Shoot first

[Mike Cangi 0]

Ok I get that it's a loot based game, but you guys have seriously have got to end the kill everyone mentality. Work together, feed each other, help out the humans. why do all of you instantly kill the living?

[Homeschooliazon 87]

Because it's fun and then they can't kill you. And because they are conscienceless monsters!

Edited March 17, 2020 by Homeschooliazon

[McWendy 675]

21 hours ago, Mike Cangi said:

Ok I get that it's a loot based game, but you guys have seriously have got to end the kill everyone mentality. Work together, feed each other, help out the humans. why do all of you instantly kill the living?

Its the easy mode way of play.

No need to be friendly as a keyboard warrior....... 

Me? I had a few runs where i choose not to talk and shoot first but the fun in that quickly fades. 

I'll take that eerie feeling of mistrust over eaSy mode/easy loot Kos cowards.

Friendly? Sure but i got my eye on ya. 😉

[Funkmaster Rick 373]

The Risk vs. Reward matrix for DayZ is something like this:

1. You don't shoot, they don't shoot. You win.
2. You don't shoot and they shoot. You lose.
3. They don't shoot and you shoot. You win.
4. You both shoot. 50/50 chance you win/lose (not accounting for skill).

In cases where you don't shoot, your survival depends on the magnanimity of your counterpart. Assuming an exceptionally generous 50/50 chance that your counterpart is cooperative, that means a 50/50 chance of survival.
In cases where you do shoot first, your survival increases to something like 75/25 in your favour since them not shooting is a win for you and them shooting back is, more or less, a second 50/50 chance resulting in a net 3/4 chance of survival.

The thing is, the math always tilts in favour of shooting first. Even if you drop it to a 10% chance of your counterpart shooting on sight, you shooting first will still increase your survival odds. No matter what, your survival will always be more likely if you shoot first because then you're still benefiting from your enemy not shooting on sight, and when he does shoot on sight the fact that you did the same makes it an even fight, more or less. If you're just running the numbers and interested in your own personal survival, the math suggests you should shoot first.

Bohemia still hasn't bothered putting real end-game content in, none of the cooperative stuff they'd been considering early on, things that were supposed to give people real opportunities to group up with strangers and accomplish things. Unless you know and recognize the person in your cross-hairs, you really ought to just shoot them. Chances are they're some scared kid who lost their stuff to a bandit last life and figured out that safety in this game is achieved through quick, decisive, and utterly merciless action. We all tried to be friendly at some point but the math just doesn't work out.

[maxon-69 35]

 

You need to be careful and always be ready to fight. I always carry weapons in the hands of the city and if I see a person, I carefully monitor his actions and try to keep my distance until I make sure of his adequacy.

[Parazight 1599]

Convince yourself that loot is not important, because it isn't.   If you deem that your loot isn't important then there is no loss when you lose it.   Because this isn't really a loot based game.  It's a game about social interaction.  Loot is really easy to get because it's a MMO with no linear progression.  The only thing of value is experience.  Find a like minded community and enjoy killing and being killed!  Good luck.

[emuthreat 2837]

On 3/22/2020 at 4:50 PM, Funkmaster Rick said:

The Risk vs. Reward matrix for DayZ is something like this:

1. You don't shoot, they don't shoot. You win.
2. You don't shoot and they shoot. You lose.
3. They don't shoot and you shoot. You win.
4. You both shoot. 50/50 chance you win/lose (not accounting for skill).

In cases where you don't shoot, your survival depends on the magnanimity of your counterpart. Assuming an exceptionally generous 50/50 chance that your counterpart is cooperative, that means a 50/50 chance of survival.
In cases where you do shoot first, your survival increases to something like 75/25 in your favour since them not shooting is a win for you and them shooting back is, more or less, a second 50/50 chance resulting in a net 3/4 chance of survival.

The thing is, the math always tilts in favour of shooting first. Even if you drop it to a 10% chance of your counterpart shooting on sight, you shooting first will still increase your survival odds. No matter what, your survival will always be more likely if you shoot first because then you're still benefiting from your enemy not shooting on sight, and when he does shoot on sight the fact that you did the same makes it an even fight, more or less. If you're just running the numbers and interested in your own personal survival, the math suggests you should shoot first.

Bohemia still hasn't bothered putting real end-game content in, none of the cooperative stuff they'd been considering early on, things that were supposed to give people real opportunities to group up with strangers and accomplish things. Unless you know and recognize the person in your cross-hairs, you really ought to just shoot them. Chances are they're some scared kid who lost their stuff to a bandit last life and figured out that safety in this game is achieved through quick, decisive, and utterly merciless action. We all tried to be friendly at some point but the math just doesn't work out.

First of, props for working magnanimity into your post. : ]

While I can't disagree with your statistical assessment, it's notable that this is limited in scope to instantaneous outcomes, which is a bit of a shame.

Your reasoning here is guided by the presumption that the only thing gained or lost by these interactions is your instantaneous in-game progress.  Under those terms, your flowchart for shoot on sight risk/reward pencils out.

But if you factor in long term gameplay, where character position and loot progression is averaged out over dozens of in-game lives, the only thing of value gained or lost by interaction with players is the ability to find future allies.
All of your math was done with the assumption of 1 on 1 meetings.  In practice, it's as common to run across two or more players at once, just as often as a lone player; and even in the cases of lone player meetings, there is often at least one other person who is called in via discord or steam chat.
So I would argue that focusing on statistical outcomes of 1 on 1 meetings would trend against the player in the long term, as a portion of instantaneous encounters that are won by shooting first, may be priming them to be shot on sight by companions of the person they initially saw.

I've had numerous encounters that started with shooting each other out of a quick fright, which were resolved by talking through a closed door; and a portion of those meetings resulted in regular cooperative play after the fact.

Sure then, it might be instantaneously safer to shoot everyone first, but you might be killing the guy who has your back for the next three encounters, thus reducing your odds of survival over time.

[Parazight 1599]

What if you don't feel a need for random future allies?  What if you've done your share of new player babysitting and you have a gaggle of homies already?

We both shoot!  Because there's no real risk.  What exactly can a person lose when the only thing of real value is experience?  It's a sandbox with guns and people.  The most entertaining thing is shooting your brother because you want to see how your buddy on discord will react.

It is true theatre from the get go.  The risk/reward matrix goes right out the window as soon as you understand that survivors in a desperate situation would obviously band together.  Sociopaths are the first to be put down.  But here, in DayZ, it's fun to shoot at people because rational people know that they won't be punished.  This game is so great.  Kill people with no actual, or virtual consequences!

 

 

[FunkInYourTrunk 354]

5 hours ago, Parazight said:

survivors in a desperate situation would obviously band together.  Sociopaths are the first to be put down.

i would agree almost entirely with your statement aside from that i believe you are wrong about the sociopaths.  they would be the last to die in the end of worlds.  they would take control.  they would be the ones willing to do what was neccessary, without letting guilt get in the way.  the average person would be going through a list of emotions when faced with the task of "putting someone down".  the sociopath is not burdened by this.

[MaxwellHouse69420 87]

The reason why everyone shoots is because no one has soft skills so there’s no reason to save that person that may be a medic , or a pilot or a weapons expert .

You see , long ago when the dayz devs actually wanted to complete their game and make it more than just a run and gun simulator , they had the idea to add advanced soft skills so that you had to practice everyday your skill like medic , pilot , car mechanic , etc so that you could be a valued part of the team or possibly even be spared by your enemy for your useful skills .

Why the devs stopped working on this feature we will never know ; I’m assuming Bohemia told dayz devs they Needed to push to 1.0 because they skimped our alpha short and pushed through beta in less than a few months , which in turn probably made them cut the scope of the game even if they can’t admit they did - very stupid decision and it only hurt their future chances of adding things like soft skill.

Now here we are Almost done with the first quarter of 2020 and the devs are completely silent on their future plans to make this game more than just a crappy survival shooter , worst part is we won’t hear anything about the future of this game until tbeir entire team is done working onnthe next money maker (probably arma 4) . It’s sad to see the devs chugging along for years and then see them stop dead in their tracks at the most pivotal time in the development when things can really get done quickly .
 

Seems they don’t care to finish the scope of the game they laid out years ago for whatever reason, probably because they’ve already made 10+ million dollars off of the pc crowd and a few more million off of the gullible console crowd that should have seen how lazy the devs were and how inactive they were at securing dayzs future and they should never have bought Into the game to support the devs . I did because these devs were honest and transparent back in the day , but now they are just dragging this project along and stringing us along with it . 

Edited April 3, 2020 by MaxwellHouse69420