Anyone Else Having Trouble Staying Friendly?

[Time Glitch 453]

To be clear about butthurtness/whining, I haven't died in 11 days.

I'm just about at the end of my rope. I'm still managing to keep my Murders at 0, but it's getting harder. With all of the deathmatching, and all the times I've been shot on sight for no reason in the past...I'm beginning to wonder just how worth it being friendly is. Currently, the game doesn't reward me whatsoever for being friendly, and only gives me benefits for being a dick and killing everyone I see.

I've played the game for almost a month, and not once have I gotten anything better than an M4 as far as advanced equipment goes. Why? Because I don't kill people. I didn't kill the ghillie-suited badass that didn't see me. I haven't sat by the NWAF and hunted raiders.

Basically, I've played by all the "good guy" rules, and I have not been rewarded. Rather, I have been punished.

Rocket, I know you want to keep this a sandbox, and I want it to stay a sandbox as well. But there HAS to be some benefit to teaming up and/or not killing on sight. There HAS to be some incentive, because right now I am actively being punished for being a good guy. Friends of mine who JUST started playing do not share my optimism, and after being randomly killed once, they've started shooting on sight.

Why do such innocent and newly-spawned souls resort to this?

Because there is NO reason not to, other than your own morals...And that has to change. I don't have the answer, but it has to change if this mod/future game is EVER going to be more than PermaDeathmatch with Zombies.

That's all.

[humbleuk 76]

No point in being friendly anymore, you could back in may and way before that too, to group up with randoms and survive together, now it's whoever see's who first gets killed.

To be fair though, without any form of communication in side channels, it is becoming harder to state intentions, direct chat doesn't always work as intended either.

[Time Glitch 453]

No point in being friendly anymore' date=' you could back in may and way before that too, to group up with randoms and survive together, now it's whoever see's who first gets killed.

To be fair though, without any form of communication in side channels, it is becoming harder to state intentions, direct chat doesn't always work as intended either.

[/quote']

Direct chat really needs more range. Needs to be like 100m by default.

[trimethylxanthine 12]

Personally I'm still managing to stay friendly.

Main reason for this is that I always travel with friends so that we can watch each other. So far we have stayed alive for close to 3 weeks.

There have been a few.. incidents where we have had to shoot players. Apart from one occasion it has been a result of aggression from other players.

Like you I feel that staying friendly towards others is getting harder and harder. Mostly because shooting a lonely traveler in the back is rewarding right then and there (well, apart from the guilt) and attempting the friendly approach often results in backstabbing.

Like most we have had to adopt a fight or flight policy. We avoid anyone we see and usually stay hidden and wait (this has resulted in several Benny Hill-ish incidents, guilty as I feel for watching someone fight for his life, it can be hillarious).

Despite this we have made some new friends along the way and very rarely find shooting others necessary. And hard as it may be to see, the dark really is your best friend if you want to stay alive. :)

Personally I don't miss the side chat at all, but I would like the direct chat to have a bit more range.

[Pulse007 2]

Yesterday some trad killed me with a hatchet, a bloody hatchet! I just spawned and had nothing me me, seriously what's the point except just just being a dick.

I am the same as you, I don't want to be forced to shoot everyone the second I spot them because if I don't 99% of the time I would be looking at an hourglass again.

I understand the sandbox principle and love it. But as you say there is no befit anymore to waiting a sec and holding your fire, since the second you are spotted you are working your way back down the beach with a flashlight.

[DemonGroover 8836]

You are right. Until there are incentives to maintain high humanity and some side effects for low humanity - possibly requiring drugs which high humanity players dont need, the mindless consequence free killing will continue.

[Time Glitch 453]

I think the psychological effects that have been brought up around the community would be a great deterrent to the senseless killing. I imagine if you just killed everyone you see, you'd probably start getting more jumpy. Maybe you get more "twitchy" and have a small chance to fire your weapon randomly if you see a zombie or other player at a certain range. Like, if you round a corner and see a zombie, you have a chance of just firing off a shot.

The heartbeat is a great start, but maybe we add some twitchy idle animations as well, to identify a low-humanity player from a distance. Head constantly on a swivel? Bouncing up and down a little while crouched? Re-gripping the weapon?

These are all features that might subtly punish those with super-low humanity.

[herd 69]

Yes, removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[Timberwolf (DayZ) 118]

Yes' date=' removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[/quote']

I totally agree with this. It's not realistic but damn things were way more enjoyable back then.

[shawgo 3]

It would be nice to be able to tell a bandit from a survivor.

[captjac 0]

you know coming into this game i had the same intentions as you, I wanted to be friendly and help people. I wanted to form a group that would be dedicated to helping other players, but now after what I've seen in dayz, where people will kill you if you so much as ask them if they're friendly, it's become an old hat. People would rather kill you and get what stuff you have rather then working with you and trying to get more supplies between you. Some players just need to learn that sure, you can kill me and get my food/supplies/ammo, but that's one less person who could watch your back, one less person who could help you survive, one less gun to shoot enemies. I mean yeah sure you got my M4a1 but you already had a gun, you can't use both, so you end up dropping one anyway.

Also because of the fact that more and more people are just killing on site, more groups are forming with just that intent, kill anyone we see to protect our group. Soon we will see factions of groups fighting each other for dominance, and those who aren't on a side, will be the ones who suffer the most.

[Soldier of Failure 14]

Ive tried to be friendly, but the game calls me a bandit due to self defense murders. Oh well :/

[evoxtom 142]

Yes' date=' removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[/quote']

Normally I'd argue against skins like that but this idea is really clever. Just have to make sure bandits do not switch skins by doing something nice to trick ppl with the skin then killing again. I'd be all for this.

[Yeti (DayZ) 9]

Yes' date=' removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[/quote']

Normally I'd argue against skins like that but this idea is really clever. Just have to make sure bandits do not switch skins by doing something nice to trick ppl with the skin then killing again. I'd be all for this.

That is a pretty great idea.

Expanding on it, "Good" guys could get rewards like body armour, higher chance to find military loot etc, as they are not killing people and taking things it is the only way to really get anything if they didn't kill a bandit. They could obtain good by healing other players, killing bandits, etc. The only way to prevent bandits from exploiting the buddy heal is to have murders have a huge negative impact that's not easily attainable. The downside is if you encounter a fresh bandit that has no murders and they attack you and you get a murder just because you survived... Unless there is a humanity/karma system?

While the bandits just kill people, that's how they get loot.

[wordplayuk@gmail.com 101]

when even let's players like paul soars jr are turning kill on sight you know it's only way to survive as a lone wolf. I'm not talking about people 3 fields over or obviously avoiding you, that's beyond necessary. But in general staying 'friendly' seems counter productive.

[Ducky (DayZ) 10]

I like the idea of not knowing by looking at someone whether they have good intentions or bad. It's part of the 'survival' aspect of the game that you have to fend for yourself. Adding artificial incentives like better loot might make some people choose to stay friendly, but what's stopping the bandits from killing you and taking that loot?

I understand the argument that you need to make it worthwhile to not kill on sight. What if banding together was necessary purely for survival's sake? As in, you can't survive alone for very long because it's too dangerous out there.

This game is great because it simulates reality so well - the fact that you have to find food and water adds to my experience. Giving me a better chance at finding loot because I'm a nice guy would break that experience for me. I'd rather the good loot be hidden somewhere with way too many zombies for me to kill, so that I had to go there with a team. I realize that groups still can shoot others on sight, but when you're with a friend, the others probably aren't as likely to kill you for fear of retaliation.

Just my two cents, anyway. I try to be friendly, but I don't hold it against anyone who shoots me.

[ruecanonrails 24]

Be friendly, Don't be stupid. The way I play is if I see someone at a distant I try to avoid and watch them. If they are close I try to communicate using direct chat while still staying hidden.

Only once communication has started and the other player lowers his weapon (looks down and uses alt to look around, or switches to flashlight) and we share a similar goal Then and only then will I reveal my position.

The biggest thing you must do in order to remain friendly is NEVER give away your position if you have the drop on someone. Do not shoot them on site, instead watch, analyze their behavior and make an honest choice on what to do next whether you decide to stay quiet and hidden, try to communicate, just avoid them, or if the situation calls for it shoot them. but as in real life, shooting someone during times of an apocalypse should be the last resort.

Being friendly does not mean you only shoot at someone when they shoot first. To me, being friendly is giving everyone a chance to walk away in one piece. The common goal of this game is to survive and defend what is yours.

As for the possibilities of consequences for killing to much.. I think that needs to be thought out much more and have many different variables.

Making someone accidentally discharge his weapon due to having killed 50 people and is going insane is a good idea however it starts to fail when you consider the real world. There are some people that just aren't phased by that sort of mindless killing, they were raised for the battlefield and taking another life does not shake them one bit.

I think the players should spawn in and everyone have a set character trait (changes each death, but some system that doesn't allow suicide switching to get a "good" one)

Spawn in with a character that has the trait of "Serial killer" that person could be slower, require more food/water than normal and start out with a relatively high stress level which can cause the misfires and hearing things, etc. For the Serial Killer role, in order for him to lower his stress he would have to kill another player

Lone wolf, stress increases when in groups of people or even inside of large towns, paranoia sets in (I think of high stress being similar to what's in the game amnesia the dark descent) When the character is out in the wilderness his stress goes down. Lone wolf could get more out of eating and drinking so you can eat and drink less or get more healing from food.

I think if we have a system of stress or whatever you want to call it where players have consequences we need to have it rounded out to accommodate EVERY playing style and having different character classes without changing the game and turning it into a rock paper scissors match just simple boosts to each style of play.

[Kane (DayZ) 0]

I'm half friendly, I don't shoot people that don't shoot me and I don't shoot people that aren't a threat but in dangerous area's like military zones then I'll shoot on sight because it's a risky place to be.

I disagree with penalties/rewards for being a bandit/civilan, there's so many tense situations and memorable moments made from not knowing the other guys intentions and firefights between groups that would be completely ruined if you start thinking "they kill people which is the wrong way to play the game because I don't like being killed".

You're going to die from other players and lose your stuff because they are the big threat of the game, just don't get upset over it and restart.

Trying to reduce that threat or making it really easy to see who's a bandit/civilian will ruin so many potential heart racing moments and turn the game into a "Red vs Blue" scenario which is in every generic fps and doesn't need to be in this game.

Also trying to put people into 2 groups or trying to say "this group bad, this group good" is impossible to do in a sandbox game like this since there is so many shades of grey amongst the black and white.

[Torque (DayZ) 0]

Yes' date=' removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[/quote']

I totally agree with this. It's not realistic but damn things were way more enjoyable back then.

This seems like a legit idea. It would defiantly prove use to players to identify who is friend or foe. You should submit this to the suggestion thread or some way to get it in front of the developing team.

[aLmAnZo (DayZ) 21]

I agree with your thoughts. Things where at least a bit better back in the bandit skin days. I still haven't killed other players, not even bandits because I think killing is wrong, and I am role playing. I've been killed with starting gear several times, with nothing on me of value. I don't get how killing innocents are fun, it's not even a challenge.

It is more profitable to be a bandit, especially if you have a couple of bandit friends. It has allways been like that. I find that to be a bit sad, there should be equal profits to be had with both play styles.

[Ducky (DayZ) 10]

It is more profitable to be a bandit' date=' especially if you have a couple of bandit friends. It has allways been like that. I find that to be a bit sad, there should be equal profits to be had with both play styles.

[/quote']

Maybe the problem with this simulator is that it's too real? You know, because the real world operates pretty much the same way. You can get by just fine, but some of the people who have it really good - they screwed a lot of people over to get there.

The ambiguity of all having the same outfit makes the game tense and exciting for me. In the real zombie apocalypse, the only people you'll know to avoid will be prison inmates in their orange jumpsuits.

[Surg3on 4]

I stay friendly by legging it as soon as I see anyone. Its a sad state of affairs. I dont use direct chat as I expect to be shot as soon as they are aware of me.

Lone wolf is lonely :(

[Steve McAwesome 6]

it's tough. However, a few of my most trusted and valued dayZ buddies are people that i randomly encountered without being forced to resort to violence. It really helps if you have voice chat. It's pretty funny when some of my teamspeak buddies automatically want to shoot first and we have to talk them down from a pontentially risky conflict. it adds a real player driven dynamic to the game. roll with your buddies and randomn lone wolves will be less inclined to take you on, offering you the chance to extend a hand of peace and maybe invite them to join you. Dont give in to the deathmatching! but dont be needlessly trusting either :D

[imdrunk 0]

No point in being friendly anymore' date=' you could back in may and way before that too, to group up with randoms and survive together, now it's whoever see's who first gets killed.

To be fair though, without any form of communication in side channels, it is becoming harder to state intentions, direct chat doesn't always work as intended either.

[/quote']

nobody ever responded to me in direct chat

---

Yes' date=' removing the bandit skin was a bad decision.

There should be 3 skins in the game:

- military skin for bandit killing, good players.

- surviver, a neutral

- bandit skin for bandits.

Simple enough. Wihtout any way to see who is who, I just shoot anyone right now.

When we had the bandit skin, people would actually group up.

[/quote']

also terrorists, bandit in survivor skins lol