dayz pvp complexity

[Stonecold (DayZ) 2]

I love this game, it's the one I've been waiting for since forever, full sandbox, full loot, permadeath etc.

I wonder if the pvp could/should be more complex though.

If I play cod I never play free for all or king of the hill. Sometimes I play team deathmatch, but 90% of the time I play seek & destroy. I like objective driven pvp, where the situaction is always changing, one minute you're on the offensive, then you need to defend, you gain the upper hand, than you suddenly lose. Also a game which I very much liked was quake wars, where one was advancing throught several different objectives.

In dayz after one learns all the ins and outs of the game, can handle zombies, knows where to find loot and memorizes the map and layout of the cities one kind of reaches the end game which is pvp. Currently the pvp is free for all which i find kind of bland. It also diminishes the roleplaying potential of the game.

I don't know where rocket wants to take this game. I wonder if it would be fitting to introduce some factions or objectives. I don't think surviving is a valid objective, because when you learn the game it's actually quite easy and you can do it for a long time.

Maybe a world with competing factions, like in fallout games there were riders, cities, bos and whatnot. Each faction could be identified by clothing, maybe could gain control over a town or district. Like having control would make zombies not aggro a members of a said faction.

No idea if it could be possible to archive with such limited amount of players per server, but I find the dynamics of politics in eve quite nice.

The bandit skin system was not that bad I think, at least one had a choice to join pk or survivors faction.

Also on a roleplaying level the free for all mode is not very interesting. I have no problem going friendly with a random person and dying for it from time to time. The criterias on which one makes a decision to shoot someone or not are quite limited atm.

In the end I personally like the immersion and pvp, so I wonder if the current system could be somehow made more interesting/complex.

[Sparks (DayZ) 14]

I don't know, I feel like the factions thing should be player enforced and less an actual mechanic in the game. Maybe being able to secure a town or something in the future would be cool if you got enough people and met a few conditions. At the moment though, there are other things that need to be fixed and exploits/bugs to be hammered out.

Something as complex as what you are suggesting would take a lot of well thought out mechanics that are not as simple as one might think.

[Lukio (DayZ) 24]

The PvP is free for all, if you enjoy team based games with objectives and capture points, then DayZ definitely is the wrong game to play. The only way to have something like a team is to cooperate through external voice chat and even the the random axe or bullet to the head because you have a larger backpack may happen.

There used to be more uncertainty when you met unknown players, these times however are over. I think its the community's job to change this but currently the disappointment factor for undertaking this is high. Once the KoS mentality has settled in, its very difficult to cancel it out.

[Infernisle 0]

The fact that it's a matter of do whatever the fuck you want serves it just fine. Zombies not aggroing a faction in a certain area would be stupid and kill the point. There is no safety. It was meant to be this way. If you want factions, get friends. Instant faction. It's already a world of competing factions. Every 2-3 man group of friends might as well be a faction. Hell, if you want to take it to the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. level, then everyone WITHOUT a group might as well be their own faction. It's not a thing that needs to be a mechanic, because it already works the way it is just fine.

[Zoop 343]

I don't know' date=' I feel like the factions thing should be player enforced and less an actual mechanic in the game.

[/quote']

This.

I'm currently rolling in a faction called the Black Hat Brigade. We're a gentleman's brigade out to purge the land of Chernarus of all the ungentlemanly filth inhabiting it.

I've always gotten the idea Rocket's vision is that he provides the playground and the players fill in the details.

[Ypsan 20]

Right now it is player enforced and it turned into a FFA DM. There must be some mechanic enforced if you want to see cooperation or it won't happen.

[Infernisle 0]

Right now it is player enforced and it turned into a FFA DM. There must be some mechanic enforced if you want to see cooperation or it won't happen.

False. Ammo rarer, more zombies, zombies more alert, guns rarer. Not gonna shoot unless your life is in danger.

Also, shoot on sight is a fairly common misconception. Just my last session I was hanging around in Cherno very obviously and trying to bait a bandit cause I felt like dispensing a little justice. I found four survivors none of which shot me and I didn't shoot them. We exchanged greetings and parted ways.

[gloopy 6]

I think you should be able to pick OPFOR BLUFOR or Independent. You should still be able to kill whoever you want it would just mean you could potentially identify someone as "friendly" or part of your faction and then decide whether you're going to kill them or help them.

Literally the only difference would be the player skin. No forced factions/teams just an option to choose from where you hail, a bit like your race in an MMO.

(Currently me and my crew all have black faces and aviators. Kill all the white man....)

[Stonecold (DayZ) 2]

Well, I think I do every kind of pvp dayz has to offer nowadays.

I'm in a clan, so we roam the map killing everyone on sight, looting airfields, getting vehicles.

We did set up a base several times, but they get compromised/hacked/alphaed so we gave up on it.

I go lone wolf inland. If I get a drop on someone, I let them go. I'm kind of in a won position anyway, I like fighting and don't care much about griefing. If he had bandit skin of ghillie I'd most likely shot the guy.

I also go electro/cherno for pvp. There I operate on kos, don't care if the other is armed or not. I consider those cities war zones.

If you take eve as an example, they already had very complex corporation/alliance mechanics in place, they still added faction warfare to provide players with more gameplay styles.

Having mates on voice coms is of course fine, having factions would provide dayz with a deeper rpg context and more options in gameplay. I must admit that I'm myself not sure if it would work fine in dayz or if it's ok with the direction rocket wants to take the game in.

And I don't think that it's possible for dayz to archive the rpg goal of degradation of human relationships rocket wants to have for 2 reasons: clans and servers voice comms.

[Worldatlarge 0]

I don't know how anyone could think that the DayZ style of FFA PVP could be bland in any way. There are so many random-chance scenarios driven by the encounters players have, with the difficulty never teetering out since it, like the PVP scenarios, are completely player driven. You can have a random 1v1 encounter in the grocery store that will never be repeated, I feel like adding a CONTROL THE GROCERY STORE objective beacon would just cheapen it. I look forward to having some kind of clan identification, but anything beyond that would ruin the feel.