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

[MinxinG 50]

I totally support this, now that my group has about 4 people and 2 cars, we are trying to group up with more people, sometimes we go to Elektro and one of our team members go to the hills with a sniper and then we go searching for players without Guns to team up and gain their trust, but some times we find some douche bags happy trigger with AKM or AK74, or even a Makarov that shoots on sight, then our Sniper takes him out, thats a sad point, because even us that use High Gear (Usually we go down with M16A2 ACOG, M24, Mk48, AKM) and want to team up, and these new guys that actually needs help just shoot on sight. Your suggestion would really decrease the Shoot On Sight chance, because they will think before deciding to go Lone Wolf or Team Up and survive the easy way.

Another Suggestion

-Zombies has the chance of grabbing you and you will need to kill him to leave the grab.

[OW22 21]

-snip-

Well, yes and no. Actually, I have no idea why I said that. Here's what I think:

You wake up on the beach. You lost all your items, or threw most of them away, since they had too much saltwater on and in them. My thoughts on why you have no items. That, or your boat capsized or something and you weren't carrying anything but a spare bandage for when you cut yourself on the rusty gaurdrailing.

I think food spawns should be more plentiful. I think they should be only in a few places, though. Say farms had none. They grow organic, not canned, and probably don't drink unhealthy soda. Supermarkets should be hotspots. It would be dangerous there. Regular houses should vary from the food they have, but should be in cabinets, the greater supply in locked (where you need a crowbar to open, which doesn't BREAK the lock but opens it enough so you could reach inside) and some random ones on the table.

And then of course, hospitals, firestations, churches, industrial buildings, warehouses, and ect would have no food or water. That leaves you to go hunting in residential. Also, you can't really stockpile food that well. You'd need a base. Someone might take 2 or 3 cans. So what?

Edited July 17, 2012 by OW22

[jay.pis 32]

There will also be less killing in towns if they increased zombies by at least twice the amount that it is now that roam around them which will have players think before discharging their weapons. Also increase the range of their hearing so the chances of getting swarmed is higher with firing a weapon.

Edited July 17, 2012 by jay.pis

[OW22 21]

Another Suggestion

-Zombies has the chance of grabbing you and you will need to kill him to leave the grab.

Well look at you, piggybacking. Couldn't attract enough people to your thread?

That was mean, it was, but you should be aware what you're doing. You're pitching an entirely new idea that's completely unrelated to this thread. And now look what you did. You attracted another poster going off topic with you. Shame on you. For shaaaaame. :P

Seriously, don't do that.

[OW22 21]

There will also be less killing in towns if they increased zombies by at least twice the amount that it is now that roam around them which will have players think before discharging their weapons. Also increase the range of their hearing so the chances of getting swarmed is higher with firing a weapon.

No, increasing their hearing (or spawnrate) is not a good thing to tamper with. Right now, we're looking at it would be a good idea from our point of view, which is only focused on one aspect. Rocket has to take in the whole picture before making a decision. We can't make them faster, slower, blinder, deafer, or more perceptive without seriously thinking about the ripple effects.

So let's think. Where do these campers hideout? In buildings or on rooves. So that's... something. Do something with that. Say we already gave them less ammo. They will still try to kill, but they'll be more careful with their shots. Now what to do next?

Edited July 17, 2012 by OW22

[tai231@hotmail.com 10]

I kill newly-spawned survivors.

I don't like to, but I HAVE to. First time my group approached a survivor, we held him at gunpoint, and told him to nod if he was friendly. We tried to teach him how to use the chat/voice chat. He took off. Probably scared/running to meet his friends. 5 minutes later, after we stopped to refuel our car, he came back with a makarov and tried to kill us. No longer, from that day and after, if someone sees us, he's a goner.

And there is, of course, the RESPAWN.

If a player finds your camp, you kill him, he WILL come back with his group to try and raid your camp. They'll join other servers, walk to your camp's position, take good sniping positions, and spawn all at once, all in position to completely slaughter you and your friends. Only way out is to move your camp.

Not to mention the large amount of betrayers, people that tag along with you, being friendly and shit, until he finds out the location of your camp, then he just kills as many as he can, or just leaves and organizes a raid like I said above.

Mostly, we don't kill for fun, we kill because we can't trust anyone. Even if we need other people, my clan buddies would suffice. Our rule is: If you're spotted, you kill. If you're not spotted, it's your call. If the player is armed, you ALWAYS kill.

[jay.pis 32]

snip

QFT!

You can't trust anyone except for your online and/or IRL friends.

People should just deal with it and have the devs focus game mechanics else where.

[Worrun (DayZ) 108]

I'm sorry but tl:dr but I agree, we need to have some incentive for players to join up, although:

Do NOT make it so we can't effectively survive alone. Some of us don't have friends to play with or preffer to play alone or simply can't be bothered to find someone or limit your playing time to only when the other person is available to play.

Also, bring back chat. I think a GREAT idea would be area chat, like in your town/area/sqKLM there is a seperate chat box to the next, that way you won't see every single person from Cherno to Green Mountain (shiver) to the coast spamming chat and you can say e.g. "You there, next to the red barn" and they will know someone can see them etc.

[OW22 21]

I'm sorry but tl:dr but I agree, we need to have some incentive for players to join up, although:

Do NOT make it so we can't effectively survive alone. Some of us don't have friends to play with or preffer to play alone or simply can't be bothered to find someone or limit your playing time to only when the other person is available to play.

Also, bring back chat. I think a GREAT idea would be area chat, like in your town/area/sqKLM there is a seperate chat box to the next, that way you won't see every single person from Cherno to Green Mountain (shiver) to the coast spamming chat and you can say e.g. "You there, next to the red barn" and they will know someone can see them etc.

Fist off, what tl;dr mean? I sincerely don't know. Next, chat in what your talking about is a bad idea. Then PKers will KNOW someone is nearby when they chat.

Like most people have suggested before, world chat should be used in radios or some sort of texting machine. For nearby chat, I would, as I have before, suggest player callouts tailored for Day Zed. You can already get an ArmA voice pack, but one specifically for Day Z would make it a lot easier. How does it work? You press a button and your player says the dialogue in-game. It has a realistic range, though. Say when caps lock is off the callout is whispered, and while caps lock is on the callout is more audible? This is for players who don't have a mic and alike.

It doesn't solve all your problems, but you can ask for friendly players, or tell them to leave, you know? How I see it: friendly player you don't know = meet him, then watch him as he or you leaves immediately.

You got away with you life and a few more bullets.

A lot of players are friendly, but get nervous when they see a gun pointing at them, because it looks like they're going to shoot, even if they're just looking.

Edited July 17, 2012 by OW22

[guirc 6]

Bandit mentality: kill everythingon sight, because they might have that tool or food, or item I really need. This just incentivizes the anti-socials and bandits, it doesn't help cooperative play. Sure survivors may band closer, but bandits will have a much more serious reason to kill and loot you.

Bandit mentality: kill everythingon sight, because they might have that tool or food, or item I really need. This just incentivizes the anti-socials and bandits, it doesn't help cooperative play. Sure survivors may band closer, but bandits will have a much more serious reason to kill and loot you.

This is why it won't work, will never work. If you had a team, surviving could be much more difficult, since you need to SHARE things. What this means? Lone bandits trying to kill you no matter what for a Soda Can.

The error is in "living hell with scarce supplies".

Edited July 17, 2012 by guirc

[Zetal 90]

I read through this topic all the way from page 1, and had about 7 moments where I wanted to grab a poster and rip their heads off because of their ignorant, poorly founded, and idiotic posts that CLEARLY indicate that they didn't bother reading the previous pages of the topic.

These statistics are estimated, and clearly biased, but are the only explanation I can come up with:

85% of the people that oppose this idea DID NOT patiently read through this topic, or even the entirety of the main post. This gives some psychological indicators into the reasons behind their opposition, actually, in that they're impatient and likely oppose any sort of change that might result in them losing dominion over what they perceive as a part of the game they dominate.

~65% of the people that support this idea DID patiently read through this topic, and the main post.

Overall, only 15% of resistance can be tallied, and 65% of positive feedback can be tallied. This leaves the 'positive' feedback slightly ahead, and even moreso considering that I completely agree with the OP.

Anyone informed enough to give their thoughts on this, and has the proper mindset to be informed enough, will almost always agree with this suggestion.

Just common sense. Ciao.

[wolfstriked 143]

Deleted since I did not read the first post and its the same dam thing;)

Edited July 17, 2012 by wolfstriked

[Nariquo (DayZ) 39]

really guys pvp is a part of the game..

and it is realistic. why no pvp? really ...

you want equip food usw just get them form another person who have it ...

you dont want to be killed? you want to play pve.. there are so many empty servers or region where quite nobody is playing..

if you go to a big town well your problem there are many other players..

but to try to get the pvp out ? i would stop playing then because then its boring.

my clan and i are going only for pvp... we are looking in the middle and in the north for player groups and then to kill them .. and we only do this AND IT IS FUN

[OW22 21]

I read through this topic all the way from page 1, and had about 7 moments where I wanted to grab a poster and rip their heads off because of their ignorant, poorly founded, and idiotic posts that CLEARLY indicate that they didn't bother reading the previous pages of the topic.

These statistics are estimated, and clearly biased, but are the only explanation I can come up with:

85% of the people that oppose this idea DID NOT patiently read through this topic, or even the entirety of the main post. This gives some psychological indicators into the reasons behind their opposition, actually, in that they're impatient and likely oppose any sort of change that might result in them losing dominion over what they perceive as a part of the game they dominate.

~65% of the people that support this idea DID patiently read through this topic, and the main post.

Overall, only 15% of resistance can be tallied, and 65% of positive feedback can be tallied. This leaves the 'positive' feedback slightly ahead, and even moreso considering that I completely agree with the OP.

Anyone informed enough to give their thoughts on this, and has the proper mindset to be informed enough, will almost always agree with this suggestion.

Just common sense. Ciao.

What a creative way to say, "I support this." Honestly though, your basing a general asumption from how you THINK people act. I posted the 3rd post on a different topic, and everyone after basically restated my ideas without quoting me. The thread was still ONE PAGE LONG mind you.

This thread has a lot of lengthy replies, and you'll find that a lot of people just don't have the time. They post what they can, and by the time they get out what they want to say, they gotta go. Or they have better things to do. They give their piece and then they're gone.

Hell, I didn't read through all the replies because I knew SOME people were going to be restating eachother. Did I try? Yes. Did I use the search function? Yes. Did I post my feelings anyway? Hell yes! In fact, wouldn't you say an idea that everyone feels the same about is a good one? The fact many people feel the same way about something supports it. Either that a lot of people have a good point, wrong idea, or some other opinion.

Do I read all the new posts on the thread? Yeah, I try my best to. Did I restate anyone? Most likely. But I contributed to the thread in more than just one post. We had an idea, and we developed it. We fiddled with it and played around. How could my/our idea be bad for the game if I did try and think about it, play with it, and see how others felt?

Everyone has their piece. You're probably going to tell me that some of those extremely similar replies were on the same page too, right? I can't argue with that. I try to break paragraphs often to make the post seems shorter.

The fact is, you can't base something like "Their ideas and decisions will eventually destroy the game because they don't take the time to think them through." just because they didn't quote the post or have SOME differing quality. Some people will actually use @insertusernamehere or will reply to the post above theirs without using a quote.

Unless the posts are under a page in difference than I think having similar posts on separate pages is fine. It keeps the idea fresh. Just let them post. It's not like rocket is going to directly listen to us. We MIGHT inspire him, and he'll do what he wants. Any posts that repeat eachother aren't hurting anyone, even if it's annoying.

Edited July 17, 2012 by OW22

[texcat11 11]

Wow these are really good, I'm glad to see that not everyone just wants new weapons and items.

[ChocoAfro 1]

i was too lazy to read the whole text...

[RachetSmurf 2]

This is basically the game I want to play. Hopefully Rocket reads this post.

[wolfstriked 143]

Rocket could try allowing servers to set the amount of spawn cross the boards and see if people like it.Sadly there is no responses from him or any of his team and these harsh world topics.

Edited July 17, 2012 by wolfstriked

[Gunnm 2]

really guys pvp is a part of the game..

and it is realistic. why no pvp? really ...

you want equip food usw just get them form another person who have it ...

you dont want to be killed? you want to play pve.. there are so many empty servers or region where quite nobody is playing..

if you go to a big town well your problem there are many other players..

but to try to get the pvp out ? i would stop playing then because then its boring.

my clan and i are going only for pvp... we are looking in the middle and in the north for player groups and then to kill them .. and we only do this AND IT IS FUN

No one here want so set FF=off.

What we want here, is to give more social life into the game without any system involving nerf or restriction or what ever you call it...

So the way we try to do it, is by incentive with harsher world.

You want to kill everyone on sight ? Good to you :) With the actual game mechanics it's possible without worrying about ammo or weapons.

So, imagine you'll travel the wasteland mainly with hatchet, crowbar, a marakov and 1 perhaps 2 clips if very lucky. Starving to death, a guy show up with only a crowbar. Do you still will kill him on sight without knowing if he has food on him ? With the threat of infected nearby harder to fool around ?

That's the questions we would like that pop up on every guy playing the game and dealing with other guys.

[Strawcrow 10]

I am already trying to survive in real life. For me to play a game or mod, I need to enjoy it. My group can not all play together all the time, I need to be able to lone wolf it some.

In a real breakdown of society people will kill you to eat you, which is what I would love to see, killing and eating of survivors

. The reason to team up, or one reason, to gang up and kill others. Easier to snipe if others are watching your back. The core idea is great, make the enviroment a bigger factor great, but making everything a two person event like the blood packs is taking enjoyment away from it.

I remember a mod for the original Medal of Honor, instead of killing others in multiplayer, you went around handing out cupcakes and party invitations. The one who gave away the most won.....maybe that is what some of you want to see. This is a game with guns, if you were just going to hunt just animals a shotgun and a decent rifle is all you need. Military gear is meant to hunt/ kill people, not frost cupcakes.

[OW22 21]

I am already trying to survive in real life. For me to play a game or mod, I need to enjoy it. My group can not all play together all the time, I need to be able to lone wolf it some.

In a real breakdown of society people will kill you to eat you, which is what I would love to see, killing and eating of survivors

. The reason to team up, or one reason, to gang up and kill others. Easier to snipe if others are watching your back. The core idea is great, make the enviroment a bigger factor great, but making everything a two person event like the blood packs is taking enjoyment away from it.

I remember a mod for the original Medal of Honor, instead of killing others in multiplayer, you went around handing out cupcakes and party invitations. The one who gave away the most won.....maybe that is what some of you want to see. This is a game with guns, if you were just going to hunt just animals a shotgun and a decent rifle is all you need. Military gear is meant to hunt/ kill people, not frost cupcakes.

I do agree with you that it should be able to be played by yourself. I have always agreed with that. Unfortunately (or fortunately), cannibalism will never be in Day Zed. Why? It will be banned in some countries for that.

So what's left? We need a way to stop people from going trigger happy. Thinking... thinking....

[flypp 21]

"It's easier to steal than share."

I hear this excuse all the time on the forums, and it's bullshit.

The problem in this mod is not PvP. PvP is awesome. If I get shot because a player is starving to death, and needed my beans...well I'm okay with that. If a player has nothing but a crowbar and beats me to death for the winny on my back, again that's okay.

What is NOT OKAY is the guy sitting on the hospital roof with the DMR just popping people to see the "Murders:" number tick up one-by-one. That, boys and girls, is a douche.

There is nothing wrong with lone wolf play. There is nothing wrong with PvP. But you need to make the killing more meaningful.

1. Remove military grade equipment. No NVG. No thermal-sight assault rifles. No freaking 50-cal sniper rifles. This is DayZ, not ARMA2. Only weapons should be civilian.

2. Ammo needs to be incredibly scarce. When I find that Makarov mag I should dance a happy dance, not leave it on the ground and spit on it. Every pull of the trigger should be a hard decision. Do I put a few rounds into this guy, hoping he has replacements? Or do I let him walk past me? Or ask him if he has any rounds to spare. And hunting rifle rounds should be so rare they might as well be mythical.

3. Food should be more scarce than it is, but you should be able to go longer without eating. You should feel the hunger more. Rather than losing blood you should lose the ability to run fast, screen should be blurred, etc. Water works fine as it is...IRL you need to drink far more frequently than you need to eat.

This is the big one:

4. Remove the debug monitor and the kill notices, and don't release k/d stats for anyone or put them on the leaderboard. The only reason douches kill is to get that e-peen stroke of seeing their murder count tick up and that "joe has been killed" text. Remove both of those and you will see them run for the COD hills. It's also much more realistic...you shouldn't know if your shot took that guy out...or if he's circling behind you right now to pay you back.

You make these 4 changes and I promise you'll see less douches and more real PvP. The kind of PvP we can live with...

That's it!!! Remove scoreboard. It's simple. "Hardcore bandits" will cry, but it's necessary.

All that talk of "it's human nature" is bullshit. A REAL bandit don't care of a scoreboard. He cares of survive.

I understand another player kill me because i was near of him tend, or he see that i got a weapon... but, killing me while I am unarmed? -> Scoreboard, feed my ego.

When I first play this game, i saw a guy wearing a hatchet. He yelled "Friendly!" and I responsed the same. He told me he was injured, but i haven't food or medicines. He said me "I'm about to die. Let's go together and try to find medicines. If I die, take my hatchet and hope we met again sometime".

We moved to a town, but zombies killed him. I wait and get the hatchet avoiding the walkers. When I reach to town, I meet a guy in the lake. "Friendly" we said at time. Another guy with an AK spot us and ask if we have items. We answered we have nothing, only a hatched, so he leaves. When we heard shooting at town, we get the road to avoid a dangerous situation. At this time, I love this game. Could not be more inmersing.... but...

We were walking unarmed (the hatched were in the tool belt) across the beach when i guy in the forest kill us with a rifle from the forest. Why? We were not a threat. It was obvious we have nothing to loot... but... someone needed do increase him scoreboard, that's all.

From that time until now... the only thing I see is "flypp was killed", "flypp was killed", "flypp was killed". No interaction. No one response at my "friendly!". No loots (people killplayers at spawn points), no threat (people kill players in lonely places where there is nothing loot to procect)... just... scoreboard. Just Call of Dutiers starved of ego.

Remove scoreboard and see what happen.

Edited July 18, 2012 by flypp

[mrducky (DayZ) 33]

First and foremost: Deathmatching behaviour isn't really caused by the lack of difficulty, it's caused by the game mechanics and having nothing better to do than to go shoot at other players.

Yes, one might argue that by adding difficulty, now the players have something better to do - having to battle the environment. And yes, if the players are getting killed more by the environment, they are forced even more to cooperate to survive that... right? But is that really going to happen?

First, any adjustement in the game/environment difficulty will always have the biggest impact on the noobs. They are the ones who will immediately get slaughtered by the merciless environment. Not the experienced players or established groups. Will this somehow affect the grouping behaviour of the people?

Very little, I suspect. Because, as far as my experiences in the game go, the bright eyed solo noobs who have not yet been jaded by all the killing going on, are the ones who try to cooperate with every random encounter rather than try to shoot them on sight. Their behaviour is not the biggest problem.

The people who are most willing to shoot on sight are the groups of bandits or just any other established groups of people who are playing with their IRL friends, etc. They already have their little group put together. They don't want to risk it by getting some random player join them.

And of course there are always the few odd solo players who just enjoy running around killing everything they come across. And some of these probably were those noobs, who got killed too many times trying to be friendly, and then decided that the game is just best played as a deathmatch.

If you try to force the players to coop, by making sure they die if they don't do so... You are just making the game even more miserable for those players who would already like to coop, but keep ending up getting killed by others. Then they will not only still get killed by the other people, but they will also be killed by the environment. You end up not solving the actual game mechanic problem causing people to kill each other, but also add new problem that the people who are getting killed by others are now are getting killed by environment as well.

The problem is that the game has the same area, the same difficulty level for all of the players. The noobs and the pros. If you cater the pros and larger groups by making the game difficulty more suitable for them, you're just dickslapping all the solo noobs in the face. The noobs will just rage quit after the first few hours of play because they just can't make it anymore.

If you cater the noobs by making the game easier to survive, the pros will be utterly bored in that environment (which certainly won't help with the DM situation, but isn't really the fundamental issue, which is the lack of other things to do).

Its a lose-lose situation whichever way you go with the difficulty, unless you somehow manage to make it dynamic, so that the environment offers a suitable challenge to both groups, noobs and pros.

For example, I like the idea of the wondering zed hordes in the map (outside cities as well). Why? Because they could be just the kind of environmental threat that mainly affects larger groups of people, rather than the solo players... The solo players can always just run away when they see such a horde approaching, whereas some bandit group might actually have to defend themselves against the horde, if the zeds in the horde were, for example, to destroy any tents they come across. When the bandits would see a horde moving toward their campsite, they would probably want to defend their site and intercept the horde. They would now have one more threat and an interesting thing to do other than to go snipe the noobs.

Alternatively you could have the usual player classes (Note: I'm not suggesting to implement these!), by making even any medium sized bandit group not to have all the necessary skills in their team. If they lack a doctor, or say an electrician to make their base electricity work (assuming there were bases), then they would have an incentive not to kill all people, but rather somehow try to get that random electrician guy they find to fix their electricity. By some trade or by threat or by whatever means.

Just by making something like the character classes based on the acquired loot would not change anything, because once again, the bandit groups are the best equipped anyway. Its the noobs that are affected by lack of necessary items, not the bandits. Also, even when ignoring the bandit groups... Items can be deprived from the cold dead hands of the other player. The other guy has something you need? Wanna risk cooping with him... or maybe just shoot him to get what you need? (Unless those items take up most of your inventory, introducing any items to promote coop is quite unlikely to work, it just promotes killing the other player to get the item. With the exception of those items that require at least one other player to use, like with the blood bags)

Sorry, if most of these point were already presented by other replies. The OP was just so long and there were so many replies that I didn't really wade through all of them.

TL;DR - Just generally adding the game difficulty is not addressing the fundamental game mechanics issues that cause the deathmatching. It won't stop the solo players who want to coop getting shot on sight by the other players. It will just make those said players die from the environment as well. Its just an additional slap in their face.

Edited July 18, 2012 by mrducky

[tatortodd22 12]

I think this is one way to help stop the crazy PvP in southern cities. Up north it is expected. Players with good loot, experience, and patience have some epic adventures up north, but newer and impatient mainstream players are looking for quick kills or action, so they lure bait snipe and own in electro and cherno because of high population driving away new players. Making the game more difficult, exciting, or terrifying may give them enough action to prevent early PvP spamming, until they've mastered zombie survival and move up north for good stuff and better fights.

[entelin 13]

The reason we shoot on sight is because we have nothing to gain from teaming up.

There's every reason to team up, much easier to kill people & secure an area with your 5 clanmates than it is alone :)