How to make more Epic PvP Moments

[Serrath 0]

Two deaths in thirteen are murders. That seems like a pretty good figure to me. A lot of folks are saying bandits are out of control, but them's clearly not the facts. (If you disagree, please do so elsewhere, I would like for this to be a place to contribute ideas, not debate gameplay. That can be done in the appropriate forum.)

I'd like to open the discussion for ideas to improve the quality of PvP rather than trying to curb it. We want to create tense PvP situations where players are invested in their kills and in their life. Social tension, paranoia, desperation, you get the gist. You've all seen The Walking Dead. It's got zombies all over, but it's the social tension that really makes the show what it is. Same deal with Day Z. It's the player-player interactions fueled by this zombie apocalypse that make the best moments in the game.

It's THESE kind of moments I want to see more of. If 1/13 deaths is something as exciting as this, PvP's doing pretty damn well. It's the sniped-out-of-nowhere mechanic that doesn't really add much tension after a certain point. (Once you know to avoid places you can easily be sniped, that mechanic's reached its saturation point.)

THESE moments:

http://imgur.com/a/6SEcl

You get the gist. This is good PvP. This is what we love. So how do we make this happen more?

My thoughts:

1) More Cooperative Goals (i.e. Blood transfusions, vehicles, etc.)

2) Create a need for partnership from the get-go. (Transfusions, outnumbered by zombies, etc.)

I'd really like it if everyone in the community could give a quick idea or two here to improve the PvP experience. I'm not talking about nerfing weapons or punishing bandits, you get what we're after. Think subtle mechanics!

[Reaps 22]

I think the PVP, is the larger part of what the games all about, some very good little clips, not too sure about the betrayal clips, as this is kinda the opposite of "good" pvp moments. (imo)

It's a tough one to go for. I'm completely against any nerf in regards to bandits/Survivors. They are a must have element of the game. It's what keeps you dying and restarting to do it all over again. It's the apocalypse life cycle.

The problem we're facing is the co-op element of the game is hugely diluted now, because the "betrayal" is so rife. We've had several ways to distinguish who's friend or foe in dayz so far, and due to the mechanics of the game. They have all been slightly flawed. Now it's not because the ideas were bad, and there are some very creative ones going around the forums. I really like the heartbeat at the moment, very eerie but they have to be taken with a pinch of salt. I ended up a bandit very quickly (when there were bandit skins @ low humanity) through no fault of my own. Came out a barn, couple of guys shot at me, missed. I returned fire and blam. Hello bandit Skin.

What I'm getting at is without the ability to distinguish murders from self-defence, there's no way to distinguish bandits from survivors. Without that, we have 50 people with a "better him/her than me" trigger finger which generally means very little to no Co-op.

Fix? I'm not sure there is a solid way to change peoples play style, or instil Trust. Nor do i know if there should be. I see the Pros and cons for not knowing whos good vs bad. But i see a lot of get rid of bandits posts, so there's obviously demand for change. I've gone down the teams route in my suggestion in my sig. But regretfully the only way to do that logically is to remove the ability to backstab (directly; You could still lure people into traps.)

Back on post.

1) More co-op goals: not sure what, how, why or how many people.

The more the better really. If there's more things you simply can not do alone, you have to take the chance and team up. This would not dilute the pvp in anyway and may take the action elsewhere than the NWAF/Cherno/Electro/Sobor(s)/Berizi. It would cover your 2nd point too.

+1 to many, many more co-op elements.

But what co-op elements could be added, that doesnt drastically leave the lone wolves out there at a huge dissadvantage, but is enough of an incentive to have people want to do it. It needs to be a fairly big carrot to swing people from shooting each other in the face, to working together for the spoils.

[Serrath 0]

Really, without betrayal, there's no tension. The co-op dynamic is great, but part of what makes it so interesting in Day Z is the tension between players, the paranoia that creeps up. "Is he going to shoot me in the back for my beans/ammo?"

However, casual betrayal, along the lines of, "I wonder if he's got an extra clip for my pistol. I'll wager one bullet into the back of his skull that he does..." is uninteresting. People should be betraying one another because they're desperate, not out of idle curiosity.

I don't want to punish bandits, I don't want a method for establishing trust. I want more reasons to cooperate and more reasons to betray people. I want to add to the tension, and make your heart pound every step your buddy takes. He's a godsend, and you're a godsend to him, but the temptation to plunder...

[outlawxxable 10]

those videos didn't seem like good pvp at all. the first 3 are just friends killing each other?

[UbiquitousBadGuy 846]

My thoughts:

1) More Cooperative Goals (i.e. Blood transfusions' date=' vehicles, etc.)

2) Create a need for partnership from the get-go. (Transfusions, outnumbered by zombies, etc.)

[/quote']

These aren't necessarily exclusive to pvp-centric attitudes. Indeed many pv...z'rs have been wanting more cooperative goals to encourage ad hoc alliances in game instead of resorting to killing. That doesn't make them bad suggestions, they help both playstyles equally, but thinking about Pvp only benefits is going to take some creative and hard thinking without resorting to gamey mechanics.

[Reaps 22]

Really' date=' without betrayal, there's no tension. The co-op dynamic is great, but part of what makes it so interesting in Day Z is the tension between players, the paranoia that creeps up. "Is he going to shoot me in the back for my beans/ammo?"

However, casual betrayal, along the lines of, "I wonder if he's got an extra clip for my pistol. I'll wager one bullet into the back of his skull that he does..." is uninteresting. People should be betraying one another because they're desperate, not out of idle curiosity.

I don't want to punish bandits, I don't want a method for establishing trust. I want more reasons to cooperate and more reasons to betray people. I want to add to the tension, and make your heart pound every step your buddy takes. He's a godsend, and you're a godsend to him, but the temptation to plunder...

[/quote']

On reflection, you're sort of right. Moments where you have that weird alliance but doubt in the back of your mind are a huge buzz. However, they are few and far between simply because of the rest of your post.

People aren't working together to the point of "hmmm he's got an alice pack, that would look so much better on me" BLAM. Currently, it's almost never happening. Simply because people have seen said videos and shoot first, cause hey. They'll only shoot me when i get something they want, Right?!

We need a way to keep that tension of should i trust this guy? but also give you the security (perhaps a false sense of security). There's far more devious ways to kill someone than pulling the trigger yourself.

As UbiquitousBadGuy posted, the co-op changes will benefit ALL players, not just the pvp. depending on the co-op elements it may become a new hotspot for the pvp to take place.

[(gp)echo 0]

It's the sniped-out-of-nowhere mechanic that doesn't really add much tension after a certain point. (Once you know to avoid places you can easily be sniped' date=' that mechanic's reached its saturation point.)

[/quote']

Although I agree with the spirit of your post, and appreciate the intent of this thread (i.e. pvp is essential to the Day Z experience), I strongly disagree with the thought above.

Snipers play a vital role in enhancing the tension everyone is describing. The NWAF is a very dangerous place. Standing out in the open produces an amazing sense of isotropic fear; it is precisely this fear of the unknown marksman on the hill, in the forest, or on the building that prevents you from climbing that tower, or crossing the runway, without a care in the world.

Besides, if the sniper is good enough to land a shot at 900m, they have earned their kill. Removing these weapons, or nerfing snipers in general, is a terrible way to improve the pvp experience.

[Serrath 0]

You're absolutely right, and I agree with you. Let me explain myself better:

Snipers DO add tension, and it's important up to a point. Once a certain % of your deaths are due to snipers, that tension stops building. You need enough sniper-related deaths that you're paranoid about that, but then stop; more sniper deaths doesn't add more tension once that particular flavor of paranoia's set in. I'm not suggesting any weapon nerfs; I want snipers to continue sniping just as they were.

[matt.gilmurray@gmail.com 46]

Yes to more Epic pvp no to more frequent pvp.

[Bo0G 7]

I think that something as loud as a sniper rifle should draw zombies from klicks around. This would be a good and realistic way to prevent snipers camping an area from 500M out indefinitely.

When a marksman rifle is fired, high probability proc to spawn a few zombies at min distance with a patrol path leading to where the weapon was fired. At least this would force the sniper to stay mobile.

[Serrath 0]

I'd love to see loud weapons like the Lee Enfield draw in large numbers of zombies from all directions if fired repeatedly from one area. (Maybe spawn them out of visual range and have them slowly creep in as if they've been around all along.)

Something like that would really give the world a great feel. Start a thread for it!