.

[leomentheus 0]

 

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by leomentheus

[Munchermanjz 36]

I personally haven't though of a solution to server hopping, its a difficult issue to solve. Combat logging however, can be fixed by adding a delay to the logout process, a player cannot move and can die while logging out and it isn't instant.

 

Sleepers would require the contained server. Else all players would be vulnerable on all servers on that hive meaning the hive system is rendered useless. However, unless you hosted your own server or servers limited the amount of players who could ever join that server, you'd be hurting players. Servers will only be able to support so many people at one time, and if it is full, that player would no longer be able to play the character he/she wants to until someone else quit. This means a player could be under attack and unable to log in to do something about it. Theres no way around that problem either. If you built a 2 story building ans sleep on the top floor, but could join a different server due to your original being full, then where would you be? you couldn't have the whole structure come with you, else buildings would just appear and disappear all over. Yes this solves server hopping, but it would punish DayZ players more than server hoppers do.

 

Theres also the issue that in DayZ, a shelter isn't something a new player is expected to come by, meaning things like the soon to be added cold mechanic would kill players overnight unless they had a shelter, most of which have zombies nearby. The only safe places would be random sheds that dot the landscape, but not only would finding one just to log out take too long, but they would be a common target for bandits to kill/loot. I could add more, poke more holes in the idea but I think this is already overwhelming as is.

I give you credit, it was a good though, but in practice... well lets just say theres a reason you had to say:

 

                   "Rust and DayZ are both post-apocalyptic survival games, but that is largely where their similarities end."

 

Rust and DayZ are different, too different in design once you get into the details that these things just can't be implemented on DayZ without harming both the player and the game. Combat logging and the other similar problems regarding logout could be fixed just by adding a delay to the logout process, however server hopping is a much more difficult thing to tackle. There might be a solution out there, but this just isn't it.

[phoboss 224]

Has been discussed before. Staying inside the game world is the dumbest idea somebody ever had while making a game like this. 

For one simple reason. It forces you to play frequently. Even with housing, they would be destructible, which means, if you go offline long enough, someone will come and destroy it. So if I build me a nice little house for a couple of hours and then go on vacation for 2 weeks, not only will the house be gone, my char will be dead as well.

 

So in short, this will NEVER happen, and if it will, people will go ape shit!

 

I do not get why anyone would like this... It forces me to play daily, if I want my char to survive. So I have to come online and check my house for damage, and repair it if necessary. If I don't it will get destroyed and I couldn't do anything to stop it, aside from coming online every day.

Edited January 20, 2014 by phoboss

[Jaybopper 49]

I like the ideas simply for their "realism" factor but I have to agree with Munchermanjz and phoboss

[Vector636 30]

They have done the same thing in Epoch and Origins with buildings and it worked. The issue with new players not having shelters and being at the whim of the elements was solved in the mod, with items like heat packs and being able to build fires.

[phoboss 224]

They have done the same thing in Epoch and Origins with buildings and it worked. The issue with new players not having shelters and being at the whim of the elements was solved in the mod, with items like heat packs and being able to build fires.

It worked? Like hell it did!

Sorry, but Origins approach to this was HORRIBLE at best. First off, you couldn't destroy buildings, so that was a plus, but you had to log in every 10 days to access your house in order to "save" it. So when I wen't on a 3 week vacation I had to extract my ArmA 2 and ArmA 2 OA keys out of my registry and give them to a friend so he could access my account and save my house for me while I was away.... 

Explain to me, how this is a good approach?!

 

And while I do think there will be no way around destructible housing I still think it's a bad idea. You can't defend your base while offline, and it's just not fair to people who don't have time to come online every day. And also it's totally unrealistic. In real life, if there were an apocalypse and me and my friends settled down somewhere in the world, build a base and started living there. There would ALWAYS be someone to watch over it at all times (or at least in the vicinity). But in the game we have to go offline at some point. Thus rendering the base defenseless. And not because we're to stupid to defend it, or we got killed while trying, but simply because we're a sleep, at work, on vacation or what ever. 

So unless your character becomes a NPC while your offline who defends your base for you (which will never happen, because rocket doesn't want NPCs in DayZ), I don't think its the right way to go. I at least need to have a chance to defend it (me). I have no problem with losing my stuff if I had a chance to save it. But if I'm at work and someone simply shoots my house to peaces because no one is around, it's a horrible idea. 

Destructible yes, but not while your offline. 

Edited January 20, 2014 by phoboss

[Molaram 0]

Possibly too late to influence things, but I hope DayZ doesn't ever get the capacity to build your own buildings. For me that is totally unrealistic, and would negatively impact the feel of the game. Why would you build your own building when you don't have months of time, probably don't have house-building skills, and in any case you live in a world that should be full of abandoned buildings? Creating your own buildings would change the feel of the game completely - its not city building game, its a scavenge and stay alive and interract with people (either by talking or shooting) game. It feels like the first month or two after the infection starts. If players could start building stuff and making guild-like towns and whatever, it would feel more like a year or two after the infection, when things are less chaotic and new stable social structures are being created. Less about surviving the chaos, and more about taming the chaos. Meh.

I don't like the idea of sleepers, don't like the idea of players being able to "own" more than what is on their backs and in their pockets.

[phoboss 224]

Possibly too late to influence things, but I hope DayZ doesn't ever get the capacity to build your own buildings. For me that is totally unrealistic, and would negatively impact the feel of the game. Why would you build your own building when you don't have months of time, probably don't have house-building skills, and in any case you live in a world that should be full of abandoned buildings? Creating your own buildings would change the feel of the game completely - its not city building game, its a scavenge and stay alive and interract with people (either by talking or shooting) game. It feels like the first month or two after the infection starts. If players could start building stuff and making guild-like towns and whatever, it would feel more like a year or two after the infection, when things are less chaotic and new stable social structures are being created. Less about surviving the chaos, and more about taming the chaos. Meh.

I don't like the idea of sleepers, don't like the idea of players being able to "own" more than what is on their backs and in their pockets.

While I do agree, that it's somewhat unrealistic that you would start building your own house, when the world is full of abandoned ones, it gives people something to do. And endgame content is something the original mod was always lacking. 

I'd like it a lot more if you could "claim" a house somewhere and fortify it against enemies. But that would bring all kinds of new problems with it.

[Vector636 30]

Having your base be destroyed is just apart of the game yes it does suck but it happens. I believe Epoch had the same thing where you had to maintain your building in a similar way, but they fixed it where you did not have to. I know Rust is a different game but like Epoch they had destructible buildings and I think it works. Breaking in is just a question of how prepared the owner has made the defenses and how determined the burglar/anarchist is. Although I don't think rocket is too keen on "above ground" player buildings but he was not to hash on maybe securing a building. He did throw around the idea of having a underground base as a separate instance that groups of players could build evil genius style.

 

In real life if no one is at your base, asleep or off doing something else and someone with ill intent comes knocking they wont go well no ones home I cant do anything I might as well leave. They would break in and steal/kill anything/anyone inside its bad and it sucks but it happens.

[phoboss 224]

Like I said, destructibility isn't my problem, the being offline part is. All realism aside, this is still a game, even if rocket sometimes thinks it's not. And people need to take brakes from games. And the effort I put into it, shouldn't be taken away from me, while I'm at work or asleep, when I have no way of defending or even knowing about it. That favors people who have more time to play more then it does those that don't.