I'm of the Opinion that KoS will be shorted sight and wasteful....

[dustylion@gmail.com 14]

Once zeds start being an actual threat.  When they spawn in numbers, when they roam the country side, and when they threaten to tear down any defense.

 

As a wise man once said, the best defense against walkers is people.  More people means more labor, more fighters, more carrying space.

 

At the very least you can handcuff the bambi and make them run through town as a distraction :P

[rossums 2190]

It will be short-sighted and a silly decision a lot of the time, only then will you realise that a lot of players don't make the most logical decisions.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Rossums

[dustylion@gmail.com 14]

It will be short-sighted and a silly decision a lot of the time, only then will you realise that a lot of players don't make the most logical decisions.

 

Still.... as it is right now Zeds are a complete non-issue most of the time.  You're primary threats are other players, and ambiguous status messages. 

[mercules 1290]

Yep, but there will always be those that will go out of their way and bring misery and hardship to themselves to tear someone else down... just because. So it won't go away, but maybe there will eventually be some consequences for it that make sense. :)

[mercules 1290]

Still.... as it is right now Zeds are a complete non-issue most of the time.  You're primary threats are other players, and ambiguous status messages. 

 

Say that when 5 of them agro on you at once. Sadly in most places you will find 5 spread across a moderate sized town but I was on during the daytime(I know right?) and ended up with 5 zeds on my butt out in the open. It was not a fun fight. :) Okay, I take that back it was totally fun but not a situation I would want to be in on a regular basis.

[xX_fr0st-w0lf_Xx (DayZ) 343]

The oceans will dry before kos stops.

[dustylion@gmail.com 14]

The oceans will dry before kos stops.

 

I never expect it to stop.  I just feel like there could be reasons to where it isn't simply the safest option.

[Nalestom 116]

I never expect it to stop.  I just feel like there could be reasons to where it isn't simply the safest option.

 

Killing on sight will always be the safest option for me if I play with a group of friends. I know the capabilities of my friends, and I trust them as much as they trust me. I don't trust you, the random player carrying a weapon that we've just sighted, and there is a slight chance that you're carrying items like food and water that we need. If I have a group of friends that I play DayZ with, I have absolutely no motivation to not kill you as soon as I see you.

 

The circumstances don't necessarily change if I'm by myself. I might be on the verge of starvation, and you might have food. The realistic chances of you giving me any food for free are slim, and the realistic chances of me approaching you without being shot are even more slim. I need food, and your death is the only solution to my problem.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Nalestom

[mercules 1290]

 I need food, and your death is the only solution to my problem.

 

It's not the only solution, but it is the easiest to figure out, anything else might require thought and we don't want that, do we. :)

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Unless rocket has changed his plans massively since last he spoke on the topic, zombies are not meant to be a greater threat than players. Other players are meant to be the greatest threat in the game.

 

It's smart money. No matter how good the zombie AI gets, it will still be an AI - vulnerable to manipulation, behavior patterns and easily "beatable" by experienced players.

 

Humans with human intelligence are the best AI available, and free! Which is why it makes sense to use players as the game's primary enemy.

 

Even as zombies get more dangerous, KoS is not going to fade away. In fact, I think the opposite will happen. If alerting zombies has the potential to end my life, then the last thing I want near me is a stranger I can't trust to move safely and quietly around the zeds. I'll surround myself with trusted friends and known companions, but still generally eliminate any other players I come across.

[kragz 156]

I'm going to go out of my way to keep the KOS attitude running. Without it, this isn't a game, but a running and eating simulator. I could sit in a house and eat beans all day long in real life if I wanted. It would be boring in real life, and certainly boring in a game. Gathering loot to do nothing with is similarly boring - much like the raiding mentality in WoW. Raid to get more gear to raid with. Pleasure in loot is a false one. This isn't Collecting Simulator 2014.

 

KOS is going to stay alive, I'm going to kill everybody I can, and even pretend to be friendly before I kill them for rags. It's the most fun part of the game and that's why it is so popular.

[mercules 1290]

Unless rocket has changed his plans massively since last he spoke on the topic, zombies are not meant to be a greater threat than players. 

 

No one said they would be. We have only stated they should be a greater threat than they are now. Even now in larger numbers(I've had 5 on me at the most) they would be difficult to deal with. You can't slow them down and you can't shoot them all dead without wasting ammo. Going into Melee with 5 of them would be a bad idea, and the Zombies are placeholders. Zombies should and can be a threat and yes you can figure out how to deal with them but the point would be that you can shoot at players but risk "Not dealing" with zombies in that fashion and then have to get yourself out of that situation. 

[mercules 1290]

I'm going to go out of my way to keep the KOS attitude running. Without it, this isn't a game, but a running and eating simulator. I could sit in a house and eat beans all day long in real life if I wanted. It would be boring in real life, and certainly boring in a game. Gathering loot to do nothing with is similarly boring - much like the raiding mentality in WoW. Raid to get more gear to raid with. Pleasure in loot is a false one. This isn't Collecting Simulator 2014.

 

KOS is going to stay alive, I'm going to kill everybody I can, and even pretend to be friendly before I kill them for rags. It's the most fun part of the game and that's why it is so popular.

 

You sir... are using KOS incorrectly. Even without "Kill On Sight" there are plenty of reasons to kill people. No one is saying we shouldn't be able to kill each other. We are saying the, "Player: BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM!" is stupid and unrealistic to a zombie apocalypse. That is what KOS is. There are a lot of people who do just that. No reason to shoot, probably plenty of reasons not to, but they are trained in most FPS to shoot as soon as they see movement. 

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

I'm going to go out of my way to keep the KOS attitude running. Without it, this isn't a game, but a running and eating simulator. I could sit in a house and eat beans all day long in real life if I wanted. It would be boring in real life, and certainly boring in a game. Gathering loot to do nothing with is similarly boring - much like the raiding mentality in WoW. Raid to get more gear to raid with. Pleasure in loot is a false one. This isn't Collecting Simulator 2014.

 

KOS is going to stay alive, I'm going to kill everybody I can, and even pretend to be friendly before I kill them for rags. It's the most fun part of the game and that's why it is so popular.

why dont u head up North and fight people with gear.. instead of preying on fresh spawns on the coast..

 

oh yeah right, cuz thats a challenge..i can see why u wouldnt want that. esp. if the other player had a weapon.. yikes u might actualy DIE !

[kragz 156]

You sir... are using KOS incorrectly. Even without "Kill On Sight" there are plenty of reasons to kill people. No one is saying we shouldn't be able to kill each other. We are saying the, "Player: BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM!" is stupid and unrealistic to a zombie apocalypse. That is what KOS is. There are a lot of people who do just that. No reason to shoot, probably plenty of reasons not to, but they are trained in most FPS to shoot as soon as they see movement. 

Sounds like DayZ perhaps isn't the game for you if you don't like the sandbox element of it. I shoot people for a kill count. I GUESS if you wanted to argument from a RPG perspective you could argue that somebody who kills for the fuck of it is playing the role of an insane person. Definitely realstic to a zomebie apocalypse scenario

[kragz 156]

why dont u head up North and fight people with gear.. instead of preying on fresh spawns on the coast..

 

oh yeah right, cuz thats a challenge..i can see why u wouldnt want that. esp. if the other player had a weapon.. yikes u might actualy DIE !

Why are you so butthurt? Killing fresh spawns fits the role of somebody who has simply cracked due to the stress and fear of an apocalypse. If you don't like this aspect of the game then perhaps DayZ is not the game for you.

[mercules 1290]

Sounds like DayZ perhaps isn't the game for you if you don't like the sandbox element of it. I shoot people for a kill count. I GUESS if you wanted to argument from a RPG perspective you could argue that somebody who kills for the fuck of it is playing the role of an insane person. Definitely realstic to a zomebie apocalypse scenario

 

No, it sounds like you want to play a FPS where they actually track the kills.... I can't think of any off the top of my head... Um... Maybe COD/BF/Planetside/Unreal/Quake/every single OTHER FPS in existence currently that isn't DayZ.... 

 

 

Yes, anti-social behaviour would probably be compounded by an apocalypse, but guess what, those guys will probably die off fairly quick and don't respawn at the coast and run to the firehall for a new gun. Oh, and 99% of the population isn't anti-social/psychotic so we could use a few less people choosing to play that role. ;)

 

[Nalestom 116]

It's not the only solution, but it is the easiest to figure out, anything else might require thought and we don't want that, do we. :)

 

You're implying that people who kill on sight for food, ammunition, and other resources are brainless or not willing to "go the extra mile" to get their resources. You're wrong.

 

Player interaction in DayZ is a lot like an ecosystem in the real world. Players can be carnivores, omnivores, or herbivores. The herbivores find and eat food, the carnivores eat the herbivores, and the omnivores don't care how they get their food so long as they get to eat it. The majority of the DayZ community seems to think that the "correct" way to play is to be a herbivore. Unfortunately, just like a real ecosystem, the majority of the DayZ community doesn't get to define how each player gets their food.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

No reason to shoot

 

I will always have reasons to shoot you if I don't know you.

 

a) I don't trust you not to do the same to me.

 

b. I don't want to share nearby loot with you.

 

c) I don't want you giving up my location to your friends.

 

d) I don't want you moving loudly or firing weapons and alerting nearby zombies.

 

e) I take satisfaction in imagining you standing on the beach with a flashlight cursing my name.

Edited December 19, 2013 by ZedsDeadBaby

[-Gews- 7443]

When we have more zombies, perhaps people will think more before pulling the trigger.

We also need zombies to be able to ascend stairs and climb ladders, because right now you can sit in an apartment block or two-story building with impunity.

Sounds like DayZ perhaps isn't the game for you if you don't like the sandbox element of it. I shoot people for a kill count. I GUESS if you wanted to argument from a RPG perspective you could argue that somebody who kills for the fuck of it is playing the role of an insane person. Definitely realstic to a zomebie apocalypse scenario

The sheer amount of KoS in the mod wasn't realistic. Even in the worst places, unless there's a full-blown war going on, I doubt everyone's being shot on sight. You'd probably be captured, and then executed. Same end result I guess...

However there's nothing wrong with killing everyone you see, this is a sandbox game. It's a valid play style. Otherwise we'd all be playing DayZRP.

[zreks 14]

I KoS because i dont have a mic.

[T-Dawg 6]

Killing on sight will always be the safest option for me if I play with a group of friends. I know the capabilities of my friends, and I trust them as much as they trust me. I don't trust you, the random player carrying a weapon that we've just sighted, and there is a slight chance that you're carrying items like food and water that we need. If I have a group of friends that I play DayZ with, I have absolutely no motivation to not kill you as soon as I see you.

 

The circumstances don't necessarily change if I'm by myself. I might be on the verge of starvation, and you might have food. The realistic chances of you giving me any food for free are slim, and the realistic chances of me approaching you without being shot are even more slim. I need food, and your death is the only solution to my problem.

 

I always share my food if somebody needs it. It´s people like you that feed the KoS mentality and then it goes into a bad spiral. Usually when I´m playing in a group we get whatever food and water we need rather quick and then we can focus on getting gear. If somebody attacks we fight back. The only time we attack somebody is if we really need something and then we will try to capture them first. Personally I think it´s a little too easy to find food right now. 

 

It´s good that some people are bandits but it´s way too many imo. A sound amount of bandits will keep you on your toes.

 

I guess this is what happens when you can insta-respawn instead of have wasted your only life. If there was some penalty from dying I think everybody would be a little more cautious because they would know that if you fire at someone they will surely fire back.

Edited December 19, 2013 by T-Dawg

[Nalestom 116]

I always share my food if somebody needs it. It´s people like you that feed the KoS mentality and then it goes into a bad spiral. Usually when I´m playing in a group we get whatever food and water we need rather quick and then we can focus on getting gear. Personally I think it´s a little too easy to find food right now. 

 

If you always share your food with somebody who needs it, that's great! That is entirely your decision to play that way, and I completely encourage you to continue playing the game how you wish to play it. However, it is important to note that very few people share your style of gameplay, and so the chances of me meeting a person like you are slim to none. 

 

If I'm in the middle of a forest, with no town nearby, and I'm about to starve to death, I am faced with an ultimatum: find a source of food, or die. When I see you walking through the forest, armed to the teeth, I have a decision to make:

 

1. Take a huge risk and reveal myself to you, hoping that you'll see me (who is also armed to the teeth) and decide to help me, not shoot me. If I take this route, most players will shoot me on sight and loot my body for the few resources I have, although there is a very small chance that you will be friendly and help me out. The chances do not weight in my favor.
2. Take a smaller risk and use the element of surprise to open fire and kill you. The first few shots I take will be disorienting, as you won't know my location while I know exactly where you are. I will also have a relatively long time to make an accurate shot, so the chances of you dying while I live unscathed are relatively high.

As you can see, the second option has a much higher chance of survival than the first. I enjoy surviving. I'm going to take the second option.

 

My choice isn't a reflection of my style of gameplay as much as it is a reflection of the current state of the game. The simple fact of the matter is that I have a much higher chance of surviving if I shoot first, ask questions later, especially if I'm armed and have a dire need for food, water, or blood. The only person who can really change this is Rocket and the rest of the Bohemia Interactive team. No matter how much people complain on the forums or in-game, people like me will exist unless we're given incentive to change.

[kragz 156]

No, it sounds like you want to play a FPS where they actually track the kills.... I can't think of any off the top of my head... Um... Maybe COD/BF/Planetside/Unreal/Quake/every single OTHER FPS in existence currently that isn't DayZ.... 

 

 

Yes, anti-social behaviour would probably be compounded by an apocalypse, but guess what, those guys will probably die off fairly quick and don't respawn at the coast and run to the firehall for a new gun. Oh, and 99% of the population isn't anti-social/psychotic so we could use a few less people choosing to play that role. ;)

 

You can track your kills in a note with a pen. Sorry, that rules out that whine.

 

Your last paragraph is a joke. You basically concede that my point is valid, and that murders would exist in such a scenario. Are you family with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs? Educate yourself and you might find that people aren't as predictable as you'd quite like them to be.

 

Not sure what you have against respawning though. Don't think many people would pay £19.99 for a game they only get to play once with no respawn :/.

 

So basically that argument is resolved? You agree that KOS with absolutely no motive is not only ok and fine for this game, but correctly simulates a zombie apocalyptic scenario? If you don't agree with that statement, you need to find another game to play :). 

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

If you always share your food with somebody who needs it, that's great! That is entirely your decision to play that way, and I completely encourage you to continue playing the game how you wish to play it. However, it is important to note that very few people share your style of gameplay, and so the chances of me meeting a person like you are slim to none. 

 

If I'm in the middle of a forest, with no town nearby, and I'm about to starve to death, I am faced with an ultimatum: find a source of food, or die. When I see you walking through the forest, armed to the teeth, I have a decision to make:

 

1. Take a huge risk and reveal myself to you, hoping that you'll see me (who is also armed to the teeth) and decide to help me, not shoot me. If I take this route, most players will shoot me on sight and loot my body for the few resources I have, although there is a very small chance that you will be friendly and help me out. The chances do not weight in my favor.
2. Take a smaller risk and use the element of surprise to open fire and kill you. The first few shots I take will be disorienting, as you won't know my location while I know exactly where you are. I will also have a relatively long time to make an accurate shot, so the chances of you dying while I live unscathed are relatively high.

As you can see, the second option has a much higher chance of survival than the first. I enjoy surviving. I'm going to take the second option.

 

My choice isn't a reflection of my style of gameplay as much as it is a reflection of the current state of the game. The simple fact of the matter is that I have a much higher chance of surviving if I shoot first, ask questions later, especially if I'm armed and have a dire need for food, water, or blood. The only person who can really change this is Rocket and the rest of the Bohemia Interactive team. No matter how much people complain on the forums or in-game, people like me will exist unless we're given incentive to change.

 

And all that boils down to this game is about surviving.  From both zombies AND players.  I come across a player, I will shoot them as long as I have the advantage to do so.  I survived and that player didn't.  End of story, better luck next games life.

 

After all, this is a game of survival.  Not a game of lets make friends and be merry around the campfire roasting marshmellows singing Kumbyah.