Why is everyone I meet an ***hole?

[Smirk 0]

Do what I do. Whenever i see players that have already spotted me, I lower my gun my gun and quickly aggro a ton of zombies. Strangely, people tend not to shoot others who are having zombie problems and it gives them a chance to help you. Helps gain a bit of initial trust if they shoot at the zombies instead of you.

If you can't hope to defend yourself and all else fails, run in circles like idiot. It's worked for me.

[zombiedrd 0]

Killing for gear I fully get. What I don't understand is why the people with high end gear camp the shore and pop newly spawned. For that one bandage? I am running into this. It isn't even low level gear, I've been ripped to shreds by LMGs within ten steps.

The other thing that sucks is the people who watch the high-yield sites to kill. Can't tell you how many times I have been sniped in the tower of the fire stations. I have given up on finding high stuff now. I settle for menial loot and hide in the heart of the map. Clans control the good zones, and I have accepted that.

[gizm0 96]

Why is it that people immediately brand you an asshole if you kill them?

Why is it that people immediately brand you a carebear if you aren't gaming the system and farming kills?

Gaming the system? Please elaborate. Theres also no such thing as farming kills' date=' the game doesn't reward you in any way, shape or form for killing other players, other than the loot they carry, in which case that's just another form of scavenging.

Sorry but I firmly believe that every play style is a part of the experience. Whether it be solo'ing it and hunting for beans in the middle of BFE, or sitting ontop a building in chern and killing for fun, it all has it's place in the game. What better simulation of real life than to give people the means to be assholes?

[/quote']

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz, thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

[funionz 7]

Why is it that people immediately brand you an asshole if you kill them?

Why is it that people immediately brand you a carebear if you aren't gaming the system and farming kills?

Gaming the system? Please elaborate. Theres also no such thing as farming kills' date=' the game doesn't reward you in any way, shape or form for killing other players, other than the loot they carry, in which case that's just another form of scavenging.

Sorry but I firmly believe that every play style is a part of the experience. Whether it be solo'ing it and hunting for beans in the middle of BFE, or sitting ontop a building in chern and killing for fun, it all has it's place in the game. What better simulation of real life than to give people the means to be assholes?

[/quote']

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz, thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

[gizm0 96]

Why is it that people immediately brand you an asshole if you kill them?

Why is it that people immediately brand you a carebear if you aren't gaming the system and farming kills?

Gaming the system? Please elaborate. Theres also no such thing as farming kills' date=' the game doesn't reward you in any way, shape or form for killing other players, other than the loot they carry, in which case that's just another form of scavenging.

Sorry but I firmly believe that every play style is a part of the experience. Whether it be solo'ing it and hunting for beans in the middle of BFE, or sitting ontop a building in chern and killing for fun, it all has it's place in the game. What better simulation of real life than to give people the means to be assholes?

[/quote']

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz, thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

why should I be killed,mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

[FatihSalihKiraci 0]

yeah man i see what your saying im a nice guy and helped heaps of people sorry for what u gone though D:

[funionz 7]

Why is it that people immediately brand you a carebear if you aren't gaming the system and farming kills?

Gaming the system? Please elaborate. Theres also no such thing as farming kills' date=' the game doesn't reward you in any way, shape or form for killing other players, other than the loot they carry, in which case that's just another form of scavenging.

Sorry but I firmly believe that every play style is a part of the experience. Whether it be solo'ing it and hunting for beans in the middle of BFE, or sitting ontop a building in chern and killing for fun, it all has it's place in the game. What better simulation of real life than to give people the means to be assholes?

[/quote']

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz, thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

why should I be killed,mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

[zombiedrd 0]

Gaming the system? Please elaborate. Theres also no such thing as farming kills' date=' the game doesn't reward you in any way, shape or form for killing other players, other than the loot they carry, in which case that's just another form of scavenging.

Sorry but I firmly believe that every play style is a part of the experience. Whether it be solo'ing it and hunting for beans in the middle of BFE, or sitting ontop a building in chern and killing for fun, it all has it's place in the game. What better simulation of real life than to give people the means to be assholes?

[/quote']

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz, thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

why should I be killed,mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

[funionz 7]

Your right its fine that they are assholes with no social consequence. And your right they should be the only who truely enjoy dayz' date=' thanks to being immune to any kind of focused punishment since they can just change their name, or the server they are on.

[/quote']

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

why should I be killed,mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[Faced1111 0]

well ive been murdering people without warning because i dont want to be shot first...i have much more to lose, i have my immediate friends i play with (around 4 of us) and i try to recruit sometimes but only out side of the game...if i see someone in server i will open fire almost all the time because ive been killed countless times and never want it to happen again...

[gizm0 96]

Punishment for what? Playing the game the way you don't want them to?

why should I be killed' date='mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

[/quote']

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

[Faced1111 0]

why should I be killed' date='mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

[/quote']

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

well if you die because you dont shoot first who is the true cunt?

[gizm0 96]

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player' date=' we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because [u']you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

well if you die because you dont shoot first who is the true cunt?

He is still, I don't see how me not shooting changes anything. (also thats my sig by the way :P )

[funionz 7]

why should I be killed' date='mocked,targeted for not wanting to kill other players, yet players who do get praise, and defended? seems kinda backwards to me.

[/quote']

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player, we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses, should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

[Zakificus 10]

I was at Balota AF. Saw a guy running across, and he saw me. I took cover by a hanger door, he proned. I held position while he slowly moved in. Got within talking range and I announced I was friendly, just looking for supplies and would head out now. He said "easy let's not do anything hastey. I don't want a firefight" I asked him if he wanted me to drop some food for him as a token of good faith before I left (this was when food was scarce and I had a ton of meat on me). I walked out the door and tried to run around the hanger's side but he killed me outright.

-------------

Later that day I was in a tree stand, and spun around to see two guys staring at me. I told em I was friendly and not to shoot. the first guy lowered his weapon and the second blasted me with two shots. The first guy climbed up and started to bandage me but I bled out first. Screen went black as I heard him saying he was really really sorry.

Mixed results, not everyone is an asshole, sometimes they're just a little jumpy haha. I still find the odd player who won't kill me right away and wants to run around a bit as a team.

[Ingway 4]

lol yeah... it gets kind of annoying, one time i had an hatchet with me, and saw someone running away from loads of zombies, i said trough voice comm "get inside i can help you kill those zombies".

He instead runs around the other side, and dosn't respond, i close the door, he later comes after luring the zombies to me and having me kill then, opens the door, and shots me for no reason and i die... hoping the shots atracted more zombies on him and he died horribly XP

[aragos 1]

Simple fact. Teaming with others enables supreme ganking.

Example: Our crew hit NWAF. Brought a big army truck we'd fixed up, and 8 of us went in. Two non-Us folks were on the AF running toward the hangars. They saw us, began to sprint. I cut them down with the machine gun. Rest of teh crew hit the hangers, et al, set up perimeter security while I provided fire support and overwatch with the 7.62.

Bottom line: teamwork and coop are not a guarantee of happy friendly time. The only way you can guarantee that is to prevent players from shooting each other 100% of the time. Not all groups are friendly and cooperative outside of their gang. Just sayin. On the other hand, a large bandit gang can actually do cool stuff--build vehicles, rescue team mates who have just respawned a new character, reequip teammates who need gear and so on.

[zombiedrd 0]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']

I was not trying to say there should be right and wrong, I was just saying that you were trying to act like ruining others experience is not why you would shoot someone who poses no threat, nor has any equipment you need. You kill for shits and giggles.(The kneecapping the guy from zombie train). That is fine, fully in the realm. A real apocalypse would see serial killers as well. I am not saying this should be changed. This adds a new layer to the game and I embrace it. It is a challenge. Just as there are groups who band together to hunt bandits/killers.

My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

[gizm0 96]

I think you're missing the entire point here. We are not mocking you for not wanting to kill another player' date=' we are mocking you for wanting to apply your own personal rules to the game. You don't want to kill other players? Then don't. Avoid humanity at all costs. But don't complain and come here suggesting changes to the game because [u']you won't adapt.

To be perfectly honest, there was a time when I would drop some mags for a player out of ammo, and would give food to someone who needed it. That time was back in April. There's too many new players now, and i've been shot in the back of the head too many times to trust anyone except my personal friends. If I saw you running from a horde of zombies i'd sooner kneecap you with my enfield and keep moving, not because I want to ruin your gameplay experience, but because I want to enhance mine. Stop taking things so personally.

Just saying, your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses, should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

No, how does making names static and having players control the rep of other players(with meta-data) equal a god complex? its more like an out of game bounty-board.

[funionz 7]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

I get what you're saying, but 'ruining' has a much wider definition. It also implies that the random person I shot felt the game was ruined by me killing them. It could be a person like me who accepts their death and moves on, or it could be someone like the others, and runs crying to the forums/side chat. There's just too many variables. But saying i'm 'ruining' someone elses game I feel is a bit overkill, hackers ruin peoples games, people who spawncamp the beach can 'ruin' someones game, etc.

As far as running people off, even if we ran off half the playerbase, at 20 bucks a pop the game would still be insanely successful.

---

Just saying' date=' your idea of enhancing a game seems to be to ruin it for others. Why waste ammunition on someone running from zombies. Better saved for a more dire situation.

[/quote']

But that is the beauty of the game itself, there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses, should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

No, how does making names static and having players control the rep of other players(with meta-data) equal a god complex? its more like an out of game bounty-board.

Because a name implies an identity, which implies the same exact thing I was just talking about. You want some way of tying someone to their various misdeeds, and it's completely unrealistic.

Taking it back to your explanation, if I shot you in the middle of nowhere, how would those people know that I am the one who did it? Would they have a magic bounty board that has names that materialize on it whenever someone dies? The whole idea behind the game is when you die, you're dead. You're not actually respawning, you are a new survivor starting out on the beach, so why would you retain knowledge of who did what? Adding this feature would be the same as making tag visible servers mandatory.

[Cormac McCarthy 15]

"You're not actually re spawning, you are a new survivor starting out on the beach, so why would you retain knowledge of who did what?"

i agree with this. dunno why i felt the need to share that but here goes lol

[gizm0 96]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

I get what you're saying, but 'ruining' has a much wider definition. It also implies that the random person I shot felt the game was ruined by me killing them. It could be a person like me who accepts their death and moves on, or it could be someone like the others, and runs crying to the forums/side chat. There's just too many variables. But saying i'm 'ruining' someone elses game I feel is a bit overkill, hackers ruin peoples games, people who spawncamp the beach can 'ruin' someones game, etc.

As far as running people off, even if we ran off half the playerbase, at 20 bucks a pop the game would still be insanely successful.

---

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players, since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses, should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

No, how does making names static and having players control the rep of other players(with meta-data) equal a god complex? its more like an out of game bounty-board.

Because a name implies an identity, which implies the same exact thing I was just talking about. You want some way of tying someone to their various misdeeds, and it's completely unrealistic.

Taking it back to your explanation, if I shot you in the middle of nowhere, how would those people know that I am the one who did it? Would they have a magic bounty board that has names that materialize on it whenever someone dies? The whole idea behind the game is when you die, you're dead. You're not actually respawning, you are a new survivor starting out on the beach, so why would you retain knowledge of who did what? Adding this feature would be the same as making tag visible servers mandatory.

Ok than how about tie players to their forum names, and not in-game this way we can tell what level of asshole everyone is, just not in game. >.> You seem to want to keep online gaming completely anonymous but quite frankly I wish I had to tools to bitch slap every bandit and KOS player just like they have done to me till I just started avoided other players in a multiplayer game.(I want to know I"m killing some POS lowlife that doesn't deserve any of the beans he has eaten.... /RP rage)

[zombiedrd 0]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

I get what you're saying, but 'ruining' has a much wider definition. It also implies that the random person I shot felt the game was ruined by me killing them. It could be a person like me who accepts their death and moves on, or it could be someone like the others, and runs crying to the forums/side chat. There's just too many variables. But saying i'm 'ruining' someone elses game I feel is a bit overkill, hackers ruin peoples games, people who spawncamp the beach can 'ruin' someones game, etc.

As far as running people off, even if we ran off half the playerbase, at 20 bucks a pop the game would still be insanely successful.

I said ruin beca1use that was what you said. I am sure most people would just restart, hoever, I do know at least one guy who quit after being killed 6 times in a row within 5 minutes of spawning. Guys were camping that particular coastline in that server with sniper rifles, popping new spawners.

Honestly, most people who get killed get killed because they are stupid. The coast is the main PVP zone, and everyone knows this. The three airfields are clan zones(Almost always bandit clans, I have run into one group who wasn't out of dozens). Unless you have your own locked server, people who play by themselves or in small groups should just accept they will never get good equipment. All those places are locked down and only another large group could take it. I have been alive on my current life for 8 days. I just make a small existence in the heart of the map. Hit small towns, use the bow to kill animals etc. Have not seen another for a while now. I know I will never get a Ghillie or NVGs, or a DRM, etc., but I am surviving.

[funionz 7]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

I get what you're saying, but 'ruining' has a much wider definition. It also implies that the random person I shot felt the game was ruined by me killing them. It could be a person like me who accepts their death and moves on, or it could be someone like the others, and runs crying to the forums/side chat. There's just too many variables. But saying i'm 'ruining' someone elses game I feel is a bit overkill, hackers ruin peoples games, people who spawncamp the beach can 'ruin' someones game, etc.

As far as running people off, even if we ran off half the playerbase, at 20 bucks a pop the game would still be insanely successful.

---

I'm not saying it needs to be balanced just that players should be stuck with a single persona and thus their reputation as a player will spread based on what they do and players will interact with them based on what they have heard. basically remove the ability to be completely anonymous. This and allowing players to set up fortifications is all I am really asking for anymore. These two things do nothing to harms anyones gameplay or play style.

I mainly support suggestions that encourge teamwork and being friendly towards other players' date=' since this is still in its alpha state, I can only hope that working with other players becomes worth the risk by the time beta rolls out.

also couldn't you just avoid the player instead of capping him in the leg?

also right now I"m stuck avoiding other players because even if they don't have a chance to even hit me, they still shoot at me when i'm hunting cows. (stupid kill on sight players.)

[/quote']

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses, should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

No, how does making names static and having players control the rep of other players(with meta-data) equal a god complex? its more like an out of game bounty-board.

Because a name implies an identity, which implies the same exact thing I was just talking about. You want some way of tying someone to their various misdeeds, and it's completely unrealistic.

Taking it back to your explanation, if I shot you in the middle of nowhere, how would those people know that I am the one who did it? Would they have a magic bounty board that has names that materialize on it whenever someone dies? The whole idea behind the game is when you die, you're dead. You're not actually respawning, you are a new survivor starting out on the beach, so why would you retain knowledge of who did what? Adding this feature would be the same as making tag visible servers mandatory.

Ok than how about tie players to their forum names, and not in-game this way we can tell what level of asshole everyone is, just not in game. >.> You seem to want to keep online gaming completely anonymous but quite frankly I wish players had to tools to bitch slap every bandit and KOS player just like they have done to me till I just started avoided other players in a multiplayer game.

That would be fine in my opinion, as long as there's no frame of reference ingame as to what the persons name is (i.e. no visual tag)

It's not about making online gaming 'anonymous', it's just that this particular game calls for it. Stop being so angry about being killed, it seems your suggestions come mostly from frustration about being killed, rather than thinking about the long lasting effects that your idea would have on the game. It's that instant gratification, knee-jerk response that fuels 95% of the crappy suggestions on this forum.

I truly believe that most of the problems people have with this game come from the fact that it's such a radically different game from everything else out there. We have been conditioned to have minimaps and massive HUD's with ammo counts, objective arrows and death messages, etc. This game won't hold your hand, it won't make things easy on you, and there are those of us who love that, but there are also those who don't, because, in my opinion, it's out of their comfort zone.

[gizm0 96]

But that is the beauty of the game itself' date=' there is no right or wrong, and by shooting that player if I aggro a mob (with an enfield its gonna happen) and die and lose all my gear, do I run to the forums and complain that the gun is too loud? Or that the players should be less lucrative to shoot? No, because I accept the game for what it is. I've had people ask for help, only to be shot in the back after I helped them. Did I complain? No, I respawned and hunted them back down.

It's this mentality that everything has to be balanced that is dumbing down the playerbase.

[/quote']My point was about you are particular(Or rather, you example if it is real) with your specific post. Your enhancement does come from ruining it for others.

The only thing I worry is if enough people are ran away from the game, would it be worth it for Rocket to continue? He runs on donations now, but I expect at some point this will become a charge game. If that occurs, I would be afraid not many would get this from reputation or demo, etc.

I get what you're saying, but 'ruining' has a much wider definition. It also implies that the random person I shot felt the game was ruined by me killing them. It could be a person like me who accepts their death and moves on, or it could be someone like the others, and runs crying to the forums/side chat. There's just too many variables. But saying i'm 'ruining' someone elses game I feel is a bit overkill, hackers ruin peoples games, people who spawncamp the beach can 'ruin' someones game, etc.

As far as running people off, even if we ran off half the playerbase, at 20 bucks a pop the game would still be insanely successful.

---

So what you're suggesting is that a person who commits murder in a lawless society with little to no witnesses' date=' should have some sort of lasting reputation that would alert other players of his/her intentions? If I put a round into your skull from 600m, you should automatically know who did it? Do I need to go on?

It just doesn't fit with this style of game, you're suggesting they add some sort of god mechanic to the game where everyone is judged according to their actions, and that's just not how life works. In a desolate post apocalyptic wasteland, if I gun you down out in the middle of the woods and steal your beans, I could walk into town and be friendly with the next person, or I could befriend them long enough for them to let their guard down and kill them for their supplies. That's just part of the dynamic.

I think what people are having trouble adjusting to is the feeling of losing hours of their hard work, and letting go of their character they have been building. Until the benefit of teaming with other survivors outweighs the benefit of ganking them, this pattern will continue.

[/quote']

No, how does making names static and having players control the rep of other players(with meta-data) equal a god complex? its more like an out of game bounty-board.

Because a name implies an identity, which implies the same exact thing I was just talking about. You want some way of tying someone to their various misdeeds, and it's completely unrealistic.

Taking it back to your explanation, if I shot you in the middle of nowhere, how would those people know that I am the one who did it? Would they have a magic bounty board that has names that materialize on it whenever someone dies? The whole idea behind the game is when you die, you're dead. You're not actually respawning, you are a new survivor starting out on the beach, so why would you retain knowledge of who did what? Adding this feature would be the same as making tag visible servers mandatory.

Ok than how about tie players to their forum names, and not in-game this way we can tell what level of asshole everyone is, just not in game. >.> You seem to want to keep online gaming completely anonymous but quite frankly I wish players had to tools to bitch slap every bandit and KOS player just like they have done to me till I just started avoided other players in a multiplayer game.

That would be fine in my opinion, as long as there's no frame of reference ingame as to what the persons name is (i.e. no visual tag)

It's not about making online gaming 'anonymous', it's just that this particular game calls for it. Stop being so angry about being killed, it seems your suggestions come mostly from frustration about being killed, rather than thinking about the long lasting effects that your idea would have on the game. It's that instant gratification, knee-jerk response that fuels 95% of the crappy suggestions on this forum.

I can understand not wanting the game to say your a bad person for killing this guy, but why not let meta gaming do its thing and have players with evidence call you a bad person and allow the community to control player reputations. Its better than the bandit system because the game doesn't say anything, any judgement made about you is done so by your fellow gamers.