Unless we get flags/effects for murder, this game will just be Deathmatch.

[PinkTaco24 10]

Whelp' date=' this is proof positive that he'll clutch at anything he can find and call anybody who's being shot at an innocent, even if they shoot back and suddenly have a bandit skin.

Ciao~

Dude... I really don't understand how you fundamentally misunderstand something so simple, so drastically.

Please.. BE DONE with this thread. You don't have the mental capacity to understand it.

[evulclown@gmail.com 191]

Just saying "Nope' date=' you're wrong" and not giving any reasons doesn't help your argument in the slightest.

[/quote']

Apparently you can't read, so why should I? I would imagine it's yet again full of baseless judgements.

There is nothing realistic about FFA deathmatch.

You can sit there and call it a "FFA deathmatch" all you want. Say it until your face turns colors and your lips go numb. Shout it from the hilltops.

No amount of repeating it is going to make it true.

No deathmatch game allows you to survive for hours' date=' let alone days, let alone weeks, let alone over a month.

Learn to survive or get used to dying & crying. rocket is not going to show up on a fiery steed and rescue you like some kind of damsel in distress. Dry those tears, hike that diaper up and reload your weapon. You've got work to do. Nobody's going to do it for you.

[/quote']

Never have truer words been said...

[ryansongy@hotmail.com 27]

In real life people would not be killing the way they are even in this situation. It's as simple as that. The majority of people are unable to just kill other people for no reason, ESPECIALLY if they just came from a civilized society. The reason people kill on sight in this game is because theres no moral consequences. There's no moral consequence because this is just a video game. As much as it is supposed to be a simulation it is still just a video game.

Therefore some sort of artificial consequence needs to be added to simulate the moral consequences of killing someone in real life.

[PinkTaco24 10]

Never have truer words been said...

except.. those deathmatch style games DO exist.

/next

[doitonlan 0]

Lol sorry Jay I forgot to follow the meaning of my sentence after I used an nonrestrictive clause. I feel your pain after rereading it.

[KWilt 157]

Before I leave, to those coming in, here's an ITT. You can go ahead and put this in the OP, Pink. It's 100% true, given your words.

ITT: If you kill someone who isn't already a bandit, you are now a bandit, no matter what the circumstances are. If you are killed in this state, you're still a bandit until the time runs out. You spawn with the bandit skin, and if someone sees you after the spawn, even if you were defending your own property or someone was putting you into a state that lacked security (even after a valid warning was given) when you received your skin, they have a clean pass to shoot you on sight until your timer runs down. Have fun children, and you can't read if I don't agree with you.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Never have truer words been said...

except.. those deathmatch style games DO exist.

/next

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Deathmatch games exist... okay? DayZ isn't one of them, as evidenced by my post and I hope we've been talking about DayZ this whole time.

We've been talking about DayZ, right?

Right?

[PinkTaco24 10]

Hahaha. You want me to purposefully aim away from people who are actively firing at me because they are "innocent?"

you need to set your story straight. If they are shooting at you' date=' caused damage, they would be flagged.

You want me to let a murderer get away because he got in a vehicle with "innocents?"

you can kill the murderer all you want. Just not the innocent.

Your argument for the car case is 'the guy i want to kill is in a car with innocents, and I should be able to destroy the car and just ignore the collateral damage.' Sorry bud. No. You killed innocents. Deal with it, or don't kill them. Again, you do have some kills leeway before perma flag... And those kills decay over time.

I'm sure there is a kill to time played ratio that can be set that says unless you very specifically seek out and murder innocents consistently you won't be perma flagged.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

In real life people would not be killing the way they are even in this situation. It's as simple as that.

*Checks to see if DayZ is in real life*

Nope.

*Phew*

That was a close one.

Therefore some sort of artificial consequence needs to be added

Therefore nope.

[PinkTaco24 10]

Never have truer words been said...

except.. those deathmatch style games DO exist.

/next

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Deathmatch games exist... okay? DayZ isn't one of them' date=' as evidenced by my post and I hope we've been talking about DayZ this whole time.

We've been talking about DayZ, right?

Right?

[/quote']

How the fuck are you this stupid?

You made the argument that deathmatch games don't exist that allow you to stay alive for many days, even months. I'm telling you they DO. What's not to understand here broheim?

[evulclown@gmail.com 191]

In real life people would not be killing the way they are even in this situation. It's as simple as that. The majority of people are unable to just kill other people for no reason' date=' ESPECIALLY if they just came from a civilized society. The reason people kill on sight in this game is because theres no moral consequences. There's no moral consequence because this is just a video game. As much as it is supposed to be a simulation it is still just a video game.

Therefore some sort of artificial consequence needs to be added to simulate the moral consequences of killing someone in real life.

[/quote']

Go walk around in Somalia on your own and see who's plagued by "moral consequences" -- Protip: You'll be found ransacked in a ditch with a bullet hole in your face.

[christopher.hill449@gmail.com 314]

:D

[Duba 1]

Rather than trying to punish people for being anti-social and murdering anyone they see, give them a better reason than blood transfusions to work together and the 'deathmatch' mentality will die fairly quickly. Though, in all fairness, plenty of competent players (myself not included) have managed to keep daily-played characters alive for upwards of a month, so the word 'deathmatch' isn't very fitting in the first place.

[Korppi (DayZ) 0]

I'm really getting depressed of this "People would kill everyone they see if this scenario was real life and there were no laws or penalties!" What kind of fucking sociopaths roam the internet? Have you people no notion of morals? Or sympathy? If indeed people would act like this then it would be ok to kill on sight since it would just be people acting like zombies versus people acting like zombies vs zombies. And the mindless walking dead would be on the moral high ground. Now' date=' how fucked is that?

[/quote']

Well, realistically, there would be a certain point where we would become 'shoot on site'. At the worst point of the outbreak, there probably would be no station of civility such as a hamlet or town, so we'd all be pretty much nomads. And if you found someone with supplies you could use, but they wouldn't give them to use because they want to use them as well, would you really buddy up for just half a can of beans, or would you just kill them and get the whole can for free?

Well realistically two persons would have higher chances of survival than a single person. Other one, for example, can keep a lookout when you're scavenging for -two- cans of beans. If the person holding out on the beans however refused such a notion I'd either walk away to find a more likable character or, in case someones welfare whose close to me would depend on me, I'd threaten the person at gunpoint to hand over the beans and do my best not to have to kill another person.

[doitonlan 0]

LtChicken- have you ever been in a hostile situation where simply gaining the resources necessary are a huge risk to your life? I do not think that we can make a statement such as "we wouldn't act that way if the situation were real", but I do feel that there are some limitations in the game that would be able to achieve a nonviolent encounter with another person.

Long story short, this is what we have to work with and so far this is what helps us with our own personal survival.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

you need to set your story straight. If they are shooting at you' date=' caused damage, they would be flagged.[/quote']

Did you read my post?

They shoot at me and hit. I return fire and kill them. Now their friends emerge from a nearby building and start firing. I kill the friends before they hit me.

I'm a bandit.

Story straight.

you can kill the murderer all you want. Just not the innocent.

They're in a vehicle. Vehicles catch fire and explode killing all occupants.

So all murderers have to do to be safe is travel around in a bus full of survivors?

Foolish.

Again, you do have some kills leeway before perma flag... And those kills decay over time.

Again, no I don't because none of your retarded idea exists and never will. I'll blow the whole fucking vehicle up and piss on their smoking corpses while I sing the song of my people.

---

You made the argument that deathmatch games don't exist that allow you to stay alive for many days' date=' even months. I'm telling you they DO. [/quote']

Please name deathmatch games that allow you to survive for a month.

I'll wait patiently.

Brodouche.

[chrismgtis 55]

Nothing wrong with that...it just adds some adrenaline when you meet another survivor and he says nothing after you ask "Friendly???

That's a quite comical statement. Once you see another survivor, you're likely dead as he's probably seen you already and started firing. Unless you're lucky enough to be the one to see him first in which case you better start firing or you're dead.

That is the true state of the game.

[evulclown@gmail.com 191]

It's amazing how these morons want to impose some useless system upon all of the humans playing this game so that they can be more "human" -- Get a clue, they're already being human. With no laws they can do what they want.

What do they want to do? Kill you and take your shit -- What a shock, get over it and start hiding yourself better.

[PinkTaco24 10]

Again' date=' no I don't because none of your retarded idea exists and never will. I'll blow the whole fucking vehicle up and piss on their smoking corpses while I sing the song of my people.[/quote']

then leave the thread fool.

Please name deathmatch games that allow you to survive for a month.

I'll wait patiently.

Brodouche.

planetside

dust514

APB reloaded

move along chump

[Never 237]

Just shoot them. Because there is no reason not to.

That's my attitude to other players.

YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Lazy minded sheep like you has turned the game into a 'deathmatch' long with poor design choices.

Its Rocket went "We have a bit more PvP than intended' date=' So I'll remove guns on spawn then add [i']sniper rifles with thermal scopes."

Easy solution to all this:

Step 1) Remove high grade military sniper rifles ENTIRELY along with NVGs.

Step 2) Stop tweaking stuff to try and 'balance' the game for problems caused by gear etc. Its not a problem with the PvP mechanic, the problem lies in OVERPOWERED GUNS BEING COMMONPLACE AND LACK OF OTHER THINGS TO DO.

Step 3) Drop the bandit meme as it was flawed and also stop focusing on the PvP element, THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS GAME so put your minds to developing that. We need MORE content, not removal of the little gameplay there is atm.

[osiriszoran 33]

I don't understand what the carebears have trouble comprehending.

When you're along the Coast the chances of meeting players who wont KOS is much higher than meeting players in the North. Sure there will always bee those people who KOS all the time but i've met just as many who dont KOS on my server when in coastal cities.

[PinkTaco24 10]

It's amazing how these morons want to impose some useless system upon all of the humans playing this game so that they can be more "human" -- Get a clue' date=' they're already being human. With no laws they can do what they want.

[/quote']

Quit taking realism into account. its a fucking video game where there are no 'real' stakes. People change their attitudes when their own life becomes in jeapordy.

As an example, if someone held a revolver to the back of your head with only 1 bullet, and pulled the trigger every time you murdered and innocent in dayz(russian roulette style). would you be so willing to shoot them?

probably not.

This is a game where there are no real stakes. In a 'real' situation, things change. Its also stupid to argue what people would do... because no one really knows.

---

I don't understand what the carebears have trouble comprehending.

When you're along the Coast the chances of meeting players who wont KOS is much higher than meeting players in the North. Sure there will always bee those people who KOS all the time but i've met just as many who dont KOS on my server when in coastal cities.

To me, the carebears are the ones afraid of being flagged criminal.

poor kiddies.

[KWilt 157]

Well realistically two persons would have higher chances of survival than a single person. Other one' date=' for example, can keep a lookout when you're scavenging for -two- cans of beans. If the person holding out on the beans however refused such a notion I'd either walk away to find a more likable character or, in case someones welfare whose close to me would depend on me, I'd threaten the person at gunpoint to hand over the beans and do my best not to have to kill another person.

[/quote']

That's a good point, as well. But I suppose maybe a can of beans wasn't the best example to throw out there. If you were starving, yeah, I'd probably try robbing them before I shot them. But you can't rob people in DayZ. If that were a possibility, hell yes I would embrace it. But people always have their guns out, so they can always shoot you. And that's the one problem with trying to find a reason not to kill people. They can always retaliate against you. Sure, it's not going to be the best retaliation (Makarov vs. DMR, for example) but it's still possible for them to kill you if you let your guard down.

And on the abiding side of the argument, as someone who wants to surrender my goods, whose to say they won't just shoot you in the end anyways?

Those are the things we have to play out in DayZ, and we can't realistically do yet. And I suppose that's why the game is so 'shoot on sight'. The only person you can trust is yourself or a person without a gun, really.

[doitonlan 0]

I hate to stir up some shit with Pink, but weren't you spouting out how you liked the game for a mechanic that felt more "realistic"? Honestly, I was hoping to find some witty retorts from people, but that doesn't seem to be a possibility.

Pink's thread: http://dayzmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=25077

I'm beginning to think you are only here to whine about being pked and are luring a bunch of people into your sulk.

---

KWilt- you can loot from people's backpacks near you =) I haven't done it or had it done to me, since I travel with friends but we are constantly sharing our backpacks with each other.

[osiriszoran 33]

Asking for bandits to be flagged criminals is for kiddies bro. Most of us do not need our hands held to Identify who is friendly or not. Finding a group of survivors IS social interaction bro. This game takes entirely too much time for random people to randomly come across each other, group up, and try to survive unless they agree to add each other on steam or move to a teamspeak,vent,mumble, etc voice comms.

basically, people like YOU (pinktaco) are trying to dumb the game down to make it easier for you to play HOW YOU WANT TO PLAY. Stop trying to force your BS ez mode safety valve mechanics.