Why Randomly Spawning All Over The Map Is A Bad Idea

[Katana67 2907]

I often see the idea of "random player spawns" dispersed across the entire map floated as some sort of mythical panacea which is going to solve all of the "problems" with spawning on the coast.

 

"It's random, it's luck!," they say, in response to concerns over whether folks will be spawning near high-value locations like NWAF. I guess some folks just get lucky. Lucky enough to miss out on 90% of gearing and the unforgiving journeys which make DayZ what it is. Whilst the rest of us just squabble around because the dice say we shouldn't have nice things.

 

Several things, though.

 

1. They're placing most (if not all) of the high-value loot locations along the western edge of the map. So right there, you've already got a system predisposed to spawning on the coast (specifically the eastern coast as they've specified).

 

2. If you think recycling spawns or suiciding is bad now, you will absolutely rue the day that you suggested giving players the capability to luck into spawning next to NWAF. You will rue the day indeed.

 

3. You say you want more people using more of the map? Okay. Then you can also do other things. Like dynamic loot allocation. Like making towns actually attractive, via making things like survival something more than just devouring an entire cow cooked to perfection in one sitting. Or, having towns each have their own specific (and useful) loot biases. Or, one could bias the loot away from the coast (if one views the coastal clusterfuck as a problem, I don't).

 

You can do other things to encourage non-linear player mobility (even though the relatively linear east-west travel is only one aspect of mobility) other than just the caveman solution of plopping folks all over the map.

 

4. It's certainly arguable in the first place, as to whether the current spawn system (i.e. spawning on the coast) even presents a distinct problem in the first place.

 

But the biggest flaw of this approach, by far, is the way in which it undercuts any persistence and/or player storage/construction.

 

Figure 1, "The Current Paradigm"

 

Key - Red STAR = Spawn Point, Green TRIANGLE = Persistent Object/Structure

 

If I place a tent, or structure, or anything on the map now... it's, near as makes no difference, equidistant from the spawns on the coast. Even if I, for whatever reason, want to place a tent somewhere other than the NW corner of the map (like the always attractive west or northern borders) I can still control how likely it is that my tent will be discovered by virtue of being able to place it relative to where people spawn.

 

Likewise, the paths people typically create also factor in to the process of figuring out where the optimal place to put a persistent object is. But the point here is that players who already exist have the ability to manage the risk of their persistently placed structures/objects. It therefore becomes an adaptive "reward" scenario, wherein the player is rewarded with a less-discoverable persistent object in managing the flow of players from the coast inland.

 

In other words, you can make your persistent object more/less likely to be found based on how well you place/hide said object.

 

Figure 2, "The Random System"

 

Key - Red STAR = Spawn Point, Green TRIANGLE = Persistent Object/Structure

 

Let's look at a similar scenario, with random spawns. Refer to the Northwest corner of the map again, if you will. Not only does the player have a chance of spawning on top of the persistent object (thus rendering it useless), he/she also has the ability to spawn within a stone's throw of these persistent objects.

 

Where you place your persistent object becomes totally irrelevant/useless if someone can just spawn near or on top of it. Having nothing but chance (not player pathing, not dynamic loot spawns, not fixed resources on the map, not private hives) dictate the usefulness of your persistent storage is unacceptable. Any undue advantage upon the mere act of spawning into the game (i.e. randomly spawning nearer to your persistent object) is also unacceptable.

 

It no longer becomes about how well you place/hide your object that dictates how likely it is to be found, it becomes a matter of "how long until someone chances into a nearby spawn and takes all of my shit." Which is absolutely silly.

 

 

TL;DR

- The map (by virtue of having high-value loot in the west) is predisposed to having folks spawn on the coast

- Suiciding to cycle spawns to more favorable/easy locations may become much more prevalent

- There are more elegant, ambient, and subtle solutions to encouraging non-linear player mobility

- It's arguable as to whether coastal spawns are the problem, or a problem, in the first place.

- "Random spawns" undercut any utility, skill, or risk management in placing a persistent object if a new player has the ability to spawn in on top of, or nearby, said object.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2014 by Katana67

[theirongiant 200]

I'm happy with all the spawns being on the East coast, there is a line of military spawns that runs down the west coast, if there is a spawn point that is nearer to one of those then people will just cycle till they get it. Personally I would have preferred south coast spawns with military bases along the north of the map.

[DemonGroover 8836]

For me DayZ is spawning on the beach.  I don't even like the few interior spawns that exist now.

[Zedertone 378]

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :beans: :beans: :beans: :beans:

[boneboys 7988]

They should add coastline all round the map once they have defined the limits.

Then we could all meet up in church at Stary Sobor.

[pilgrim* 3514]

..//..

 

But the biggest flaw of this approach, by far, is the way in which it undercuts any persistence and/or player storage/construction.

 

Figure 1, "The Current Paradigm"

 

Key - Red STAR = Spawn Point, Green TRIANGLE = Persistent Object/Structure

 

If I place a tent, or structure, or anything on the map now... it's, near as makes no difference, equidistant from the spawns on the coast. Even if I, for whatever reason, want to place a tent somewhere other than the NW corner of the map (like the always attractive west or northern borders) I can still control how likely it is that my tent will be discovered by virtue of being able to place it relative to where people spawn.

 

Likewise, the paths people typically create also factor in to the process of figuring out where the optimal place to put a persistent object is. But the point here is that players who already exist have the ability to manage the risk of their persistently placed structures/objects. It therefore becomes an adaptive "reward" scenario, wherein the player is rewarded with a less-discoverable persistent object in managing the flow of players from the coast inland.

 

In other words, you can make your persistent object more/less likely to be found based on how well you place/hide said object.

 

Figure 2, "The Random System"

 

Key - Red STAR = Spawn Point, Green TRIANGLE = Persistent Object/Structure

 

Let's look at a similar scenario, with random spawns. Refer to the Northwest corner of the map again, if you will. Not only does the player have a chance of spawning on top of the persistent object (thus rendering it useless), he/she also has the ability to spawn within a stone's throw of these persistent objects.

 

Where you place your persistent object becomes totally irrelevant/useless if someone can just spawn near or on top of it. Having nothing but chance (not player pathing, not dynamic loot spawns, not fixed resources on the map, not private hives) dictate the usefulness of your persistent storage is unacceptable. Any undue advantage upon the mere act of spawning into the game (i.e. randomly spawning nearer to your persistent object) is also unacceptable.

 

It no longer becomes about how well you place/hide your object that dictates how likely it is to be found, it becomes a matter of "how long until someone chances into a nearby spawn and takes all of my shit." Which is absolutely silly.

..//..

 

??

 

You used all these words to say "if spawns are random someone might spawn close to your tent"

 

this is sententious

 

xx

Edited July 22, 2014 by pilgrim

[glemmar 88]

I likethe way of think. The spawns definetly need to be as far as possible from the high value loot areas and it would be great if you would be killed off by the enviroment, hunger or thirst if you started to run towards the west end of the map from the spawn without first looting some food and other equipment near by.

For example in DayZ Namalsk one of the most valuable loot areas was this military base on top of a mountain. The climb was tedious and the worst part about it was that on the mountain top the temperature dropped so low that you would start to freeze in minutes unless you had special cloathing or a backpack full of heat packs. Unfortunately you could not be killed by the cold, but because your hand started to shake aiming became almost impossible and eventually you would become infected which would eat up over 50% of your blood and made you cough constantly. Ofcourse you could cure this by taking some antibiotics, but Namalsk only had one area with hospitals (that were camped by people almost 24/7) in it and the developer of that sub-mod (proapbly a sadist) decreased the spawn chance of antibiotics in total. So in general it was not worth the weight to climb up to that mountain top unless you were equipped for that.

Something similiar could (and should) be implemented to DayZ SA as well so one would not simply walk to NW airfield without first gearing up for the trip. If DayZ was more sci-fi then I would propably suggest something like the Brain Scorcher from S.T.A.L.K.E.R. -series, but I would be okey with just harsh enviroment full of angry (and lethal) wildlife and zombies ofcourse.

Incase you are not familiar S.T.A.L.K.E.R. -series or the Brain scorcher I'll give a short description of both of them inside this spoiler.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is set in the post-soviet Tshernobyl in Ukraine. During the Tshernobyl dissaster the area around it was covered in radiation like in real life, but also for some reason the fauna started to mutate into deformed creatures and strange annomalies that could rip a man appart if he was not causes. This area became known as "The Zone". Even though it is prohibited to be inside The Zone many people broke into it in hopes of finding strange and valuable "artifacts" that were created by the annomalies. These people are called stalkers.

The Brain Scorcher was an experimental mind control device that would litterally fry your brain and turn you into a mindless zombie like creature if you got too close. According to the fluff only the most skilled stalkers could navigate past it without getting brain fried but in the game you use this special anti-psi device to protect yourself from the effects of the Brain Scorcher.

 

If I place a tent, or structure, or anything on the map now... it's, near as makes no difference, equidistant from the spawns on the coast. Even if I, for whatever reason, want to place a tent somewhere other than the NW corner of the map (like the always attractive west or northern borders) I can still control how likely it is that my tent will be discovered by virtue of being able to place it relative to where people spawn.

Actually, building your camp at the edge of map is one of the worst places for a camp I could think of. It is way too obvious. In the mod there were alot of people that went spesifically tent hunting and they would usually run around the edges of the map looking for tents. I've done it couple of times with great success.

In my past I've had couple success full camp sites (the best one was never found since it vanished because "the devs broke the mod" so the tents and vehicles didn't save propely, but our camp site of four tents, two motorcycles and an atv was up and running for over a week) and I can assure you these were not near the edges of the map. Ofcourse I am not going to reveal you my secret locations because I am going to use them when the persistent items get implemented but I can tell you one place which no longer exists. There used to be this barn at the end of the road that went North of Vybor. At the time we were playing Breaking Point so there was alot of vehicles in the game. I think we had two military trucks, humwee with a grenade launcher, 2-3 off-road cars, a police car, couple atvs and motorcycles and three different kind of UAZs hidden inside the barn. The biggest problem with the vehicles was that they were damn hard to hide from helicopters, but because they were inside a barn no one could see them above. Ofcourse both of the trucks were full of guns, ammo, food, spare parts, medical supplies, backpacks etc, so if we would need to move the camp to a more safer location we could just hop in them and drive off.

Our "motorpool" stayed hidden for about 5 days, but then it was discovered by a fresh spawn with nothing on him. He drove a tractor about 200 m from our barn and ran straight through the forrest into our barn. Fortunately at the time we were inside our barn so we killed him immediately but unfortunately our location was compromised. So we rolled out the trucks, planted all the satchel charges we had inside the barn and leveled the place with all the vehicles in it. After we shedding few manly tears we drove off into the sun set.

[Karmaterror 982]

I agree, there needs to be some sort of separation from safer campsites and spawn points, There would be no tactics in where to camp if people spawned anywhere. Also random spawning could leave you a 5-10 min run from NWA, closer if true full random.  That takes all the accomplishment away from making it there in the first place. Was nothing like that feeling of finaly getting there in the mod after dying couple of times to zeds/hunger and/or bandits, then finally that tense moment as you cross the wall and go in, knowing if you get shot, you are right back on the coast again :)

[thelonewarrior 886]

Since when does anyone spawn down by kamenka

Your first picture stating the current spawn points is incorrect

I've not spawned there for monthes

Everytime I've spawned it's been from solnichny upwards, never any lower on the map

[King Raptor 191]

Only server logs will be able to tell if the new spawn system doesn't work right. At least it makes better use of the map and so far, I like not constantly spawning in the same spot. Makes it more difficult to get yourself orientated and offers a bigger chance at better loot right away.

What is not to like?

[Katana67 2907]

You used all these words to say "if spawns are random someone might spawn close to your tent"

 

this is sententious

 

Cool? You used even more words pointing out that you think I used too many words instead of posting constructively. I suppose that folks should now stop writing books, simply because they have a thesis which can be condensed into a single sentence.

 

There's more in-depth analysis needed to explain the overall concept (i.e. the reward found in managing risk via being able to predict player flow in placing a persistent object versus not).

[Katana67 2907]

Since when does anyone spawn down by kamenka

Your first picture stating the current spawn points is incorrect

I've not spawned there for monthes

Everytime I've spawned it's been from solnichny upwards, never any lower on the map

 

It's meant to be the "coastal spawn" paradigm versus the "random spawn" paradigm.

 

I included spawns which were in the mod to demonstrate a point, not to be accurate.

 

Actually, building your camp at the edge of map is one of the worst places for a camp I could think of. It is way too obvious. In the mod there were alot of people that went spesifically tent hunting and they would usually run around the edges of the map looking for tents. I've done it couple of times with great success

 

You're preaching to the choir my friend. This is all I used to do in the mod.

 

But, for the most part, the wilderness area on the margins of the map still have some very good places for hiding things. As opposed to the high-traffic areas (all areas are high-traffic, some more than others) to the SE.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Katana67

[Evil Minion 943]

In general I don't like people randomly appearing out of thin air. This goes for freshspawns, server hoppers and even people just logging in. Now you cannot remove this particular feature but you can reduce it. Log ins and server hoppers are discussed elsewhere (also an indicator that I might not be alone with my opinion) so lets concentrate on freshspawns.
 
There are three options I can see so far:

• provide lots of spawn locations (decreasing the chance of someone spawning in a particular place)
• provide somewhat predictable spawn areas (which also helps creating a natural "progress" in terms of gearing up)
• punish death (so suicide-respawn is not worth it at all)

Now things that should be avoided:

• spawning right next to another player
• spawning near a high value loot location
• spawning inside buildings

All those points favor coast spawns. More specifically: east coast spawns. Players should not spawn further west than the eastern end of Chernogorsk maybe even east of Elektro. Now instead of having only a few disccrete spawn locations you got a high number along the coast. If a player spawns he will do this in a weighted fashion. The probability to spawn at one specific place...

• increases with the distance to the next player
• increases with the distance to the next high yield loot area
• increases with the distance to all of your death locations on this server

This way your chance of getting lucky or unlucky is reduced and everyone gets a fairly "bad" spawn location. Now if you also punish death by adding a significant spawn timer (e.g. 5-10min) suiciding to get a better location is less of an option and going "bambi bandit" (running up to geared players punching them as you have nothing to lose anyways) is much less attractive.

1. They're placing most (if not all) of the high-value loot locations along the western edge of the map. So right there, you've already got a system predisposed to spawning on the coast (specifically the eastern coast as they've specified).
 
2. If you think recycling spawns or suiciding is bad now, you will absolutely rue the day that you suggested giving players the capability to luck into spawning next to NWAF. You will rue the day indeed.
 
3. You say you want more people using more of the map? Okay. Then you can also do other things. Like dynamic loot allocation. Like making towns actually attractive, via making things like survival something more than just devouring an entire cow cooked to perfection in one sitting. Or, having towns each have their own specific (and useful) loot biases. Or, one could bias the loot away from the coast (if one views the coastal clusterfuck as a problem, I don't).
 
You can do other things to encourage non-linear player mobility (even though the relatively linear east-west travel is only one aspect of mobility) other than just the caveman solution of plopping folks all over the map.
 
4. It's certainly arguable in the first place, as to whether the current spawn system (i.e. spawning on the coast) even presents a distinct problem in the first place.

1. So it makes sense to have spawns elsewhere. Spawns at high value loctions are silly. People are already drawn to them and having people spawn there makes them deathzones with even more survivors appearing out of thin air.

2. Its bad and thats why all spawns should be fairly "bad" and death should be a major setback. If you get KoSed and have to wait for several minutes that might be somewhat annoying but on the other side it makes you value your life much more. Suiciding should not be worth it.

3. Dynamic loot respawns can help a lot. Either server-wise with effective measures against server hopping or hive-wise. Loot should respawn away from player activity* so if everyone goes to Berezino for example they would soon run out of supplies and have the choice of either migrate, rely on imports (geared players coming to Berezino from elsewhere) or eventually "starve" to death (in terms of food as well as ammo and medical supplies).

4. I don't see much of a problem right now but maybe the coastline will prove to small on bigger servers pushing player density over acceptable limits. On the other side this would also create a very interesting early game of "getting out of there" or surviving against all odds.

 

*Define in a way that is best for gameplay. E.g. if an item is about to spawn is will appear in the "least active" element of a set partition of the map.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Evil Minion

[pilgrim* 3514]

It..//..

for the most part, the wilderness area on the margins of the map still have [has] some very good places for hiding things. As opposed to the high-traffic areas

..//..

 

No, it does not

 

To say no one goes there is not to say an object is "hidden"

No one goes there because at present there is no game element in those areas

As soon as it becomes known that players stash loot there, it will be sought, found and taken

 

In your OP you say:

"There are more elegant, ambient, and subtle solutions to encouraging non-linear player mobility"

- that's quite a mouthful. But you don't say what they are.

I would like to hear them.

 

xx

 

Costal spawns are cool, especially for new players

Edited July 22, 2014 by pilgrim

[pilgrim* 3514]

..//..

the idea of "random player spawns"

..//..

 

I agree that random spawns are not a great idea, but I don't know if this has been proposed seriously.

 

Specially for new players, or inexperienced players who do not know the map by heart - reading the forums shows how many problems these players have already. Random spawn would be very unfair and discouraging. Beach spawns are about as much as new players can be reasonably expected to cope with.

 

As for storage - in the Mod players positioned tents completely across the map, wilderness, town, well hidden or not, so there is always a chance of spawning close to a tent, once spawn locations are scattered away from main city areas, whatever the spawn distribution.

 

We know that the devs are interested in different spawn distributions.

But no one should expect the devs to radically alter the existing map, while they are still adding to it.

 

I think beach spawns work well, and they are fair to inexperienced and new players, which is important.

Perhaps someone has suggestions for other good locations for spawning players into the game?

[solodude23 649]

Point #2 on your post makes no sense. If spawns were to be added ALL over the map, (lets say there are 200 total spawn points) It would be ridiculous to repeatedly suicide in attempt to spawn at NWAF. On top of that, my proposal for "spawning all around the map" would have exceptions such that you couldn't spawn within ~2km from a high value location. This includes not only military bases, but also large cities. 

 

I don't have time for an entire write up but I largely dislike the notion that ANY specific part of the map is known as the "spawn". Right now if you want to go camp some bambis you can immediately go to the east coast north of Solnich and you're set. 

 

Also,  a simple fix for spawn points and tents/buildables is that you simply restrict areas surrounding spawn locations from being built on. At that point, even with a huge server, there's a VERY low likelihood that you'd spawn at a given spawn point while someone is nearby or at that location. On the flipside, it's quite common for bambis to spawn in nearby when you're in Berezino or Svetlo.

 

If anything, the coastline spawn should be extended south to maybe Kamyshovo, with the possibility of spawning anywhere within 2km of the shoreline. I just hate how concentrated it is. Makes the map feel like everyone died in the apocalypse and the survivors(players) came over on a boat and called it home - rather than the apocalypse happened and the immune were left over, spread throughout the map.

 

Dammit I didn't want to write this much.

 

Edit: But whatever I'll add more.

3) This is good regardless of where spawns are located.

4) It's in no way "debatable" whether or not the current spawn system presents issues. Some people favor it, some people don't, that's all there is to it. I, for one, think it's a pretty poor system when you are having everyone spawn in a (relatively) compact area. Especially as server pop increases.

Edited July 22, 2014 by solodude23

[jubeidok 495]

^ I wonder if these people realize that their whole discussion revolves around the inability to deal with loss. The saying still applies to the items you have stored in your tent. 

 

 

 

With that said, if your whole argument is to try and avoid people spawning near something like the NWAF so they don't get to gear up with mil grade stuff before you get a chance to, then I would pose to you this question...

 

What is the difference between lucking out and spawning near a virgin airfield or lucking out and spawning behind a fully geared player?

 

No matter what, any time you are a new spawn, there will be x amount of people around the map that have top tier gear. Doesn't matter where they spawned, doesn't matter where they are or how they got it. The point is they are out there and you wont know it unless you happen to run into them. Luck is a part of this scenario, it's a part of any life. It doesn't matter if that luck occurs at the beginning or 3 days into a life, it will eventually run out. And who knows, maybe someone else's misfortune becomes your fortune. 

 

In the end, a random spawn point system is no different than any non-new spawn player logging into the server after you have spawned.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

Point #2 on your post makes no sense. If spawns were to be added ALL over the map, (lets say there are 200 total spawn points) It would be ridiculous to repeatedly suicide in attempt to spawn at NWAF. On top of that, my proposal for "spawning all around the map" would have exceptions such that you couldn't spawn within ~2km from a high value location. This includes not only military bases, but also large cities. 

 

I don't have time for an entire write up but I largely dislike the notion that ANY specific part of the map is known as the "spawn". Right now if you want to go camp some bambis you can immediately go to the east coast north of Solnich and you're set. 

 

Also,  a simple fix for spawn points and tents/buildables is that you simply restrict areas surrounding spawn locations from being built on. At that point, even with a huge server, there's a VERY low likelihood that you'd spawn at a given spawn point while someone is nearby or at that location. On the flipside, it's quite common for bambis to spawn in nearby when you're in Berezino or Svetlo.

 

If anything, the coastline spawn should be extended south to maybe Kamyshovo, with the possibility of spawning anywhere within 2km of the shoreline. I just hate how concentrated it is. Makes the map feel like everyone died in the apocalypse and the survivors(players) came over on a boat and called it home - rather than the apocalypse happened and the immune were left over, spread throughout the map.

 

Dammit I didn't want to write this much.

 

Edit: But whatever I'll add more.

3) This is good regardless of where spawns are located.

4) It's in no way "debatable" whether or not the current spawn system presents issues. Some people favor it, some people don't, that's all there is to it. I, for one, think it's a pretty poor system when you are having everyone spawn in a (relatively) compact area. Especially as server pop increases.

You'd still have people who are at high value locations within minutes of spawning, even if they were 2km away from the nearest base, whereas someone else could be lost in the woods for much longer until they stumble upon someone who was fully geared because they got lucky.

There are plenty of high value locations on the west coast, so all you'd have to do would be spawn in the west and you'd already have 1/3 of the journey to run. That's the problem. It's not like most people would kill themselves until they're only 5 feet away.

[BeanWarVeteran 0]

I don't want spawns anywhere expect the east coast until they add an option to spawn near friends. DayZ is a pretty social game to me and spawning randomly on the map would be a major pain in the ass as far as meeting up with friends goes.

[Katana67 2907]

As soon as it becomes known that players stash loot there, it will be sought, found and taken

 

In your OP you say:

"There are more elegant, ambient, and subtle solutions to encouraging non-linear player mobility"

 

I'm not saying "it will be 100% hidden 100% of the time."

 

Players are less likely to be on the periphery of the map, and are therefore less likely to stumble across your stash. I can post a heatmap graphic to demonstrate this.

 

 

And, yes, I did state these solutions in my OP.

 

You say you want more people using more of the map? Okay. Then you can also do other things. Like dynamic loot allocation. Like making towns actually attractive, via making things like survival something more than just devouring an entire cow cooked to perfection in one sitting. Or, having towns each have their own specific (and useful) loot biases. Or, one could bias the loot away from the coast (if one views the coastal clusterfuck as a problem, I don't).

 

If you're going to say "well, you didn't outline them in detail," well... that's because the objective of this thread isn't to highlight these individual aspects. It's to highlight a general flaw in an approach.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Katana67

[Katana67 2907]

Point #2 on your post makes no sense. If spawns were to be added ALL over the map, (lets say there are 200 total spawn points) It would be ridiculous to repeatedly suicide in attempt to spawn at NWAF. On top of that, my proposal for "spawning all around the map" would have exceptions such that you couldn't spawn within ~2km from a high value location. This includes not only military bases, but also large cities. 

 

3) This is good regardless of where spawns are located.

4) It's in no way "debatable" whether or not the current spawn system presents issues. Some people favor it, some people don't, that's all there is to it. I, for one, think it's a pretty poor system when you are having everyone spawn in a (relatively) compact area. Especially as server pop increases.

 

If there's even the slightest chance that one could luck into a favorable spawn (in terms of high-end loot and/or persistent storage), I am not in favor of it. And if there's even the slightest chance that people could spawn next to NWAF, or even just 2km closer, they'll take it. There's a 1 in 4 chance that you'll spawn in the quadrant that NWAF occupies, if spawns are to be dispersed across the map. There's a 1 in 2 chance that you'll spawn somewhere on the western half of the map (which is where most, if not all pending the NEAF revamp, of the high-end loot is located currently).

 

And to anyone saying that this is somehow an effort to make persistent storage objects harder to find. It isn't. It's to give an appropriate level of time/effort/risk involved in finding a stash, vice just... lucking into a spawn close to one.

 

Everyone should start with the same advantages, you are what you make your character/avatar. Not the utter pawn of chance.

 

And yes, it is debatable. You even highlighted this in the following sentence... "Some people favor it, some people don't," that is the seed of a debate. Disagreement, definition of. And moreover, a large bit of the disagreement of coastal spawns has to do with the PvP-centric nature that this results in, making for a clusterfuck on the coast. I don't view that as a problem (this coming from someone who can count on one hand how many times he's been in Chernogorsk in two years of playing DayZ, so it's not out of a desire to preserve the deathmatching on the coast that I'm saying this), and even if I did, there are other solutions which I've mentioned which can alleviate any undue focus on PvP on the coast.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Katana67

[Bororm 1156]

I just wanna say that you are probably one of the most reasonable people on this board Katana67 and while I've pretty much given up on the rest of this forum I always enjoy seeing your posts.

[pilgrim* 3514]

..//..

Likewise, the paths people typically create also factor in to the process of figuring out where the optimal place to put a persistent object is. But the point here is that players who already exist have the ability to manage the risk of their persistently placed structures/objects. It therefore becomes an adaptive "reward" scenario, wherein the player is rewarded with a less-discoverable persistent object in managing the flow of players from the coast inland. In other words, you can make your persistent object more/less likely to be found based on how well you place/hide said object.

..//..

 

... yes, I do so see your point ...

 

Has any serious person ever proposed random spawns across the map, at any time, anywhere ?

By random I mean aleatory, of course.

I mean: vice pan-cartographical spawn randomisation ... random spawns were never slated for implementation were they ?

 

Spawns on or close to the coast are by far the best solution.

1 ) Do not destroy from the outset a new player's opportunity for initiation within the game

2 ) Establish a practical non-sanction impediment nullifying the utility of suicide respawn

3 ) vice PvP - is there a "clusterfuck" in Kamenka at the moment ?

4 ) You have understood the significance of the development team's ongoing alterations to spawn placement.

 

It's a pity you don't want to expand on your outlined solutions.

No other fair and practical spawn dispersion can be implemented, other than coastal region spawn

[Katana67 2907]

... yes, I do so see your point ...

 

Has any serious person ever proposed random spawns across the map, at any time, anywhere ?

By random I mean aleatory, of course.

I mean: vice pan-cartographical spawn randomisation ... random spawns were never slated for implementation were they ?

 

Spawns on or close to the coast are by far the best solution.

1 ) Do not destroy from the outset a new player's opportunity for initiation within the game

2 ) Establish a practical non-sanction impediment nullifying the utility of suicide respawn

3 ) vice PvP - is there a "clusterfuck" in Kamenka at the moment ?

4 ) You have understood the significance of the development team's ongoing alterations to spawn placement.

 

It's a pity you don't want to expand on your outlined solutions.

No other fair and practical spawn dispersion can be implemented, other than coastal region spawn

 

I don't want to expand on them, because that would require several dedicated threads (one on loot bias moving away from the coast, one on having fixed resources on the map like gasoline/water, one on dynamic loot spawn allocation, one on town-specific loot, one on the different ways in which survival needs can encourage mobility, and one on increasing the number of zombies along the coast as well) all of which have been covered before. Moreover, as I've stated, the objective of this thread isn't to tout the merits of coastal spawns (hence why I didn't go into detail on that) nor is it to provide "solutions" to the issue of random spawns (because it isn't the case, this is a preemptive outline of a flaw in an approach).

 

And yes, I see the idea floated all of the time both here and on Reddit. Hence why the first sentence of my OP states that. Who says it doesn't matter, I can't judge someone's "seriousness" based upon their forum handle.

[King Raptor 191]

I just wanna say that you are probably one of the most reasonable people on this board Katana67 and while I've pretty much given up on the rest of this forum I always enjoy seeing your posts.

 

Personally I think Pilgrim has more zest!