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

[mercules 1290]

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 :). 

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

[mercules 1290]

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. 

 

I guess most of you don't understand survival then. A group is better equipped to survive than individuals which is the how and why society formed in the first place. You don't end up with groups when you shoot at everyone you meet. You are actually actively going against your own best interests for survival. Now trusting everyone is stupid almost as stupid as trusting no one. 

[kragz 156]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Easy way out of not answering my difficult question - making this a red herring and thus showing you to be intellectually dishonest. I'll assume you know what a red herring is and won't attempt to patronize you with a link.

 

Please show me precisely where I misrepresented your argument.

 

Remember, key points that I adressed in your post:

 

Kills can be logged with a pen.

Educate yourself on Maslow.

No respawns is a bad idea.

 

Thanks.

[Nalestom 116]

I guess most of you don't understand survival then. A group is better equipped to survive than individuals which is the how and why society formed in the first place. You don't end up with groups when you shoot at everyone you meet. You are actually actively going against your own best interests for survival. Now trusting everyone is stupid almost as stupid as trusting no one. 

 

Groups and societies formed because it was easier to gather and kill food as a group, as opposed to gathering and killing food as an individual. Not only that, but groups and societies were essential to humanity because they provided a means for reproduction. Until sex and farming are implemented into DayZ, there is nothing that a group can do that a single individual can't do.

 

You're not allowed to tell me what I can and can't do in the sandbox. Please keep that in mind when you respond.

[MrMerc 12]

Two things to be said here:

#1 KoS happens because the person doesn't know nor trust me. You are a liability to my survival and you might have that backpack I've been looking for. There is absolutely no benefit to the game for me to parlay my safety for a stranger I have no intention to get to know. Furthermore, I've been lugging this M4 around for an hour and I want to use it in a combat scenario, oh a player is over there? Guess what is about to happen.

#2 If your playing this game for realism and you don't KoS than you are not valuing your life as much as you should be. It's great to be charitable in our current situations; electricity, running water and a 9-5. When the sh*t hits the fan though, the charitable ones die first.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

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

 

dont forget to add some extra kills to pad the number before u hand ur paper into the judges for the trophys..

 

 

hahahah

 

/epic facepalm

 

ps i hear at 100 koS kills u get a free TF2 hat... /fact

[erocean 21]

lol all these explinations of why/how people should or should not play, bandits and KOS players or survivers all alike trying to explain to another why its ok and not ok to play this way and that way are making me chuckle. Who cares...... play how you want and shut up, quit trying to make some false statement of how you play when simply you enjoy killing players and that's what your going to do or you simply just want to survive.

 

I kill when I want, I help when I want, I play nice if I choose... and a few times I have was hiding like a school girl. Your choice no one elses, just play the game and stop wasting your time trying to "explain" yourselves to others because no one really cares.

Edited December 19, 2013 by erocean

[mercules 1290]

Easy way out of not answering my difficult question - making this a red herring and thus showing you to be intellectually dishonest. I'll assume you know what a red herring is and won't attempt to patronize you with a link.

 

Please show me precisely where I misrepresented your argument.

 

Remember, key points that I adressed in your post:

 

Kills can be logged with a pen.

Educate yourself on Maslow.

No respawns is a bad idea.

 

Thanks.

 

The majority of your post is, "You agree with me, huh?" Which was a Strawman. 

[mercules 1290]

...because no one really cares.

 

Oh, I think someone actually cares as we will see a post sometime soon of someone ranting about being shot with a sniper rifle as they spawned on the coast with nothing. :) I get the feeling they care about why someone would do that. :)

 

 

#2 If your playing this game for realism and you don't KoS than you are not valuing your life as much as you should be. It's great to be charitable in our current situations; electricity, running water and a 9-5. When the sh*t hits the fan though, the charitable ones die first.

#2 is absolutely false. When the shit hits the fan you will find human kind actually often flock together and group up. Those groups often do much better than individuals. 

[xX_fr0st-w0lf_Xx (DayZ) 343]

Why to kills on sight?

 

1) Safest option

2) gear :)

3) care bear tears.

 

Do I need more reasons?

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

I guess most of you don't understand survival then. A group is better equipped to survive than individuals which is the how and why society formed in the first place. You don't end up with groups when you shoot at everyone you meet. You are actually actively going against your own best interests for survival. Now trusting everyone is stupid almost as stupid as trusting no one. 

 

Oh I understand survival very well.  I shoot you dead means I survived and you didn't.  End of story.

 

Do groups survive better?  Absolutely, it's called safety in numbers.  And when i'm with my group (numbers) you can be assured that the chances you are the one that does not survive go up exponentially.

[Tek (DayZ) 95]

You're not allowed to tell me what I can and can't do in the sandbox. Please keep that in mind when you respond.

 

This is the single greatest thing anyone can take away from this thread and any KoS thread made.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

I guess most of you don't understand survival then. A group is better equipped to survive than individuals

 

Right. That's why I join a group of players and then we kill everyone else on sight.

[T-Dawg 6]

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.

Maybe so. But in the long run your survival chances actually gets worse. Everytime you KoS someone you contribute to an increase and after time people get tired and start KoS themselves. Who knows how many times you snuck by a guy hiding in the forest having the chance to kill you? Next time he might kill you for your pristine raincoat instead of letting you go just because that´s what all the other assholes do. 

 

 

 

Of course you can do what you want, that´s not the issue. I´m not trying to force you to play a certain way, I´m just telling you I think you got it wrong. But if you come here telling your story you should be prepared for reactions.

 

You may think you are hardcore, but playing your way is actually the easy way. And killing someone for beans right now is just so fail. They are easy enough anyway.

[m.w. vindicator 880]

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.

 

 

False.  I have met players and given them stuff for free.   

 

 

KoS is lame.  If you don't trust someone, just give them some space and leave and everyone  wins.

 

 

Plus if you kill someone for food, you will destroy the food with your bullets.   

Edited December 19, 2013 by Vindicator

[LeeEverett 15]

The only way to avoid players who KoS is to avoid everyone you see. Unless you know the people you're playing with, you have literally no idea how another people is going to react to seeing you. I'm sure the same rule would apply to real life if the dead stood up and started eating the living.

[mercules 1290]

Oh I understand survival very well.  I shoot you dead means I survived and you didn't.  End of story.

 

Do groups survive better?  Absolutely, it's called safety in numbers.  And when i'm with my group (numbers) you can be assured that the chances you are the one that does not survive go up exponentially.

 

In the game, yes. In real life you shoot someone dead just because you saw them... remember Kill On Sight is what we are talking about... you just killed the pharmacist who knows the code to get into a locked building full of antibiotics. Whoops... now you have an upper respiratory infection slowly killing you.... 

I know nothing like that is in the game but the game is supposed to eventually get around to being a simulation, not just a death match. Other people have hidden values and the way you find them out is by not... remember what we are talking about... killing them the moment you see them. 

I get that we form groups outside the game and then hop on and consider everyone else "them" and don't want "them" to hurt "us". But not everyone has a ready made group and while I am not a social person in the least I believe you might find some fun out of actually getting to know some of the people out there instead of just looking at them as an obstacle or victim. Unfortunately that rarely happens when the majority of the population simply blast away upon contact with anyone. At that point extending a greeting is often the last thing you want to do. 

It's a downward spiral though. I'm not asking you all to stop shooting people. I'm asking you to maybe stop a moment and think about if the game is better where the assumption is that you just shoot everyone or better when maybe, just maybe those other people might not shoot back and so now you might want to actually interact with them. 

In real life it is rare when a fight happens and one person/side walks away unharmed. Action movies don't follow this reality. ;) So it is in everyone's best interest to avoid a fight in most of those situations. The game doesn't have systems that make that a reality although it is getting better. I can tell you the guys who killed me walked away with some pretty damaged gear and blood they won't be getting back for a good long while. Engagement wasn't their best option. 

The game really isn't as much fun when EVERY encounter is a firefight. It actually get more tense when it isn't because you never know when it could turn into that. Instead it is, "Oh, there is a player. Yep he is shooting. There... shot him. *yawn*." 

 

[Nalestom 116]

Maybe so. But in the long run your survival chances actually gets worse. Everytime you KoS someone you contribute to an increase and after time people get tired and start KoS themselves. Who knows how many times you snuck by a guy hiding in the forest having the chance to kill you? Next time he might kill you for your pristine raincoat instead of letting you go just because that´s what all the other assholes do. 

 

You may think you are hardcore, but playing your way is actually the easy way. And killing someone for beans right now is just so fail. They are easy enough anyway.

 

Until the game gives me a reason to think twice about killing somebody in order to survive, I'm not going to stop. If I see somebody and don't have an immediate need for food or water, I'm not going to kill them - that's not how I play the game. However, if I do need food or water and see no immediate alternative, I will do what is necessary in order for me to survive.

 

I would avoid labeling players who kill others on sight as "assholes." Just because somebody is playing the game differently from how you are, doesn't make them wrong - much less an asshole.

 

I don't think that I'm hardcore, nor do I think my style of play is hardcore. I don't kill others to put it in my next montage, and I don't plan on going to Dreamhack or MLG for the DayZ National Championship. I play the game how I want to play it because I think it is fun, and what is an isn't "fun" is completely subjective. I don't understand how this is a difficult concept.

 

False.  I have met players and given them stuff for free.   

 

 

KoS is lame.  If you don't trust someone, just give them some space and leave and everyone  wins.

 

 

Plus if you kill someone for food, you will destroy the food with your bullets.   

 

As I have said before, just because you play the game a certain way, doesn't mean that the vast majority of players don't play the game that same way. Just because you give food freely to other players, doesn't mean that 90% of other players will do the same. This is a psychological instance known as "availability heuristic".

 

Whether or not killing other players on sight is lame is irrelevant. It's a style of play, and nothing you or I can say will prevent people from playing the game how they want to play it.

 

In my brief experience with the SA, it doesn't seem that killing players damages the food - if it does, that would be a slight incentive to not kill people for the food and drink they carry.

[sobieski12 835]

No offense, but since the majority of DayZ vet players are running around with M4s. I'm not going to bother trying to talk them down, I'll just snipe every single one with the mosin nagant. 

Edited December 19, 2013 by Sobieski12

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

the game is supposed to eventually get around to being a simulation

 

Says who? Where?

 

not everyone has a ready made group

 

No, but everyone is entirely capable of finding and joining one.

 

It actually get more tense when it isn't because you never know when it could turn into that.

 

Which is precisely where your argument falls apart. Encounters with players are only intense because, most often, they involve an attempt to KoS. If most encounters with players were nonviolent, the game would cease to have the same level of tension and drama.

Edited December 19, 2013 by ZedsDeadBaby

[Illiad 22]

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.

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.

That's just it... with multiple survivor groups, it IS war.  It's us, or everyone else...  I'd rather it be everyone else.

[Illiad 22]

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.

if 50% of the population in game is friendly... hell, even 98%, I would rather kill you than fall victim to the 2% that will kill me.  Simple as that.

[mercules 1290]

Says who? Where?

 

 

No, but everyone is entirely capable of finding and joining one.

 

 

Which is precisely where your argument falls apart. Encounters with players are only intense because, most often, they involve an attempt to KoS. If most encounters with players were nonviolent, the game would cease to have the same level of tension and drama.

 

No, knowing I am going to shoot someone is not intense. It is the opposite of intense. There is 0% intensity involved in it. It is an "Oh shit!" moment but that is about it and after a lot of "Oh shit!" moments they all tend to become, "Oh shit... *sigh*" moments really quick.

 

When I meet with someone and extend the "friendly" offer or start a trade with someone I don't know what is going to happen... at all... 

When I start a firefight or someone else does there are things that will be done or I will die. Sometimes people flank you, but in this game with 3rd person it is basically, drive each other into cover, wait... wait... wait... he got impatient and shoot him. 

[kragz 156]

The majority of your post is, "You agree with me, huh?" Which was a Strawman. 

No, you're clearly, once again, bringing up a red herring to ignore the points I made. You are being intellectually dishonest. 

 

Please address the following points, for the third time, with regards to your argument about KOS attitude:

 

Kills can be logged with a pen.

Educate yourself on Maslow.

No respawns is a bad idea.

 

Thanks.

[Illiad 22]

I guess most of you don't understand survival then. A group is better equipped to survive than individuals which is the how and why society formed in the first place. You don't end up with groups when you shoot at everyone you meet. You are actually actively going against your own best interests for survival. Now trusting everyone is stupid almost as stupid as trusting no one. 

EXACTLY!  MY group is better suited to survive than a group of nameless randoms we dont' know or give two shits about.  If you aren't in my clan, aren't part of the wolf pack, you are KoS.  Simple.  There's too much risk involved in letting you live, because your survival in our vicinity COULD be detrimental to OUR group.