guy huts your karma? Groups fighting each other?

4. What the difference if you call it karma or humanity? Same basic idea, only the word changes and you start to ban people..

[anonymousplayer457 1]

In a Zombie apocalypse where people are killing each other all over the place for supplies, killing people just because you think they may kill you IS valid. You cant ban people for this. Or even people who kill for fun, this is a sandbox game where as long as people aren't cheating the system they can do WHATEVER they like, and this is what makes the game great.

"killing people just because you think they may kill you IS valid"

I agree with this. If I might add, I don't have a problem with people killing others due to the fear of their life being ended. Something similar happened to me when I was faily new to the game.

--BEGIN STORY--

I was in the super market of Elektro one failful night and was digging through all the loot, obtaining what I needed and such. Suddenly, a road flare is thrown in my direction and before I know it, I'm dead. Not many days after this incident, I was in that same supermarket doing the same thing. Suddenly, a road flare is lit in my general direction. Remebering what happened last time, I kill the player who through the flare. Not because they had fired upon me, but because it triggered a memory of my previous demise and caused me to panic.

--END STORY--

The karma system should not be around to ruin the atmosphere or have people go against what they might do if they were to encounter such a scenario, it's just there to keep the game as realistic as possible.

[Mos1ey 6301]

Congratulations on 'throwing the first punch'. I must disagree with you in saying that the reason DayZ is so great is the freedom. i'd say it's more about the fact the it's the most true-to-life zombie survival what with the perma-death and all. But in order for DayZ to stay true-to-life, the players would have to start thinking in a more realistic manner.

"I think what the game actually needs is more incentive for people to co-operate with strangers"

So this karma system isn't an incentive? We've already tried the 'bandit status' and humanity. Both of which have failed. So unless you are willing to provide your own solution to this problem, then don't go and knock those who have though of a possible solution. There is no point in giving criticism if it isn't constructive.

Please, don't be that person who turns down every idea without even trying it and not even contribute to any of them or come up with your own.

I said 'part of what makes DayZ so great...', read mate. Of course being the only realistic apocalypse survival sim doesn't hurt either.

And no, your 'karma' system isn't an incentive, it's outright dictatorship...

[anonymousplayer457 1]

I see few problems

1. You cant ban people for their playstyle, if someone would like to be homicidal maniac he should be able to.

2. How do you track things?

- someone shoots you, doesnt hit you. You shoot back and kill him for self defence. Hurts you karma?

3. Killing for self defence without possibility to loot the other guy huts your karma? Groups fighting each other?

4. What the difference if you call it karma or humanity? Same basic idea, only the word changes and you start to ban people..

"1. You cant ban people for their playstyle, if someone would like to be homicidal maniac he should be able to."

It wouldn't be such a problem is not so many people did it. At least on the servers I play on.

"2. How do you track things?"

Already answered this.

"3. Killing for self defence without possibility to loot the other guy huts your karma? Groups fighting each other?"

The person who fired the first shot would be the one at fault. Anybody who shoots after that within the radius of the range of that persons gun would not have their karma dropped.

So if somebody with an AS50 shot somebody from 1000m away and missed a group of players, then the actions that follow from those players would not degrade their karma.

"4. What the difference if you call it karma or humanity? Same basic idea, only the word changes and you start to ban people.."

Karma in the way I'm suggesting it to be implemented is more like enforceable rule whereas Humanity is more of a deter ant. That is why I suggest they stay separate.

[anonymousplayer457 1]

I'll be heading off to be for now. It's too late. Feel free to continue posting with your questions and CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.I will attempt to answer all questions when I wake up. it's 00:27 where I like right now. Good night all!

[SP45M 240]

So I need some food desperately and I shoot a player in order to gain some, the dead player has no beans or anything I need for that matter so I don't loot him, would I be punished by your Karma system?

[SP45M 240]

I find a lone female player clam slamming some poor survivor in the woods, the downed survivor is not dead and she grabs him and rag dolls his limp body for luls before scoping up to shoot him in the head........According to the way of the Karma I Should ;

(a) Shoot her for being an evil banshee take all her shiz and help the dude on the ground.

(B) Applaud her lurid but comical behaviour sit down and watch the show.

© Shoot the downed survivor in the head with an AS50 to save him more shame.

(d) Turn on Fraps and do nothing.

(e) Hold them both at gunpoint and make them have Milk and cookies till they work out their differences.

Ok I guess the point I am making is that Dayz is far to random and complex to add yet another broken humanity system to it. Dayz is fantastic because it has no rules, if you don't like pvp its not the game for you.

[captainwaffles 41]

Well its safe to say that your idea is terrible if i want to kill 10 people then im going to do it.

Anyway you know no matter how much you argue it wont be put in right?

Oh no! My criticism isnt constructive!

Edited October 22, 2012 by captainwaffles

[Sutinen 635]

If you kill enough to "earn" the bandit skin, every good survivor will know not to show you mercy if they have an advantage over you. So yeah, I guess that's the karma system.

[anonymousplayer457 1]

Being able to take criticism is a quality as well.

Believe me I can take criticism, but I also encourage others to give constructive criticism so that we don't have people wondering what is wrong with their suggestion because a ton of people (for example) have said "this sucks I don't like it".

You can't develop an idea with non-constructive criticism. Which is why I don't encourage it.