The ONLY Realistic Way to Prevent Deathmatching: Make DayZ a Living Hell

[wulfenrider@msn.com 14]

If you want to get people cooperating to a greater degree.....how about being very brutal in terms of what equipment you can carry.

Make it that every character can carry a map,compass and watch as a standard belt inventory.....and only another two slots for other items, and one melee.

Melee...axe OR survival knife.

Binoculars OR NVG's.

Maybe have a medical kit that replaces all items other than the emergency field dressing,pain killer,morphine...that has to be carried on your toolbelt.

You could still survive by looting and scavenging...but it is going to really ramp up the difficulty and you could not really depend on looting other players for your items.

[rick57@gmx.de 38]

'Awesome Post'

Amen Dude ! :heart:

[davidcastle 19]

What you suggest' date=' CO-OP play ON A MASSIVE SCALE, well let's face it, that is simply not DayZ, as it has been envisioned and designed by the devs. I would love to play through your idea sometime, but it would never be DayZ.

[/quote']

If PermaDeathmatch + Some Zombies is exactly what Rocket wants this experiment to be about, then by all means let that continue. I haven't seen the evidence to support that this is his vision, though.

And I'm not looking to get rid of PvP. That will never happen, as some have said. I just want to get rid of EVERY encounter being one where people start shooting at one another. I haven't heard a story of cooperation in a long time.

ewwww. i wish not only EVERY encounter was gunfights, but with better server stability 150 people per server so there would be MORE encouncters!!!!

[Refried 14]

I just want to get rid of EVERY encounter being one where people start shooting at one another.

this is already the case.

wild exaggerations or using your own personal playstyle/experiences as the basis for an entire community with hundreds of thousands of players is not going to further any suggestions you want to present.

[Time Glitch 453]

I just want to get rid of EVERY encounter being one where people start shooting at one another.

this is already the case.

wild exaggerations or using your own personal playstyle/experiences as the basis for an entire community with hundreds of thousands of players is not going to further any suggestions you want to present.

Tell me...When was the last time you were approached with friendly intentions?

90% of encounters in DayZ boil down to either shooting or total avoidance. Bandits engage, and survivors hide. That's not interaction. That's rampant paranoia because there's no benefit to being friendly.

Here's to hoping that changes.

[davidcastle 19]

I just want to get rid of EVERY encounter being one where people start shooting at one another.

this is already the case.

wild exaggerations or using your own personal playstyle/experiences as the basis for an entire community with hundreds of thousands of players is not going to further any suggestions you want to present.

Tell me...When was the last time you were approached with friendly intentions?

90% of encounters in DayZ boil down to either shooting or total avoidance. Bandits engage' date=' and survivors hide. That's not interaction. That's rampant paranoia because there's no benefit to being friendly.

Here's to hoping that changes.

[/quote']

I will do everything in my power to stop that from changing!!!

[SystemiK 366]

I outlined this a bit in the OP' date=' but what we need to do to prevent the lone wolves from killing one another is to make PLAYERS more powerful than their ITEMS. Make it so you can only do so much for yourself, and you must rely on other's actions to help you survive. The body heat and setting/splinting ideas are a start to that.

[/quote']

Ok so now you have made life such a "living hell" that players will generally not survive without banding together with others. Ok. So you have sizable groups of survivors banding together on one side, and on another, you have these clans which have already banded together in a supportive group. You still have created a deathmatch scenario here. All groups will have to work harder to stay alive, but in the end it's still going to end up group on group PVP. Bandits against survivors. In the meantime, you have also managed to alienate a sizable number of players who ENJOY lone wolf play.

No matter how you slice this game it still comes up PVP.

[Powell (DayZ) 734]

Dude...I love you. I want the game to be THIS hard, THIS nightmarish. I want to feel like I'm PREY, I want to feel like suicide is the only option.

Can you become a Dev?

[pengs 8]

I think the OP's direction is what the mod needs, but maybe not so severe.

The problem is that there are a few types of PVP.

1. Intentional without fear - spawn, get gun, shoot, die, respawn (no fear of death)

and

2. Intentional with fear - player hunting/back stabbing while acquiring loot, highly anticipated and earned kills (fear of death)

and

3. Unintentional with fear - crossing paths, lack of communication, confliction, fear, confusion, angst (fear of death)

The 1st is the one that needs to go IMO. We need PVP/Friendly Fire (friendly fire specifically, the game would not exist without it) but we don't need 'Hai, it's another shewter' PVP. Taking high end guns away from the coast is my advice - it would also push the player to understand the game before they start shooting people willy nilly.

And I think with a more difficult landscape and a few key components that make players useful to other players (like blood bags), someone playing number 2 or 3 may become more quizzical about an encounter with another player. I'd love to see some intelligent backstabbing and elaborate kills. Social doesn't have to stand for rainbows.

[Deviant (DayZ) 43]

Why the fuck would you want to prevent deathmatching? ._.

People kill because people do not want to be killed. Simple.

[septuscap 42]

I would look forward to the challenge' date=' though most will probably say "Then everyone will be even MORE desperate!" The trick though, is that in this scenario, asking for help will be more beneficial than taking their items. The idea here is to give players more power than their items.

[/quote']

I already *have* my group, and I will axe you in the head all the same.

This thread is just another waste of space.

Though I do want to see zombie hordes with slightly different aggro mechanics (not that it would foster cooperation). When you get into a gun fight, hordes could slowly move to investigate that noise, even if they're not within all out frenzy aggro range. So a gunfight is essentially a ticking time bomb until eventually you'll have 50+ zombies on your ass.

[adanteh 2]

The only thing is that people will form groups of two/three into soloing. You do realize that forming a group is already way more effective right now? You can use different guns, watch each others backs. Save the loot, more shit to carry around etc... Our group is quite large anyway. You didn't propose a single thing that we can't do and still kill every lone survivor we see. Why would we help him? We don't know him. We don't trust him and he is of no interest to us. He's just dangerous to our group so we get rid of him. This game is mostly around PVP. For me the zombies are only there to distract you from the PVP. The main reason I don't want to get aggro? If I fire a single bullet suddenly every bandit in the server might know my location.

Plus you know what? I like my sniping sessions in Elektro. It's pretty funny. You feel in control over the life of the players running around there. Feeling all safe in the dark, thinking no one is watching them.. And then suddenly from the other side of the city they receive a bullet to the chest. Or if I think that survivor might be a nice guy/gal (How the hell do I know anyway from couple of hundreds meter away) I might kill some of the zeds that are chasing him.

It all depends on the mood I am though. Today we spotted a survivor (With a rifle) running away from a gas station when we had to refuel. Sure, I could've chased him all the way and taken him down, but for us it was more effective to just refuel and get on with it. Anyways, once you get experienced with this game you can do whatever you feel like. Wasting 5 mags of DMR ammo on random survivors sneaking about in Elektro or Cherno? Not a problem, there's 30 more stuffed away in a tent anyway. I mean, what else could we do? We can't really make a better camp than we already have. We can't organize server wide activities seeing there's no way to message other players (No side chat, no tape messages, no grafiti signs in the towns, etc).

[Deviant (DayZ) 43]

After re-reading your post, I believe that more co-op options should be added in. A simple "wave", or "Lower your weapon" hand signal would be helpful.

Being able to carry people (Like, fireman's carry) would be excellent. Sharing body heat, that kind of shit. Is awesome. Those are interesting ideas.

[daedrick 90]

I completly agree, especialy about the idea of the ''plague'' in cities. Going in capitals for easy loot should be a nightmare. North west airfield should be a joke compared to cherno, electro ane berezino.

Corpes should be all over the place. Coastal main cities should be covered in fog and toxic vapors. Every cut and wounds in a city would almost certainly mean infection.

Maybe DAYZ could leave the zombies alone and perhaps use another kind of monster. Maybe surnatural monsters. Perhaps monsters inspired from series like silent hill? Hard to kill with many tricks to kill you. Some fast, some slow, some very though, some with insane attack abilities, some with range attack.

silent hill monsters; http://characters.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Silent_Hill_monsters

Perhaps monster inspired from exmortis? http://exmortis.wikia.com/wiki/Cult_Of_Exmortis

Maybe some kind of monsters inspired from ''the mist'' of stephen king. http://aliens.wikia.com/wiki/Creatures_of_the_Mist

Thing is, and this is the most important part of my post so take note, it really doesn't matter what kind of monster rocket use as his main threat in the game, zombies or anything else. What matters is how chalenging they are and how much fear they inspire.

Zombies are overused anyway.

PS; The survivality of the game would stay the same, only the monster would be different and how we approach them.

[septuscap 42]

After re-reading your post' date=' I believe that more co-op options should be added in. A simple "wave", or "Lower your weapon" hand signal would be helpful.

[/quote']

"\" salutes, "CTRL"x2 lowers your weapon.

Look up the controls before crying for dev attention for fuck's sake.

That said, if you want to meet other survivors. Travel in a group. When you see a stranger, have ONE of your group greet him and see how he responds. Use the others in your group to dispense justice if he turns out to be a bandit.

The reason there aren't more "friendlies" in the game is because most of the players who are friendly are fucking morons.

[davidcastle 19]

I think the OP's direction is what the mod needs' date=' but maybe not so severe.

The problem is that there are a few types of PVP.

1. Intentional without fear - spawn, get gun, shoot, die, respawn (no fear of death)

and

2. Intentional with fear - player hunting/back stabbing while acquiring loot, highly anticipated and earned kills (fear of death)

and

3. Unintentional with fear - crossing paths, lack of communication, confliction, fear, confusion, angst (fear of death)

The 1st is the one that needs to go IMO. We need PVP/Friendly Fire (friendly fire specifically, the game would not exist without it) but we don't need 'Hai, it's another shewter' PVP. Taking high end guns away from the coast is my advice - it would also push the player to understand the game before they start shooting people willy nilly.

And I think with a more difficult landscape and a few key components that make players useful to other players (like blood bags), someone playing number 2 or 3 may become more quizzical about an encounter with another player. I'd love to see some intelligent backstabbing and elaborate kills. Social doesn't have to stand for rainbows.

[/quote']

why should the first go? is your style of gameplay more important than others? I love killing without fear. I AM the ideal bandit. I AM the reason you can have fear yourself. You will never see a large ammount of intelligent backstabbing and elaborate kills because let's face it... people aren't really into that. In real life, gun fights are not these elaborate scenes that follow movie sequences and provide 100% satisfaction to all involved. You will never get a completely cinematic game that is also open world and able to please everyone.

---

Btw i kinda do the second. Player hunt... but i don't really feel the fear of death. lol. With help of my clan or knowledge of all the mil spawns and possible helo spawns I have all my gear back in a couple hours and it's back to murder.

[XDARKNESS192 20]

I think we can all agree that there is simply too much murder right now. There's no incentive not to kill. We've tried bandit skins' date=' getting rid of global chat...All of these are very gamey solutions. And none of them have worked.

[/quote']

Taking away global chat influenced killing along with the Leaderboards. after Global and Side Chat were taken away i started getting killed constantly nobody cares anymore you can no longer chat with others and make new friends make a group you now have to go risk your stuff hoping the person 15 feet away from you will respond to your direct chat which 99% of people dont they just shoot on site.

[Casualblue 2]

well, first you have to change human nature.

or just disable FF if people are so bothered about being killed

[Steve McAwesome 6]

well written post, and I agree the game needs to only get harder and more complex to stay interesting. However, forcing people to co-operate will not eliminate the murders. People are already cooperating through steam chat and teamspeak with their real life buddies. Cooperation alone will not reduce the murders, it'll just encourage them to team up to increase their chances of surviving long enough to grief more. their are plenty of incentives to cooperate in dayZ already, and it's still a deathmatch. forcing more teamplay will just result in more team deathmatch. Just sayin.

[-Robert- 0]

The reason there aren't more "friendlies" in the game is because most of the players who are friendly are fucking morons.

The most intelligent thing I've read on the DayZ forums this week.

[Steve McAwesome 6]

well written post, and I agree the game needs to only get harder and more complex to stay interesting. However, forcing people to co-operate will not eliminate the murders. People are already cooperating through steam chat and teamspeak with their real life buddies. Cooperation alone will not reduce the murders, it'll just encourage them to team up to increase their chances of surviving long enough to grief more. their are plenty of incentives to cooperate in dayZ already, and it's still a deathmatch. forcing more teamplay will just result in more team deathmatch. Just sayin.

I believe what is needed is more ways to facilitate communication and judge a players disposition. Also more rewards for staying alive longer. some of these ideas are dangerously close to the 'gameafication' we all would like to avoid but hear me out:

maybe reward players who stay alive longer with better resistance to cold and infection. maybe a player who hunts and kills animals to survive will become hungry slower when eating food they killed and cooked. Maybe they'll have some enahnced tracking skills. Maybe those who give blood transfusions will bleed out more slowly, or those who provide others with food wont get hungry as quick. This could also work both ways and offer bandits some perks for staying alive and killing efficiently as well. Maybe a bandit will get colder quicker but have steadier aim when low on blood or in shock. That way nobody is really being 'punished' for a certain playstyle but it still has an effect on their experience.

I think we've all seen that simply making the game more difficult does not in any way discourage killing.

[wufnu 0]

I like it. I think we'll need more players, though, and a larger map. Those people who are already with a group, sniping Elektro 'cause they're bored (which probably wouldn't happen solo 'cause there would be zombies everywhere, even on their wooded hills), would have other groups to oppose them. If their members are out screwing around, they get raided and lose all their stuff. If they roam the countryside in groups, killing everyone they see, eventually their noise making (inevitable if zombie spawn is increased and they are found even in forests/fields) would alert another group who will get more people and mow them down. Why would you befriend a random stranger when you already have a group? To get more numbers so that you can more easily dominate other groups on the server.

As it is, though, I don't think there are more than one large group per server. They band together and run around unopposed so much that they're insanely bored and just go our sniping to fill time. Fixing that would be a good step in the right direction. It would make being a lonewolf viable but insanely difficult way of life.

[RpTheHotrod 1]

More difficult is good, but you also don't want to make the game a chore.

It needs a good balance.

[CrimsonBlade 2]

Sounds good.... but..... big groups might kill other big groups, thus turning this into TDM. Would probaly make the Southern Coast friendlier... and make the North populated with big groups. Only way to join a big group would be to sight them put your weapon down and put your life at risk. The life cycle of your everyday joe if this was implemented would be.

1. Meet up with people in the South

2. Loot

3. Head North

4. Live out your days in the twees

[dsi24 227]

OP, no, not OP, Time Glitch. He has that real talk.

Full support.