Knowledge exchange: Dynamic bandit / hero recognition

[GodOfGrain 191]

Introduction

 

Ok, on one hand there is the problem how to measure "good" or "bad" behaviour.

I don't have a satisfying solution for that.

 

But as a working method let's say we have a basic system which records PvP behavior:

- Killing good guys results in negative humanity

- Killing bad guys results in positive humanity

- Killing noone results in a gradual increase of humanity

- No exploitable "humanity via medical assitance" - stuff

- Avoid the situation where 1 or 2 kills in selfdefense result in being marked a bandit. The system should record for a longer time before giving another indication than neutral.

 

How to differentiate players based on humanity values?

Obviously, giving bandits a black hat does not suffice the community's quality standarts.

 

We had this heartbeat-system which had some potential. Something like that is good enough, although it should also provide a positive feedback when looking at a player with positive humanity. It is important though that this system does not help in spotting players! Information would only be available once in a certain distance, probably dependent on whether you use a scope or not to watch a player.

 

Ok, after this basic stuff, my idea:

 

A social mechanic of bandit / hero recognition

 

It is indeed unrealistic to have some god-given knowledge about who is the good guy and who is the bad guy.

 

But I think there is a realistic concept which offers distinct advantages:

 

The word-of-mouth:

Civilized, friendly people would exchange information about others in the vicinity, about that crazy bastard in the hills who slaughtered Billy and Jane over a can of beans.

 

How to simulate that in DayZ?

Give players the opportunity to sit together and exchange such knowledge.

If you are next to another player you could use the "chat for a while" option. If the other player agrees, both or multiple characters sit down on the ground. A small progress bar is displayed, and after one minute the process is finished: Players have exchanged knowledge about who is dangerous and who is trustworthy.

 

The system could be quite simple: If you never talk to anyone, you have no idea who is good or bad. The system would not provide any information when looking at another player.

 

Once you have talked to one or two other players, your knowledge increses to a certain point.

a ) the "signal" (visual or audio) increases in strength, easier to observe

b ) the max distance to receive the signal (player to player) increases

 

You would need to talk to about 7 other players to have the maximum of information about other players (strength of signal / distance). This information degenerates over time, resulting in the need for continued social interaction.

 

For the system to become useful it has to be a bit unrealistic. You should get a signal (e.g. heartbeat) from quite large distances, e.g. 50 meters or 100/150 meters with a scope. Otherwise it becomes obsolete, if you have to get into handshake-distance. That is a bit gamey, but... I think it is worth it.

 

 

How to prevent that (bandit) clans spread information among themselves?

 

First, it would require a certain amount of people to reach full information; perhaps after talking to like seven other people within a couple of days would result in full information.

 

Second, the system should monitor to whom you speak. Information obtained by speaking to people you have spoken to before (one time, two times, ten times) is reduced. Information obtained by the same person increases again after some time of course. In short, it should be possible to have a system which identifies groups and group members; sharing information among group members should have limited effect.

 

Bandits should benefit from the system just as well as "good guys" - but of course they will find it more difficult to find conversation partners. They can force others of course to agree to the conversation.

 

 

Why?

 

First, we need some form of differentiation between good or bad players.

 

Second, we need reasons for social interaction. Right now, you gain nothing if you approach a stranger - only risk.

This system would provide an incentive to approach people outside of your group.

 

Third, it is an incentive to play as a "good guy", as bandits will find it more difficult to obtain this valuable information. [Although they don't need this information as much as they shoot everything anyway]

 

Fourth, I think it would be an interesting game element. You have to approach a player, gain his trust, then perform this "ritual" of sitting down. During the progress of exchanging information (simulated), you can also have a nice conversation, about the wheather for example :)

Edited February 12, 2014 by GodOfGrain

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

You say we need this, you don't really explain why it has to be foolproof or an omnipresent aura.

It's a cruch, it's just bad, heroes vs bandits is such a Disney-like simplification.

 

What do you do of people who will decide on a coin flip whether they are gonna give you food, water and protection or lure you in a corner to terminate you like a dog?

 

There is no such thing as "evil" and "good" people. People don't simply do harmful things all the time (or good things all the time). And those systems disregard the subjectivity of the situation, which is why you got killed:

• Fun, sport, sadism.
• Opportunism, pragmatism.
• Revenge, anger, spite.
• Fear, despair.
• Chaos, entropy, mistake.

Edited February 12, 2014 by Lady Kyrah

[GodOfGrain 191]

Yea, it is a bit Disney-like, the good versus the bad.

 

But from a design perspective, it just enriches the game. It makes certain playstyles viable which cannot exist otherwise (hero, bandit hunter). Than this game element of sitting together and exchange information...

 

And such information is of course no guarantee... hero can still shoot ya...

But even with such a basic system of counting kills you can reliably differentiate between a typical PvP player and a pacifist.

Combined with the above system of knowledge exchange you also have a realistic concept why you have this information.

Edited February 12, 2014 by GodOfGrain

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Yea, it is a bit Disney-like, the good versus the bad.

 

But from a design perspective, it just enriches the game. It makes certain playstyles viable which cannot exist otherwise (hero, bandit hunter). Than this game element of sitting together and exchange information...

 

And such information is of course no guarantee... hero can still shoot ya...

But even with such a basic system of counting kills you can reliably differentiate between a typical PvP player and a pacifist.

Combined with the above system of knowledge exchange you also have a realistic concept why you have this information.

It's not that it can't exist, it is just really hard, real life hard. You can check Gandhi's biography, exemplary life, but beaten, imprisoned and finally murdered.

 

"True heroes" are far from the "good murderers" portrayed by movies. (yeah when a good guy kill a bad guy it's still murder)

[igotrage 47]

*cough* Alliance, Horde *cough*

[GodOfGrain 191]

PvP all day, no differentiated gaming experience *cough*

[fundan@gmx.de 82]

NO. Re-suggestion 10000000000 times. and NO!

[Monkfish (DayZ) 339]

NO. Re-suggestion 10000000000 times. and NO!

This. A hero/bandit detection/awareness system using humanity or some other shit like that gets posted practically every day.

 

@ OP> It is impossible to write game code that would understand the context of every single situation you find yourself in, and you want to make a system that bases itself on this interaction, with all its subtleties and people's vagaries thrown in? Behave. You judge people by their behaviour and how they present themselves to you. If you make a bad judgement and die, deal with it.

[GodOfGrain 191]

I actually haven't played since mod-days, so I am not butthurt.

 

Stop defending a system which is not working.

The game needs elements which facilitate social interaction and reduce PvP.

 

Btw, I am quite sure that this suggestion was not made before. Perhaps you just read the title?