The War on Wilderness - Reclaiming Myshkino

[Sleeves 98]

Are we implying that there are "safe" areas. More high loot cities means more people heading inland, which boost player interaction. Why would you even want to wander alone? What is the fun in that.

The while debate about the shrinking wilderness is comparable to people scared about overpopulation in real life.

[a_ruttle 199]

Or they could push the map outwards 3 or 4 km north and south and leave every single inch of that new area as open countryside with small villages and farms. Myshkino used to be such a chill spot, I used to hide vehicles there in the mod.

[Katana67 2907]

We are talking about just the tents, right?  I have no problem with this, and don't mind things being more spread out, encouraging more traveling.  The tents are hardly the holy grail as far as item loot tables go.

 

What I really don't want to see are areas that become known for particular things.  For example, I wouldn't want an area to be known for guys hanging out in the woods roughing it, because then that is where everyone would go to kill them.  I don't want all the decent loots like this either.

 

Spread it out all over the place.

 

This is exactly what I'm saying. Putting more military bases in the west = narrowing the area in which loot spawns, and to which players travel.

 

If you place a military base next to Myshkino, it will only be known as one thing (that you apparently wish to discourage). It will be known as just another clusterfuck military spawn, and not as a freeform wilderness location.

 

And by implication, putting a high-value location in the wilderness narrows the other feasible locations at which players can place hidden tents/vehicles/structures. Thereby minimizing the number of "good hiding spots" in the wilderness, making finding these spots all the more likely.

 

 

Are we implying that there are "safe" areas. More high loot cities means more people heading inland, which boost player interaction. Why would you even want to wander alone? What is the fun in that.

The while debate about the shrinking wilderness is comparable to people scared about overpopulation in real life.

 

No, we are not implying that there are safe areas. Which should stop you right there.

 

I wander alone, because it's fun. DayZ doesn't force player interaction, which is great. It only becomes a problem when no player interaction is encouraged, at all (which is essentially the case now in the alpha).

 

Yes, the two arguments are comparable.

 

ASIDE - People act as if there's no military base in the woods, then people won't go to the woods... ever... under any circumstances. This is just categorically false/idiotic.

 

Did you all even play the mod? The woods were wonderful locations in which people stored their tents/gear/vehicles, prompting interaction. It wasn't by virtue of a fixed high-value loot location that did this. And not to mention the real unique gameplay that could/will sprout up from a robust wilderness... like actually having utility in a base/cabin that isn't on the road to a military base. Or in having a secluded tent that people have a hard time finding. Or in having to survive off the land because canned goods are too hard to find (which is going to be the case as per developer statements).

Edited September 21, 2014 by Katana67

[AlfalphaCat 66]

It also would help, once vehicles are introduced, to slow down the running speed of our toons.  It makes the wilderness seem so small.

 

good luck with your crusade to save the wild places. :)

Edited September 23, 2014 by AlfalphaCat

[MaxTheSurvivor 152]

That s why i don t even bother looking for a tent, since they re eating all the forests to replace them with towns and city the risk to have your hard won tent found by some guy is too high. The only way would be to have a bigger map, maybe the same as we have now but twice the size so that distances creates a feel of safety as it will take much longer to go from on point to another and thus giving those who want to build a safe haven the possibility to do so.

[Briljin 102]

I agree with Death, we need more interesting things in the wilderness to begin with, not just empty expanses without true purpose.

 

Totally agree, right now the forested areas I do travel through are just a convenient means to hide myself while traveling between popular hot spots on the west side of the map.  The problem is how do you make these vast forests nothing more than dead space that are only used as short cuts from one point to another?  Now there is more than enough open area for them to stick cities and bases with removing any more or at least integrate them together.  I always liked how the military outpost SE of Pavolo is completely tucked away in a forested valley.  Just adding in some forested area with no point of interest is not the solution.

[Katana67 2907]

The problem is how do you make these vast forests nothing more than dead space that are only used as short cuts from one point to another?  Now there is more than enough open area for them to stick cities and bases with removing any more or at least integrate them together.  I always liked how the military outpost SE of Pavolo is completely tucked away in a forested valley. Just adding in some forested area with no point of interest is not the solution.

 

This is exactly my grievance, this whole approach of "make a POI or nothing!" Not every POI has to be a damn themepark a la every-game-in-existence. And not everything has to be a point of interest, we can have areas of interest too.

 

The woods, themselves, should be made into an attractive location. Not have the caveman solution of "put military bases there and people will go there."

 

For one, this solution is flawed from the very start... it doesn't encourage people to go to the forests for its own sake. It encourages people to go to fixed loot locations that just happen to be surrounded by forest. The POI is still the military base, not the forest.

 

Second, there are much more elegant and subtle ways of encouraging people to just use the forest as is. Like in the mod, where we had things like tents and vehicles to store. The effectiveness of these mechanics was almost exclusively owed to the forest (i.e. an isolated hideaway which players could use to create freeform bases/camps). It really is that simple, add valuable items... give them a place to be hidden effectively... and people will use the woods for all sorts of things (which I'm actually drawing precedent from the mod, vice just making shit up).

 

Third, adding fixed high-value bases in what was previously the only real untouched wilderness left in Chernarus+ thereby reduces, significantly, the effectiveness of freeform player creation. Again, I'm not going to waste time crafting a cool base if I can't find a place to guarantee relative safety from intruders (not absolute safety, if folks don't know the difference then that's their own fault).

 

Fourth, the woods themselves should (*gasp*) be turned into a (*gasp again*) ecosystem. If the forests were more necessary for survival (i.e. foraging, hunting, fewer zombies, etc.) then they would be attractive. I think once they limit edible food spawns, people will be forced to live off the land moreso (rather than just go to the proverbial/literal supermarkets of Chernarus).

 

Fifth, as I've said previously, adding things like player construction (i.e. freeform resource placement) would encourage the use of isolated areas.

 

In short, putting POIs in the wilderness is a simplistic solution. It is a solution that inherently short-changes a variety of gameplay archetypes (i.e. freeform/open-world resource placement, woodland survival, etc.) Not to mention, that the argument can be made that we've got enough military bases in Chernarus just from a map balance perspective.

 

Likewise, there is this massive misconception that Chernarus is so huge, that it couldn't possibly be the case that the wilderness is being marginalized. Open space is good, it doesn't have to be filled with cities and bases, let the players fill it. Moreover, Chernarus isn't that big. Even just on foot now and in the mod, I can survey the entirety of the western forest in something like an hour. Also, just the narrowing of potential hiding spots is the problem. Sure, we've got some woods... but if they're just irrelevant preambles to the next massive city 500m away, then they aren't a part of a wilderness.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Katana67

[Briljin 102]

The woods, themselves, should be made into an attractive location. Not have the caveman solution of "put military bases there and people will go there."

 

Could you jump to any more conclusion about what the hell a "POI" is?  Your right now all points of interest have to be military bases, they could be hunting lodges or long forgotten camp grounds.  Hell they could even be abandoned mines or old towns that went under.  Just placing a vast forest out there is not going to be much interest to too many players.

 

But hey, at least you got your rant on...

[Karmaterror 982]

This is exactly my grievance, this whole approach of "make a POI or nothing!" Not every POI has to be a damn themepark a la every-game-in-existence. And not everything has to be a point of interest, we can have areas of interest too.

 

The woods, themselves, should be made into an attractive location. Not have the caveman solution of "put military bases there and people will go there."

 

For one, this solution is flawed from the very start... it doesn't encourage people to go to the forests for its own sake. It encourages people to go to fixed loot locations that just happen to be surrounded by forest. The POI is still the military base, not the forest.

 

Second, there are much more elegant and subtle ways of encouraging people to just use the forest as is. Like in the mod, where we had things like tents and vehicles to store. The effectiveness of these mechanics was almost exclusively owed to the forest (i.e. an isolated hideaway which players could use to create freeform bases/camps). It really is that simple, add valuable items... give them a place to be hidden effectively... and people will use the woods for all sorts of things (which I'm actually drawing precedent from the mod, vice just making shit up).

 

Third, adding fixed high-value bases in what was previously the only real untouched wilderness left in Chernarus+ thereby reduces, significantly, the effectiveness of freeform player creation. Again, I'm not going to waste time crafting a cool base if I can't find a place to guarantee relative safety from intruders (not absolute safety, if folks don't know the difference then that's their own fault).

 

Fourth, the woods themselves should (*gasp*) be turned into a (*gasp again*) ecosystem. If the forests were more necessary for survival (i.e. foraging, hunting, fewer zombies, etc.) then they would be attractive. I think once they limit edible food spawns, people will be forced to live off the land moreso (rather than just go to the proverbial/literal supermarkets of Chernarus).

 

Fifth, as I've said previously, adding things like player construction (i.e. freeform resource placement) would encourage the use of isolated areas.

 

In short, putting POIs in the wilderness is a simplistic solution. It is a solution that inherently short-changes a variety of gameplay archetypes (i.e. freeform/open-world resource placement, woodland survival, etc.) Not to mention, that the argument can be made that we've got enough military bases in Chernarus just from a map balance perspective.

 

Likewise, there is this massive misconception that Chernarus is so huge, that it couldn't possibly be the case that the wilderness is being marginalized. Open space is good, it doesn't have to be filled with cities and bases, let the players fill it. Moreover, Chernarus isn't that big. Even just on foot now and in the mod, I can survey the entirety of the western forest in something like an hour. Also, just the narrowing of potential hiding spots is the problem. Sure, we've got some woods... but if they're just irrelevant preambles to the next massive city 500m away, then they aren't a part of a wilderness.

 

All of this.....Save some space for camping. I really hate the increase in town density. Hoping that we loose a few of the original A2 towns later in development to recreate the spacing.

 

Push players to the woods through the natural benefits of being there like low zed density and concealment of campsites.

 

Make forests so big you dare not enter without a compass to keep you on track. Make it an event when you do find a POI, an achievement, not stumbling across them everywhere. 

Edited September 24, 2014 by Karmaterror

[AlfalphaCat 66]

Honestly, once persistence and tents are working, the camps that players set up will become the POI in the forests and clearings.  You would be surprised too, how many times people put their camps in the same spots that others think are great hiding spots. 

 

I like the idea of getting rid of some towns from A2, the whole middle of the map could be made more like wilderness if just a few of the small villages were removed.