Insanity System

[matt.gilmurray@gmail.com 46]

This was an idea that popped in my head while playing and I thought it would be cool that if your humanity dropped to a certain point you would here gunshots at random that weren't there and the lower humanity the louder the gunshots and maybe even hallucinations of zombies or loot that wasn't there that would be a great deterrent to being a bandit.  

[plexico 386]

This has been suggested many times, bandits are a part of the game and if you suddenly find no one wants to shoot at each other because for some reason they're gonna start hearing gunshots at random times then the game will be quite boring. 

[AP_Norris 1018]

This was an idea that popped in my head while playing and I thought it would be cool that if your humanity dropped to a certain point you would here gunshots at random that weren't there and the lower humanity the louder the gunshots and maybe even hallucinations of zombies or loot that wasn't there that would be a great deterrent to being a bandit.

I like this simply because I hate bandits.

But it would be cool hallucinating, I wanna see a good mix of crazy funny shit and stuff that makes them go hearing funny gunshots and footsteps behind them.

[Firewarrior64 69]

There already is a sanity system: The person who plays the game.

You should have as much control about your character as possible. If you want to kill people, do it. If you feel bad about it, don't do it. Not the game should dictate how your character feels, you should do it.

Other than that, there are ways in SA to discourage banditry. Diseases.

[Chris529 380]

I like this simply because I hate bandits.

But it would be cool hallucinating, I wanna see a good mix of crazy funny shit and stuff that makes them go hearing funny gunshots and footsteps behind them.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I introduce you to "The Problem". I don't like bandits so I'm going to support 'features' that make the game less fun for them so it is more fun for me! Epic clap for you guys, making DayZ worse one step at a time.

 

There already is a sanity system: The person who plays the game.

You should have as much control about your character as possible. If you want to kill people, do it. If you feel bad about it, don't do it. Not the game should dictate how your character feels, you should do it.

Other than that, there are ways in SA to discourage banditry. Diseases.

Exactly, so if you kill someone their stuff might be covered in blood and if you don't disinfect all the stuff then you risk getting all dirty and sick. I also feel guilty if I kill someone who was innocent, no need for a system to be introduced to force people to play a certain way in a SANDBOX GAME.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Chris529

[AP_Norris 1018]

Ladies and gentlemen, may I introduce you to "The Problem". I don't like bandits so I'm going to support 'features' that make the game less fun for them so it is more fun for me! Epic clap for you guys, making DayZ worse one step at a time.

 

Hey I liked far cry 3, because it had awesome trips.

It would probably hardly ever happen and only affect people that have done some really bad shit, of course killing one stranger doesn't make you mad, maybe killing someone you've been with friendly like has the most affect.

But currently its fifty times easier for bandits games change for the better sometimes.

What makes a game better isn't just up to you.

[Chris529 380]

Hey I liked far cry 3, because it had awesome trips.

It would probably hardly ever happen and only affect people that have done some really bad shit, of course killing one stranger doesn't make you mad, maybe killing someone you've been with friendly like has the most affect.

But currently its fifty times easier for bandits games change for the better sometimes.

What makes a game better isn't just up to you.

it's easier to be a bandit because you never put your life in the hands of other people. That's just realism and no matter how unbalanced it seems you can't place restrictions on people after telling them they can play the way they like. If there was an apocalyptic scenario today the people who won't last are the naive and gullible who try to be good for the sake of it. It's a predator/prey scenario, bandits are the cats and friendly survivors are the mice. If you want to be a mouse then expect to be hunted by hungry cats.

Don't get angry with the bandits and punish them for playing on the weaknesses of others.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Chris529

[AP_Norris 1018]

it's easier to be a bandit because you never put your life in the hands of other people. That's just realism and no matter how unbalanced it seems you can't place restrictions on people after telling them they can play the way they like. If there was an apocalyptic scenario today the people who won't last are the naive and gullible who try to be good for the sake of it. It's a predator/prey scenario, bandits are the cats and friendly survivors are the mice. If you want to be a mouse then expect to be hunted by hungry cats.

Don't get angry with the bandits and punish them for playing on the weaknesses of others.

In a realistic scenario people don't kill without feeling regret. Look at most recent shootings you see that a lot of those people are really quite crazy. If people don't feel bad for their dick moves then I think the game should do it for them.

And you say it's against the game being a sandbox, however people still have the choice to do whatever they want, face it, it's realistic and balanced.

[Sutinen 635]

It's more realistic the less punishment there is. It's a game, so people don't really regret killing. But I wont kill you in DayZ unless I really feel like it. Usually interacting with other players is more fun than just killing them.

[wisper 61]

Chris do u know how to skin a cat? Cause I have a dozen ways and the strongest is community. If a griefer works his/her way through enough players, it follows that they will shoot the griefer on sight and even band together and go out of their way to dispose of said bandid. That is why permanent names are so important.

[AP_Norris 1018]

It's more realistic the less punishment there is. It's a game, so people don't really regret killing. But I wont kill you in DayZ unless I really feel like it. Usually interacting with other players is more fun than just killing them.

Most people don't ever work that out and the game is suddenly like every other PVP game except dying is hours of progress lost because you think you can trust someone who is just looking for cheap thrills.

Rocket says himself he wants to give banditry a bit of a poke in the eye and make the game harder to do alone.

[Chris529 380]

Chris do u know how to skin a cat? Cause I have a dozen ways and the strongest is community. If a griefer works his/her way through enough players, it follows that they will shoot the griefer on sight and even band together and go out of their way to dispose of said bandid. That is why permanent names are so important.

Banditry ≠ griefing

Someone isn't a griefer because they got the best of you and took your stuff, a griefer is someone who will screw you over for fun. If we didn't have people killing each other in DayZ it would be bloody boring.

 

In a realistic scenario people don't kill without feeling regret. Look at most recent shootings you see that a lot of those people are really quite crazy. If people don't feel bad for their dick moves then I think the game should do it for them.

And you say it's against the game being a sandbox, however people still have the choice to do whatever they want, face it, it's realistic and balanced.

I don't kill people if I don't have to because it makes me feel bad for them. I don't really care so much if I had no other choice or they attacked me first. Yet despite this the game is supposedly going to force me to go crazy about killing a complete stranger, as if I just murdered my family with a rusty spoon?

 

It's more realistic the less punishment there is. It's a game, so people don't really regret killing. But I wont kill you in DayZ unless I really feel like it. Usually interacting with other players is more fun than just killing them.

Pretty much this. If there's no drawbacks for being a friendly survivor, but there are plenty of drawbacks for being a bandit, then it isn't really a "play how you like without restrictions" sandbox game. What if nobody chooses to be a bandit anymore because it's got too many automated features that make it not worth playing? There goes the fun of being shot at, there goes the paranoia of stalking through Cherno at night. Things shouldn't be interfered with.

 

Most people don't ever work that out and the game is suddenly like every other PVP game except dying is hours of progress lost because you think you can trust someone who is just looking for cheap thrills.

Rocket says himself he wants to give banditry a bit of a poke in the eye and make the game harder to do alone.

When infection was changed, if you complained that you kept dying you were told to suck it up and adapt to it. Trusting randoms and getting shot in the back of the head and then complaining? I say suck it up and adapt. Hopefully in SA there will be more things to do that need 2 or more people, so you will be used before you get shot (or you can convince him you aren't worth killing, you don't have way better stuff than him).

[disorder 344]

I thought it was about the paranoia of being killed too and the levels of trust. I don't agree with the player skins for this reason.  Insanity was/is driven by players I think.

[Firewarrior64 69]

Banditry ≠ griefing

I don't kill people if I don't have to because it makes me feel bad for them. I don't really care so much if I had no other choice or they attacked me first. Yet despite this the game is supposedly going to force me to go crazy about killing a complete stranger, as if I just murdered my family with a rusty spoon?

When infection was changed, if you complained that you kept dying you were told to suck it up and adapt to it. Trusting randoms and getting shot in the back of the head and then complaining? I say suck it up and adapt.

That's the thing that makes a sanity system look stupid. Would you get insane when you kill every person you meet for no reason? maybe. Would you get insane when you kill every person you meet because every person you met before tried to kill you? definitely not.

 

Pretty much this. If there's no drawbacks for being a friendly survivor, but there are plenty of drawbacks for being a bandit, then it isn't really a "play how you like without restrictions" sandbox game. What if nobody chooses to be a bandit anymore because it's got too many automated features that make it not worth playing? There goes the fun of being shot at, there goes the paranoia of stalking through Cherno at night. Things shouldn't be interfered with.

Hopefully in SA there will be more things to do that need 2 or more people, so you will be used before you get shot (or you can convince him you aren't worth killing, you don't have way better stuff than him).

This. I'd say there should be no disadvantages for bandits (except the diseases) but there should be some advantages for players who team up. Making players do something is like training a dog. Don't punish him for doing wrong stuff. Reward him for doing the right stuff.

Currently there are only advantages for killing on sight. You get better stuff, and you don't risk getting killed by the guy who you just murdered. Teaming up has basically just the advantage of having double firepower and being able to bloodbag. But you have the disadvantage that your buddy could betray you which is a HUGE disadvantage. So there need to be more advantages for team players to make both playstyles somewhat equally rewarding.

 

If people don't feel bad for their dick moves then I think the game should do it for them.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Firewarrior64

[AP_Norris 1018]

^ if you went outside right now found, kept walking the streets untill you found somebody talking about their computer, ask about his specs... If they're better than yours stab him and tell me if you feel remorse.

It's not the fact that its a stranger you would still feel bad, I respect that you can hold of on shooting others if you don't wanna just be a dick.

The second you get in somebody sight they'll have a to at you because there's no consequences.

However for trying to help them/ help yourself you face a large variety of dangers... Because they want what you got and they're getting it free of charge. That doesn't happen IRL because people don't do that no matter what (in most circumstances) in dayZ atm all they get is a different look.

I think bandits are a good base part of the game, but it should be a sort of after a couple kills without being shot at.

They should IMO be about 1 in 5 which would mean meeting others is pretty much safe enough.

Most players should be neutral survivors and the bandits should be about as rare as heros.

The thing I hate most is when somebody has a gun at them as they come through the door and you get "friendly friendly" only to shoot you as you pick up some beans just because they've never seen an M14 aim before, its like I haven't even shot it yet A hole some ppl are just the worst kind.

You had their life's in your hand, they take your decency and trust and use it against you like fucken scum they are.

Saying to adapt and KOS isn't right, I wanna play how I want to, like a real sandbox game without being punished for trying to be the better man.

I make the choice to not lower myself to what most of you have done and if all you can say Is adapt you gotta be kidding, bandits now go insane. There adapt yourselves.

[wisper 61]

...In the end I think we all say the same thing, aka no extra bandit drawbacks, (other then the infection risk,) and more cooperation benefits. Myself am stuck with the permanent name issue, which I think is super important for players to know where they stand in respect to who they meet. This "reputation" is more vital then any hero/bandit skin and it was superbly well explained in its own topic two-three months back.

The topic was Perma-identity by Mickhail.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Wisper

[Chris529 380]

^ if you went outside right now found, kept walking the streets untill you found somebody talking about their computer, ask about his specs... If they're better than yours stab him and tell me if you feel remorse.

It's not the fact that its a stranger you would still feel bad, I respect that you can hold of on shooting others if you don't wanna just be a dick.

The second you get in somebody sight they'll have a to at you because there's no consequences.

However for trying to help them/ help yourself you face a large variety of dangers... Because they want what you got and they're getting it free of charge. That doesn't happen IRL because people don't do that no matter what (in most circumstances) in dayZ atm all they get is a different look.

I think bandits are a good base part of the game, but it should be a sort of after a couple kills without being shot at.

They should IMO be about 1 in 5 which would mean meeting others is pretty much safe enough.

Most players should be neutral survivors and the bandits should be about as rare as heros.

The thing I hate most is when somebody has a gun at them as they come through the door and you get "friendly friendly" only to shoot you as you pick up some beans just because they've never seen an M14 aim before, its like I haven't even shot it yet A hole some ppl are just the worst kind.

You had their life's in your hand, they take your decency and trust and use it against you like fucken scum they are.

Saying to adapt and KOS isn't right, I wanna play how I want to, like a real sandbox game without being punished for trying to be the better man.

I make the choice to not lower myself to what most of you have done and if all you can say Is adapt you gotta be kidding, bandits now go insane. There adapt yourselves.

A better and more relevant example would be nice. If I need weapons to survive in a harsh environment and all I have is a piece of junk handgun, I will take an assault rifle off someone else if I can't find one. Whether or not it's over their dead body, well I will do what needs to be done to live. If I went into a camp at night and killed everyone in their sleep but it turned out they had nothing of value, THEN we can start venturing into mental repercussion territory.

 

Also maybe people don't feel bad about being 'dicks' because they ARE 'dicks', it's what they do. I bet remorseless killers would thrive in such an environment as DayZ, because they will kill without going nuts over it.

 

I really don't want to get into this again, so I just want to say I agree with this

 

...In the end I think we all say the same thing, aka no extra bandit drawbacks, (other then the infection risk,) and more cooperation benefits. Myself am stuck with the permanent name issue, which I think is super important for players to know where they stand in respect to who they meet. This "reputation" is more vital then any hero/bandit skin and it was superbly well explained in its own topic two-three months back.

Fair enough being in a group has many benefits e.g. safety in numbers, lots of support, ability to get things done as opposed to going it alone. That will help with people just shooting on sight. As for the names, as long as my name doesn't just pop up and incite KOS on me because I did a few bad things then I guess I agree.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Chris529

[Firewarrior64 69]

...In the end I think we all say the same thing, aka no extra bandit drawbacks, (other then the infection risk,) and more cooperation benefits.

Good conclusion.

Now let's be quiet and let it die a natural death.

[SalamanderAnder (DayZ) 1747]

Uhhhg this suggestion again? It punishes gameplay tactics. I can't get behind it.

[wisper 61]

Does not! :p If u keep your pointer for 5secs over a target, it's not the name that betrays the position.