The importance of fine-tweaking stealth

[Pharmakon 8]

I feel that it is time to evaluate our conception of the role of stealth as of update 1.7.0, which removes the Makarov from the spawn inventory. (I will digress a bit, every topic leads to another)

Obviously, not having a gun forces players to use stealth, seemingly the opposite of a firefight. However, I would say the Makarov was rather complimentary to stealth than opposite to it. As a mediocre short-ranged weapon, it was generally used to kill off zombies who had been chasing you because you got detected while sneaking. It was a bit like in Splinter Cell, where you only pulled out your weapon (or reloaded the game) if you accidentally got spotted. Unless they can zigzag up a steep hill to put some distance between them and the zombies, or lure them off a cliff, newspawns usually have to start all over again if they get spotted once. This might seem "hardcore" to some of you, but really it's just a chore: the average lifespan is 32 minutes, and the first 32 minutes are usually the least interesting part of a good run.

And so, stealth needs to be deeper and more interesting, because it's the only tool newspawns have until they find weapons:

1.

Characters have to stop standing straight up ("Ms. Survivor, would you stand up, please?") when they pass through a doorway or bump into a 5 cm change in terrain while prone. I'm not joking, this bug (or rather oversight) has gotten me killed more often than anything else.

2.

Zombies should not be able to use doorknobs. I'm not sure if the developers are capable of making doors destructible, but this is definitely worth looking into. Players who are getting chased could close doors behind them to give them more time to escape or prepare.

3.

Zombies shouldn't be able to identify your footsteps as being those of a survivor. This irritated me a lot in Splinter Cell and Thief: why does the guard IMMEDIATELY presume my footsteps are those of an intruder and, y'know, not just the sound of one of the dozen other guards milling about? In DayZ it's even worse, because we're dealing with zombies who should definitely not be mentally capable of telling footsteps apart, and upon hearing them they get aggressive, as opposed to just suspicious or curious. Footsteps should get zombies attention. Upon hearing a light step, they should turn towards its position, and if they see nothing, resume their shambling. If they hear louder, or running footsteps (granted, they're not used to hearing running) they should go to the last known location of the sound. Every game that isn't an run and gun action shooter needs to have more AI states than "oblivious" and "aggressive".

4.This suggestion isn't as important, I feel, but I think it would be neat if there were different levels of aggressivity. I suggest that zombies who have been shot at would pursue over longer distances, and would be more willing to break down doors. Likewise, zombies who merely attack because they have spotted a nice meal would be a bit less "angry", as even their basic instincts would tell them it is not worth spending all their energy to catch a prey. This means that upon being spotted, players could decide against firing their weapon if they can think of more clever strategies.

5.

Players with lighter packs should be quieter. This is my favourite idea here, and It is pretty obvious: there is a reason why it's called a light step. Even if ArmA II does not track item and character weight, it would still be possible to adjust a player's noise proportionally to backpack type or item count. This would especially have an impact on players who are moving prone. Realistically, if I have a 30kg backpack and an M240 in my hands I would be making a lot of noise dragging my body against the ground, whereas if I had nothing but a czech vest pouch and a knife I could move prone without having any other part of my body than my forearms and feet touching the ground (it wouldn't flatten too much foliage either). I think such a change would have terrific results, as sneaking would be easier for newspawns: it would shorten the time (and risk) necessary for getting all the basic essentials needed for more worthwhile adventuring. It would also guide players towards adopting specific playstyles: if you want to carry car parts and machineguns around, don't expect to be able to tiptoe through a zombie-infested town. This would effectively be a handicap, but one that is both realistic and voluntary. If possible, the developers could even make it so players with lighter pack can get from the prone to the standing position faster.

However, to go back to the starting point of this text, I think the biggest impact of the removal of the Makarov is on cooperation. Every time there is a change or suggestion, we need to think, first and foremost, about the way it impacts the way people play together. I generally agree with the decision to remove the Makarov: before that, players often decided to forego scavenging entirely and just spent their 32 minutes trying to get the jump on someone with better gear, making the game even more of a "loot treadmill". However, the downside is that unarmed players aren't useful in instances of cooperation. As I mentioned, when playing a solo non-player-killer, the Makarov is only useful for self-defence when stealth fails. But with multiple players, it can effectively be used to engage zombies. The underlying idea of this post is that many small changes should be made in order to decrease the amount of time/attempts it takes for newspawns to get into the game proper, as most survival features can't be experienced within the current average lifespan. Spawning unarmed generally means it taking more time before being able to get into the most interesting aspect of the game: interacting with others. Even if you meet the friendliest band of survivors, or the dastardliest gang of bandits who are looking for a new member, you won't be able to contribute to the team at all if you aren't armed.

I'm definitely not saying the change should be reverted. I simply (or not) think there should be more ways of interacting with players that don't require fireweapons. Right now, cooperating (aside from PvP) generally involves sticking together to clear a town of its inhabitants. It's a bit like Left 4 Dead, which is a good game (judging from the demo), but I feel DayZ, as a dynamic, nonlinear and generally unrestrictive game, can be much more than that. My suggestions were all about solo stealth, but maybe there could be ways it could be cooperative (having one person sneak through one side of town while a friend scours through the other is more of a separation of tasks than an instance of interdependant cooperation). I can't really think of anything too specific right now, but as an example of what I mean, imagine that a player has to draw the zombies to one end of a village (while his friends search another), with a speaker powered by a manual crank set at a safe spot. Or that a player has to use a spotlight at night to guide another player, while making sure not to point it directly at him. These examples would probably be a bit hard to integrate into the game, but they illustrate what I mean: players should have nonviolent (suicidally attracting every zombies to yourself doesn't count) means of cooperating that make them INTERDEPENDANT. This would add more depth to the game and to player interactions, and remove the very strict need for weaponsas a precondition to actually enjoying the game.

[kloust! 0]

I like your ideas. Took a while to read through, but +1 for you!

[mikyjax 3]

Bump.

[fundan@gmx.de 82]

Good points...

[sgtsnug 26]

#1 - Entirely agree, this has gotten me into trouble so many times as well and turns a usually successful sneak into a sudden and unfairly forced combat scenario. However It's likely due to asset placement just being mildly off and is more a beta issue not alpha (because it doesn't need fixing, it's just a little mistake in placement).

#2 - Another good and valid point, my first time playing my instinct was to close the door expecting it to hold the horde at bay, however I found they merely walked right through it. I'd love to see a solution and even zombies breaking the door in for a few moments but this is an AI problem and a lot of the AI issues are not fixable because it's ARMA 2 not the mod causing the problem.

#3 - I completely back up this concept, I myself have relentlessly posted over and over zombies shouldn't engage things by sound at least not unless they are really close to it, instead if they hear footsteps, running or even gunshots at a distance should respond to the sound as they would a smashing whiskey bottle, turning and walking toward the source meaning they will surround the player unless they move, still a threat but not an unfair one.

#4 - An interesting idea, thou personally I'd implement a stamina system like ACE where the longer you run the worse your performance, blurred sight, laboured breath, poor accuracy and eventually passing out. Zombies should lose interest after they have tired themselves out, having less stamina then a fully healthy uninfected person.

This suggestion also plays along with your next #5, where you suggest weight being a factor of play, the heavier the bag and gear the faster you'd deplete your stamina, encouraging those who care to avoid conflict to pack a smaller bag or even drop their bag so they can run away, whilst if they carry heavier weight should expect to fend the zombies off knowing they won't outrun the zombies.

#5 - Everything you've said hits the nail on the head, great suggestion that adds value to choosing your backpack instead of just grabbing the biggest you can find, it encourages players to think about their role and what equipment they really NEED to take with them for what they have in mind. I could also suggest ghillie suits should reduce visibility at least while stationary to zombies, camo to a slight degree as well thou not as much.