The one and only Anti-PVP/PvP Discussion thread! Whine/discuss here!

[Nighthawk4 3]

TBH I liked the PvP. it's a post-apocalyptic world, everyone on it's own. it scares me when I hear gunshots, so usually I don't go to places where I might see other people.

And please don't make other things like blood transfusions. I'm a lone-wolf for a reason. I don't want some random dude show up -who knows i'm low on blood- and i HAVE to trust him and hope he's not just here to shoot me. The blood transfusion is an essential thing, so that can stay, but I don't like having other mechanics like that.

so, really, I think it's fine as it is. It adds to the experience in my opinion. when you're crawling through zombies (or at least, when you still could) and you hear gunshots, you can't move anywhere fast, so you freak out, which may cause you to make an error and die. all part of the palm-sweating fun :).

EDIT: Also, This is the sort of realism I want. It should not be higher just for the sake of realism. I think Rocket has found a nice balance between realism and fun, though he may be screwing it up by removing side chat and the lot.

[Legacy (DayZ) 1091]

The idea of PvP is nice and all, not knowing who to trust or if you should shoot that guy that is looting another players body...

[sandorski 17]

The Zombies have killed our Family and Friends and now many of our fellow Survivors have turned into murderous Bandits. Now more than ever,

Perhaps a Clan(s) could counter act these things?

[Never 237]

Do we really need another thread on this when a number of the others are actually doing the job quite well?

[SCHOLAR 9]

Here is my constructive suggestion for the day.

Stop trying to force morality into the game. Even if morality was forced in the game' date=' the only consequences to morality are socially constructed. When there is no police or government, there are no consequences. Most moral consequences that aren't part of social constructs are religious, and I don't think people are worried about going to hell in game. (Debug forest maybe). I suppose another consequence of acting "immoral" would be that everyone hates you and doesn't want to help you, which as a bandit is already the case. You shoot at people, people start to shoot back.

What this game needs is Amoral solutions that benefit all players no matter what their "moral preference" is. Mechanics that make the game interesting and fair for everyone is what we need.

[/quote']

The only consequences to morality are socially constructed??? what a pile of shite, Neitzsche's dead dude, stop the nonsensical rants

[Disgraced 1123]

I would prefer if there was a better way to communicate in game besides typing. Channel based radios have been mentioned.

I would like to find a radio and start trying to hear if anyone is on any channels. Listen for a bit, to see what they're up to.

Maybe I would hunt those people, or maybe ask to join them. We could then coordinate effectively.

[istari766 0]

The only consequences to morality are socially constructed??? what a pile of shite' date=' Neitzsche's dead dude, stop the nonsensical rants

[/quote']

It's true.

If society fell apart, I could kill someone without risk of consequence. I might feel guilty about it if I thought you were innocent. But humans have a way of justifying to themselves terrible things under bad circumstances. And I'm certain that zombie apocalypse qualifies as bad circumstances.

No bogey man is going to come and get me. Maybe someone who was close to the friend who witnessed it and identified might come after me seeking revenge. Which is fine, and that can happen in game right now.

Believe it or not people do not simply fall apart when they kill someone. Especially when killing with guns, when you shoot someone from a distance it's not as big of a deal. It becomes more traumatic if your melee fighting and you can see all of their reactions. But picking someone off at 300m, little to no reaction at all.

[sandorski 17]

The only consequences to morality are socially constructed??? what a pile of shite' date=' Neitzsche's dead dude, stop the nonsensical rants

[/quote']

It's true.

If society fell apart, I could kill someone without risk of consequence. I might feel guilty about it if I thought you were innocent. But humans have a way of justifying to themselves terrible things under bad circumstances. And I'm certain that zombie apocalypse qualifies as bad circumstances.

No bogey man is going to come and get me. Maybe someone who was close to the friend who witnessed it and identified might come after me seeking revenge. Which is fine, and that can happen in game right now.

Believe it or not people do not simply fall apart when they kill someone. Especially when killing with guns, when you shoot someone from a distance it's not as big of a deal. It becomes more traumatic if your melee fighting and you can see all of their reactions. But picking someone off at 300m, little to no reaction at all.

Agreed, pretty much why a Clan or organized Group is the solution to rampant Banditry.Call it an interim Government.

[yedrellow 0]

I really like pvp, but I understand there are some issues with it. Personally, I have never been killed by a zombie since I have started playing this game, but have probably been killed by players about 8 times or so. I have also been the bandit, mostly because of opportunism and paranoia rather than direct malice (eg cherno snipers). I don't hunt players, so I don't have a ridiculous amount of murders, but probably kill 4 players for every death, which isn't so bloodthirsty because I generally live quite a long time (a week+).

I mentioned that just because I believe that there are a lot of the people in this middle ground, who would probably have a similar sentiment.

The truth is that player hunters have a massive advantage over the general average solo northern survivor. Hunters can not be hunted due to cross server persistence, so there is no use in creating a survivor militia to hunt the people you regularly see in sniping videos. This means that nothing other than other player hunters can prevent the average murder count for these guys reaching 20+.

This, compounded with tents and the ever increasing accumulation of the previously rare night vision goggles in to the hands of these players means that it's very difficult to kill off the threat. As even if you succeed at great disadvantage at killing them, they can grab more equipment from their previous encampments, while you have to work back up from the torch.

I am not saying that it should be easier for a regular survivor, after all, no matter what you do, it will always be a hell of a lot easier to sit in a forest overlooking a common entrance point to Stary Sobor and kill players, than it is to approach the tents themselves with the intention of looting them, and surviving.

In a hypothetical non-cross server persistent dayZ, a player as long as he stays on the server can be hunted and areas can be secured from bandits. Similarly, in a hypothetical dayZ without simple item storage, the bandit would have to start again with a torch, just like everyone else.

In the absence of the removal of cross server persistence/item storage, it would be great to have something like ACE style mechanics to make sniping harder. However, the absolute most important thing to level the playing field involves changing bullet damage back to default arma 2 pvp values. This way, snipers still one hit, as they practically do already, but people with less accurate assault rifles, like akms are still a threat to them as long as they manage return fire. Body shots from assault rifles should not be shrugged off.

TLDR: Player hunting snipers are overpowered due to low bullet damage, cross-server persistence, item storage and ease of sniping.

[SCHOLAR 9]

The only consequences to morality are socially constructed??? what a pile of shite' date=' Neitzsche's dead dude, stop the nonsensical rants

[/quote']

It's true.

If society fell apart, I could kill someone without risk of consequence. I might feel guilty about it if I thought you were innocent. But humans have a way of justifying to themselves terrible things under bad circumstances. And I'm certain that zombie apocalypse qualifies as bad circumstances.

No bogey man is going to come and get me. Maybe someone who was close to the friend who witnessed it and identified might come after me seeking revenge. Which is fine, and that can happen in game right now.

Believe it or not people do not simply fall apart when they kill someone. Especially when killing with guns, when you shoot someone from a distance it's not as big of a deal. It becomes more traumatic if your melee fighting and you can see all of their reactions. But picking someone off at 300m, little to no reaction at all.

Anyways, whatever, I could right a thesis on why you're wrong, but lets leave it at this, it's a game, and no matter what the fact... it remains a GAME and that is the final criteria for my actions. One day I"m friendly, one day I'm not taking the risk but bottom line, it's a game and whatever philosophical or sociological leanings one has as their convictions, this is only a game and seeing it as any more than this is a misread

[istari766 0]

The truth is that player hunters have a massive advantage over the general average solo northern survivor. Hunters can not be hunted due to cross server persistence' date=' so there is no use in creating a survivor militia to hunt the people you regularly see in sniping videos. This means that nothing other than other player hunters can prevent the average murder count for these guys reaching 20+.

[/quote']

I don't think that this is 100% true, if there was a survivor militia you could make protected servers. You could say this server is protected by the Survivor Militia, Bandits Beware. Kind of like Neighborhood Watch. While bandits could log on and off as they like. They would find it hard to be comfortable on a server where everyone is out to get them.

[SCHOLAR 9]

The truth is that player hunters have a massive advantage over the general average solo northern survivor. Hunters can not be hunted due to cross server persistence' date=' so there is no use in creating a survivor militia to hunt the people you regularly see in sniping videos. This means that nothing other than other player hunters can prevent the average murder count for these guys reaching 20+.

[/quote']

I don't think that this is 100% true, if there was a survivor militia you could make protected servers. You could say this server is protected by the Survivor Militia, Bandits Beware. Kind of like Neighborhood Watch. While bandits could log on and off as they like. They would find it hard to be comfortable on a server where everyone is out to get them.

man that's the perfect opportunity for a bandit, join the militia and then pick the militia off as a gunfight with another bandit ensues, perfect, bring on the militia

[peetgamer 10]

Players themselfs should deside to be eather RPK or ANTI its up to us players what we gonne do when you see a player KOS them all or not.

There should never be game maganics that deside how we should play thats why i like DayZ alot no more bloody carebear game pussy comfort zones its all HARDCORE you dont like it go play something else:)

[yedrellow 0]

The truth is that player hunters have a massive advantage over the general average solo northern survivor. Hunters can not be hunted due to cross server persistence' date=' so there is no use in creating a survivor militia to hunt the people you regularly see in sniping videos. This means that nothing other than other player hunters can prevent the average murder count for these guys reaching 20+.

[/quote']

I don't think that this is 100% true, if there was a survivor militia you could make protected servers. You could say this server is protected by the Survivor Militia, Bandits Beware. Kind of like Neighborhood Watch. While bandits could log on and off as they like. They would find it hard to be comfortable on a server where everyone is out to get them.

Explain to me how you're going to go about this. A militia, even if it is the majority of the server can not adequately defend from even a single bandit.

Let's take the extreme case, 49 players, all in the 'anti-bandito-vigilante-militia' and one bandit. The hypothetical bandit sniper is just going to pop in, moonlight as a survivor, take advantage of the requirement for an anti-bandit militia's requirement to id players, kill one player he thinks he can get away with and run off. Even if all other 48 players try to track him down, it doesn't matter, he can leave the server, join another one and he escapes all consequences for murder.

A police force of any kind can not work with cross-server persistence, considering the 'perp' can just quit the game or join another server.

DayZ will always be skewed towards the player hunting snipers, unless bullet damage is increased, persistence is removed, item storage is removed and shooting difficulty is increased, absolutely nothing will ever change.

[sandorski 17]

The truth is that player hunters have a massive advantage over the general average solo northern survivor. Hunters can not be hunted due to cross server persistence' date=' so there is no use in creating a survivor militia to hunt the people you regularly see in sniping videos. This means that nothing other than other player hunters can prevent the average murder count for these guys reaching 20+.

[/quote']

I don't think that this is 100% true, if there was a survivor militia you could make protected servers. You could say this server is protected by the Survivor Militia, Bandits Beware. Kind of like Neighborhood Watch. While bandits could log on and off as they like. They would find it hard to be comfortable on a server where everyone is out to get them.

Explain to me how you're going to go about this. A militia, even if it is the majority of the server can not adequately defend from even a single bandit.

Let's take the extreme case, 49 players, all in the 'anti-bandito-vigilante-militia' and one bandit. The hypothetical bandit sniper is just going to pop in, moonlight as a survivor, take advantage of the requirement for an anti-bandit militia's requirement to id players, kill one player he thinks he can get away with and run off. Even if all other 48 players try to track him down, it doesn't matter, he can leave the server, join another one and he escapes all consequences for murder.

A police force of any kind can not work with cross-server persistence, considering the 'perp' can just quit the game or join another server.

DayZ will always be skewed towards the player hunting snipers, unless bullet damage is increased, persistence is removed, item storage is removed and shooting difficulty is increased, absolutely nothing will ever change.

I suspect, in time, much of that will be addressed. One way would be to delete all Assets a Player has accumulated when they die.

[yedrellow 0]

I suspect' date=' in time, much of that will be addressed. One way would be to delete all Assets a Player has accumulated when they die.

[/quote']

Even that doesn't solve the problem, after all, it would only take one live player to keep a tent active for the rest of the players in his clan or teamspeak. The rest could die quite often, but with decent inventory management, the good equipment could always end back up at the encampment.

[istari766 0]

Anyways' date=' whatever, I could right a thesis on why you're wrong, but lets leave it at this, it's a game, and no matter what the fact... it remains a GAME and that is the final criteria for my actions. One day I"m friendly, one day I'm not taking the risk but bottom line, it's a game and whatever philosophical or sociological leanings one has as their convictions, this is only a game and seeing it as any more than this is a misread

[/quote']

I agree it is a game, and wonderful game it is. I'm only so adamant about my beliefs because I don't like the fact that people are trying to punish certain play styles because of what I think are untrue beliefs about humanity. This is a big part of the PvP discussion, which is why I've been so long winded about it. If we can all agree to ignore what people would or should be doing in a real life zombie apocalypse (a bit of a paradox), then we can move on to debating what mechanics work and don't work and how they would impact gameplay.

[gopher_p 1]

Maybe we can start by calling these people what they really are, murdering sociopaths, instead of allowing them to hide behind this bullshit bandit label. I find it a bit ironic that there are so many out there calling others "Care Bear" while pretend they're something that they're not. If you're not willing to own up to what you really are, then maybe you should reconsider your actions.

Bandits kill to survive. Murderers kill for the sake of it. Very few of the player kills in this game are for survival.

[Crosshair (DayZ) 0]

Here are my idea on how to discourage bandits.

For every zombie that a player kills a player gets more zombie scent on them so zombies have to get closer to them before sensing them. For every human a player kills they get more fresh human blood on them and so therefore zombies will detect them at longer and longer ranges. So the people who live as bandits will have a harder and harder time moving about the map without attracting large numbers of zombies. Players also will be encouraged to kill zombies to build their zombie scent, so they can move through more heavily infested areas, and perhaps even team up to do so.

This will make server hopping all the more dangerous for bandits because the server they hop into could have a group of 4 zombies in the bandits now massive zombie attraction zone.

Of course the ratio wouldn't be 1-to-1, killing one human player would perhaps require killing 2-4 zombies to undo. Easily within the abilities of a player who kills in self defense, but a major headache for a bandit. This could easily be implemented as it would just be an adjustment to an individual players visibility and noise stats.

I have not seen this idea elsewhere, let me know if it has been proposed before. Offer your own variants or balance ideas.

[istari766 0]

Explain to me how you're going to go about this. A militia' date=' even if it is the majority of the server can not adequately defend from even a single bandit.

Let's take the extreme case, 49 players, all in the 'anti-bandito-vigilante-militia' and one bandit. The hypothetical bandit sniper is just going to pop in, moonlight as a survivor, take advantage of the requirement for an anti-bandit militia's requirement to id players, kill one player he thinks he can get away with and run off. Even if all other 48 players try to track him down, it doesn't matter, he can leave the server, join another one and he escapes all consequences for murder.

A police force of any kind can not work with cross-server persistence, considering the 'perp' can just quit the game or join another server.

DayZ will always be skewed towards the player hunting snipers, unless bullet damage is increased, persistence is removed, item storage is removed and shooting difficulty is increased, absolutely nothing will ever change.

[/quote']

Well depending on how many people there are you could do several things. The easiest would be to limit your area of control. Obviously you cannot control the entire map, but perhaps you could protect Cherno and Elektro. You could put people in the town, and could also have scouts watching the tree lines for snipers and ambushes. There could be small two man teams that could be dispatched from a centralized location to deal with off site threats.

I also think that people need to be realistic about what areas should be safe. Anything military related excluding deer stands is going to be a very dangerous area. Military weaponry is designed for killing not survival, and that is what people who are seeking said weapons are going to do. So don't expect bases and airfields to be enemy free zones, if you want to raid them fine, but take a group, or be very careful.

[Crosshair (DayZ) 0]

Maybe we can start by calling these people what they really are' date=' murdering sociopaths, instead of allowing them to hide behind this bullshit bandit label. I find it a bit ironic that there are so many out there calling others "Care Bear" while pretend they're something that they're not. If you're not willing to own up to what you really are, then maybe you should reconsider your actions.

Bandits kill to survive. Murderers kill for the sake of it. Very few of the player kills in this game are for survival.

[/quote']

Very true.

[punisher_1 3]

It's a simple solution

If you play by yourself EVERYONE is a target!

Or you play with people you know.

You naturually would not murder everyone you seen in real life but this is not what the game mechanic intends you to do. Actually the game mechanic for communication or in game visual ques is removed or limited.

Even then somone can lie.

Short of the guy (s) you invited to play and know on TS or Vent thats all you can trust.

In short this is a player versus everyone game.

[Kageru 18]

The game will become what Rocket wants it to be. But at the moment it is far more about fans of free for all, full loot, PvP finding a game that supports their play style than it is about zombies. A realistic outcome of a zombie outbreak is not getting a sniper rifle, heading for a rooftop, and doing everything in your power to bring the survivors down to 1 unless the person was a psychopath to begin with.

I'd like to see some elements to control this without removing it entirely, because it does add tension, (my suggestion is here), but if you let the PK fans run rampant sooner or later that's all that will be left. And then they get bored due to lack of targets.

[Crosshair (DayZ) 0]

It's a simple solution

If you play by yourself EVERYONE is a target!

Or you play with people you know.

You naturually would not murder everyone you seen in real life but this is not what the game mechanic intends you to do. Actually the game mechanic for communication or in game visual ques is removed or limited.

Even then somone can lie.

Short of the guy (s) you invited to play and know on TS or Vent thats all you can trust.

In short this is a player versus everyone game.

Sounds to me like you're making excuses for going around being a bandit/sociopath. To me and the people I know personally, the point of the game has always been everyone against the zombies.

[logan23 118]

To solve the issue with killing on site you could-

You want players to team up but how do you do that without just making it so players team up for numbers and still leads to teams killing other players.....You could sprinkle through the game skills one can learn that would make you valuable in a team.

The idea is if you have a team of players and then they come across another player, the team might need someone skilled with medicine to help with their sickness/cold. This lone player might have this skill. If they shoot him on sight then they will never get the benefits. If they talk to the player and they have a skill medicine or maybe they don't but the conversation could lead to the team of players either getting /asking for his help or just leaving him alone since there is a face/voice/text with the Character/player they see in their scope.

I really believe that DayZ will need some type of skill system which can grow from exploring the land and locations. This would create a need for players to ask questions before shooting. A player who shoots on sight will then only be hurting themselves.

All players start off as survivors but then they can discover book/info that will open that skill to them. Even giving a blood transfusion should up or promote the medicine skill.

This makes players each more valuable.

what do you think?