Day Z CV! (Discouraging Random Killings)

[3rdparty 229]

Do you think it would be a good idea to set up some kind of pre-experience for the game, e.g doctor, mechanic, soldier, policeman etc.

For example a policeman/mechanic could still take painkillers, but they may not be able to conduct a blood transfusion. A doctor could fill up a car, but could not repair one.

CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE FOR IT TO ENCOURAGE TEAM PLAY:

Although not every player has these skills, they could learn them, through being in the perimeter of someone who does have those skills, and are using them. I.e you are watching a mechanic repair a car, so you start to gain that function.

I think this feature would encourage people to work together more. Anyone got ideas on this?

[Budiak 1]

You should really look at some of the other five threads in the past week that suggest this.

To voice my opinion as it was in the other threads, no. This reduces the initial fairness. Everybody starts out with the same equipment, same backpack, with the same abilities, in a random place. Fairness ends there. Everything from that point on is up to the player.

[3rdparty 229]

Oh didnt see em, tbh though i dont think this is disadvantaging people at all, this pre experience only really applies to advanced playing, when your picking up more sophisticated weaponry/dealing with more extensive injuries/fixing complex vehicles

On top of that people who operate in groups effectively understand the abilities everyone brings to it, and so it would also encourage people to work together.

---

Also its closer to a survival scenario, you could even have the office gremlin for the hardcore player who wants people to know hes survived from the remoteness of chance and skill XD

[Gaidoon 19]

I made a thread or two about the subject maybe you should look at The Factions thread it had some really good idea's.

[3rdparty 229]

Oh can you send a link,

Also i dunno if it was discussed, but i think the idea of having to be in someones perimeter in order to gain other non-starting skills also encourages team work

[Gaidoon 19]

Link here

http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=12093&highlight=Faction

[3rdparty 229]

Er that wasnt really along the ideas i was thinking, good idea definantly, but this kind of encourages team play amongst strangers, which again if were gonna be realistic is all your gonna come across post apocalypse.

I love the idea of clans setting up, and taking over areas.

But a problem for me, and for alot of people i think, is that we dont personally know many people who own this game, we dont have our own servers. a vast majority of us are on an extreme disadvantage on that level. teaming up for the majority just doesnt occur often. whereas in reality it clearly would happen, because of everyones unique contribution

[Budiak 1]

Forcing people to work together is a crutch. Nothing in the game requires you to do anything except eat and drink. All the rest is totally up to you. The idea that I wouldn't be able to fix a car, gut an animal, or patch a wound without a stranger's help would make the game unplayable to me. Forcing people to play in any particular way is not what this game is about.

It doesn't encourage people to work together, it requires them to work together. It cripples those who CHOOSE to play in a particular way.

---

I realize what I just said. Let me clarify.

The players are all at an even keel in this game. As it stands, everybody has the same skills. Teamwork comes from a shared cause, be it to find food, provide security for one another, or simply because you in real life prefer having someone around for moral support. I choose to go without. Not being able to perform basic functions like bandage myself or fix a car with parts that I procured myself would limit me and all others who choose to play the way I do unfairly. I am already taking an enormous risk by going alone. I don't need more reason to not play. The game is as unforgiving as it needs to be.

Not only would you need somebody else, but he would need the skills you don't have.

So I'm going to act friendly with somebody, have him fix my car, and then shoot him and absorb the quickening. Hardly teamwork imo. The skills would cause jealousy and even more backstabbing. Worse backstabbing than there is right now, even.

[3rdparty 229]

not necessarily, certainly doesnt cripple them, but i do see your point. However where i disagree, is on force, this game forces you to act in many ways, theres many ways to approach a zombie infested town but i think we all know the best one. Theres many different ways a survivor interaction could go down but i think we all know what is assumed to be the safest one.

YOur forced to play that way because of the items you have acquired, and the knowledge that you could get better items off that person and in that way it actually creates an incentive to do so, there is no countering positive incentive towards a stranger/person themselves as there would be in a real zombie scenario.

The only thing that requires team play ESSENTIALLY in this game is a blood transfusion, i dont think thats right at all.

I think its far closer to the reality of a zombie survival scenario, that certain actions require skilled survivors, or more than one.

---

naa it wouldnt, and even if it did at least the relationships you create would last longer than the quick sudden bullet alot of experience in the back of the head

---

Tbh i think it comes down to the direction the game is gonna take. If it is striving towards a pure zombie survival as possible than im afraid to say group work is long term survival.

Also, the idea of people naturally through the game forming small groups would then make survival interactions far more tense/active as once as a few people of various abilities have merged there doesnt necessarily have to be more.

ALso having to be in someones perimeter a couple of times watching them do it might override that backstabbing element ye mentioned, but tbh i think that backstabbing element should be left in

[Budiak 1]

You're making a lot of assumptions. Both about me and the game itself.

What is the best way to enter a town, since you claim it to be self evident? I am not being coy. I really want to know what you think the best way to enter a town is. I likely do not do it your way.

Also, what is the best way to approach a survivor? Do not assume that you know what other people are thinking.

Next, blood transfusions and epi pens both require interaction. Those items are not needed in order to enjoy the game or succeed. That is why they don't break it. They also do not require special skill. You seem too caught up in the idea that the game needs gimmicks and equipment and skills to encourage teamplay. You are totally ignoring the fact that team play in itself is an advantage. There are inherent advantages to both styles of play that have nothing to do with equipment or skills. Teamplay does not need to be a mechanic in any way, shape, or form. Gaining the benefits of working together requires no more than two real live human beings working together because they want to.

Next, I am not forced to play because of what equipment I have. I acquire certain items based on how I play. I have no need for silenced weapons because I avoid contact with both zombies and humans and therefore will not accept the limitation of rare ammo types. I will pass up a silenced MP5 and keep a lee enfield. It is my choice because of how I choose to play. If I am without a main weapon I would leave an M24 behind because I'm really not a sniper and if someone sees me with it they may kill be because of the gun when otherwise they would let me carry on. Maybe if I had room in my pack, but I would not carry it or sling it. I have better things to put in my pack, like food, water, and extra bandages.

It does cripple those who choose to play as I do because it would effectively close off significant portions of the game experience to us. Cars, first aid, gutting and cooking. All of those things are already a much greater burden on a solo player. Making them more difficult is not necessary.

The reality of a zombie survival scenario is ancillary to this entire experience. The sandbox free-form gameplay should be the first concern. Classes and "encouraging" anything denigrates the sandbox experience.

"This is a hold up! Drop the rifle! Move slowly! Now, fix that car! DO IT! Yeah, good. Now, gut this cow. Slowly...slooooooowwwlyyyy....yeah...that's good knowledge..."

Eh.

I was on a game last night, minding my own business as always. I was reading side chat for about 90 minutes where two guys were trying to meet up; one had a car. They sounded like they were buddies in real life. Seriously, they had real rapport. Well, turns out when they met up, the driver was shot in the head, looted, and the other guy drove away in new wheels. Situations like that are situations from which solo players are effectively immune. That's another advantage of solo play. Of course, it could have gone quite swimmingly. That's an advantage of team play.

[3rdparty 229]

1st of all, there are many ways to approach a town, and if were gonna get into semantics we would comment on geography and building but generally I would say the SAFEST Way is to go quietly and slowly, and again there are many ways an interaction could occur, but generally people shoot on sight i.e safest option.

If you wanna survive this game under its current settings, for as long as possible, youve gotta be slow, quiet, out of sight, shoot on sight.

And i didnt say you could bandage yourself, i said more complex actions like broken bones (using just morphine to fix a broken bone is silly). + i would expect under this system there would be a pre experience setting for survivalist

And if your playing the way i think your describing, ie out in the wilderness, then i dont see you coming to town, or using the roads much, ie effectively cutting out vehicles through your own actions.

And whats wrong with that scenario that you just proposed? being imprisoned by bandits and forced to work is far more of a fmemeorable unique gaming experience then getting shot randomly.

[Budiak 1]

The scenario I described was a joke. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, and it could very well be a viable method of securing services. I found it pretty amusing.

There are many ways to approach a town. You did not say anything before about the safest way, but you mentioned the best way. There is no best way. It is all dependent upon the situation. Building and geography is in no way an issue of semantics, rather, one of tactics. I run all the time, but in the dubious safety of the forest. I run from tree to tree, usually about 50m at a time, and then observe. SiLLS- Stop, Look, Listen, Smell. Well, there's no smell, but you get the idea. It takes a long time to cover distance. Sometimes it takes two nights of playtime to get to where I need to go. I choose to travel this way. I've never, not once, been sniped while travelling. That is by far not the only way to play the game, though. Some people rely on aggressiveness to achieve their goals. Some rely on groups.

There are many ways to survive right now. Slow, quiet, out of sight, shoot on sight is one way. I don't shoot on sight because it's not necessary for survival, which is again based on the situation. If someone gets the drop on me or if I turn a corner and there's no time to think, someone's not going home that night. Hell, usually when I shoot someone I just run once they fall. I'm not in the business of ruining someone's game because we were in the wrong place at the wrong time but that's just me. I'll add right now that I haven't engaged another player in one week of gameplay. Most people don't have the patience to play the way I do, and I'll not assume for an instant that the way I play is superior to anybody else's. I enjoy it. I choose to play this way.

While most of my time is spent in the forest, I very often go into towns. I do, however, spent considerable amounts of time observing the landscape and reconnoitering in order to decide the best avenue of approach based on what I observe and what I can't observe. With a group it would be easier because of overwatch, advanced scouting, etc. My skill and patience make up for the lack of numbers. That's what it takes to play solo. I'm good at it. Some aren't. Some are but choose to play with a group anyway. It's their choice.

I said you can bandage yourself. If I get hurt and I break a bone, I can only rely on myself. I have only what is in my pack. If I can't heal my broken bones then I will be crawling until I find morphine. There doesn't need to be anything else required to heal because everybody needs to do it and again, those in a group are at a material advantage. Using morphine to heal a broken bone is indeed silly, but it's a game and the morphine represents the extra steps required to tend to serious injury.

I haven't found a car in a long time, but you can bet your bottom dollar that I'd drive it, but I would probably only fix up an offroad vehicle because it suits my style of play. A car would be a hindrance, hence, I would leave it be. I also don't use tents. I refuse to be tied to anything that could get me killed, so I accept the limitations of what I can carry on my person.

[3rdparty 229]

Ok well really all you did was just confirmed what i said, WITHOUT getting into SEMANTICS (or tactics), the GENERAL, SAFEST way people play, is slow, quiet, stay out of sight, shoot on sight.

Regardless, this is not the point of this post. The point is, is that currently, there is no real intuitive incentive to team up in this game.

I know what youve said about the inherent advantages of team play, but its not intuitive to people in this game as it would be in real life.

Its far too much of a deathmatch free for all atm which doesnt feel realistic.