We need more community involvment! Official "Private" Servers?

[scriptfactory 620]

I already belong to a private DayZ hive. It kinda' sucks since it is always empty.

Anyway, there is no problem with the public hive. This is intended behavior because Rocket wants to have a global loot table and support cross-server clan wars (which is a fucking awesome idea.)

The fix for both server hopping and ghosting is just to save player locations per server. Join a new server? Get a fresh spawn location. Die? All spawns are invalidated since they are tied to your character ID and not your account ID.

[Wayze 549]

I already belong to a private DayZ hive. It kinda' sucks since it is always empty.

Anyway, there is no problem with the public hive. This is intended behavior because Rocket wants to have a global loot table and support cross-server clan wars (which is a fucking awesome idea.)

The fix for both server hopping and ghosting is just to save player locations per server. Join a new server? Get a fresh spawn location. Die? All spawns are invalidated since they are tied to your character ID and not your account ID.

It's a terrible idea. In the end, people who server hopp will always have the advantage over other. The rarest weapons will be stored on empty servers, with admins who kick everyone who tries to join.

[scriptfactory 620]

It's a terrible idea. In the end, people who server hopp will always have the advantage over other. The rarest weapons will be stored on empty servers, with admins who kick everyone who tries to join.

 

Why would server hoppers have an advantage? Server hoppers wouldn't be able to just change servers however they wanted. If they wanted to go to NW airfield on multiple servers they would have to run from a fresh spawn point on each new server they joined...

[Wayze 549]

Why would server hoppers have an advantage? Server hoppers wouldn't be able to just change servers however they wanted. If they wanted to go to NW airfield on multiple servers they would have to run from a fresh spawn point on each new server they joined...

Oh, that's what you meant. Well, terrible idea too. People would spawn on the coast and kill each other. What would be the point of having connected servers?

 

And the problem with low pop servers wouldn't be solved. People could still switch servers and store the best weapons on servers nobody plays on.

[scriptfactory 620]

Oh, that's what you meant. Well, terrible idea too. People would spawn on the coast and kill each other. What would be the point of having connected servers?

 

And the problem with low pop servers wouldn't be solved. People could still switch servers and store the best weapons on servers nobody plays on.

 

I think that, eventually, spawns will be randomized over the entire map. Even now people spawn as far inland as Stary.

One of the advantages of having connected servers are cross-server clan raids. Clans have their "home" server but hop to other servers to find parts for (server-bound) vehicles (just like in Arma 3: Breaking Point, for example). You send out a lightly armed scouting party to find where clans have built their bases, organize your troops on that server and execute a organized raid to steal items and destroy their base.

I don't know if there is a way to fight against people storing their items on low-pop servers.

[Wayze 549]

I think that, eventually, spawns will be randomized over the entire map. Even now people spawn as far inland as Stary.

One of the advantages of having connected servers are cross-server clan raids. Clans have their "home" server but hop to other servers to find parts for (server-bound) vehicles (just like in Arma 3: Breaking Point, for example). You send out a lightly armed scouting party to find where clans have built their bases, organize your troops on that server and execute a organized raid to steal items and destroy their base.

I don't know if there is a way to fight against people storing their items on low-pop servers.

I don't know either, but it is by far the biggest problem.

 

And I don't think it is an advantage to have cross-server clan raids. It unbalances everything. Imagine your clan is playing on one server, looting, building a base etc. The economy is very balanced, there is another clan on the other side of the map and they are your rivals. You always try to destroy each other and it's fun. One day, a 20 person clan comes to your server, basicly destroys everything you both have, and goes on to another server.

These guys had the best weapons ingame because they stored they're weapons on a clan server. You will never see them again, and you will never be able to have any kind of revenge.

 

I don't think it's fun. I don't like having random ass people destroying everything. I like to have connections and actual politics. If you are bound to one server, you cannot just go and say "let's search another server and store our loot", you have to deal with all the people on the server. And you will get to know them. Maybe you meet some people twice, as they play on the server. Maybe you get friends or enemies. This is what DayZ was about for me. The long term player interaction. With connected servers, the likelyhood to see a person twice is near zero. And the worst thing, people who will play the game legimitimatly will be punished by people who store loot on a low population server. Real raids will never occur, because people do not store their loot on the servers they play on. Don't shit were you eat. You don't wanna have everything you worked for on an unsecure server right?

 

Well, I do not enjoy that at all.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Wayze