Babies! (Well, society)

[KVCC 1]

This is a horrible idea, please don't add this into the game....

This isn't the Sims or Fable.

Babies aren't needed in a MILITARY simulation game..

Seriously?

[mcslaughter 14]

Remember kids, if you don't agree with him you're a narrow-minded nincompoop who has no future and is a complete ignoramus who has no capacity to function in society.

[7-75 callaghan 43]

I have a new favourite thing on this forum. The ignore function. I highly recommend it to anyone who responds to people who can't communicate basic ideas. Or who are just annoying trolls.

I can see that someone has responded, but cannot see what he has said.

Saves me time and my beautiful head of hair in one fell swoop.

:-)

[KVCC 1]

I have a new favourite thing on this forum. The ignore function. I highly recommend it to anyone who responds to people who can't communicate basic ideas. Or who are just annoying trolls.

I can see that someone has responded' date=' but cannot see what he has said.

Saves me time and my beautiful head of hair in one fell swoop.

:-)

[/quote']

Sucks being wrong doesn't it?

OP : *Covers ears* LALALALALALALLALA

Everyone else : lololol this idea SUCKS

[mcslaughter 14]

I have a new favourite thing on this forum. The ignore function. I highly recommend it to anyone who responds to people who can't communicate basic ideas. Or who are just annoying trolls.

I can see that someone has responded' date=' but cannot see what he has said.

Saves me time and my beautiful head of hair in one fell swoop.

:-)

[/quote']

This is sad. Anyone who doesn't agree with your suggestion is simply ignored and thrown out as if they're an idiot. Having a superiority complex isn't getting you anywhere, and it's just making you look like a jerk. You should grow up and learn how to respond to criticism.

[7-75 callaghan 43]

This is a horrible idea' date=' please don't add this into the game....

This isn't the Sims or Fable.

Babies aren't needed in a MILITARY simulation game..

Seriously?

[/quote']

ArmA 2, is a military simulation game. Which I most likely play with more realism than anyone on this forum, as I help run a group with the highest standards I know of.

DayZ, is not a military simulation, it is a rather arcadey (so far at least) Zombie Apocalypse simulator. These apocalypse scenarios involve the breakdown of society, and the threat of extinction of the human race. Therefore, efforts to reproduce are absolutely and indisputably central to the overall concept.

You need to understand what it is you are playing.

If it is military simulation you seek, you are playing the wrong mod.

I suggest you use what we use in my unit - ACE, ACRE, DSR AI, DAC, ST LB Enhancement and others.

DayZ is what I play for a bit of fun, much less testing than playing ArmA as it was designed to be played. It is intense yes, but to call it military simulation is a joke.

---

I have a new favourite thing on this forum. The ignore function. I highly recommend it to anyone who responds to people who can't communicate basic ideas. Or who are just annoying trolls.

I can see that someone has responded' date=' but cannot see what he has said.

Saves me time and my beautiful head of hair in one fell swoop.

:-)

[/quote']

This is sad. Anyone who doesn't agree with your suggestion is simply ignored and thrown out as if they're an idiot. Having a superiority complex isn't getting you anywhere, and it's just making you look like a jerk. You should grow up and learn how to respond to criticism.

Not at all, if you have constructive criticism to offer, then I will listen to it and respond. I only ignore trolls who clearly have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to social dynamics.

What is your constructive criticism when it comes to this suggestion?

So far I have only disregarded the following criticisms, for reasons that you can read in my previous posts. 'Not realistic', 'I don't want to bugger a dude man', 'this isn't the sims'.

And that is about it. None of those are insightful, or valid, yet I responded to them all in great detail and with a lot of patience anyway.

---

Besides, you only need to look at my other suggestions to see the difference between an adult discussion, and me responding to incoherent and poorly-thought-through brain farts delivered by people who simply don't know what they are talking about.

---

Specifically, I suggest looking at my Zombie infection suggestion thread, to see the difference between valid, and well-reasoned criticism, and my response to it, as opposed to the kind of -

'I dont want this f*ggy sh*t in mah game' or 'This adds nothing and is forced' (without being able to explain, over many, many posts, how).

If you had been in my shoes, and had to respond to the same mindless nonsense time and time again, you would get impatient and start ignoring people too.

---

And i'm still waiting for that constructive criticism from McSlaughter.

I guess he saw my other threads, understood what I was talking about when it comes to these people, and decided to leave quietly.

If you are out there McSlaughter, i'm waiting, and ready to respond.

[Gaidoon 19]

You seem to be going by on an assumption that just because something happens in real life it should happen in game. That's not what realism is about. If something is worthless to gameplay and immersion' date=' it's worthless to the game

This suggestion is just so forced and pointless

May I just ask, are you autistic?

[/quote']

Lol i know now you are a troll this game is a Real Life simulator it's based on real life why do you think we don't see zombies 20 ft high with massive claws it's because whenever someone suggests adding them in people rag on them for being unrealistic well if people Like being realistic so much they can't complain when you add all the components in. Also you can't argue against Callaghan he's not uneducated and can turn any argument you make against you with evidence and witty remarks.

[doom4mr 135]

just play SIMS...

[RobbL (DayZ) 26]

I've seen some of your other suggestions and they're quite decent (I commented on your thread about helis), but you must have had a massive brain fart when you came up this. Just accept this might not be a great idea and drop the superiority complex

[murhis 4]

The more you post the more this troll gets attention... Nobody seriously wants babies, sasquatches or fucking sexual anxiety in this game. SO PLEASE STOP IT NAOW!... :(

Edit: Just click 1 star and move along, that's what troll deserves!

[Gaidoon 19]

Callaghan i suggest Requesting an Admin to give any trolls who post here a warning If people Don't like an idea they can give an educated response telling why they like/Hate it, These idiots are children seeking attention by trolling an internet forum.

[RobbL (DayZ) 26]

Lol i know now you are a troll this game is a Real Life simulator it's based on real life why do you think we don't see zombies 20 ft high with massive claws it's because whenever someone suggests adding them in people rag on them for being unrealistic

Adding something which is impossible and stupid like the example you mentioned would obviously make the game unrealistic. Excluding something that happens in real life though wouldn't make the game any less realistic, especially when it's something that is irrelevant to existing mechanics.

Take Microsoft Flight Simulator for example, it's one of the most realistic flight simulator games out there. However, there's no feature that involves the pilot needing to leave the plane on autopilot or handing controlss over to a co-pilot every once in a while so he can pop to the toilet. Does that happen in real life? Yep. Does excluding it from the game make it unrealistic? Nope.

[Izziee 128]

OP, there's already enough to worry about thank you, last thing I want is for some horny bugger to try and stick it in my poop shoot. You realise night time can get quite dark?

[murhis 4]

Requested "educated" answer: I don't like the idea. It's not authentic, it's not giving anything. Have the OT thought like that little possibility that some people could just buy another copy of ARMA(especially when they are not that expensive) for just to get that buff from an opposite sex player. Which you could keep safely at some location. OR would you like to risk that buff for some random dude you face at open world? NO... you most likely would do this "reproducing" with some friend of yours. So you would be able to shoot other survivors no matter are they women or men if you desire. OR would you get a multiplied bonus if you reproduce with multiple females? That at least wouldn't be very fair for female players. So should I even continue with this ridiculousness?

Sorry I couldn't resist to reply...

[UbiquitousBadGuy 846]

Let's get back on track people, I rather not wade through a 12 page thread looking for comments to delete or posters to warn because of excessive trolling but I certainly will if I have to.

My personal opinion? I think that family dynamics is a bit out of the scope of this mod as we are are dealing with survival mechanics, not society rebuilding ones. Also long term goals seem a bit detracting to a game where death is so easily accomplished.

Still, as long as discussion is in earnest, I can't really justify closing a topic because it's a "weird" idea. Simply don't comment if you feel the idea has no merit.

[ravenger 10]

HAHAHAHAHAHA this thread made me lol. I would be open to the idea if arma actually had some attractive female models. All seriousness I see the point of having something to "do" but I would much rather have the devs do something else with the game. Like have the town idea or something. Many things they have yet to do.

[7-75 callaghan 43]

Requested "educated" answer: I don't like the idea. It's not authentic' date=' it's not giving anything. Have the OT thought like that little possibility that some people could just buy another copy of ARMA(especially when they are not that expensive) for just to get that buff from an opposite sex player. Which you could keep safely at some location. OR would you like to risk that buff for some random dude you face at open world? NO... you most likely at least would do this "reproducing" with some friend of yours and still you would shoot other survivors no matter are they women or men. OR would you get a multiplied bonus if you reproduce with multiple females? That at least wouldn't be very fair for female players. So should I even continue with this ridiculousness?

Sorry I couldn't resist to reply...

[/quote']

Finally, something pertaining to a serious response. But I addressed several of your gripes already. And although you claim an 'educated' response, you clearly do not know about several key issues that render this important in anything that seeks to be a post-apocalypse scenario.

Here is my response to your criticisms, although you might be given more credit by avoiding things like 'ridiculousness'.

1. What is not authentic about it? After having covered basic survival needs, everyone desires the elements represented by my mechanic.

I think this is about as authentic as it gets.

Please refer to Maslow's heirarchy of needs - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

This is widely accepted in some form of another by sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, and to a varying extent, geneticists.

The basic concept is that once basic physiological needs have been covered, which is incredible easy for a relatively patient/skilled/experienced player to achieve in the mod, (I only ever die when I get bored of having no end game content, and specifically go looking for trouble out of having absolutely nothing to do, and way too much food and, dare I say, comfort) safety is the next concern. Again, very easy for patient/skilled/experienced survivors to achieve. Surviving in the wilds is probably the easiest way to do it, and after having played the mod extensively, have never come across a serious player threat that my group could not defend itself against.

So, having covered these initial basic needs, what do most players turn to? Player killing, senseless, pointless player killing, not for survival, but out of boredom, having nothing else to do with their stacks of equipment, weapons, food etc.

What is needed is more end-game content to add depth and, reffering back to your (highly misplaced) claim of inauthenticity, let's refer back to the index of needs. What comes next? Oh, wow, what's this? 'Friendship, family, sexual intimacy'. I'll assume you are young, not meaning to play the age card, but most adults would not need a chart to understand this.

So, a clearly very authentic need, irrespective of the environmental context, so long as the first two tiers can be achieved.

The challenge for a developer/game modder like myself, is to then translate this highly authentic element into game terms. I would never claim that my suggestion is a great one, let alone a perfect one, but it is viable as a plastic and adaptable suggestion. PROVIDED, those involved in the discussion actually understand how games work, as well as the psychology that they affect. Unfortunately, most people here are just players, young ones at that, with little understanding of the arma community, and shouldn't really be in the discussion. Still, I have no right to exclude them, so I do my best to respond to their repetitive questions anyway.

Back on point - this clearly important and authentic need, should be translated into a game mechanic in some way. Which brings me onto point...

2. Buffs and the risk of exploitation.

This is a risk when introducing any new game mechanic, fact. And yes I have thought about the issues raised. That is the point of a suggestion thread, to develop a germinal idea into something usable and difficult if not impossible to exploit. As I have said, I prefer non material rewards, as I think that the game is too easy in the material sense. Hence the following suggested details, that not ONE person has thought to discuss: (and remember, these are initial, I am open to any change suggestions)

a. Cost vs benefit, risk assessment etc.

The female, while in the 'pregnant' stage, would require additional food and possibly other items, poss. meds that would be added. If she becomes infected, they fail in this challenge. This would make it clearly, end-game content, and not something people could do at any moment, just because they have a team.

The details of the mechanic, would have to be worked out, so that the reward makes the notion attractive (beyond intrigue which, I assure you, is enough for many players) but without making it something so good that it is worth the while of 'farming' type groups to use.

b. Balance, authenticity, and exploitation control. The mating pair, as mentioned in another post, is the basic unit of society. Now i'm sure I don't need to tell you about the 'birds and the bees', so why you mentioned 'multipliers' is just silly. As per real life, the woman could only be pregnant with the child of ONE male character at a time, but, the male could have several females. This is known as an alpha male, and should there be a player skilled enough to be able to provide enough food for so many women at a time, then I think it would be an excellent, and very funny dynamic. The pressure would be great, and enough to put the vast majority of players from attempting it at any one time. Currently, there are between 16-20% female players in the game, so this would not happen much if at all. The suggested mechanic, would cause a rise in the female players, but I suspect up to a maximum of a 25-35% limit.

The benefits, which have barely been discussed, let alone set in concrete, could not be 'stacked', as you are rightfully worried about. Because the only benefits I have suggested, which only a couple of people have had the intelligence to discuss, have involved either a slight maximum blood level increase, to represent the extension of their genetic line (as well as the increase in toughness that parenting invariably brings about), a skin change to represent social status, or perhaps a small material reward. Personally, my favourite idea was a combination of these, with the ability to name the child (not represented by an NPC or similar, unless people really want that), and then the ability to play as this child once your character dies. In adult form of course, as the engine has no children models. This would be represented by a semi-unique skin, the ability to change player gender once more, and possibly a random (or selected) inventory item from the father/mother.

You could reproduce with multiple females yes, but good luck finding that many, and as I said, because the risk is carried by the female more than the male, it is obvious that the male would have the hunter-gatherer role (what were you saying about authenticity again?). Making it difficult if not impossible to provide for more than one.

3. Foresight, even more gameplay related reasons, and other details.

Finally, the benefits would only be had if BOTH parties survive, for simple mechanic-balance reasons. Then again, this is just an idea, and someone may have a reasonable argument to counter that. This would develop stronger loyalties between players, add great depth and end-game content for truly skilled players, and form an excellent basis for many other additions, as said in the OP, such as the 'Liberate Town Mechanic', which would provide a safer environment for society formation.

Whether people succeed or not, is not my concern, it is the mechanic that is my concern, and one that adds a great deal to the game - not making it at all harder for new players who struggle to survive (one mentioned it would add another thing to worry about, but clearly it would not, it is merely an optional end-game challenge), but gives something to those like myself, who become bored out of their wits after a certain point, because aimless PvP is not what we play this mod for, there are a million other games and mods out there that do PvP if that is what I want.

Again, just ideas, don't run from them thinking they are set in concrete.

Is that a comprehensive and reasonable enough response to your criticisms?

---

Let's get back on track people' date=' I rather not wade through a 12 page thread looking for comments to delete or posters to warn because of excessive trolling but I certainly will if I have to.

My personal opinion? I think that family dynamics is a bit out of the scope of this mod as we are are dealing with survival mechanics, not society rebuilding ones. Also long term goals seem a bit detracting to a game where death is so easily accomplished.

Still, as long as discussion is in earnest, I can't really justify closing a topic because it's a "weird" idea. Simply don't comment if you feel the idea has no merit.

[/quote']

Please read my most recent post. I am doing my best to keep this discussion on track, and provide sincere and well-informed suggestions for the mod. At the end of the day, I don't mind if this particular mechanic is not introduced, but I think the reasons I state in my last post show that I understand the need and ways in which end game mechanics should be introduced. All I ask is that people try to discuss this as adults.

Also, death is not that easily accomplished :-)

My most recent survivor only died because I had so much ammo, food, loot and meds, and more in a stash, that I had nothing else to do but go looking for trouble. I decided to go bandit hunting, and was killed by a hacker.

And thank you, very sincerely, for reminding people that if they think this idea has no merit, they need not say anything. This place is for valid and well-reasoned criticism, not trolling.

[Gaidoon 19]

Let's get back on track people' date=' I rather not wade through a 12 page thread looking for comments to delete or posters to warn because of excessive trolling but I certainly will if I have to.

My personal opinion? I think that family dynamics is a bit out of the scope of this mod as we are are dealing with survival mechanics, not society rebuilding ones. Also long term goals seem a bit detracting to a game where death is so easily accomplished.

Still, as long as discussion is in earnest, I can't really justify closing a topic because it's a "weird" idea. Simply don't comment if you feel the idea has no merit.

[/quote']

Thank you for your honest opinion this thread is in dire need of moderation.

[murhis 4]

Requested "educated" answer: I don't like the idea. It's not authentic' date=' it's not giving anything. Have the OT thought like that little possibility that some people could just buy another copy of ARMA(especially when they are not that expensive) for just to get that buff from an opposite sex player. Which you could keep safely at some location. OR would you like to risk that buff for some random dude you face at open world? NO... you most likely at least would do this "reproducing" with some friend of yours and still you would shoot other survivors no matter are they women or men. OR would you get a multiplied bonus if you reproduce with multiple females? That at least wouldn't be very fair for female players. So should I even continue with this ridiculousness?

Sorry I couldn't resist to reply...

[/quote']

clip, clip clip... oh my lord...

Is that a comprehensive and reasonable enough response to your criticisms?

Certainly, but if you summarize the message you could have wrote the same message with a "little" less space and still it really didn't give the answers for the problems I addressed.

Lets start with your Maslow's hierarchy and authenticity. First of all I'd say it would be quite a poor investment to have a baby in a zombie infested land. At least for the surviving sake. I would guess your first goal would be to find some safe place to even consider the offspring. Obviously a woman who is carrying a child would slow you down, not to speak about the infant. So I don't really see reproducing as a high priority in such conditions. Hostile people, hostile zombies, scarce resources... very poor place for offspring or baby carrying women. So I don't really see this necessarily very authentic "feature".

Anyways the most crippling fact for this "feature" is that what it would mean for the gameplay. Like I already gave you very brief examples which would be a serious problems. The most ironic part is that this "feature" would actually hurt even more at those who are playing without a clan or other friends. Because of the very obvious reason which is that your survival chances are much better in an organized group than as a random player and thus making it more likely to survive as "couples" => having more blood whatsoever buff. Are you following me? Not to mention ARMA copies I mentioned. So you would be also able to buy this buff.

Could you clarify yourself a bit on a one point... You are saying at one paragraph that benefits won't stack but at other saying that ofcourse you can reproduce with multiple females, but good luck with it in food wise. Because if you can the problem I mentioned still exists. Male and female characters are unbalanced. Simple as that. Besides gathering food in this game isn't really a problem. Forests are full of game and ponds and wells everywhere.

My question still for you is that what this "feature" would really add to the game? Except an artificial buff when you touch the opposite sex player and I really like to put weight on the word GAME. Other "romanticism" about the feature in a gameplay wise is really non-existent.

Edit: When you are talking about non-material rewards I don't want to make you disappointed, but the benefit you are suggesting is practically a "material" bonus. Whether it's blood, toughness whatever... it's giving you something in the game. Which is physical in a "game wise".

[7-75 callaghan 43]

1. Lets start with your Maslow's hierarchy and authenticity. First of all I'd say it would be quite a poor investment to have a baby in a zombie infested land. At least for the surviving sake. I would guess your first goal would be to find some safe place to even consider the offspring. Obviously a woman who is carrying a child would slow you down' date=' not to speak about the infant. So I don't really see reproducing as a high priority in such conditions. Hostile people, hostile zombies, scarce resources... very poor place for offspring or baby carrying women. So I don't really see this necessarily very authentic "feature".

2. Anyways the most crippling fact for this "feature" is that what it would mean for a gameplay. Like I already gave you very brief examples which would be a serious problems. The most ironic part is that this would actually hurt even more at those who are playing without a clan or other friends. Because of the very obvious reason which is that your survival chances are much better in an organized group than as a random player and thus making it more likely to survive as "couples" => having more blood whatsoever buff. Are you following me? Not to mention ARMA copies I mentioned. So you would be also able to buy this buff.

Could you clarify yourself a bit on a one point... You are saying at one paragraph that benefits won't stack but at other saying that ofcourse you can reproduce with multiple females, but good luck with it in food wise. Because if you can the problem I mentioned still exists. Male and female characters are unbalanced. Simple as that. Besides gathering food in this game isn't really a problem. Forests are full of game and ponds and wells everywhere.

3. My question still for you is that what this "feature" would really add to the game? Except an artificial buff when you touch the opposite sex player and I really like to put weight on the word GAME. Other "romanticism" about the feature in a gameplay wise is really non-existent.

[/quote']

1. I have clarified this several times now. This stems from basic human need, not investment - it is endgame content to challenge the most experienced players. It is not about mathematical priority, it is a fundamental human need that overrides what you think may be otherwise important. In terms of individuals, especially inexperienced ones, yes, it may bring them down, especially the first attempt.

But in terms of genetics, it very much is in the group's interest. The individual is not important, basic genetics when it comes to social mammals.

For the capable player, it would be a big challenge, psychologically rewarding if they are able to pull it off.

As I have said, birth rates are higher in dangerous places, it has nothing to do with what 'seems' rational to you. Study genetics and anthropology, maybe also the wider notion of economics, and group psychology.

2. Logical fallacy. Right now the biggest threat to new and under-equipped players are well-equiped, bored players without enough end game content to keep them busy. With social, team work based challenges such as this mechanic, there would be a MASSIVE reduction in pointless attacks on other players, especially the starting players who have nothing worthwhile on them. As you said, groups will seek safer places, and I assure you there are many inland, they will not be hunter-gathering around the coasts. Furthermore, the 'buffs' are just ideas, including the blood etc - it would be a one-time-only, should it be included. People can buy multiple copies as is to buff their characters, occupying different parts of the map to increase their chances of finding crash sites etc. Therefore that argument is not only a non-sequitur, but not at all exclusive to this mechanic. These potential exploits are easily ironed out with careful discussion, the most important part at this stage is to not focus on the 'colour of the babies clothing', if you will, but the fundaments of the mechanic in terms of gameplay and the reasons that someone might want to undertake the challenge. Things I have covered extensively now, to say the least.

3. Aside from taking the strain of PvP off new players, which is a massive complaint right now, it would add, as I have said many times, a major challenge for experienced players.

Objectives are inherently rewarding in themselves, that is essentially the ethos of emergent gameplay, and emergent gameplay is the basis for the success of this mod.

Such layers of complexity add up to create something greater than the sum of the parts.

Teamwork, which could be improved on and encouraged further in this mod, would also be aided by this mechanic. Shoot-on-site between male and female characters would be reduced because of the added potential benefit to peaceful interaction. Romanticism doesn't come into it.

I have already explained the benefits many times now, and how they work together with other gameplay mechanics being anticipated, including the very popular 'liberate town' mechanic - another social mechanic, which, in combination with this one, would again generate another layer of complexity - greater than the sum of its parts.

All of the rewarding things in this mod stem from player generated gameplay, not loot and objects in the game, which players become jaded with very quickly.

On top of being of benefit to both new and experienced players because of the effects I have already mentioned, it would, when it comes to PvP, take it to the next level. People would have a greater psychological and emotional investment in their characters, pairs, groups and (soon to be added by Rocket), factions. This basic group-building unit therefore further capacitates this tribal function, innate in all players whether they are aware of it or not, to build solid groups with greater meaning than basic material investment and payoff. So, when those PvP moments do arise, they will be far more intense, involving far more people, and over far more important things than a can of beans.

Have you played planetside? People ended up being very attached to their factions, and this suggested mechanic is just another step on the road that allows for complex and deep gameplay.

If you are purely concerned with material throughput, loot, and survival time, then you neither understand the mass appeal of this mod, nor the BIS ethos, and the reason mods like this exist in the first place.

[Soulphayze 0]

If you did this idea you would need to work the kid crying into the factor. Nothing like running through a forest while you have a screaming child on your back.

[7-75 callaghan 43]

If you did this idea you would need to work the kid crying into the factor. Nothing like running through a forest while you have a screaming child on your back.

I know full well you didn't even read a word of the post' date=' original, or otherwise. This is a serious discussion, watched by moderators. Bye now.

[hr']

I think I have typed quite enough detail for now. Hopefully if you add another comment it will not simply be a reiteration of previous posts, as I have other things to work on.

Please take a look at my suggested Helicopter crash site mechanic, as honestly that is something I could see being implemented easily and in the near future, from an arma-modder perspective that is. This is a complex subject, my crash site proposal is straight forward, and very popular. Something we might see implemented in the near future, that is something I would like more feedback on from more people.

[murhis 4]

Callaghan I tried, but I stop now. You don't see your sayings as romanticism, but really they are.

People are having different motives to play this game. Some enjoy roleplaying it, some enjoy just plain killing or some just like to explore the world. Or anything in between those... BUT any artificial buff or "achievement" or whatever it's wouldn't change them. As example if we imagine this "feature" would really exists in DayZ I would do exactly as I wrote before... We would split sexes with my playbuddies and continue playing like before and it certainly wouldn't reduce any of our "trigger happiness" when we see other survivors, no matter what gender they are. Random player is an enemy long as he has a power to kill you. AND I really doubt I'm alone with this or I'm not even from the "darkest" side if you could say.

There is absolutely no base this would actually reduce any of player killing. Infact this actually offers even more funny options to fool people to their death... Think about it as a woman seducing men and killing them for fun? I bet there would be many who would like to play as "black widow"... OR think about those women who are already pregnant? They are good as death for those randoms who like to have that buff for themselves. Competition you know...

You really have to remember the very simple fact that long as you CAN kill others, it will happen. Also you can't get people to "teamplay" with artificial goodies if there's a possibility to get shot by a random just for lulz.

[Disgraced 1123]

You're returning to your in game family’s camp now' date=' after gathering some wood for the nights fire. Coming into earshot you begin to hear the joyful cries of torture as a long line of clansmen No! Your camp has been raided by a clan, those cries... The sounds of other players forcing your lifelong partner to accept the Rape. You can see them now, there's a line and she keeps running through that horrible animation, and what.. what they're Raping and gutting your toddler!

And then you're Raped, you try to fight but you pass out long enough for them to make your ass bleed, and force you to watch as a rogue clan rapes your family, loots your camp and leaves you to die..

(Some gameplay features)

Add a tension/stress meter-determined by how much stress you are in and stuff like sexual frustration and such.

When your meter is full its like shock and shaking. They can put a new drug in the game. Mood pills. One mood pill will take the meter half down. Two pills makes it empty. Only this drug and finding another partner can fix it.

Don't like this idea? You must be a Fag

[/quote']

I pity you, that you even typed this.

When you mature, and know women, you will regret it.

[Gaidoon 19]

You're returning to your in game family’s camp now' date=' after gathering some wood for the nights fire. Coming into earshot you begin to hear the joyful cries of torture as a long line of clansmen No! Your camp has been raided by a clan, those cries... The sounds of other players forcing your lifelong partner to accept the Rape. You can see them now, there's a line and she keeps running through that horrible animation, and what.. what they're Raping and gutting your toddler!

And then you're Raped, you try to fight but you pass out long enough for them to make your ass bleed, and force you to watch as a rogue clan rapes your family, loots your camp and leaves you to die..

(Some gameplay features)

Add a tension/stress meter-determined by how much stress you are in and stuff like sexual frustration and such.

When your meter is full its like shock and shaking. They can put a new drug in the game. Mood pills. One mood pill will take the meter half down. Two pills makes it empty. Only this drug and finding another partner can fix it.

Don't like this idea? You must be a Fag

[/quote']

I pity you, that you even typed this.

When you mature, and know women, you will regret it.

I still pity you all plus this thread just implies sex and a whole new level of banditry