Multi-Person Mechanics to discourage KOS

[bfisher 561]

It might help of this zombie apocalypse actually had ...you know...zombies.  Some threat where it made sense to team up with perfect strangers.

 

 

Honestly, if 90% of the other players weren't violent psychopaths, this game would just be wandering around the woods picking up stuff.  I can go do that at my inlaws house in New Jersey.

[p4triot 207]

Early in development rocket talked about introducing multi person interaction mechanics that supposedly would help to reduce KoS'ing. As it stands there is only a single multi-person mechanic, and that would be administering blood and saline bags. Please share any ideas you might have for interesting multi person mechanics that would be easy to-implement and would help deal with the constant KoSing.

 

One idea I had would be relevant along the coast: Shaking apple trees with two people.

 

Coastal players mainly desire food to carry them into the mainland. When they meet a player they think that they can either rob or eat them and get off the coast sooner. If two strangers could meet and do something productive together like shake an apple tree to make a dozen or so apples fall into the ground/vicinity rather than having to search for apples individually, then this could be a great way to break the ice between players, establish trust, and potentially lead to long lasting friendships and alliances.

 

With this addition when players are fresh and on the coast fresh, they will look at another survivor not as a piece of meat or a mark to extort, but instead as a valuable resource (alive) whose cooperation can lead to good things.

 

Even though this mechanic would only make a difference for coastal players (inland players care about gear over food), I think it would drastically improve the coastal experience, and it should be exceedingly easy to implement as a feature (placeholder animations for now with motion capture down the road, apples spawning in a circular pattern around the shaken tree).

 

Another potential mechanic that was talked about but never implemented would be a trading vicinity menu option. If players had a formal way to trade with one another then there would be incentive to actually introduce yourself to people instead of shooting them for their gear. This would help coastal players get along and would also create interesting encounters for mainland survivors.

 

The other mechanic I came up with is a general one that can be used in many potential features. Objects that are so big they require two people to move them. A dynamic event could be that some normally enterable houses have had the doors barricaded with refrigerators or something, which could require two or more people to push out of the way. For that server restart only, there could be special loot inside the barricaded house, given that since it had been barricaded, nobody will have scavenged it. The reward for opening a barricaded house could be basic clothing, backpacks, and food, possibly with rudimentary guns like shottys and magnums as well. Every restart some random houses across the coast or the entire map could become barricaded as a part of a dynamic event just like heli crashes. It would be easy to implement because they simply need to have the fridge be moved to a doorway in a house (thereby blocking it, and also ensuring that other entrances are blocked), and add a mechanic that with two players this fridge can be pushed aside or knocked over to allow access to the house. It doesn't have to be a fridge, but it certainly could be.

 

Whether or not you're moving a large object out of your way, or moving some large object or piece of equipment into place for some specific use, having a requirement for two people to move an object it something that can mesh well with vehicles and with basebuilding. What would be perfect for DayZ as it is currently is some sort of two person chore that coastal players can do in order to get the advantage required to make a safe trip inland.

 

I think there should as many multi-person mechanics as possible so that when two strangers meet, they instantly begin thinking about all the nearby stuff they can do if they would agree to work together. I've been trying to think of more two person mechanics that would be easy to implement and also productive so that players are encouraged to cooperate instead of murder, but it's hard to think of good ideas, so this is where you all come in. Please share your ideas for multi person mechanics that can encourage cooperation instead of competition. Mechanics that can be done by freshly spawned strangers as a way to get off the coast and meet each other would be most ideal for the current state of the game.

 

Love the idea for the sake of gameplay, however it wont work to reduce KoS, since most KoSers are actually friends playing together (as I am), and we KoS because we dont take risks. (No, actually we dont KoS, just step away, hide and observe you as you may not be alone. But if we can't hide then kill on sight)

[vfxtodd 125]

Yea I agree with the above these things would have zero effect on KOS.

The only real thing that maybe could have such an effect is severely restricting firearms and lowering ammo and weapon spawn rates.

It worked in Rust would work in Dayz but at the end of the day I don't think weapon rarity is something the devs intend for atleast not at this stage in development.

Ridiculous. This whole idea of reducing ammo and weapon spawns would only mean it might take the KOS players a tad longer to get what they need to go on a KOS spree. But, it won't reduce KOS. It will only mean fewer players would be able to defend themselves against KOS.

I've had encounters where my having ammo and a weapon prevented being KOS'd because I fired back and bought myself more time to get away from the KOS group trying to kill me.

Being able to defend yourself is part of an apocalypse experience. Reducing the ability to do that will surely reduce the chance of my ever playing DayZ.

You really want to reduce KOS? Then you have to increase the rewards / benefits of cooperative gameplay.

One possible way to do this is to enable a player that wants to team up with another to "tell" the server through an interface of some kind that the two players are teaming up. This could initiate the ability of these two (or more) players to shake a tree together to get more apples. Or to knock down a barricade - with loot on the other side.

I see people suggesting more ideas, but without including how to implement their ideas. I love ideas for "valuing life", etc., but try to include how you believe your idea can be implemented. Otherwise this thread will just decay into another whiny, rambling waste of time. We have enough of those threads.

Edited June 14, 2015 by BulletGarden

[gibonez 3633]

Ridiculous. This whole idea of reducing ammo and weapon spawns would only mean it might take the KOS players a tad longer to get what they need to go on a KOS spree. But, it won't reduce KOS. It will only mean fewer players would be able to defend themselves against KOS.

I've had encounters where my having ammo and a weapon prevented being KOS'd because I fired back and bought myself more time to get away from the KOS group trying to kill me.

Being able to defend yourself is part of an apocalypse experience. Reducing the ability to do that will surely reduce the chance of my ever playing DayZ.

You really want to reduce KOS? Then you have to increase the rewards / benefits of cooperative gameplay.

One possible way to do this is to enable a player that wants to team up with another to "tell" the server through an interface of some kind that the two players are teaming up. This could initiate the ability of these two (or more) players to shake a tree together to get more apples. Or to knock down a barricade - with loot on the other side.

I see people suggesting more ideas, but without including how to implement their ideas. I love ideas for "valuing life", etc., but try to include how you believe your idea can be implemented. Otherwise this thread will just decay into another whiny, rambling waste of time. We have enough of those threads.

 

It would absolutely reduce KOS.

 

If you have only a handful of shells and a mediocre weapon you might not want to engage the distant person minding his own business. You might not want to risk shooting at a group of 2 or more people since you can not guarantee you are well armed enough to come out the victor.

 

Low ammo and weapon spawn rates would absolutely reduce KOS even if it is merely due to the lack of ammunition making it a fruitless act.

 

Will it stop it completely of course not.

 

But based on pure logistics it would reduce it dramatically.

[Evil Minion 943]

Strictly speaking of KoS:

and we KoS because we dont take risks.

That's a big point. Reducing weapon and ammo abundancy would mean a big chance here as the average player threat level goes down (players are less likely to shoot you because they simply can't) where the cost for shooting goes up (bullet loss, weapon degradation, noise). So in fact shooting a random player might be more risky as you lose valuable ammo, degrade your weapon and maybe get the attention of someone (or something) much more dangerous.

 

Now in general we do not want to eliminate KoS completely but rather provide viable alternatives and make it less of the "go-to playstyle". By introducing cooperation and cooperative rewards there is more reason for the "non squad players" to work together instead of simply shooting each other. And cooperation between big groups might even benefit "squad players" (especially when talking "end game feature"). You should be able see strangers not only as a potential threat but also as a potential resource and killing others as some kind of investment.

[JohnMcClane 19]

I don't get why people get bent out of shape when players KoS. It is a valid tactic, and is one that adds a level of realism and fear to the game. I understand the frustration when you work for a while to accumulate gear and someone takes it from you. Sure it sucks to get killed by someone you didn't know was there or even worse- someone you were trying to help. That said it could happen in the real world, what this game was designed to emulate.

[vfxtodd 125]

It would absolutely reduce KOS.

 

If you have only a handful of shells and a mediocre weapon you might not want to engage the distant person minding his own business. You might not want to risk shooting at a group of 2 or more people since you can not guarantee you are well armed enough to come out the victor.

 

Low ammo and weapon spawn rates would absolutely reduce KOS even if it is merely due to the lack of ammunition making it a fruitless act.

 

Will it stop it completely of course not.

 

But based on pure logistics it would reduce it dramatically.

 

Disagree. It will only SLOW DOWN players who are into KOS. The reduction will be imaginary because you're only delaying what's going to happen anyway.

 

And again, you're FORCING a style of gameplay. You're always going to have KOS players on games where there's competition for ammo, supplies, or weapons. Especially in survival games.

 

Here's another situation. You're on your way to meet up with a friend in DayZ. While you're heading towards him, you hear that he's surrounded by KOS players. You get there, and what happens? Well, if you're geared and armed, you get to help your friend stay alive. If you're not all you can do is run. So, we're right back to allowing the KOS players to have the upper hand.

 

People keep asking for things that would happen in a real apocalypse, except where it would interfere in their personal play style. In a real apocalypse, you would have KOS people. People who would rather hunt down and take other people's supplies. So, why are you trying to reduce the frequency of a situation that would actually generate intensity in a game made for intensity.

 

Survival games wouldn't be fun if all they were about was gathering stuff, planting and growing foods, and building bases. If that's all you want to do, then play SIMS. Survival games are meant to create moments of fear.They're supposed to be visceral experiences. If you're too worried about being killed, play Mario Brothers.

Edited June 14, 2015 by BulletGarden

[gibonez 3633]

Disagree. It will only SLOW DOWN players who are into KOS.

 

Yup and guess what the end result of that is ?

 

Less Kills on sight due to not being able to.

 

I am not arguing for or against people playing in certain ways merely stating that if they indeed wished to reduce the amount of kill on sight that happens in the game one surefire way would be to make weapons and ammo super scarce.

[vfxtodd 125]

Yup and guess what the end result of that is ?

 

Less Kills on sight due to not being able to.

 

I am not arguing for or against people playing in certain ways merely stating that if they indeed wished to reduce the amount of kill on sight that happens in the game one surefire way would be to make weapons and ammo super scarce.

Yes. And if your idea comes to fruition, DayZ will sell the fewest copies of any game in history, imho. They might as well change the name to "DayZ: Home and Garden Edition".

People seem worried about "encouraging" one play style over another. While missing the point of encouraging all styles of gameplay.

Most of the ideas I read here are people suggesting things that support their own preferred style of gaming at the sacrifice of other play styles. DayZ will only remain challenging if multiple styles of gameplay are encouraged. Suggesting ideas to support your style, then turning around and suggesting ideas that hinder or limit other styles is the worst approach to the development of a game like DayZ.

Do you really want balance? Or do you just want to make sure your gameplay is supported? You can't have both.

[dashender7 78]

Do you really want balance? Or do you just want to make sure your gameplay is supported? You can't have both.

 

This is one of the most nonsensical statements I've seen yet.

 

How do you not understand that if you give people plenty of guns and ammo in a video GAME where LIFE AND DEATH HAVE NO REAL CONSEQUENCES, including one's OWN DEATH, and they know they can "re-gear" quickly after respawning, and let them run around with no balancing mechanics, the vast majority will devolve into Battlefield style PvP?

 

If you want that, that's fine and that's your opinion but at least just admit that's what we're talking about.

 

It's really ignorant to keep acting like the absence of mechanics and consequences in a game makes it more balanced or realistic - that's the whole point - a game is just the sum of it's parts - it's mechanics or lack thereof - and often it's the lack thereof that lead to a really base level, least common denominator, mindless sort of PvP competitive play where players make decisions that do not reflect a "real life" sort of scenario.

 

We're asking for DayZ to try to tackle some of the mechanic and balancing issues and to be a pioneer game in importing and yes imposing some mechanics that encourage players to take life and death more seriously, thus importing a more realistic player to player interaction environment into the game.

 

All games including DayZ are just a sum of mechanics imposed on the player to create the experience.  This includes mechanics like health systems, stamina systems, food and hydration systems, etc. These are all things "physically and mentally" imposed on the player to create an immersive experience.  What's missing are some of the mechanics that would actually cause the average player to value their own safety, preservation of life, and survival at a deeper level such that they're not so willing to throw it away seeking constant PvP death matching, but where they might still choose to risk that life if survival really depended on it.

 

Proponents of the status quo of mindless PvP and "tactical play", just keep straw-manning the argument. 

 

We're not asking for the elimination of killing or KOS, don't you get that?  

 

We're just asking for mechanics that balance the game in such a way that one might expect to not encounter the majority of players playing like they're playing another BF PvP video game, but instead an immersive survival sandbox, where just perhaps, survival really does become paramount to seeking PvP endlessly out of boredom.

 

We're asking for DayZ to be something a little different for a change - perhaps a game that thinks about how to artificially implement some effects and consequences of playing it like killing and dying routinely over and over again all the time don't matter at all.

[vfxtodd 125]

Dashender 7,

No, dude, YOU just don't get it. You're assuming that by limiting access to guns and ammo you're making the game "balanced".

That's selfish and delusional thinking. People are going to play KOS regardless of what you do. Imposing limitations on a specify style of gameplay will limit the sales of the game. On top of the fact, this game is based on an APOCALYPSE!! You will have KOS in any apocalypse, real or game based.

You're being "nonsensical" in your insistence on controlling and limiting on how others play. KOS isn't going anywhere. You think you're smart because you think you know better then anyone who disagrees with you.

Search YouTube for DayZ videos. It's amazing how many ways DayZ is played. You don't like KOS? Don't blindly run into towns looking for loot. It's an APOCALYPSE!! It's supposed to be scary! And KOS is part of what any apocalypse would be like. Adapt or cry to your mom.

The way to BALANCE and discourage KOS is by rewarding cooperation. And that has been discussed thoroughly in these forums. Pay attention.

[dashender7 78]

You are clearly unwilling to listen to what I've actually been saying. It's kind of baffling. You keep arguing points against me that I'm not even actually arguing.

 

I'm not arguing against KOS altogether and I've said that over and over again, yet you can't get your mind past that point. 

 

I'll say it another way:  KOS is great - it is necessary, yes I AGREE it's an inherent part of the post-apocalyptic scenario.

 

But the death matching PvP cycle of running and gunning, PvP in high pop areas, die, gear up quickly with an assault rifle and repeat ad nauseam is what I'm saying needs to change.  And yes, that's just an opinion.

 

And I've been saying that in addition to good multi-person mechanics, other systems of the game need to change for us to see that.

 

The funny thing is that if you'd have been actually paying attention to what I was saying you'd see that we might actually agree on more than you think. 

 

I'm saying that it would be interesting if DayZ could experiment with ways to discourage the majority of players from resorting to this really base level style of gameplay, the constant cycle of gear up, PvP, die, repeat, and instead provide players with an attractive alternative that is challenging and rewarding but still allows for player killing at any time.  I would just like to see the consequences of life and death be greater such that players are encouraged to play with a more human and survival oriented mindset.  That's all.

 

Also, I continue to disagree about guns and ammo, to some extent.  Yes, KOS will continue even if guns and ammo are very very scarce, and yes, players should continue to be able to kill one another and NOT be kept from doing so outright.

 

But great gear including guns and ammo will continue to be a big part of the DayZ endgame no matter what.  Therefore, if these things are not easy to find quickly, then more players will spend more of their time searching for these things, and protecting them when they do have them, because they realize it might take many many hours before they can find it again.

 

Going along with that, when other kinds of gear, and food, are harder to find, it will spread players over the map and cause them to spend more time surviving and foraging for things than looking for someone to kill.

 

Also, while squad play and friends playing together is a great part of DayZ, a very large part of the DayZ population, probably the majority of the time, is playing alone (lone wolf) at any given moment.  Especially in one on one encounters, my experience and that of people I know, has been that such encounters are way more likely to foster some sort of conversation or interaction (or something interesting like a robbery), rather than outright blindside KOS, if one or both parties aren't observed to be carrying a weapon, especially a weapon like and AK or something that is really overpowered.

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

It wasn't that long ago that I read a dev quote that went something like this: firing a weapon should have consequences. They want us to weight the decision to fire a weapon very carefully and decide if it is indeed worth the risk. In my opinion, one of the biggest factors towards discouraging KoS will come in the form of aggressive AI. 

 

So, hypothetical scenario time: Someone who normally would just kill anyone and everything that moves as quickly as possible finds themselves in the police station in Severograd. They exit the front door out onto the main highway that runs West-East through town and see another player moving into a garage across from them. In the past, they would have just wall peeked for the right moment and shot the guy in the back.

 

However, this is hypothetical DayZ build 0.95, let's say, and the 3PP camera has long since been tweaked to no longer provide aerial support. There are at least two hordes of 50 zombies within gunshot range and the KoS'er has lost sight of his intended victim. He has already looted the areas he wanted to loot in town and has two major choices to make, each with their own consequences.

 

1) Shoot the other player and possibly get something decent from his corpse, assuming all of the gear doesn't get ruined by the bullets passing through his body. Then deal with a horde of zombies that you can't outrun forever because the stamina system prevents that. So instead, the player would have to loot the corpse extremely quickly, find a defensible house immediately, then hunker down and hope he has enough bullets to dispatch enough of the zombies to make escape possible. Oh yeah, and zombies can break down doors now too. 

 

2) Not shoot the other player. The killer loses out on the potential of gaining some gear from his victim, but he can also be much more sure of not losing his own gear through death by zombie as a result of getting into a shootout in the middle of a city. 

 

I don't think DayZ Beta will even remotely resemble the DayZ that we play today and I'm also very sure that a lot of the problems the game has now are purely a result of the WIP nature of Early Access Alpha development and not evidence of a failing on the part of the devs. One just needs to be able to think a few steps ahead and see the larger picture. 

[deadjuice 64]

 

How about:

• Requiring 2 people to drag a corpse, passed out, or restrained person
• The presence of 2 people might intimidate a single infected zed - if you're in groups of 2 or more single zeds might be less aggressive (a safety in numbers trick!)

 

The first one, absolutely. It was the first thing to come to my mind. Would be so useful and nice. Make it so you can drag/arm-in-arm them at a speed somewhere between walking and jogging. 

I've had several scenarios, where someone had broken legs, and I went to go get the supplies to fix them. If I took too long, they'd either have committed suicide before i got back, or have been attacked by a zed.

Especially in combat scenarios. Me and two randoms I met got ambushed. One of them got hit, and it was pure luck that I managed to zig zag, knock down a bush, zig zag, grab the sticks, zig zag to cover, scramble back to my fallen guy after delaying for surprise, and get him up.

The other stuff is good too. The only one i don't like, and vehemently disagree with, is intimidating the zeds.

They are crazy aggressive violent flesh hungry monsters, not moaning idiots. 

 

[vfxtodd 125]

Dashender 7,

It's not that I'm unwilling to listen to you. You seem unwilling to consider other options for discouraging KOS other then making guns and ammo rare. Which is the worst idea. That's what I'm against.

What ColdAtrophy suggests is much more acceptable to all play styles. When firing a weapon, the zombies flock to you as soon as you fire your weapon. That way there are consequences for using a fire arm.

That makes a lot more sense in dealing with KOS then your idea of making ammo and weapons rare. And all play styles remain intact. The KOS'ers pay for their aggression with REAL balance. This way, people can CHOOSE to arm themselves for protection or for a more aggressive style. Either way, they're given a choice.

Your clear presumption is that anyone who grabs a weapon and ammo must be interested in KOS. a truly mistaken presumption.

[gibonez 3633]

Making guns and ammo rare would add value to said items.

 

Lowering kos is just a by product of that not the main advantage gained.

 

From a realism standpoint it would also make sense as Eastern Europe is not as gun heavy as The United States.

If the game does take place in "russia" then weapons would be even more rare. Atleast weapons in civilian hands.

 

I see rare weapons and ammo as a good realism booster that has unique and ultimately good gameplay implications.

[vfxtodd 125]

Realism. We're talking realism in a zombie apocalypse? Seriously?

Let's make ammo and weapons rare because this is Russia. Yea, Russia...in a zombie apocalypse. Talk about realism, eh? Maybe I should just wait for DayZ: New York to get developed 10 years from now. Right?

Some people can't think beyond one day ahead. Imagine when DayZ gets released. We just might see every server filled. We might even see 100 player servers. Imagine that? Then imagine, fresh spawns along the shore of Cherno or Electro being greeted by a bunch of players lining the coast waiting to kill them after they spawn. It could happen.

How? Well, let's think for a minute. (Thinking is not popular here). A lot of people will form clans for the very purpose of meeting fresh spawns with "resistance". Why? Well, that's what happens when thousands of people buy a new game where "survival" is a key component of the game. To many, this means well armed.

"What shall we do, Obi Wan Kenobi?!"

"Get used to it. Adapt to survive. As soon as you spawn, run inland and get supplies. And if you really want to survive, arm yourself in case you come across these soulless creatures who want to harm you for your goods. "

"That sounds scary, Obi Wan!"

"That's what an apocalypse is like. Scary."

Edited June 15, 2015 by BulletGarden

[gibonez 3633]

Not seeing how limited weapons and ammo would prevent anything you said.

[JohnMcClane 19]

 

From a realism standpoint it would also make sense as Eastern Europe is not as gun heavy as The United States.

If the game does take place in "russia" then weapons would be even more rare. Atleast weapons in civilian hands.

 

 

... Have you ever been to Eastern Europe? Hunting rifles are common, shotguns can be found every damn place. The availability of military hardware would make sense as well considering the apocalyptic setting of the game. All of the AK's imported into the US have to be made somewhere after all..

[gibonez 3633]

... Have you ever been to Eastern Europe? Hunting rifles are common, shotguns can be found every damn place. The availability of military hardware would make sense as well considering the apocalyptic setting of the game. All of the AK's imported into the US have to be made somewhere after all..

 

Numbers do not lie.

 

 

 

So yea Eastern Europe is not a gun filled landscape. Very few guns per citizen in fact so rare weapons and ammo would fit perfectly.

 

Yes Germany has more guns in civilian hands than Russia even with a much smaller population.

 

Just because a Nation makes alot of weapons for Exportation does not mean it itself has access to those weapons.

 

Take Russia for example it is quite hard to get a rifle yet they will willingly sell any of their high grade weapons to the highest bidder outside.

Edited June 15, 2015 by gibonez

[JohnMcClane 19]

Tl;dr my original questions stands: have you ever been to Eastern Europe? If the answer is no you cannot make an accurate assessment of the topic, regardless of whatever BS you read online. Everything on the internet is true after all. ;)

[gibonez 3633]

Tl;dr my original questions stands: have you ever been to Eastern Europe? If the answer is no you cannot make an accurate assessment of the topic, regardless of whatever BS you read online. Everything on the internet is true after all. ;)

 

Yea fuck Peer Reviewed Papers and Readily available factual information right, cause cause I haven't actually been to Eastern Europe.

 

Facts don't lie bud.

[JohnMcClane 19]

My butthurt detector is going haywire.

[vfxtodd 125]

Gibonez,

Your stats don't mean anything. We're talking about DayZ, a game based on a zombie apocalypse. And you're pulling stats out of your butt that have no relevance to a fictional video game.

Play DayZ however you want. But stop trying to rationalize your self serving ideas by incorporating real life stats into a discussion about a fictional, fantasy based video game. I don't give a flying monkey how many privately owned weapons are "actually" available in Russia. Stick to the fact that DayZ is a video game. DayZ needs to be designed for multiple play styles. Don't ask others to accept your ideas that cater solely to your personal play style. Unless you want to play on servers as populated as a ghost town.

[emuthreat 2837]

There should definitely be more mechanics that reward preservation of life; both your own, and others'.  Team carrying of valuable resources is one way that would be great.  It would also help to have a progressing character timeline and learned skills, through practice.  What if some doors spawn locked, and require either a lockpick, or from a skilled player, less time with a lockpick and the possibility to pick with a screwdriver or other "close enough" item?  What if each successful picking of an apple resulted in a greater probability of finding one, or if practice at digging and planting farm plots reduced the time required to do so?  Once vehicle repair mechanics are added, the same principle of experience making specific tasks easier/faster.  I'm not sure how this would work, but getting better at shooting after running could be improved through practice; perhaps even practicing by shooting zeds could have a slow reduction of sway.

 

As a player survives completing more experiences, those things should come more easily in the future.  No shortcuts, veteran skilled players can only be made more skillful by successfully completing relevant tasks.  This type of system would help to increase the value of a player's life to something more than the gear that you have found/killed for/been given by teammates. It should make people stop to think:  "Is chasing this guy down worth the hours of experience that I've put into this character?"  Of course there will be "boosting" possible, but as long as it takes actual in-game time and effort, we can just call it practice.  There should be a reward for surviving many battles, something like bandaging much faster seems appropriate result of surviving several bandagings; experience should not be granted unless bleeding is stopped by the bandaging. It might even reduce PVP a bit by incentivising coastal spawn with no itenerary to help each other pick apples, and take turns stabbing and bandaging one another.  that might be a bit hardcore on the spectrum of survival training, but I son't see anything unrealistic or inauthentic about it.