Multi-Person Mechanics to discourage KOS

[Aimlessone 4]

Do those of you campaigning for less guns and ammo not realize that it will widen the gap of bambis and KOS players? Think about it for one second, if they make guns and ammo rare, those that wish to KOS are going to play safe UNTIL they get their hands on guns and ammo. Then they are going to go hunting, hunting a larger population of players with no means to defend themselves. It's like a madman with a gun in a gun-free zone. IMHO less guns and ammo will INCREASE the problem because those that have them will rule the land. 

 

I shoot anyone I see with a weapon BECAUSE I value my life, I kill bambis when I need to eat them BECAUSE I value my life. I haven't played a game where I value my life more than I do in DayZ, all the references to Battlefield are illogical because death in that game has ZERO consequences. You respawn in seconds will full gear, it aint that way in DayZ. Is it easy to gear? In relative terms to this style of game yes, does that time taken to gear and make your character healthy make dying a much larger consequence, YES. 

 

Increasing the value of staying alive will only increase the want for grievers to grief - killing a fresh spawn isn't as rewarding to them as killing a fully geared person. Now add skill and abilities to to the mix and it only increases the rage from a death thus increasing the incentive for those who like to grief.

 

P.S. I don't disagree with adding skills, on the contrary I find it to be a fantastic idea. However viewing it as a deterrent to KOS is invalid. 

 

 

Bottom line, I kill to survive in a survival game...I don't understand the complaints.....

Edited June 16, 2015 by Aimlessone

[vfxtodd 125]

Aimlessone:

"Do those of you campaigning for less guns and ammo not realize that it will widen the gap of bambis and KOS players? Think about it for one second, if they make guns and ammo rare, those that wish to KOS are going to play safe UNTIL they get their hands on guns and ammo. Then they are going to go hunting, hunting a larger population of players with no means to defend themselves. It's like a madman with a gun in a gun-free zone. IMHO less guns and ammo will INCREASE the problem because those that have them will rule the land."

This is exactly my point. Why people are so blind to the fallacy of "rare ammo and weapons" is mind boggling. Reread what Aimlessone said. It's so clear. To argue for less ammo and weapons makes no sense.

When a KOS style player is geared to their liking, they take up a position and wait for fresh spawns to appear. Or the make their way to towns they know will have more targets based on popularity. Since the KOS players will be aware of the "rare ammo / weapons" factor - if it's implemented - they know it will take their "victims" more time to find weapons to protect themselves with. Making EVERY player susceptible to coming under attack by ALREADY geared KOS players.

It's so fricken obvious! Rare ammo and weapons FAVORS the KOS players. So it takes them a little longer to gear up. It also means it takes everyone else longer to protect themselves from KOS players. Jeez!! Think!

[JohnMcClane 19]

We are having a gun control debate on the DayZ forum.. facepalmmmmmm

 

 

Here's a novel idea for a game mechanic to discourage KoS: Be better than the person trying to kill you. /thread

[IgnobleBasterd 161]

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.

Shit man, I'm giving you all my beans! These suggestions are really awesome.

[JohnMcClane 19]

Am I the only one that feels like cooperation outside of your group of friends is insane in a game that is purely competitive? Because that's what this game is after all. Survival of the fittest, which is competition.

[Aimlessone 4]

I agree with both Bullet and John, decreasing guns and ammo favors KOS players and the only true way to make the game better is to be better than those people. What I fail to understand is the complaints. I never get killed by other players unless I'm in a city (which is asking for it), whether I am shooting first, or doing something stupid. People keep clamoring for "realism" and "this isn't what it would be like in an actual apocalypse" Yet these same people are sprinting through towns, bashing doors in going house to house looking for loot. This ISN'T what you would be doing in an actual apocalypse, so you have only yourself to blame. If you want to survive and not be shot then PLAY LIKE IT!

 

The first time I played this game I broke my legs and spent forever trying to find someone to kill me. I eventually starved to death. Then I survived for almost 10 hours because I played like it was an actual apocalypse. I stayed out of sight, away from large cities and watched little towns from the tree line for movement before going in for loot. When crossing large open plains I scouted with binocs or mosin scope and made sure the treeline was clear and moved quickly. I wore clothing that helped me blend in and kept a green child's briefcase over a bright red backpack.

 

With the advent of "living off the land" and other survival aspects being implemented, if your consistently being killed by other players when you don't want to be in gunfights, YOU'RE PLAYING WRONG! Stop trying to limit the game because you fail to grasp how to survive a hostile world. 

 

That said there needs to be a balance between realism and a game, games are supposed to be fun, real apocalypse would NOT be fun. The more you push for your "realism" the less fun the game becomes. Truth be told, if a real apocalypse happened and there were no laws or consequences other than vigilante justice. You'd have a lot more people killing other people for pure sport than you think. 

 

TLDR: Don't touch the guns and ammo!

Edited June 16, 2015 by Aimlessone

[vfxtodd 125]

Am I the only one that feels like cooperation outside of your group of friends is insane in a game that is purely competitive? Because that's what this game is after all. Survival of the fittest, which is competition.

I disagree. This assumes everyone plays with friends all the time. When I respawn after dying, I'm usually far away from my friends assuming I was playing with them when I died. I also like playing as a lone wolf. When you die, you're a lone wolf when you spawn. Even if you're on teamspeak with friends, you still have to make your way back to them or they come to you.

I have a lot of fun playing as a lone wolf. And personally, I don't see DayZ as necessarily competition. It's a survival game. Competition is not inherent. Unless you think you're competing for loot. But, since loot is spawning all the time it's more about a continuous search for supplies throughout the map.

[JohnMcClane 19]

You are competing to survive. If you allow other players to kill you, they will. I typically leave people alone, however if I see them as a threat, are obviously hostile, or I simply feel like it I have no problem killing them and taking their belongings.

[Aimlessone 4]

You are competing to survive. If you allow other players to kill you, they will. I typically leave people alone, however if I see them as a threat, are obviously hostile, or I simply feel like it I have no problem killing them and taking their belongings.

This is exactly how I play, I don't go running around looking for people to kill (usually mwahhaha); however if I see someone that isn't a friend I will shoot them. For the reasons I stated before, I value my life. Which is why all the post saying they need to increase the value of life in this game confuses me, I kill because I value...anyway I digress.

[vfxtodd 125]

if loot, weapons, ammo, and vehicles spawned only once then yes we would be competing for the means to survive. Competition may kick in if you're pvp-ing with other players. Or fighting to get the loot in a particular location. But competition is not inherent in the game. Competition implies that there is an end and a victor. If you kill me, I respawn. You didn't win. There is no final score.

If I'm a lone wolf, I am only concerned with staying alive and feeding myself. I'm not competing with anyone. There is no prize, honor or supremacy. You might end up with an inflated ego at the end of the day. But, nothing to show for it.

Edited June 17, 2015 by BulletGarden

[JohnMcClane 19]

if loot, weapons, ammo, and vehicles spawned only once then yes we would be competing for the means to survive. Competition may kick in if you're pvp-ing with other players. Or fighting to get the loot in a particular location. But competition is not inherent in the game. Competition implies that there is an end and a victor. If you kill me, I respawn. You didn't win. There is no final score.

If I'm a lone wolf, I am only concerned with staying alive and feeding myself. I'm not competing with anyone. There is no prize, honor or supremacy. You might end up with an inflated ego at the end of the day. But, nothing to show for it.

No way. If I kill you, and take what I want from your dead body I am clearly the victor. I got what I wanted - something I didn't have before or more of something I need/want. Maybe I needed food, or wanted the backpack you had on, who knows? Regardless, the Final score comes out to Me:1 you:0, until someone comes along and kills me of course.

 

You speak of honor and supremecy like someone who doesn't know what either are. This is a video game, not the real world.

[ScipioII 176]

How about if you get killed, you turn into a zombie and haunt the killer. ;)

[Zboub le météor 250]

How about if you get killed, you turn into a zombie and haunt the killer. ;)

 it won't happend, dev's told us thay don't want the players to became an infected. by the way, there is no zombies in dayz, only living infected, when you shoot them, they die and won't come back.

 

a lot of good ideas in this topic, i hope the dayz team take a look at this !

[vfxtodd 125]

No way. If I kill you, and take what I want from your dead body I am clearly the victor. I got what I wanted - something I didn't have before or more of something I need/want. Maybe I needed food, or wanted the backpack you had on, who knows? Regardless, the Final score comes out to Me:1 you:0, until someone comes along and kills me of course.

 

You speak of honor and supremecy like someone who doesn't know what either are. This is a video game, not the real world.

 

"I am clearly the victor."

 

Yep, you're clearly looking to stroke your ego. 

 

"You speak of honor and supremacy like someone who doesn't know what either are."

 

And you suggest that there is competition in DayZ as if it's the real world. Victory is only important if there's something to be gained. You merely caused me to respawn away from you. There is no victory. But, your self-esteem clearly depends on "defeating" someone else. So, you shoehorn the idea of "competition" into a survival game because you need your ego stroked on a regular basis. I'm sorry you need so much validation to feel good. I'm just playing a game. You seem to "need" to defeat someone. I'm not defeated. I just respawn.

 

Stick with internet porn. You can compete with yourself there. Hahaha.

[JohnMcClane 19]

"I am clearly the victor."

 

Yep, you're clearly looking to stroke your ego. 

 

"You speak of honor and supremacy like someone who doesn't know what either are."

 

And you suggest that there is competition in DayZ as if it's the real world. Victory is only important if there's something to be gained. You merely caused me to respawn away from you. There is no victory. But, your self-esteem clearly depends on "defeating" someone else. So, you shoehorn the idea of "competition" into a survival game because you need your ego stroked on a regular basis. I'm sorry you need so much validation to feel good. I'm just playing a game. You seem to "need" to defeat someone. I'm not defeated. I just respawn.

 

Stick with internet porn. You can compete with yourself there. Hahaha.

 

You seemed to be latched onto this ego idea. It has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with me killing you and looting your body. Simple as that.

[Pandema 352]

First off, I believe the suggestion forums are that way -->

 

Secondly, how would implementing mechanics that involve two people decrease KOS? Do you not play the game with friends? I already have 2+ people to do these things with, why would I risk it with some random?

 

Thirdly, reducing the amount of firearms/bullets is a shit idea as has been stated already. You're letting the fox go wild in the hen house.

[vfxtodd 125]

You seemed to be latched onto this ego idea. It has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with me killing you and looting your body. Simple as that.

Yes, because you're latched onto this self serving idea of "victory". Victory comes at the end of a competition. You focus on killing me and taking my loot. A situation that represents a fraction of the possibilities available in DayZ. Killing another player is equal to 1% of what is possible in DayZ. But it seems to be your primary objective. Which explains the "need" for victory. The need to defeat someone else. Which tells me you have a very narrow point of view when it comes to playing DayZ.

The best survivors avoid engaging another player in battle. The best survivor moves throughout Chenaraus without being detected. The best survivor knows when to work with other players to extend his/her life in DayZ. The point of this thread is to discuss ways to encourage cooperation between players. Cooperation extends the life of those who participate. Cooperation does not include competition if survival is the intent.

But, hey, kill and steal loot all you want. But, if it's competition you want, there's always Call of Duty and Battlefield Hardline.

[JohnMcClane 19]

Your play style isn't the only one. Get over it.

[gibonez 3633]

That said there needs to be a balance between realism and a game, games are supposed to be fun, real apocalypse would NOT be fun.

 

Hog wash.

 

Nothing thus far as ever even implied that "balance" was an important factor in day much less a core factor.

 

Balance for dayz should be realism and realism should be rare weapons and ammo.

 

It is a real life realism change that not only improves the game but eliminates or atleast drastically reduces the negative connotations that Dayz is just a large world death match game.

[JohnMcClane 19]

 

Balance for dayz should be realism and realism should be rare weapons and ammo.

 

But neither are rare in the real world.. As of 2007 it was estimated that there were at least 875 million firearms in the world. I somehow doubt that Chernarus (regardless of its status a fictional place) with multiple military bases and camps would only have a handful of guns in it. Not to mention private ownership.

 

Cutting the amount of guns in the game creates two types of players: Those who have and those who have not. Then what?

[capt. beefsteak 95]

I've previously mentioned which locations where KOS hotspots at the begining of this thread (Coast, All call of duty... um.. I mean military barracks. Also daytime only servers) Basically you can see anywhere easy loot and a trolling mentality can be had.

 

Now, what you do is go to a smaller town and relax, farm live etc. Mentally condition yourself to "notice/observe" your surroundings. At any location on the map you have to watch your ass, because someone could potentially be there trying to kill you. It's real to the extent that you might have something they want, and they don't know you so eff it, why not kill you. I personally like watching people from a safe distance, I don't kill them, just watch them and sometimes follow them.. I usually pick a military location to start because so many knuckleheads go there. I have been spotted before and I have been killed. The really amazing thing that happens is you learn how to follow correctly, the right speed and your timing gets better.

 

You don't need a gun with you but it never hurts to have protection. Suggested items for proper stalking of people include but are not limited to:

 

1. Food

2. Water

3. Patience

4. Green or darker clothing

5. Practice

6. Binoculars

 

Having the upper hand usually lends the ablity to spare an individual and the potential to add them to your friends list as apposed to just another meaningless kill. However since you were ready and they weren't you may need to put them down. Of course you could always handcuff them and remove any weapons they may have that could cause you harm.

 

My favorite weapon in the game will be one that can one shot K.O. someone at close range, and is 100% effective at it... Basically we need a blow gun and some sweet face paint.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Deepfryer

[gibonez 3633]

But neither are rare in the real world.. As of 2007 it was estimated that there were at least 875 million firearms in the world. I somehow doubt that Chernarus (regardless of its status a fictional place) with multiple military bases and camps would only have a handful of guns in it. Not to mention private ownership.

 

Cutting the amount of guns in the game creates two types of players: Those who have and those who have not. Then what?

 

Of those 875 million firearms the vast majority of them are in select few areas of the world. Eastern Europe where the game takes inspiration from is not civilian gun heavy, in fact firearms are quite scarce since the Soviet Union thought it wise to keep them out of Civilian hands due to threat of insurrection.

 

I am not saying these were gun free zones merely stating that the level of firearm proliferation currently in the game is not realistic at all even for a gun crazy place like the US.

 

Weapons and Ammo are just simply too easily available and thus weapons and ammo lose their importance and value.

[Evil Minion 943]

Cutting the amount of guns in the game creates two types of players: Those who have and those who have not. Then what?

KoS goes down. Because the chance to encounter a player with gun (= the one that can kill you from afar) is greatly reduced thus "paranoia kills" are less justified. On the other side less of the "kill for the lulz" players actually get guns to pull it off.

 

Simply put you have four types of player:

1. The friendly ones without gun.
2. The friendly ones with gun.
3. The hostile ones without gun.
4. The hostile ones wth gun.

Only the last group can KoS reliably and the higher the chance to meet one the higher the chance people will shoot "just to be sure". It's basically the same concept as gun control: by reducing the number of people with a gun you also reduce the number of idiots with a gun.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Evil Minion

[capt. beefsteak 95]

KoS goes down. Because the chance to encounter a player with gun (= the one that can kill you from afar) is greatly reduced thus "paranoia kills" are less justified. On the other side less of the "kill for the lulz" players actually get guns to pull it off.

 

Simply put you have four types of player:

1. The friendly ones without gun.
2. The friendly ones with gun.
3. The hostile ones without gun.
4. The hostile ones wth gun.

Only the last group can KoS reliably and the higher the chance to meet one the higher the chance people will shoot "just to be sure". It's basically the same concept as gun control: by reducing the number of people with a gun you also reduce the number of idiots with a gun.

 

I would give people a little bit more credit than this. Though we are more complex than this game obviously we still have choices to make. Ok so we take all the guns away, no this doesn't make anything better. Ask me why? Ok good, you see people that can't find guns easily know that it's not easy for others to find guns. So whats the next best thing to upset those playing the game? Melee weapons, because if i know it's a pita to find a rifle for myself then it would be for you as well so chances are you won't have one and then everyone will chase you with an axe until you are dead. Before long with the anti second amendment policy listed you'd be pissed off with people that have axes, then crowbars shall I keep going? Before long it would be a game where someone would just walk up and punch you to death; of course they could disable that as well and all PVP for that matter...

 

Its more a game about being smart and actually observing the area. If a dog craps all over the yard you'd probably be watching your step to avoid getting it on your shoe. If you approach the game with this mindset you'd have a little better chance at survival. Even careful observation can't save you from the crap under the leaves so once in a while you might get some on your shoe, but far less likely than say with a blindfold on.

 

More often than not when I encounter a hostile person I'm either dead right away or they leave a little RP to be had. If I don't get killed right away this gives a window of opportunity to engage them verbaly. Use this time wisely to state your case via any means. Or go out boldly and come on here and ask, why does everyone kill everyone? The reason behind the mass killing in this game is because of chance. If you kill someone there is a 100% chance of no retaliation they are dead for this particular instance/person. This is the main reason behind the issue you seek an answer for which is why group apple tree shaking, or lugging crap around won't help the situation. Not to downplay your ideas, however, all group activites do is invite momentary civil activity to enhance both players experience to potentially survive longer. The whole time your lugging and shaking with an unknown he's getting his, meanwhile the derringer pistol he stuffed in his pants ensures he's getting the most benefit out of your attempted efforts to be humane.

 

Chance people, Chance is KOS. Without worry people will waste you while you sleep to ensure thier own personal survival needs are met.

 

Keep Surviving and watch out for that dog crap ;)....

[emuthreat 2837]

You seemed to be latched onto this ego idea. It has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with me killing you and looting your body. Simple as that.

I don't loot my kills, that's dangerous.  Survival is my goal.  I kill to eliminate threats, and pass the time once facilitating my survival has become easy and mundane.