Morale System

[emuthreat 2837]

I've been thinking for awhile about what this game seems to be missing, aside from things confirmed to be already in the process.  The idea I came up with was for a morale system.

Morale would be a stat to be managed, parallel to energy and hydration, blood and health, heat and cold, and stamina.  It would work as a modifier to the maximum of core health stats, aside from heat and cold, which would always affect morale negatively; fatigue, from repeated depletion of stamina may also decrease morale.
Stamina would benefit from a "Complete Hard Maximum Morale" level, but this would not be possible to sustain, as repeated depletion of stamina would decrease morale and remove this benefit after one or two depletions of the morale-increased stamina reserve.

The way you get morale would be from eating better food.

Even something as simple as heating a can of beans, instead of eating it cold, would give a slight bump in morale.   In this case, it would be only a very slight boost in overall morale, but the hot food would take up slightly less stomach volume to simulate aided digestion, allowing you to take in more energy in a shorter amount of time.
At the most basic level, this will allow players who choose to take some time to prepare meals, to regain energy, blood, and health at a faster rate.  At the more advanced level, it would incentivize players to combine foods in pots and pans, and to cook more complete meals for a significant boost in morale.
There should also be the possibility for yet-to-come consumable items to be used as instant morale boosts.  Things such as alcohol and cannabis could be consumed to affect only morale (to a certain point).  These items would also serve to temporarily reduce the depletion of morale.
Beyond that, the new player controller and advanced crafting mechanics may allow for things such as eating off of plates with utensils, at tables.  Perhaps a crafted item can be table place, where a full meal and beverage can be consumed sitting down with friends, to yield a synergistic multiplier to the morale boost.
Once soft skills are introduced, morale could play into that mechanic by allowing higher morale to increase the rate at which skills can be improved.  Even existing activities with a chance of failure, such as searching for stones or apples, fishing, or lighting a fire, could see a benefit in success rate when morale is high.

The core mechanic of the morale system should really be based on eating, particularly, creating complex hot meals from fresh meats and vegetables.
Imagine that you have a zucchini and two fish filets.  At 560Cal, 160ml water content and 300ml volume taken for boiled carp filet, and 51Cal, 306ml water content and 323ml stomach volume used; eating these items would add up to a combined 1171Cal, 626ml water, and 923ml stomach volume used.
I used the product of the combined ratio of Calories to volume and ratio of water content to volume to create an arbitrary value of 0.86 for this meal of separate items.  Having these items cook together in a pot, should bump this number by 15 or 20 points for a full meal bonus.  Perhaps a multiplier based on the individual values of each ingredient?
Here's the numbers for 2 lard and 2 apples: individually; 800, -150, 180; 200, 172, 130; combined 2000Cal, 44ml water, 620ml stomach volume used. 2000 x 44 / 620²=0.23.  This is a low number, considering that lard is the most calorie-dense food in the game, but imagine eating just a whole chunk of lard, or a dish that was 70% lard.  Not too good for morale...
You can see that the balance of water to calories is important by this metric, in that the -150 water taken from the body by each piece of boiled animal lard, largely offset the benefit of being more Calorie dense. 
The substitution of one boar steak for one of the lard chunks will change this metric to 0.58. which would be consistent with the palatability difference between just fat and apples, and meat, fat, and apples.  A static modifier could then be applied if the meal is eaten hot or cold.
It's pretty slapshod math, but I just did it to prove that there is already a possibly viable way to manage morale benefit calculations based on the existing values of food items.  If foods were to be assigned additional values, this could work a bit more realistically.  The specific math isn't really important at this point.

The morale value generated by the consumption of well-balanced, hot meals could be further modified by other factors such as temperature and existing levels of wellness. Surely a sick, tired, cold, and hungry player should see more of a boost than a comfortable player already in high spirits and good health.

Morale would work similar to the energy stat, where the soft maximum of energy allows one to heal completely, but can still be added to much beyond this soft max.
 At this soft max morale level, the player's other status categories would increase at the base rate of 100% when the conditions are correct, such as when near a fire when cold, or when a player is regenerating blood while fully (soft max) energized.
When morale is further increased beyond the baseline, or soft maximum level, the player would receive benefits such as increased rate of blood and health regeneration. Conversely, when morale is lower than this soft maximum, the player might be more prone to deplete stamina faster, or take more shock damage from injuries sustained.
Maintaining a character at the Hard Maximum Morale for extended periods of time would allow the player to incrementally increase the maximum cap on health to perhaps 50% above the current maximum.  ANY reduction in morale beyond the Hard Maximum would result in a slow depletion of this bonus shock damage reserve.  Taking any damage, allowing hunger or thirst to fall out of neutral status, repeatedly depleting one' stamina, or becoming hot or cold would start to deplete the health reserves caused by attaining excellent morale status.

With this configuration, morale would serve to benefit well prepared players with increased survivability, at a cost of maintenance.  This would allow long-term survival players a higher chance to escape from danger, and for well-prepared  PVP players to have an increased chance of survival at initial attacks.
It would also serve to reinforce the goal of implementing soft skills, by further facilitating and rewarding the survival of individual characters.

I feel that this system would be controversial to many players, fearing the implications of encountering "Juggernaut" type players, but anyone has the opportunity to attain such status benefits, and any positive effects will be quickly eroded by most player or infected contact, or even sprinting long distances.  Morale would be optional, meaning that players can freely choose not to put in the time to regain full health and morale as a part of their life cycle; much as some players currently neglect to ever regain full health, opting instead to hunt other players as soon as possible, while leaving themselves on the brink of starvation.  For the amount of depth-of-play that this would add, I can't really think of any serious drawbacks.

Let me know what you think.

Edited November 4, 2016 by emuthreat
spellz

[DannyDog 532]

I really like the idea of morale/happiness being in DayZ as it adds another level of attachment to your character as well as greatly affecting player interactions.

Like giving food to other players could be a good way to increase morale as well as trust towards a player.

With this idea of morale there could also be a system that lets you buddy up with other players by increasing a likeness between each other by giving blood, food or water. Even killing zombies that are chasing said buddy.

Backstabbing said player or if the player dies by other causes could greatly decrease morale (making it harder to buddy up with another player if you back stabbed the previous buddy)

Being with a buddy can give increased morale per action.

For example like eating hot food with a buddy on a table with utensils or by a campfire.

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by DannyDog

[Decembrie 17]

I think the "Morale system" its allready in the game and it works perfectly in the sense that :

You get shot at - you run away scared for your life.

You land a hit and enemy player beeds - you become confident on your chances.

You eat good food and stay healthy - you feel safe from non lethal accidents/encounters.

You find that ammunition/weapon/hat you were looking for - you are happy for a while.

You hear footsteps/gunshots nearby or distant - You are nervous, confused, curious and andrenaline kicks in.

 

Examples can go on, the point is "Morale" cant be something that goes from 0 to 100 and could be represented in game that gives a buff, benefit, debuff or penalty.

Its different for everyone and it drives the way we play the game and how we react different on similar situations and this should not be changed.

 

Even though the ideea is well thought and explained (except for 150% health part) its not necessary and should not be added from my point of view.

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by Decembrie

[nl 986]

Morale or even a higher minimum level could also be influenced by: ( I am aware some may be hard to implement, just thinking along the same lines):

-having established a base (the more secure and the more stocked with food and items the higher the boost) (a bse getting raided or destroyed could significantly decline morale)

-wearing pristine clothing and backpack

-being in possession of certain key items like weapons, ammo, can opener, axe or knife or having food and water on your person

-surviving a confrontation with either infected or other players

-completing a successful hunt, crop harvest or landing a fish and finding food

-crafting items

-maybe even discovering new villages and towns you never were in before

 

[General Zod 1114]

Already discussed several times here. Not to mention devs said no. Which is a good thing.

Edited November 4, 2016 by General Zod

[DannyDog 532]

13 minutes ago, General Zod said:

Already discussed several times here. Not to mention devs said no. Which is a good thing.

Well that sucks, was it a "not the direction where going for" or a not a priority (so they still want to do it but just havent given it much thought)?

I mean I guess people can just make a mod of it.

I really like the idea of giving an incentive to heat food before eating it because there's like no reason to heat up food besides cooking raw meat.

[nl 986]

26 minutes ago, General Zod said:

Already discussed several times here. Not to mention devs said no. Which is a good thing.

It is always good to have an opinion but please elaborate on why you think a morale system would be a bad idea for discussion's sake. You may either convince other players why they should not want this or maybe it would turn out you envision a different end-product than others.

Edited November 4, 2016 by nl

[General Zod 1114]

This discussion was had here a lot of times but fine I'll bite.

3 hours ago, DannyDog said:

Well that sucks, was it a "not the direction where going for" or a not a priority (so they still want to do it but just havent given it much thought)?

I mean I guess people can just make a mod of it.

I really like the idea of giving an incentive to heat food before eating it because there's like no reason to heat up food besides cooking raw meat.

They don't want to punish / encourage any play style with morale system that affects players on gameplay level. 

 

3 hours ago, nl said:

It is always good to have an opinion but please elaborate on why you think a morale system would be a bad idea for discussion's sake. You may either convince other players why they should not want this or maybe it would turn out you envision a different end-product than others.

Because I don't (and devs apparently too) like the concept of game enforced right or wrong. They want players to be nice because they feel like being nice not because the game rewards for being nice or  punishes being a killer / bandit.

Frankly a system like that would not even be realistic. People are fully capable of committing horrible things and not having their stamina / health affected, and yes a lot of people who wouldn't be cold killers in real life are like that in a game because it's just a game. But I'd rather see a different means of reducing killing in this game, because that is the only reason why we have people proposing morality systems. Right now this game is basically an FPS, and there is a reason for that. Not enough survival and too many guns. The game in it's current state does not offer much in terms of entertainment other than killing other players. People aren't going to spent time in game planting tomatoes or fishing, they will get bored, you can be fully military geared in hour or two depending on your luck, what's there to do after that ? Once you have a gun, clothes and food your struggle ends. Which is why I constantly get myself into fire fights, because those and trying to get new gear are the only times when this game has some sense of satisfaction to it. 

I want to see medical supplies be so rare that when I need them and I run into another person I talk to them instead of killing them out right out of fear that my bullets might damage something in his gear that I desperately need. That's how I want to end KoS, so that bandits are bandits not just murderers. And yes there still be people in this game who just kill, but when all of the above happens they will be the thrill of this game. You won't need the game punishing them anymore. 

Edited November 4, 2016 by General Zod

[gannon46 788]

survive the nights is doing something of this sort. I can't wait to see them attempt it I can hear there forums now exploding from salt of the bandit who kills himself do to madness or the fact that they have been eating garbage and rats makes them depressed which in turn makes them suicide oh the salt it shall fall like rain as it would here if they attempted any kind of wellbeing system or morale system I for one wouldn't care one way or the other but you know how the players are OP they would want the hides of the devs to display on their living room wall if they added this.  And I will add the thing about these types of games is they can't or should i say are having a real hard time simulating morale or repercussions to decisions one can make. IRL if i go and murder a bunch of folks for no reason in cold blood it would affect me but it might affect me more than mr.psycho that has a mental problem he might have no conscious or morals. Same as some of us wouldn't kill ever they would starve before killing then you have the complete opposite that would rather steal and kill to get loot/what they need to live. then you have all the mental conditions in between like sadism masochism and all the other gems of the human mind how do they simulate that and make it for one fun for all and not punish those psychos or hell even the friendly player if he has to kill he would also be punished for those righteous kills which wouldn't make sense. I just don't see it being an easy thing to do without it just being a stat or a bar we have to fill and that to me would make the game more shallow than not having one at all.  

Edited November 4, 2016 by gannon46
added stuff

[Kohlbar 268]

I agree with @Decembrie, the morale system is already in a game and shouldn't be underestimated. Whether alone or in a group, morale already plays a huge role on what encounters you survive, what risks you take etc. Everyone reacts psychologically to the choices they make in game and to force everyone to have the same psychological effect would take away some of the randomness imo.

[emuthreat 2837]

1 hour ago, General Zod said:

This discussion was had here a lot of times but fine I'll bite.

They don't want to punish / encourage any play style with morale system that affects players on gameplay level. 

 

Because I don't (and devs apparently too) like the concept of game enforced right or wrong. They want players to be nice because they feel like being nice not because the game rewards for being nice or  punishes being a killer / bandit.

Frankly a system like that would not even be realistic. People are fully capable of committing horrible things and not having their stamina / health affected, and yes a lot of people who wouldn't be cold killers in real life are like that in a game because it's just a game. But I'd rather see a different means of reducing killing in this game, because that is the only reason why we have people proposing morality systems. Right now this game is basically an FPS, and there is a reason for that. Not enough survival and too many guns. The game in it's current state does not offer much in terms of entertainment other than killing other players. People aren't going to spent time in game planting tomatoes or fishing, they will get bored, you can be fully military geared in hour or two depending on your luck, what's there to do after that ? Once you have a gun, clothes and food your struggle ends. Which is why I constantly get myself into fire fights, because those and trying to get new gear are the only times when this game has some sense of satisfaction to it. 

I want to see medical supplies be so rare that when I need them and I run into another person I talk to them instead of killing them out right out of fear that my bullets might damage something in his gear that I desperately need. That's how I want to end KoS, so that bandits are bandits not just murderers. And yes there still be people in this game who just kill, but when all of the above happens they will be the thrill of this game. You won't need the game punishing them anymore. 

I'm afraid you may have confused morale with morality.  Morale is high spirits, morality is right and wrong.  Two very different things here.

[emuthreat 2837]

1 hour ago, gannon46 said:

survive the nights is doing something of this sort. I can't wait to see them attempt it I can hear there forums now exploding from salt of the bandit who kills himself do to madness or the fact that they have been eating garbage and rats makes them depressed which in turn makes them suicide oh the salt it shall fall like rain as it would here if they attempted any kind of wellbeing system or morale system I for one wouldn't care one way or the other but you know how the players are OP they would want the hides of the devs to display on their living room wall if they added this.  And I will add the thing about these types of games is they can't or should i say are having a real hard time simulating morale or repercussions to decisions one can make. IRL if i go and murder a bunch of folks for no reason in cold blood it would affect me but it might affect me more than mr.psycho that has a mental problem he might have no conscious or morals. Same as some of us wouldn't kill ever they would starve before killing then you have the complete opposite that would rather steal and kill to get loot/what they need to live. then you have all the mental conditions in between like sadism masochism and all the other gems of the human mind how do they simulate that and make it for one fun for all and not punish those psychos or hell even the friendly player if he has to kill he would also be punished for those righteous kills which wouldn't make sense. I just don't see it being an easy thing to do without it just being a stat or a bar we have to fill and that to me would make the game more shallow than not having one at all.  

I'm not sure if you are discerning the difference between morale, and morality.  Easy enough mistake, I suppose.  Double-click, right click, google.

[General Zod 1114]

25 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

I'm afraid you may have confused morale with morality.  Morale is high spirits, morality is right and wrong.  Two very different things here.

My bad, didn't sleep much. Shouldn't post before the 3rd coffee. 

[exwoll 252]

Yup, I also suggested something like this, among other psychological scales that would add some spice to the game :)