"Non-combat" system for friendly identification

[goblinshark 5]

DayZ'ers,

I have been reading a lot of posts regarding "friendly" survivors shooting one another out of raw fear and confusion. Nobody wants to lose their shit, and nobody wants to take a risk either.

I have seen recommendations that include:

- A "whistle" system, where players whistle to one another

- A "handshake" system, same thing but handshaking

- The already available "salute," a simple salute of friendly-being

Here's my idea, hear me out:

A non-combat system that is mutually induced. This is a system where players can approach one another, and then, use the scroll to initiate / engage in a "friendly" exchange. During this exchange you cannot change weapons, and you cannot fire your weapon. You would be in the typical "kneeling" position as if accessing your inventory.

I know that the system is not very fluid and there are a lot of circumstances guiding the effectiveness of it, like a bandit shooting you while you are talking.

However, I think taking the time to engage in a moment of vulnerability with another friendly will provoke trust and reliance. If players can stop and agree not to shoot or engage in firefighting for a second, they might be less likely to shoot one another.

Additionally, a bandit is less likely to engage in a friendly exchange of goods if he is vulnerable to dying. The odds of a bandit going through the trouble of being "friendly" in a non-combative situation is unlikely, given that when you get close to bandits these days, their heartbeats *in theory* are audible.

I think that with refinement and player / community analysis, this mechanic can be made as a dependable way for mutually-friendly players to exchange goods and services with less risk to being shot and killed on the spot just because they were nervous. The risk is also reduced because bandits would not like to make themselves vulnerable.

I am sorry for the disorganization and content of this, it's a juvenile and fresh thought process that I just came up with. I didn't want to lose it so I put thoughts to text. Please evaluate my thoughts and provide constructive feedback. Thank you.

[DryGulch 32]

Nobody wants to lose their shit' date=' and nobody wants to take a risk either.

[/quote']

But, that's what makes DayZ, DayZ!!11eleven

[MiniLink 0]

if you won't get shoot by your friends just talk to them ... There exist an ingame voice chat, and if you play on a server without you can still chat with them or use somthing like TS2, TS3, Ventrilo or Skype. if you are not organized you can't survive. if this were real, did you think there weapon doesn't work if they shoot at you ?

[goblinshark 5]

if you won't get shoot by your friends just talk to them ... There exist an ingame voice chat' date=' and if you play on a server without you can still chat with them or use somthing like TS2, TS3, Ventrilo or Skype. if you are not organized you can't survive. if this were real, did you think there weapon doesn't work if they shoot at you ?

[/quote']

I knew this would come up, as always. I forgot to address this. The game is not completely about "realism." It's about mimicking some of the effects of the conditions, while trading off some "realism" for video game logic, methodology, and playability. In gaming methodology there are theories and concepts for fluidity and playability that sacrifice true "realism" so that players can have fun.

I realise there is an in-game voice chat, however, that doesn't always work. Sometimes players can't hear you, sometimes your speaker does not work, sometimes they can't recognize your language and vice verse. Maybe they don't have a mic? There are a lot of factors governing a situation where to unknown players meetup.

It's not about playing with your friends, it's about MAKING friends to. The thought behind it is, is that the ONLY reason some players kill one another is because of the fact that you simply have NO idea what their intentions are, even if they convey them in proximity chat.

But if both players could calmy take the time to walk up, and accept a non-combative state where they can exchange gear, it would help "survivalists" avoid confrontations with secretive bandits.

It's a thought, and thus I want opions. That is all.

[Capercaillie 16]

Please evaluate my thoughts and provide constructive feedback. Thank you.

Imho your idea has alot of potential! I'm sure it needs alot of enhancing' date=' but this could just be the right way to go.

+1!!

if you won't get shoot by your friends just talk to them ... There exist an ingame voice chat, and if you play on a server without you can still chat with them or use somthing like TS2, TS3, Ventrilo or Skype. if you are not organized you can't survive. if this were real, did you think there weapon doesn't work if they shoot at you ?

what...?

"if you are not organized you can't survive"

-You are wrong

"There exist an ingame voice chat"

-Direct communication is quite flawed at the moment (or that is how I've experienced)

"you can still chat with them or use somthing like TS2, TS3, Ventrilo or Skype."

-The "issue" we are discussing in 99% of these threads is NOT talking to your FRIENDS, the issue is communicating to STRANGERS (=people you DON'T know, who will not just randomly join your ventrilo server when they meet you) who WOULD possibly like to cooperate.

The reason they will shoot-on-sight instead of cooperation is the massive lack of trust, and there is currently NO easy (well I guess it is never gonna be easy, but it could be easier) way to gain that trust.

[goblinshark 5]

-The "issue" we are discussing in 99% of these threads is NOT talking to your FRIENDS, the issue is communicating to STRANGERS (=people you DON'T know, who will not just randomly join your ventrilo server when they meet you) who WOULD possibly like to cooperate.

The reason they will shoot-on-sight instead of cooperation is the massive lack of trust, and there is currently NO easy (well I guess it is never gonna be easy, but it could be easier) way to gain that trust.

Exactly. It's about two friendly players having SOME chance of communicating. I am making this suggestion and argument on the basis that mutual friendly players currently have no way to assess whether or not someone else is friendly. SOMEONE has to take a risk, SOMEONE has to step forward and risk losing hours and hours of their life spent earning gear. Why not increase the atmosphere a bit?

The game would continue to hold its intensity, it would continue to have "realism," it would continue to be everything else that the developers and players would like. However, it would simply make it so there is SO way to meet friendly players.

I don't mind the "bandits," or "trollers." Whatever you want to label them. People will kill other people, that is life. But if people don't want to kill other people, I think it's fair that they are afforded SOME fighting chance to communicate safely with SOME reduced risk, and a less hostile personal environment. We are not all hell-bent on fulfilling our "badass ego" role in video games. It's clear that many other players do, and that's ok, feel as badass and controlling as you want. But let the players working together know who one another are.

Deception is an art, and this would make it more artful for REAL bandits to be deceptive.

[DryGulch 32]

It's just plain safer, more realistic and more atmospheric to use direct chat. If someone doesn't have a mic..they're incredibly cheap: get one. Simples.

[Capercaillie 16]

It's just plain safer' date=' more realistic and more atmospheric to use direct chat. If someone doesn't have a mic..they're incredibly cheap: get one. Simples.

[/quote']

First of all, using "realism" as an argument when discussing games, you will most likely get it wrong. This is a GAME, NOT REAL LIFE!

I agree it is more "atmospheric" to use direct, and here we get to the problem I mentioned already in my post: DIRECT COMMUNICATION DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK PROPERLY!!!

also, there are other issues related to direct.

Lets assume both players have the mic, so we can leave the captain-obvious comment of "go buy one" out of this discussion.

There is no guarantee the players understand what the other is saying (= they don't speak the same language). This MIGHT still not prevent cooperation, since people can build trust on each other with body language (not available in this game, and probably any other game that I know of, will not be available for long time I guess...). What I'm saying is, building the trust is 100% dependent on if the players understand what the other one is saying.

also mic's don't always work, neither do speakers. It would be EASIER (to find cooperating players) if there was a trust-building mechanic in the game which would not depend on the direct comm, which sometimes works sometimes doesn't.