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

[Al Bundy (DayZ) 0]

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

A mod has requested I form a list of proposed features so this can be moved to the suggestion forum:

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

=====================

=====================

- High-End Military-Grade Loot increased rarity. This should only be for the very dedicated/lucky. ONLY spawns in Military Areas.

- CZ550 replaces most Sniper Rifle spawns.

- AKM and AK-74 more likely rifle spawns than M4.

- Deer Stands no longer spawn military weapons' date=' only ammo.

- Small chance of AKM/AK-74 to spawn in Residential areas.

- All Basic Survival Consumables spawn less often (Food, Canteens, Soda, Etc.)

- All Basic Survival Consumables can now be shared between two players for full effect.

- Hunger goes down slower, but leads to Starvation when blinking. Starvation causes quicker loss of stamina, growling sound, and eventually the shakes, inability to run, passing out, and death.

- Thirst remains at the same rate, but leads to Dehydration when blinking. Dehydration causes loss of speed, blurred vision, and eventually the inability to sprint coupled with passing out. Hallucinations as a warning before death.

- Zed count increased.

- Zeds can hear gunshots from further away. However, rather than immediately locking on, they will simply investigate the noise if the player is out of their line of sight.

- If many zed are in an area, they form a pack and begin roaming further than their default AI patrol path. These have the ability to leave cities.

- Packs are more common in cities.

- Zeds spawn more in the outskirts of cities ("Wandering").

- Chance of zeds spawning in the wilderness. Chance of zed packs spawning in the wilderness as well.

- Areas where Zed have been present for long periods of time (Parts of cities) have a chance to begin to become hazardous. Players must either find Scarves or Surgical Masks to help prevent infection from these areas. They will cough loudly if they do not have either of these items.

- It's a no-brainer that other players are more helpful around more Zed.

- Injury system expanded. Players can now get scratches from infected that can cause sickness if left untreated.

- Scratches varry in intensity from a minor fleshwound (Requires bandage, does not bleed) to huge gashes (Loss of limb function, bleeds and requires bandage).

- Players can wash their wounds with water, or cleanse them with rubbing alcohol or peroxide (Both of which can be found in Residential loot). Peroxide or Alcohol completely cleans wound, where water still has a chance of infection.

- Serious gashes can cause a limb to lose function until the wound heals. Limping on a leg, or unable to use a primary weapon due to an injured arm are possible scenarios.

- The only way to break bones will be severe Zed injury (Multiple Zeds Multiple Times), or falling.

- Broken bones cannot be mended without a splint. Splints are wood and bandages.

- You can set the bones yourself, but you risk permanent damage to the limb (Decreased speed for legs, Less accuracy for arms). Another player can set your broken bones with no risk of permanent injury.

- You can set the bones without Morphine, but you risk passing out for a long time from the pain instead (The bone is not set properly). Painkillers will allow you to set a bone, but with blurred vision for a time, and a loud cry is let out.

- Once a splint is in place, the limb must mend for a full day of game time. You can limp on a leg, and can only use a primary for an arm. If Painkillers are taken, you can limp faster.

- If you take 2 doses of Morphine, you can limp on a broken leg. Continued use will enable you to keep limping, but you run the risk of overdose.

- Another player can help you walk, "Fireman" style. Using this, you can limp considerably faster on injured, broken, or splinted legs. You can both use secondary weapons during this.

- Antibiotic spawns increased, still only in hospitals.

- Infections come in different varieties: Cold, Flu, and Injury Infections.

- Cold contracted from low body temperature. Causes coughing, decrease in stamina, possible fever if conditions do not improve. The body will recover, slowly, if given enough rest.

- Flu can only be contracted in hazardous areas. It causes vomiting, leading to the shakes and dehydration. It has a high chance of fever, and can lead to death if fluids and food are not maintained.

- Injury Infections are the result of untreated wounds. These lead to shaking, loss of limb function, 100% chance of fever, and eventually death. The only cure for this is antibiotics.

- Fever causes loss of ability to jog/run/sprint, shakes, dehydration, passing out, and if disease is not cured, death.

- The healing process can be accelerated by other players. They can tend to your fever with a damp cloth, provide you with body heat if you have a cold, and keep you fed/hydrated when you're passed out. (They can also go out and get medicine!)

- While not diseases, Overheating and Heat Stroke are introduced. Overheating occurs while running in the sun for too long. This causes accelerated thirst consumption, and slightly blurred vision. Taking a break, then running in the shade will prevent this.

- If the player continues to run for too long without brief breaks (We're talking 10 seconds every 10 minutes kind of thing, no big deal), they will exhaust themselves, leaving themselves open to Heat Stroke if it's daytime (Excluding Sunrise and Sunset). They could potentially pass out for a VERY long time due to Heat Stroke if they do not take breaks.

- Players can walk during the day to receive no negative effects. This means players without water can still travel in the heat of the day without having to worry about Heat Stroke.

- Different regions and time of day in those regions now have different effects within the environment.

- The coast has deep fog in the morning and at night. During the day, whipping winds cause wind chill to those out in the open.

- Open plains during the heat of the day are very hot can cause exhaustion in players much quicker.

- Mountains are damp and misty in the mornings, causing temperature to drop.

- Forested areas are more prone to rain. This is even more so on forested mountains.

- Rain does not chill the player immediately, but if the player does not find heat or shelter soon, they will become soaked and their body temperature will drop, causing mild shivering. This takes longer during the day.

- Heavy Rain will accelerate the chilling process, and also make players unable to build fires in the open. They must find shelter or a dense forest to light a fire in. Heavy Rain will also give a light fog to the area, making it harder to see. Heavy Rain is more common in forests and forested mountains.

- Night will accelerate temperature-dropping effects.

- Being near another player will cause you to "share body heat". This will decelerate the temperature drop greatly.

- Two players can contribute to a fire pit, causing a bigger and hotter fire.

=====================

=====================

I FULLY realize that many if not most of these features will simply not be possible as DayZ is a MOD. However, my hope is that systems like these will be considered once DayZ becomes a stand-alone game...Which I have full confidence that it will.

(That was quite a lot of writing...Whoo...)

[/quote']

I love all of these changes. They put a heavy emphasis back on survival. I would like to see crossbows rarely spawn in Deer Stands but I've got a crossbow bias.

[logan23 118]

These are great ideas and concepts.

+1

[zombiegenesis 0]

After spending more time in the game deliberately to balance these proposals I can say that while I don't agree with every single one, I think the actual idea behind them is what the game really needs at this point. It's more Day Z than Day Z is.

Especially the options for the zombies, some good stuff there.

[cameron 2]

I think the OP has a brilliant idea.

It really frustrates me when I look at the topic and see

Poster 1 says

"No you're wrong"

Poster 2 says

"No you're wrong"

Poster 3 says

"No you're wrong"

Elaboration would be nice people!

"This would just encourage more shoot on sight"

Let me present a situation. You have survivor A with a CZ who spots survivor B with a makarov. A is cleverly disguised in with the terrain on a hill in the countryside and would be able to kill B easily. Now A has to take a few things into consideration. Is A wounded? With zombies now infesting the woods would any be attracted by the shooting? How much ammo does A have? If ammo is scarce then you better use it wisely, so that means that what equipment B has is worth considering.

There you go. That is a drastic improvement. Killing people has turned from a natural reaction to a tough decision. You could still kill him if you have a silencer, or you could make sure there aren't any zed nearby.

Now if A kills B what are the concequences? If B doesn't have anything of value then it was wasted ammo. What if A is low on food afterwards but lacks the firepower to get into a town? Or, maybe A found a great stache of food and ammo on B.

With the supposed changes, Lonewolfing would still be possible but it would be difficult. If you lonewolf then wounds are more deadly, shelter is more important, towns would be difficult to enter. You would need to be a smart raider to lonewolf succesfully.

"Oh but then people would just PVP in packs"

So? Thats a good thing, group fighting is more interesting than individual fighting because groups have more resources and require more resources. You need to stay in a group to survive, but the group needs more resources in general to survive. That makes high-loot areas important. You might even see clans develop and fight over resources and territory, and clans of equal strength might trade goods. (yah pretty doubtful but still possible, and rocket would need to code in a way to stop all of the DC exploits)

"What? that is dumb, someone would just shoot everyone else in the face and steal all of the loot"

Then he would get shot by everyone else, who would then completely steal his gear while making sure to recover the victims' gear

"Well, groups would just shoot all the noobs"

Then the noobs would form their own group, and the smart noobs might lone wolf it.

at any rate, considering this is an alpha build, now is the time to try these crazy insane things.

[Wulfear 6]

This guy sounds like he works for blizzard.

[logan23 118]

If you add in Skills that a player can learn- like from a found book on medicine or fixing vehicles- would make players themselves more valuable where a clan might not shoot the random player if say he will help them medicine or some other item/issue.

All players would start the same but there would be ways to build some skill sets/focus which adds to a player being more valuable alive then dead.......but still keep an eye on them in case of backstabbing. But this will give players a chance to prove themselves to a group- build trust. Once people start building a social network then the ones who are just here for pking will end up being hunted down or they will embrace the new game mechanics that are geared to survival and society building/ social.

Yes there will be groups who will fight for territory but that is what we see in the Show The Walking Dead and other shows/movies on this type of game.

To prove my trust to people I meet, i offer items/food/ ammo and also allowing the person I'm with to call first dibs on weapons..etc....This usually calms them down and shows them I do have their back.

[andmun@ziggo.nl 0]

First of all, I think the intentions of the OP are good. I concur with the idea that, this being an alpha, now is the time to try crazy ideas. But if the ideas become too crazy, I'd walk away from the alpha and there would have to be a pretty convincing case for me to buy the finished product.

Though all these ideas seem a reasonable way of inducing the so coveted goal of more cooperation, there are essentially two kinds of player:

- The pro, who has much experience with some, maybe more, different FPS games.

- The n00b, meaning me, who already has a hard time to make it to the next city, let alone stay alive long enough to loot a warehouse for food. I can't shoot very well, which will become painfully obvious once I try to function in an organized group. Someone posted earlier in this thread that it takes 30 minutes to arm oneself, and another 20 to start an all-out war. That person has either played a different game than I did, or played it radically different. In the latter case, these are issues that have to be addressed in technical way, not by altering game-mechanics.

It seems to me that the proposed 'rules' are mainly benefiting the people who have accumulated a large horde of material, and are unwilling to part with it just because some asshole saw you first. A valid emotion, but hardly of any importance for the game at large.

I think that implementing most of the measures suggested here will greatly deter any new players. And for a game to be a commercial success, you HAVE to attract new players and let them enjoy their own learning curve as set forth by the game.

Personally I feel the game is balanced at the moment: I've had as much positive encounters as I have had negative ones. There were moments when a Samaritan selflessly gave me blood and morphine. I've experienced also the sense of loss when I got shot carrying that coveted CZ550, after spending hours upon hours searching for the correct ammo. It was heart-wrenching: he pulled the trigger a split second sooner than I did.

Who cares if a typical game only lasts between 1 and 10 hours? There are so many games out there that leave you alive in the world for days and days of playing time. I think it's refreshing to see a game that has the potential to deliver the same, only rarely does. Perhaps the true survivors ARE the murderers in the end. What would you expect of people? (and I speak that last word with disdain.)

In the end, every decision to shoot, whether from afar or at point-blank range, is made on so many variables and split second decisions it's instinctive. Can't control instincts with rules. Rules might deter, but that doesn't help me much when that sniper just though: "Aw. Fekkit.". Only taking away firearms from the game in it's entirety can do that.

Which brings me to the last point.

There are a few servers that still have side-chat enabled. I speak a few foreign languages. The HATE and ABUSE and SWEARING that goes on is mind-boggling. The racism, hatefulness toward nationalities (especially the USA/RU-stuff), insinuations about their mothers, their girlfriends and their failure to be of any use to them both. The list goes on and on.

Life as a human is meant to be juxtaposed between extremes. Avoiding the extremes themselves even more so. Perhaps enabling the side-chat AND player-tags everywhere again will do more for cooperation than all these rules. I would have no remorse shooting assholes, I'm a Darwinist. :)

[Powell (DayZ) 734]

To the long updated list, I nodded my head to everything you said. It is a long way off, if at all, but by god I want this to happen

[Mekajiki 0]

These are fantastic ideas.

[Hellfire447 7]

Bump, these ideas are just what this game needs to be guided into the correct direction. I feel the game will have a healthier transition to this state from its current Deathmatch (with zombies sometimes), when people can't dc out of combat or dc zombies away, or just server hop for the mother load of all gear. What originally caused my addiction to this game was the emotion that i would feel playing. Who is around me, can zombies see me, did i just get shot? I'm being hunted, god help me, Bad ass i found that gun i have always wanted, dear lord help me i'm starving or bleeding out.. the list goes on, the sheer adrenaline everyday is addicting, but after playing awhile i realized that zombies aren't that scary because you can just glitch them away, you can't glitch players away, so it's kill or be killed out there. When people are forced to play life or death for real, no glitching or cheating death by disconnecting, the META of the game will began to mold itself into the healthy post-apocalyptic zombie world we all crave. When players new or old are forced to go through the one hundred and one colors of emotion daily in order to progress through the game, Furthermore, when players realize they are going to have to kill every zombie they see in order to... MAYBE.... find a cool gun, ammo, food, players are going to want to stay together, not kill on site, because there are more zombies then players, ammo is a luxury, food is a luxury. Going out deathmatch style will lead you nowhere if you can't survive to get to that point.

I'm sure i missed something in there, but you get my point here. These changes will help, maybe we don't see it, but when the player base realizes what this game is truly about, the META will change. You rarely hear experienced players in EleKtro or Churno or even the NW airfield discharge their weapon because in fear of who is listening, what PLAYERS, are listening. No one cares about zombies because there easy to deal with, by simply not dealing with them, When that all changes.. now we have a real survival game here. True emotion on epic proportions, worrying about zombies much more then players, strategical tactics on how you will make it through the day, not how many players can i kill before i die because that is what i like to do.... if the players are forced to play the true game, uninterrupted, everything will change.

[ZeroGravitySE 5]

So basically large groups dominate more than before.

lulz, a single bandit is chill now. A large group of 6-20. another story.

[kingssooted@gmail.com 16]

I think Day Z needs safe zones, small areas spread throughout the map where friendly players can group up and then head out into the rest of the hostile world. This safe zones where a fort, or a building would have automated turrets that kill bandits on sight. Otherwise the bandits would just camp the entrances and exits to these safe zones. Also there should be at least 10 of these in the game world. Whether it be a bunker in the middle of the wilderness. A 2 story building in Cherno, or a one of the Castles. This would allow friendly players to trade with each other, chat about adventures, maybe even store stuff, and most of all group up.

I also think that civilian heli in Arma 2 (the big white and blue one with no guns) should be in Day Z, the friendly players can use it as a taxi, or a search and rescue chopper, or an exploration chopper.

Lastly I think vehicles should have keys, not everyone in a zombie apocalypse knows how to hotwire a car come on! So vehicles can still be destroyed, looted, but not driven unless you are the driver or kill the driver and take his keys. Since vehicles reset everytime a server restarts it's not a big deal allowing ownership. Infact I think it would improve the RP experience. The lucky guy who finds the Civie Heli can now start his own post-apocalyptic enterprise. A can of Beans and a Soda could buy you a Helicopter ride to Cherno. (When Radios are implemented) Offer him a weapon and some ammo and He'll come bail you and your friends out of a Last Stand against Zombies, or Bandits.

What is to stop Safe Zones from turning into Warzones? Well we already know the Automated guns smoke bandits on sight. But what about a Survivor that wants to go postal once he's inside? Well there are a few solutions. A General Box at the door which you drop your weapons in and get them back when you leave. Have a script that puts weapons on permanent safeties while inside. Or have a few Automated Guns on the inside too so whoever decides to shoot poor friendlies doesn't live long enough to enjoy his spoils.

Bottom line: There shouldn't be any killing in a Safe Zone anyways, it would ruin the whole point of a Safe Zone.

[logan23 118]

I think Day Z needs safe zones' date=' small areas spread throughout the map where friendly players can group up and then head out into the rest of the hostile world. This safe zones where a fort, or a building would have automated turrets that kill bandits on sight. Otherwise the bandits would just camp the entrances and exits to these safe zones. Also there should be at least 10 of these in the game world. Whether it be a bunker in the middle of the wilderness. A 2 story building in Cherno, or a one of the Castles. This would allow friendly players to trade with each other, chat about adventures, maybe even store stuff, and most of all group up.

[/quote']

There are no safe zones.

The closes thing to a safe zone is when the settlement building mechanics are on game. Then you will be indoors where you are as safe as you can be ...bit stay away from windows if there are any.

What keeps the blood pounding is that you are never 100 percent safe

[kingssooted@gmail.com 16]

Yeah but turning this game into a deathmatch is going to kill this game and that is the direction it's headed. If you run into another player it comes down to who shoots first. This kind of game could be so much cooler as a simulation not a shooter.

Besides in Post-Apocalyptic Settings Safe Zones are very common.

Also there are already areas you are 100% safe, outside the map boundaries, in woods etc. People never die in woods. What the one in a million chance you run into another player in the woods? Hasn't happened to me yet.

[cameron 2]

Yeah but turning this game into a deathmatch is going to kill this game.

Also there are already areas you are 100% safe' date=' outside the map boundaries, in woods etc. People never die in woods. What the one in a million chance you run into another player in the woods? Hasn't happened to me yet.

[/quote']

Hardcoded safezones are lame. Large groups of players should make "safezones." Want to be safe? dont piss off that group. (assuming rocket decides to make it possible to secure an area from other players. As it is now you can just disconnect and infiltrate any area, and its impractical to defend a place 24/7)

[kingssooted@gmail.com 16]

Yeah but turning this game into a deathmatch is going to kill this game.

Also there are already areas you are 100% safe' date=' outside the map boundaries, in woods etc. People never die in woods. What the one in a million chance you run into another player in the woods? Hasn't happened to me yet.

[/quote']

Hardcoded safezones are lame. Large groups of players should make "safezones." Want to be safe? dont piss off that group. (assuming rocket decides to make it possible to secure an area from other players. As it is now you can just disconnect and infiltrate any area, and its impractical to defend a place 24/7)

Camping and Gunning down other players in a game with perma death is also lame

Besides when do you see more than two players together *not* killing each other unless they are buddies? Your large group theory is thus impossible unless done by clan. A large group of random players meeting will just result in a huge gunbattle that draws a lot of zombies. And most clans are already bandits so they won't help survivors.

And the whole point of a Survivor's experience is not to kill other players, but instead to kill zombies will exploring and adventuring, killing the occasional bandit in self-defense.

Right now the Game is too focused on Loot which in turn fuels Greed which in turn motivates us to kill other players to acquire More Loot.

By offering up the Safe Zone idea I am hoping to promote Cooperation, Companionship, and an Economy. If players can trade or cooperate for what they want instead of having to kill for it, I think it opens up a much richer gaming experience, then just following the Short & Narrow Degenerating Deathmatch mindset down the Rabbit Hole.

Besides I think having Friendly Safe Havens would scratch the Bandit Player's back as well. Just like Faction Cities do in MMOs. A lone bandit or two would be toast trying to attack it. But an entire clan could probably take a Safe Haven down with all it's firepower brought to bear. It would be an euphoric experience for Bandits, just like raiding Orgrimmar is for Alliance.

[cameron 2]

Yeah but turning this game into a deathmatch is going to kill this game.

Also there are already areas you are 100% safe' date=' outside the map boundaries, in woods etc. People never die in woods. What the one in a million chance you run into another player in the woods? Hasn't happened to me yet.

[/quote']

Hardcoded safezones are lame. Large groups of players should make "safezones." Want to be safe? dont piss off that group. (assuming rocket decides to make it possible to secure an area from other players. As it is now you can just disconnect and infiltrate any area, and its impractical to defend a place 24/7)

Camping and Gunning down other players in a game with perma death is also lame

Besides when do you see more than two players together *not* killing each other unless they are buddies? Your large group theory is thus impossible unless done by clan. A large group of random players meeting will just result in a huge gunbattle that draws a lot of zombies. And most clans are already bandits so they won't help survivors.

And the whole point of a Survivor's experience is not to kill other players, but instead to kill zombies will exploring and adventuring, killing the occasional bandit in self-defense.

Right now the Game is too focused on Loot which in turn fuels Greed which in turn motivates us to kill other players to acquire More Loot.

By offering up the Safe Zone idea I am hoping to promote Cooperation, Companionship, and an Economy. If players can trade or cooperate for what they want instead of having to kill for it, I think it opens up a much richer gaming experience, then just following the Short & Narrow Degenerating Deathmatch mindset down the Rabbit Hole.

Besides I think having Friendly Safe Havens would scratch the Bandit Player's back as well. Just like Faction Cities do in MMOs. A lone bandit or two would be toast trying to attack it. But an entire clan could probably take a Safe Haven down with all it's firepower brought to bear. It would be an euphoric experience for Bandits, just like raiding Orgrimmar is for Alliance.

This is a PVP game, if you don't like PVP then you are playing the wrong game. Having the risk of being shot in the face by some asshole in a ghillie suit 1k meters away is part of the game. Some of us think it happens to often and are proposing some changes.

also, why will it result in a gun battle? If they all wish to cooperate they should get along fine. It only gets torn apart when one or more of the players dont want to be in the group anymore. The idea of this thread is to make it benificial to be in a group. "But one of them will want all the loots!!!" you might say, and what would they gain? a bunch of guns and ammo they cant carry, as much food and medicine as they can carry (which may not be much) and the distrust of the group.

As to your MMO comparison... no, just no. What would be the point to raiding it? If there is a point then you'll just get large clans of people (like the goons of SA) raiding the "safe" zones in order to steal loot, or just for fun and to steal peoples' stuff.

Right now making a safe haven is impractical, but if the features making it feasable are added, it should be up to the playerbase to protect themselves.

[ssiilleesskkyy@googlemail.com 1]

/Signed

what your'e proposing makes so much sense. On top of that it's amazing. If this or even any of the above get implemented into the game it would straight away become much better.

[beeek00 1]

@Foxd1le and cameron:

Perhaps DayZ should evolve into a hybrid game, with elements of PVP, MMO and SIM to feed the appetites of different kinds of gamers and prevent boredom among those already present.

Increasing realism will by definition require more complexity.

[StealthyBrayden 6]

This idea is great but then again, it sounds so hard that I probably wont be bothered xD! I think DayZ is currently a little too easy to get around but, it definetly shouldn't be that hard.

With that said I 50% agree with this idea :)

[earion 3]

Great list of suggestions.

Before going over yours, I believe the few given by your bandit admirator deserve some attention :

- [...] Have situations where you need to carry/vehicle someone back to a medical tent at a base.

I think that could equally be achieved at an hospital. Full care for bullet wounds for example.

- Have more medical events that require a second or multiple people.

At least two to operate on a wound properly or carry someone without being too exhausted or slowed down.

- Limit the amount of tools you can carry to like 3.

That depend on the tools. Looks silly if you can't have a map, a compass, a box of matches and a GPS at the same time. But choosing between a toolbox and a hatchet seems appropriate.

Now yours. Will comment mostly on those I disagree with (a few, really)

- High-End Military-Grade Loot increased rarity. This should only be for the very dedicated/lucky. ONLY spawns in Military Areas.

- Deer Stands no longer spawn military weapons, only ammo.

IMHO, would make the game worse, by increasing loot camping at NWAF, as it is the only place to find NVGs and highest tier loot. My alternative :

* Don't see why Balota AF, Stary, Berezino, NEAF AND deerstands couldn't hold that same high end stuff. The probability should remain the same overall, but distributed across several places. Also still don't see why tents at balota never spawn anything. Would force players to move around and take more risks. "Today's menu : empty tin cans at NWAF, NVGs at Balota. Take a hike."

* I don't think the overall probability to find a weapon should be lowered, but I think the probability to find ammo for it should be dramatically reduced. Assault Rifles shouldn't spawn with 2/3 full mags as they do right now. And AK-74, AKM and AKsu-kobra aren't really that weaker than their US couterparts, so I don't really see how increasing their spawn rate would make things any better. I do agree however to have a small chance of military loot in residential areas (gun nut house, or dead soldier last stand, plenty of reasons for that)

- All Basic Survival Consumables spawn less often (Food, Canteens, Soda, Etc.)

Best idea i've read so far. Ever. Think it should give 200 blood/player, not split. This cans look big and I don't think you can keep an open, half-eaten can of sardines in your backpack without any risk of sickness (--> food decays over time, especially raw meat ?)

- It's a no-brainer that other players are more helpful around more Zed.

People are loudly saying they will still shoot you ; I doubt they will ever help you in any way. But what I have no doubt about is that, if they have a DMR with 1 half empty mag instead of 5 full clips, and that the risk of dying to zombies after shooting is a lot higher... They will certainly hesitate to pull the trigger, whatever they might say. And this will certainly going to be a lot more interesting for them, whatever they might say :)

- Antibiotic spawns increased, still only in hospitals.

I have antibiotics at home when I'm ill... I don't own a makarov.

Not likely if I have no prescription, but still possible. So, small chance to spawn in residential areas.

I FULLY realize that many if not most of these features will simply not be possible as DayZ is a MOD. However, my hope is that systems like these will be considered once DayZ becomes a stand-alone game...Which I have full confidence that it will.

(That was quite a lot of writing...Whoo...)

My meta-suggestions : try sorting out priorities out of this list.

Sharing a can of beans seems very possible. Adding minor wounds with no bleeding as well.

Things like atmospheric effects and hallucinations are maybe more complicated. I can PM you a draft of such a ranking based on importance / perceived feasability if you want.

My two cents on the whole PvP/coop/PvE/TeamPermaDeathMatch discussion :

Put players in Chernarus with :

- No weapons at all. They leave.

- Weapons and ammo for all as a default equipment. They shoot each other

- Scarce weapons, ammo and hostile environment : now that's interesting. That's DayZ. This is not PvP, not coop, not PvE, not Team Deathmatch. It's much more... complicated.

So far, I see different kinds of people playing the game you still all have to satisfy :

1. dedicated players playing lonewolves, "bandits" and "nice guys". The only difference between those two subkinds, is that "bandits" will shoot on sight 99% the time whereas for "nice guys", that drops to... 98% now that side channel is disabled on most servers ?

2. dedicated players playing in organized groups. Most groups always shoot, some MIGHT ignore you. But the really interesting things is that *for groups, bandits are just the other guys*

3. casual players that have no choice but playing on their own, as there is lack of incentive for teaming up *with randoms*, but instead a big incentive for shooting on sight as the reward is the same - minus the risk of backstabbing.

I think you can't change the 1st and 2nd categories (I belong to those as a bandit, depending on my mood). But I think the third category deserves more attention, that would add something more interesting to the other two as well. There is plenty of people looking to play casually and team up with total randoms.

It was totally possible with the side channel, but immersion breaking. It was also possible with the bandit skin, but made no sense at all. Without those two, it is now nearly impossible, so new authentic mechanics and a bit of tweaking are needed to address that. And a lot of your suggestions may just do exactly that.

[methodology 4]

Absolutely love the detailed list of ideas. Seriously hope they're given some thought by the team.

Would love to see firepits made into a more social device. For example sitting around them with more than 2 others increases your humanity (I know this may be exploited but if the other suggestions are added it might not matter). Make it so you can add water/food to the fireplace so that all around it can share it and anyone sitting there will have their water/food/humanity/temperature and any other new measurement steadily rising. Maybe you can add a firepit chat channel + trading to this.

Would also like to see food and water levels go longer before they reach danger levels but then also that it takes more than 1 bean can/soda to reach back to full levels. This will make food/water still very important (especially if they're scarcer) but will also allow more room to share.

[adamtheheretic 106]

I read the original post and first page but far too many, I definitely support this idea.

Edit: "Areas that have been densely populated with infected for a long period of time are now more difficult to breathe in. Death stinks the air, and if you spend too much time there, you might get sick. You'll cough if you don't have a surgical mask, or at least a scarf to wrap around your nose and mouth."

Please implement the gas masks/surgical masks/scarfs immediately.

[Sabata (DayZ) 1]

Has the difficulty increase in 1.7.1.x version created any more cooperation or less PvP? OBVIOUSLY NOT. Just decreased survival times and made some players angry. Going down this route makes no sense except for sadomasochist people.

[freelunch 0]

I think Day Z needs safe zones' date=' small areas spread throughout the map where friendly players can group up and then head out into the rest of the hostile world. This safe zones where a fort, or a building would have automated turrets that kill bandits on sight. Otherwise the bandits would just camp the entrances and exits to these safe zones. Also there should be at least 10 of these in the game world. Whether it be a bunker in the middle of the wilderness. A 2 story building in Cherno, or a one of the Castles. This would allow friendly players to trade with each other, chat about adventures, maybe even store stuff, and most of all group up.

What is to stop Safe Zones from turning into Warzones? Well we already know the Automated guns smoke bandits on sight. But what about a Survivor that wants to go postal once he's inside? Well there are a few solutions. A General Box at the door which you drop your weapons in and get them back when you leave. Have a script that puts weapons on permanent safeties while inside. Or have a few Automated Guns on the inside too so whoever decides to shoot poor friendlies doesn't live long enough to enjoy his spoils.

Bottom line: There shouldn't be any killing in a Safe Zone anyways, it would ruin the whole point of a Safe Zone.

[/quote']

I like this idea. I had a similar thought.

But I don't think a safe zone need be safe - just that PvP is dangerous, without an artificial game mechanic.

I suggest AI faction groups (20 men) hold some countryside areas. The armed AI civilians will shoot any player who kills another player within their zone. Has to be located so snipers cannot pick the AI off!

In the AI faction zone, you can trade with other players or meet up in relative safety.

This also allows/encourages players to group together, to raid the AI faction for weapons + stores and to kill any human players who thought they were completely safe!

"Auto-turrets" or guaranteed safety... will spoil the immersion.