"Hey, I know you!"

[dublebeanz 1]

woops sorry mate didn't recognise u! (shit i shot my friend...well ex friend)well needed..... 5 sec hover someone suggested is important....at what range does everyone think they can recognise someone?

might be nice to add friends manually by name...though only as a request that needs excepting... preventing exploit of just adding names on server for scanning.

*been thinking about the 5 sec hover to recognise (which has to be to prevent scanning)....if someone has their gun pointed at you your not gonna be able to wait, which is fair enough for people you have only spotted...just for confirmed friends it could be instant recognition (trying to get a vocal id in this situation could get u shot)

*edit

[HardTarget 27]

Especially the feature with detecting with how well you can see them. Anything more complex than distance-to-target would be pretty hard to code due to the many semi-transparent objects etc.

I agree' date=' hence why I've brought up other ideas. Some people are indeed putting in better ideas that are more feasible than what I suggested, such as Hoik's 5-10s idea. Also, as noted from all the other posts (as well as your own) that a distance would probably go a long way to prevent people from exploiting, which I had offered as a suggestion beforehand. 300m unscoped/500 scoped/binocs? Or maybe 100/300? A lot of people are saying to add a distancer in, so what are the numbers that we should try out first?

Saving the list of names to your part of the database for each player ID is also extra server load, although probably not much.

I think it's the wording I used, but as I said in the OP I want to make it as little on the servers as possible, I.E. purely clientside. When I say "database", I meant like a sort of SQL file that the client can reference with any potential ID matches given to it by the server. The server already ID's and tells your client about the ID's of other players/characters, so it wouldn't add to the overload. So, say you write someone as "Foe" ingame, your client knows their ID is from the server prior. Later on, you see this person again, and the client checks, in it's own file, for the ID if it's present or not, comparing it to the data already given to it by the server. That way, no extra loading is taken on part of the server.

Also' date=' it would require fundamental code to be changed because the current hitscan name system is only a feature of 'recruit' mode servers, i.e. easy mode, which comes bundled with a load of other things such as crosshairs. Although I do think they can be changed individually - unless server settings are forced standardised (and I only play on expert servers i.e. no 3rd person, crosshairs or names, and would hate any other system being forced on me) then the individual settings would cause problems.[/quote']

AFAIK, the setting is not standardized, like 3rd Person. I've gone to servers that have no crosshairs, indicator or built-in rangefinder, and had 3rd Person available, while some had no crosshairs but identification. I'm fairly certain these are individual settings, because as far as I have seen, they don't rely on each other. So it shouldn't force any additional system if it's used with the default Arma 2 recognition.

I think that when someone dies' date=' his/her name should be forgotten, but that might overload the main server to have to keep track of "dead" players. Maybe each "life" having an ID (myname1 for a first life) and when someone connects to the server, that ID is sent to all players currently on the server. If the name+number > to recorded name+number, the nickname data is erased from the player data. The reason is: You have a "male" friend, then that friend respawns as a girl... Yeah, sure, you can identify the shemale.[/quote']

The main issue I have is this adds to the amount of server load going through already. I'm fine that you don't remember since they've died (this is up to everyone's own opinion), and you present a good point with the male/female aspect. However, additional server load is unwanted, so how about utilizing the already implimented Arma2 ID number. I don't know exactly how the current recognition brings your name into view (Profile name), but some sort of way to keep track without extra server stress would be nice.

I disagree about the title. That is what brought me to this thread.

I would argue then it serves it's purpose! :D

The naming system seems like a great idea. as far as treeline scanning' date=' we should utilize some realism. I doubt you'd be able to identify someone from 300m or further without a scope / binoculars, or through fog, or at night. So the simplest fix is to implement distance clipping with atmosphere weights.

Additionally, client-side clipping could be used to keep people from seeing through hills and buildings, but I don't think that is a scriptable feature. Obviously, hackers can still bypass this, but the majority of exploiters wouldn't be able to. [/quote']

For the distancer, it seems the general concensus is, add a distance to prevent abuse (800m whaaa?!) or exploitation from instance distances, and it definately sounds viable. I believe there's already (in the current indicator) a line-of-sight mechanic to prevent people clipping it through walls, but it tends to have it's issues as well. Still, as you said, whatever checks should be clientside, as to prevent server load. Hackers will still meddle with it, but they'll be weeded out/banned over time the more and more they muck with things.

you know what would be really funny would be when you died that you were able to see the list of names that people *named* you.

That would be hilarious, so long as it doesn't tell you who had given you what name. The amounts of ridiculous names a long-life could hold with much interactions would be quite the amusing case. Not sure how that would be potentially coded though, with as little server load as possible.

--------------

I'll take some time to now edit the OP to put in some stuff talked about here, as I'm certain we'll have a few oddities who will post without reading the discussion, and I want to make sure the finer points brought up by those who have discussed are addressed.

[red62 9]

+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1

[oktyabr 53]

Your idea is very similar to the one I suggested myself a month ago:

http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=6468&pid=62878#pid62878

From that thread:

My suggestion: Make name tags showing up hard-coded into the mod but only at short range, perhaps 25m in daylight, 5m in darkness. Leave it up to the player to remember what they will about previous encounters.

Further I'm thinking "spotting" another player at a greater range (up to 100m daylight/20m dark?) would just put "unknown" as their tag *until* they are close enough to be recognizable.

AND I'm wondering how a simple color coded system would work... Perhaps:

RED: This is someone who has shot at you and for whatever reason is still wandering around alive and unnamed. EDIT: You may be able to assign the red color without combat having occurred.

YELLOW: This is someone you are *reasonably* sure you have not met before.

GREEN: This is someone you have "met" before without any ill effects. I imagine a routine could handle the automatic switch from yellow to green by using accumulated time within X meters of range. Ran into the same guy several times in the last half hour and neither of you shot the other? Green. Spent five minutes looting a building together, etc. both your "names" appear green to each other from that point on. EDIT: Like the RED color above a player could choose to label someone with the green color at any time, for any reason.

[HardTarget 27]

Oh damn, surprised I didn't see that former thread Oktyabr. Although a lot of discussion HAS been admittedly have on recognition, so I can see potential overlap by accident. I'll try to read through all the comments as I can, so I can get a clearer view/new ideas on how to alter the concept.

The main issue I see within recognition at the extremely close distance you listed (25m) limits understanding who you're observing to a very, very close-quarters scenario unless you keep eye contact at all times on them/don't break line of sight. This is, after all, DayZ implimented into Arma2, which many of the firefights and encounters are not always at such an extremely close distance. I've had a few, but most of my firefights end up at the very least 100m if not more, away from others. Maybe it's from how I play, I may be biased in that case.

The colour for "friendly/foe" is amusing, but the idea behind it was just to add it as a means of naming people, without adding in an artificial mechanic to tell the "good from the bad", so to speak. The other question I lay with that colour theme is, that you've been near someone x amount of time, how does it recognize barriers/walls/etc? That may end up exploited by hiding near someone through a wall, only to have their name come up in green later so you can more visibly "see" them, despite knowing little-to-nothing about them, or even confusing someone else since they'll see green and hesitate, despite the fact you have every intention of mauling them.

I don't think a mechanic to "label" if they're nice or not is needed, it should be by the player's memory alone in my opinion, no system to identify that for you. The identification should be personal to your own recollection of that individual, so long as you're certain it's the same person. Certainly your way holds merit, but I (personally, and nothing against you) think it's against the vision of the game that it's up to the player to do what he can himself (the same reason we don't need to read books/manuals in DayZ to pilot a helicopter, all up to the player).

Still, great minds and all that right?

[Tfortacos (DayZ) 41]

Shit, I read it all, I usually TL:DR, but read a few comments went back and read the whole thing.

I want this in game!

+1 (:

[BL1P 252]

Its good... but it still allows player recognition in concealed areas possible even if the player doesn't see the concealed player.

hover mouse over bush see name or colour -- shoot bush !!!

[orosian5@gmail.com 0]

Just throwing in my .02:

How about using factors such as day/night, distance, and the visibility meter to calculate how long you have to focus on them before the tag comes up?

Day and night would reduce/increase focus time respectively, distance would increase focus time, and higher visibility would decrease focus time.

When you have kept focus on the player for the required time then the tag pops up.

[BL1P 252]

Just throwing in my .02:

How about using factors such as day/night' date=' distance, and the visibility meter to calculate how long you have to focus on them before the tag comes up?

Day and night would reduce/increase focus time respectively, distance would increase focus time, and higher visibility would decrease focus time.

When you have kept focus on the player for the required time then the tag pops up.

[/quote']

Me likes !!

would need to be small focus area and low distance with long time to not become an exploit though.

[HardTarget 27]

Just throwing in my .02:

How about using factors such as day/night' date=' distance, and the visibility meter to calculate how long you have to focus on them before the tag comes up?[/quote']

Kind of what I was considering regarding pixel/image analysis, but definately for what Hoik's idea was, this can be added to help reduce suddenly knowing who you're looking at if you've marked them prior. Such factors, after all, would affect our own ability to be able to discern who is who. Only question how you calculate "visibility". Day/night and distance can already be calculated easily client-side.

I'll toss it as an addition to the OP.

[oktyabr 53]

Just throwing in my .02:

How about using factors such as day/night' date=' distance, and the visibility meter to calculate how long you have to focus on them before the tag comes up?

Day and night would reduce/increase focus time respectively, distance would increase focus time, and higher visibility would decrease focus time.

When you have kept focus on the player for the required time then the tag pops up.

[/quote']

Yup. I brought this up in "that other thread" too.

What we elaborated on there was that the new identification system has to completely replace the current, default Arma 2 system. It would require a more advanced LoS system be used with any one of a few possible solutions to make work. I think the one I personally like the best is removing the name tag from the 2D HUD completely and utilizing a 3D system instead, basically having the player's "name" float over their head and drawn as the rest of the model would be. Trees, walls, etc. would then block the name tag just as it would block actually seeing the player's "face".

Make the 3D tag component definitely reliant on distance as well as visability, either being printed on the screen in a scale proportionate to the scale of the model (i.e. very small at great distance) or with a transparency factored over distance (and light, etc.) and possibly with a time to resolve the name tag in the first place, based on distance and visibility conditions. This would make recognition somewhat authentic as you could use binoculars or a scope to help identify someone at a distance.

The color coding makes it easy to quickly make a threat assessment in lieu of having distinctly unique skin combinations and would work to prevent "blue on blue" as well.

I am against having any great sort of range for very accurate identification. 100m is about as far as the human eye can make out facial detail in good light. If the target is moving, in the periphery of vision, or in less than adequate lighting this becomes more difficult.

[orosian5@gmail.com 0]

HardTarget: If you're already looking at them then it would just be a case of waiting for the timer. If they're not prone and/or moving then it'll be easier to find them by scanning (even easier with zoom). It simulates looking at something for long enough to start seeing familiar shapes within the mess. Visibility is already implemented as the eye icon on the right of the screen.

I don't know how resource-intensive ray-tracing is, but that may also help.

Edit: Just read your post, Oktyabr. I think we're thinking along similar lines. I hope a balanced system can be implemented :)

[Techercizer 82]

Back on the first page with ye.

[matt.gilmurray@gmail.com 46]

Good job hard target it looks like this is happening.

[Senrain 148]

Yes.

Yes!

YES!

I want this, a lot. Give me what I want. I DEMAND IT.

[Boitameuh 14]

Awesome idea, deserves a bump!

[modsec 0]

This is a pretty glorious idea. I like it....

[Techercizer 82]

Back to the front

[Senrain 148]

Back to the front you go.

[Pinky Stavo 0]

Love this idea. +1

[HardTarget 27]

Glad this has gotten attention, and a good amount of points have been brought up.

The only thing I'm going to warn is to be careful with the bump use, allow the thread to slip a bit to the back, Forum rules and all. I'm certain other ideas of merit are laying about waiting for their moment to shine (Oktyabr's former mention in a thread very akin to this one, for example).

If any new discussion/comments regarding it appear, I'll take the time to respond and have a discussion regarding mechanics/points or anything else. Until then, I'll be in the background watching it (unless I think up something new to add). Although I have loved the points people have brought up regarding certain ideas, has definately refined how the mechanics functions (particularly most of it seems centered in the identification aspect, rather than naming, as no one wants it to be exploited too much).

[razzmatazz 2]

I like this idea.

I'd just like to add that "recognition" shouldn't be based on the distance that you can realistically recognize faces. The reason for this is that we actually use much more information than just facial features to identify the people we know. Hair styles, height, build, etc. Even clothes would be relatively useful for identifying people in the type of scenario DayZ models; at the end of civilization, people are likely to only have the clothes on their backs. Of course, the nature of this being means everyone can't have unique faces, hair, height, build, and clothes. I think the solution to that limitation is just to allow recognition at somewhat greater distances than what would be reasonable for just faces.

[Lukio (DayZ) 24]

I like this idea very much, except for the editing names part, why not just take over the characters name/let him introduce himself - when close enough?

It may be confusing if 3 different players actually socialize and meet up, one guy names the two other A + B, player 2 names his two guys Hammer and Owl, the third guy has Sniperboy and Bandageman. From what I read the whole naming part is just when you aren't close to a player, maybe add in some way of introducing yourselves to each other (Mouse wheel menu -> "Introduce") and then the name that the player set up for you gets replaced with your characters name.

I'd really like the addition of more social features like friends lists, grouping and the like, but I guess it still is too early for that. At the moment its very odd to socialize, most encounters I have are like randomly stumbling upon a deer in the forest. Both involved freeze, stare and move away carefully.

Also for the distance thing and how recognizing people works maybe have it so that from around 100m to 50m (just as example) you just see something like "acquaintance" and then when you are under 50m it tells you the character name (if you've met him before by the main mechanic).

[Oompa 25]

I absolutely love the idea :D

Thumbs up!

[iStP 8]

Very well thought out and written. Love the idea +1