I would like to see a new bandit system.

[BadAnti 0]

I would like to see a name rank system that you can progress through for killing people or for killing bandits. No one should ever be penalized for killing a bandit because that would be good karma. Anyone shooting/killing a non-bandit should accrue negative karma. I know the bandit skin has been done and taken out but hear me out. There is no way to know who the bandits are on a server you have just joined. Bandits escape too often by logging off as soon as they are in trouble. There needs to be some way to tell if someone is good or not. It's too easy for bandits to take advantage of situations and log as soon as it gets dangerous. Not everyone wants to be a bandit or shoot people on site. A multi-tier title list could add some good stuff to the game for example:

Savior

Hero

Vigilante

Samaritan

Crossing Guard

Survivor (Neutral)

Thief

Mugger

Killer

Rabid

Psycho

The cost to progress up or down the titles could be geometric. 1st kill you are a thief, 10 kills Mugger, 100 kills Killer, 1000 kills Rabid, 10000 kills Psycho. Same for moving up the ladder to Savior but you have to kill people with bad karma. This would give people another goal in the game. People could actually have incentive to help others and kill bandits. Bandits will still have the edge due to camping areas and indiscrimanetly killing and the ability to instantly log out in case of trouble.

Anyway, just a thought. As it is now, everyone just plays dog eat dog and even if they are friendly chances are they are going to gank you as soon as you find a good gun. Simply put there are no repercussions to being an asshole in the game and no incentive not to be.

[EnermaX 59]

And where would you be able to see it?

[xBlackCat 1]

im on the fence about the idea as a whole, but your numbers seem a bit optimistic.

#1 bandit of all time had 290 murders. The next best, who happens to be the best bandit alive currently has 135.

the numbers for bandit killers are even worse.

#1 - 65 bandit kills, still alive

#2 - 43 bandit kills, deceased

#3 - 35 bandit kills, still alive

getting to 100 puts you in the top 10 after nearly 5 million characters. 1k and 10k aren't going to happen.

[BadAnti 0]

It would affix to the beginning of their name so in my case for example "Mugger BadAnti". So in the player lists, when they chat, voip, you have them in your x-hairs, basically anytime you can see their name.

Edit: the numbers were arbitrary....

[leo235 2]

NO

You cant know if someone is a murderer or not.

[Riis 22]

There are no bandits, only survivors with different means of surviving, get used to it.

[goblinshark 5]

Firstly, the title should reflect the post. So instead of "bandit rankings," it should be, "good/bad karma ranking system."

Now. I like and dislike the idea of a karma system.

Here's why I dislike it:

- The karma system, firstly, is going to be used by min/maxers. Nobody, using the scale you provide, is going to want to be a Crossing Guard, a Thief, a Samaritan. Anyone utilizing Karma will want to be either a) Psycho or b) Savior. I also see a karma system promoting more manipulative behavior, trying to exploit game concepts.

- You should, and would lose your karma each death. As the game stands, you are a BRAND NEW human being each time you make a new character, not a persistent one. As such, it wouldn't make sense to retain your karma as a person in this world. I could see it being bound to profiles, not players, but that would not make a lot of sense, really.

Here's why I like it:

- With the way the game is currently laid out, bad players can be bad and relentlessly so, because as you already stated, they have the advantage. They can sneak, wait, ambush, kill on sight, manipulate.... the map is in their hands, much like a network hacker. In contrast, "good" players and especially "neutral" players have virtually no motivation to be "good." It's really hard to trust anyone after you have low-crawled for 6 hours then were shot and killed by someone you tried to help. With the implementation of a karma system, both neutral AND "good" players would be motivated to do good deeds and seek out other players to do "good" with. Bandits, however, would still be solo often times, giving them less of an advantage.

Final analysis:

- I think a karma system would need a lot of discussion and tweaking before being a fully developed and semi-fair implementation. However, I do feel that the positives of a karma system would outweigh the negatives. While it does seem that a karma system is not intuitive to this type of game, seeing as it's a mostly solo "real-world" military simulated zombie survival game, the benefits outweigh the loss in "realism." An efficient, clean karma system would enable players to not only decipher who is better or worse, but additionally, they have motivation to be better themselves.

[BadAnti 0]

The game as it stands now has tunnel vision... it is nothing more than a deathmatch + scavanger game. If that's all the dev wants it to be? So be it. I think he wants more though (eg old bandit skin). Now we don't spawn with guns... He is going somewhere with the game that is beyond deathmatch + scavanger so Riis when it changes again... "get used to it."

[goblinshark 5]

There are no bandits' date=' only survivors with different means of surviving, get used to it.

[/quote']

I hate constantly seeing this response in the forums. If this statement were true, then there wouldn't even BE a bandit / survivor ticker in the debugger/leader boards.

Also, legitimately having to kill someone to survive is "surviving." Exploiting the game and sprinting through the streets shooting people with assault rifles because you server-hopped fire stations and deer stands and have a backpack full of ammo, is not surviving.

And as such, it is clearly advantageous to implement SOME sort of a system that helps let people know that someone is severely trolling others.

You could set a minimum threshold - for example, the first 5-10 kills, nothing. After you have reached the "no karma" threshold, you begin getting noticed for your killings. This way, someone who killed a few people because he was worried and nervous is safe. Someone relentlessly and clearly killing people trying to survive as well can be a bit more noticed.

You want realism? Anyone who kills over 100 people in a 250k square area of the world is going to be noticed, I promise you that, especially if there's communications available.

[BadAnti 0]

Goblin I agree that it should probably reset with character death. After all, everything else is reset. If it was reset obviously the amount of kills would have to be a lot less. It also allows people try both sides each time they respawn. I like that implementation better. Thanks for adding to it.

[Zarlak 339]

Firstly, I've never seen anyone run down the centre of a city with an assault rifle firing. That's just exaggeration. What usually happens is people bump into each other, and the guy with the assault rifle fires it so that he doesn't get shot and lose it.

Secondly, no in a post apocalyptic world with no electricity, no television internet radio or newspapers, someone who kills people in the wilderness, or in a city at night isn't going to be noticed by the mases, who have never seen him, have no idea who he is, or perhaps have never even heard of said murders.

[xBlackCat 1]

There are no bandits' date=' only survivors with different means of surviving, get used to it.

[/quote']

I hate constantly seeing this response in the forums. If this statement were true, then there wouldn't even BE a bandit / survivor ticker in the debugger/leader boards.

Also, legitimately having to kill someone to survive is "surviving." Exploiting the game and sprinting through the streets shooting people with assault rifles because you server-hopped fire stations and deer stands and have a backpack full of ammo, is not surviving.

And as such, it is clearly advantageous to implement SOME sort of a system that helps let people know that someone is severely trolling others.

You could set a minimum threshold - for example, the first 5-10 kills, nothing. After you have reached the "no karma" threshold, you begin getting noticed for your killings. This way, someone who killed a few people because he was worried and nervous is safe. Someone relentlessly and clearly killing people trying to survive as well can be a bit more noticed.

You want realism? Anyone who kills over 100 people in a 250k square area of the world is going to be noticed, I promise you that, especially if there's communications available.

Similar to what i said above, there are only 6 people who managed to kill 100 people or more after nearly 5 million characters. A buffer of 5-10 kills would eliminate like 80% of the bandits and do very little because the bandits with more than that are going to snipe you from 500+ meters

[Riis 22]

There are no bandits' date=' only survivors with different means of surviving, get used to it.

[/quote']

I hate constantly seeing this response in the forums. If this statement were true, then there wouldn't even BE a bandit / survivor ticker in the debugger/leader boards.

Also, legitimately having to kill someone to survive is "surviving." Exploiting the game and sprinting through the streets shooting people with assault rifles because you server-hopped fire stations and deer stands and have a backpack full of ammo, is not surviving.

And as such, it is clearly advantageous to implement SOME sort of a system that helps let people know that someone is severely trolling others.

You could set a minimum threshold - for example, the first 5-10 kills, nothing. After you have reached the "no karma" threshold, you begin getting noticed for your killings. This way, someone who killed a few people because he was worried and nervous is safe. Someone relentlessly and clearly killing people trying to survive as well can be a bit more noticed.

You want realism? Anyone who kills over 100 people in a 250k square area of the world is going to be noticed, I promise you that, especially if there's communications available.

It's funny how people who suggest these things always die by some dude running through a street and firing his assault rifle...

Now if you were to move outside of cherno / Electro, that wouldn't happen...

I've been killed ONCE by another player, I learned from that, I took my time to scout out towns and villages before i entered, i started hunting instead of going to the supermarket to get food, i started looting deerstands instead of going to the airfields. If however i want to go loot a town, I get my mates with me.

Now what I seem to read out of all these threads is that you constantly get killed by other survivors, in cherno, in electro..It's like you WANT to be killed, but you want to justify your death by being able to say that "oh it was a bandit/PKer/CoDNoob" instead of having to wonder if it could've ended in another way.

[Bental 10]

Riis: not at all like that. I get killed in the wilderness more than a city.

But then, I prefer total evasion. If someone fires at me, I'd rather run. Yesterday, I saved a survivor with an axe from a group of zombies. I gave him painkillers, morphine, a transfusion. I turned around and he axed me in the back of the head shouting "YOU MAD BRO?!"

To be honest, not really. I'd do it again (except a mental note of his name).

Have you also never heard of the radio?

Last time I was killed, I was in a tiny town in the middle Of nowhere, 8 people on the server including me and my mate. We were filling water bottles at a pump and got sniped.

You repeat "REALIZAM HURDUR" but seem to forget that realistically, food will not respawn, people will not skip across dimensions like a fat kid across candy store isles, still water from ponds will kill you within a day, fencing wire is very easy to destroy, everyone needs to go to the bathroom sometimes, you must sleep in real life for hours a day (leaving you a very vulnerable target for a hungry zombie to happen across). Zombies would roam the forests in greater numbers, they would be absent from the cities due to being killed en masse (their primary food source often happens to be armed to the teeth), they must stumble slowly towards you in doors (their mothers apparently brought them upright) and have a total phobia of any surface above water.

Honestly, I could go on. What you fail to realize is a total real life sim in a zombie apocalypse does not exist, and will NEVER exist as a zombie apocalypse is an impossible scenario.

A game does not sacrifice fun for realism. The fun in this game happens to hinge on a believable level of realism, but it is a fine line between no longer fun and no longer believable.

Do you really think a help to good samaritans, knowing who they can help and who will stab them in the back and laugh like the special kid in class will break the game?

If its no big deal to you, why fight it so vehemently? I don't buy your story. You reek of a player who delights in murdering, which is fine, but you see it unreasonable to even discuss strategies to level the playing field, choosing instead to close with "Get used to it".

/rant.

I am completely in agreement of a karma system reset on death.

Values need to be worked out, and other actions such as giving aid should be considered, exploits such as farming with a mate etc.

But yes, please!

[vision1776 42]

I understand the reason behind wanting to know who is a bandit and who is not. But it is not realistic. Im not a bandit but my new attitude is to shoot on sight. In a situation like the one we are staged in there would be no means of communication and there would be no law and order. Its anarchy... Every man for himself. The only people you can trust are the people on your skype or teamspeak chat. If they are carrying a weapon, shoot them before they see you. Trust no one. If you want to ride solo then you better know how to survive solo.

[trylan 25]

I understand the reason behind wanting to know who is a bandit and who is not. But it is not realistic. Im not a bandit but my new attitude is to shoot on sight. In a situation like the one we are staged in there would be no means of communication and there would be no law and order. Its anarchy... Every man for himself. The only people you can trust are the people on your skype or teamspeak chat. If they are carrying a weapon' date=' shoot them before they see you. Trust no one. If you want to ride solo then you better know how to survive solo.

[/quote']

lol its not realistic....but dying and respawing randomly 2 seconds later with a backpack with a few things on it is? and zombies are? get your head out of your ass and maybe think about what your saying...

I think some kind of karma system would be awsome as it would change the atmosphere of the game from straight up pvpz to more survival..which is what the mod was intended for wasn't it? and maybe increase the zombie population and locations as well...? just a thought:s

[naizarak 41]

karma, or "humanity", is already in game. it's just being recorded behind-the-scenes and will be put to use in the future for something else.

[trylan 25]

karma' date=' or "humanity", is already in game. it's just being recorded behind-the-scenes and will be put to use in the future for something else.

[/quote']

thats very good to know:) any idea when we could expect that...or just cross our fingers and wait?

[gotima 0]

cool system, but there should be a way to see in what level someone is, and the kill numbers are a bit too extreme

[Dreganius (DayZ) 55]

You repeat "REALIZAM HURDUR"

Erm... I don't read a single point where Riis said anything about realism in his post.

[Bental 10]

Swear I saw it some where... Might have been a different post. My bad.

Doesn't matter, it was his earlier post of "Get used to it" that annoyed me.

My point is, in the real world I still highly doubt people would act the way we see in game. A few people would be psychos. Sociopaths would have a great time.

But please remember that the way people act in an on-line game such as this is vastly different compared to the real world, where there are consequences beyond a couple of hours re-gathering your lost items.

[This again assuming that a zombie apocalypse is actually possible]