Incentive for not being a bandit?

[Marvel (DayZ) 18]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit. Killing other players is the main goal right now, surviving became the second one.

This should be more balanced because in real life, if something like this happened not everybody would start killing each other, not everybody is a serial killer even when their own life is at stake.

So I think there should be an incentive for not being a bandit and a disadvantage for being one.

This can be done in a lot of different ways but maybe you can add your mood level or mental condition to the debug window, if you kill a player your mood goes down, if you help somebody it goes up. You can make a scale from 0-100 where 0 would be a born serial killer and 100 would be a very helpful player.

If your mood drops below 50 you start to feel it, you need to drink and eat more, your condition suffers from it (run slower), your aim goes down while the higher you are above 50 your mental state increases which makes you run faster, don't have to drink and eat that much etc.

That way, if you're, say, on 90 you can afford to kill somebody and take his loot, if you're on 10 you can't afford it. This won't prevent pvp which is good because it's part of the game, but it will prevent useless killing like spawn camping.

Of course this is just an example but right now surviving in this game is only physical, you need to be hydrated, you need to eat, watch your blood, temperature etc.

There should be more mental related stuff in it as well because real survival is everything about the state of your mind, your attitude and not only if you have enough food and water.

What do you think?

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit.

Alive Characters: 367,501

Bandits Alive: 67,750

Tell me, why should I bother reading the rest of your idea when it's based on a premise that is demonstrably false through stats posted on this very website?

You people wonder why you get nowhere on this forum.

Open your eyes for a start.

Edit: Yup, read the rest of your post. Standard anti-PvP bullshit. "Please punish people for playing the game in a way that differs from my own."

Here's a tip, chucklenuts. If you want to discourage banditry, pick up an FN FAL, put some bullets in it, and discourage the living shit out of them. The designers aren't going to be your knights in shining armor, riding in against the setting sun to rescue you from the big bad bandits.

[Marvel (DayZ) 18]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit.

Alive Characters: 367' date='501

Bandits Alive: 67,750

Tell me, why should I bother reading the rest of your idea when it's based on a premise that is demonstrably false through stats posted on [b']this very website?

You people wonder why you get nowhere on this forum.

Open your eyes for a start.

Edit: Yup, read the rest of your post. Standard anti-PvP bullshit. "Please punish people for playing the game in a way that differs from my own."

Here's a tip, chucklenuts. If you want to discourage banditry, pick up an FN FAL, put some bullets in it, and discourage the living shit out of them. The designers aren't going to be your knights in shining armor, riding in against the setting sun to rescue you from the big bad bandits.

Obv. you missed the point of my post entirely since I'm anything but Anti-pvp. However, terms like bullshit, chucklenuts, the living shit only say something about your level of intelligence which means you are either 12 years old or you live in a country with low education standards.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Obv. you missed the point of my post entirely since I'm anything but Anti-pvp. However' date=' terms like bullshit, chucklenuts, the living shit only say something about your level of intelligence which means you are either 12 years old or you live in a country with low education standards.

[/quote']

I assure you I did not miss the point of your post. You want bandits to suffer negative consequences for playing the game they way they choose to play it. Why? I don't know. Nobody like you ever actually provides a reason you just say "Bandits need be punished" and we're supposed to take it as a given because you say so.

Why not punish Survivors for not killing? Like over time the guilt you feel at not ridding the world of violent criminals builds up and overhwhelms you mentally and emotionally. You can't shoot straight anymore, you get hungry and thirsty faster, and you can't run as fast all because you feel bad at your inability or unwillingness to take personal responsibility for combating what you clearly feel is a dangerous and despicable blight on the world?

But, no. You wouldn't want that, would you? Because that punishes YOU for playing the way YOU play. Let me guess, suddenly it's not a good idea anymore because it would impact you and your ability to play instead of targeting others?

The entire discussion is moot. rocket said from day one, and has repeated on many occasions, that he does not intend to implement any reward or punishment system designed to encourage or discourage different styles of play. He has also reiterated that bandits and banditry are a central part of the game and that the primary threat within the game will come from PvP combat. Why would he say that and then implement systems to punish and discourage it? Senseless.

Finally, as to your asinine critique of my language and intellect, I kindly direct you to what Stephen Fry, one of the most accomplished and definitive comedians of our and perhaps all time, has to say about the

and what its use says about the intelligence of the speaker. Be warned, it neither supports your opinion nor treats it kindly.

Cheers, chucklenuts.

[Rabbican 1]

Zed you are my hero! Smarter/paranoid survivors have a higher life expectancy as they avoid fights and shoot when necessary. Dumb survivors that are too trusting have the same life expectancy as axe bandits.

[WhiteTigerShiro 25]

Alright, alright, gimme a sec and I'll go fish-up my copy-paste reply that I got sick of having to type-up for every "Nerf PvP" topic. And yes, whether you like it or not, this is a topic about nerfing PvP. Anyway...

"This game isn't about having a force-fed karma system. If you want to be a "good survivor", then it's purely for your own sake. The game does not, nor is it meant to, give a fuck about how "good or evil" you're being. So yeah, of course this means it's going to be easier to be a bandit. That's just life.

If you want a karma system that makes sure that both the good and bad options are equally rewarding, go play Mass Effect; go play an Elderscrolls game; go play Fallout*. Go play one of dozens of games out there with artificially-infused karma systems. Day Z is not about forced morality for the sake of arbitrary rewards attached to a given play-style. This game is about survival. If your lives are part of what's keeping the average life span down to only 30 minutes, then you aren't a good survivor."

Edit: I really should give that quote a look-over and reformat it a little for as often as I have to throw it around on the Suggestions Forums that might as well have the description of "Come here to whine about the PvP and post your terrible ideas for how we can "fix" the problem that doesn't exist."

This game is completely about surviving. You claim that "Killing other players is the main goal right now, surviving became the second one", but that completely misses the point of the last sentence in my reply that I just quoted. Survival always has been, and still is, the number one goal in this game. But here's the problem; if I see another player and he sees me, my survival has just been jeopardized. Trying to talk to him is just a needless risk that could end-up causing me to fail at my primary goal of staying alive.

Now, if I see signs of him being friendly; sure, I might take the risk. Though even then I'd prefer that him and I just agree to back away from each other and forget that we saw each other. I simply don't know who I'm talking to or when his motives will suddenly shift from "cooperation" to "I don't need this other guy anymore". And if he doesn't make it 100% clear that he's friendly, I'm going to put him down as soon as I know he sees me. Otherwise I'm content to just stay hidden, let him assume he's alone in the town or field (or where-ever our paths cross) and have him just go about his business while I turn around and head somewhere else.

Also...

Finally' date=' as to your asinine critique of my language and intellect, I kindly direct you to what Stephen Fry, one of the most accomplished and definitive comedians of our and perhaps all time, has to say about the

and what its use says about the intelligence of the speaker. Be warned, it neither supports your opinion nor treats it kindly.

Fucking brilliant. I'm gonna have to remember that video. And I agree entirely. The only time I've seen people be appalled by language is from people who are entirely too innocent (usually older people), or people who want to act all high-and-mighty because they know that cursing is an easy target for elevating yourself above someone because it's generally seen as "vulgar". To the people in the latter group, I say "fuck that".

Edit: I really should look that quote over and edit it a little, maybe. Make it a little more general and less aimed specifically at the poster of the topic where I originally posted it.

[dallas 5195]

I don't believe in buffs or nerfs to motivate players to change their playstyle. But it would be nice to be able to tell the psychotic massmurderers from the remaining civilized and humane players. This would really change anything for bandits, since they kill everyone, but for people trying to communicate with others, it makes all the difference in the world.

With the speed humanity generates, any backstabbing bandit, only needs a couple of hours of abstinence to lose his bandit flag, wash off the blood and hide the skull markings on his clothes, if you need an RP reason and then he'll be able to hide amongst the friendlies again.

With alot of friendlies simply avoiding other players, instead of interacting with them, it takes effort and dedication to be come a bandit. Wast majority(or everyone I meet) has adopted a KOS policy, but humanity regens pretty quickly, you just have to avoid killing anyone for a couple of hours and then you're conscience is automatically wiped clean. Might explain the low number of bandits. Denial is a powerful thing in DayZ.

I kill everyone who takes a shoot at me and misses. You wont believe how many KOS players are struggeling with hitting a moving target and because of their lousy aim, I chalk up alot of murders.

Another group killed two of our guys and durring the firefight, I killed four of them, guess how many bandits killed? Correct none.

Friendly players are being punnished already, by getting killed. Friendlies are also being punnished because their choice of playstyle has evaporated from the mod. You can't be friendly, when there's noone to be friendly to. The only consequence to killing another player at the moment is you get his gear and he dies and you live. That's why the majority KOS, not squeezing the trigger isn't a viable option.

Let's see if the bandit scowling faces, makes strangers hessitate for long enough to shape the words friendly? before shooting. I'm not sure it's enough to counter the current culture, where your only option is to flee or fight.

[robosheriff 13]

Zed you are my hero! Smarter/paranoid survivors have a higher life expaxtancy as they avoid fights and shoot when necessary. Dumb survivors that are too trusting have the same life expectantcy as axe bandits.

i will find you' date=' i ain't dumb mate

[img']http://www.webmastertalkforums.com/attachments/lounge/1774d1312434182-redneck-jokes-pictures-redneck.jpg

[DevilDog (DayZ) 455]

I think you should get a penalty if you don't kill other players and bonus' for killing them. I think after 50 kills I should turn invisible. 10 kills I get NVGs. 75 kills I become a cyborg.

This is a sand box game. If you want to punish players for being bandits then get a posse and go do it, just like this "real life" you used in your post.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

But it would be nice to be able to tell the psychotic massmurderers from the remaining civilized and humane players.

Agreed. But if you want to identify them' date=' you need to be the one who witnesses their acts, and you need to be close enough to identify them visually. Expecting the game to watch what everyone is doing at all times and then deliver you a definitive list of who is naughty and who is nice so you can go about your business without ever getting anywhere near anyone on the naughty list is crude and completely breaks any sense of immersion in this uncertain world. Why [i']should you know who bears you ill intent ahead of time?

With the speed humanity generates, any backstabbing bandit, only needs a couple of hours of abstinence to lose his bandit flag, wash off the blood and hide the skull markings on his clothes, if you need an RP reason and then he'll be able to hide amongst the friendlies again.

Yet another reason why the bandit skin and humanity system is currently pointless and broken. Why should crimes be absolved just by standing around doing nothing.

If you witness a murder and identify the murderer, you should be free to punish that person as you see fit forever until they die and their crimes are erased, or YOU die and your memory of their crimes is erased.

This "murderer for an hour" crap is just a symptom of the fact that the bandit skin system is inherently flawed to begin with. It labels people falsely bandits who might have been acting in self defense (rocket has confirmed this is the reason they were removed in the first place), so the regeneration exists to even things out over time.

Friendlies are also being punnished because their choice of playstyle has evaporated from the mod.

Tripe.

The only consequence to killing another player at the moment is you get his gear and he dies and you live.

That's the consequence for successful killing. You conveniently skip over the consequences for attempted murder which is that you, yourself, become a target. Killing is by no means a guarantee. Killing players for loot is orders of magnitude more dangerous than farming for it. Killing for food or water is just silly. Murder is a dangerous game, and will become even moreso if rocket gives us the ability to make visual identification on players who commit crimes.

[kovalhuk 19]

The best defense against other players, is like in real life, a gun with bullets. Start shoot back my friend. Shoot first if needed. If you die, just chuckle, say FCKR, and start over again. The guy that killed you is good ! he managed to kill you. This is an honor.

[Vipeax 318]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit.

Alive Characters: 367' date='501

Bandits Alive: 67,750

Tell me, why should I bother reading the rest of your idea when it's based on a premise that is demonstrably false through stats posted on [b']this very website?

This is pretty much what I was wondering as well after reading the first post. To get it into even more detail, while the Bandits are outnumbered big time, they also die far more often. Wait what? Yes, they die far more often. While almost 20% (18.44%) of the living characters are bandits, over 40% (43.15%) of the deaths in this game were bandits. This is likely to be caused by bandits engaging into fire fights & risk-heavy areas more often.

Nerfing the smallest number of players that dies the most often is a bit of a double nerf, no?

[WhiteTigerShiro 25]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit.

Alive Characters: 367' date='501

Bandits Alive: 67,750

Tell me, why should I bother reading the rest of your idea when it's based on a premise that is demonstrably false through stats posted on [b']this very website?

This is pretty much what I was wondering as well after reading the first post. To get it into even more detail, while the Bandits are outnumbered big time, they also die far more often. Wait what? Yes, they die far more often. While almost 20% (18.44%) of the living characters are bandits, over 40% (43.15%) of the deaths in this game were bandits. This is likely to be caused by bandits engaging into fire fights & risk-heavy areas more often.

Nerfing the smallest number of players that dies the most often is a bit of a double nerf, no?

OMG you are fucking awesome! I think that player deaths (IE: whether you were marked as a Bandit or not) should be listed on the front page as well. Help give us more ammo against the PvP whiners (not that we need ammo, since Rocket and the dev team are smarter than to give-in to them). Still, as ammo or not, it'd be interesting to watch the percentage change as more or less bandits die.

But yeah, I'd say that if there's a split of about 40/60 on bandits vs non-bandits dying, then balance is pretty well on. Especially when you consider that people spawn-hopping sways the survivor deaths a bit (makes me wonder if you guys track that?).

[dallas 5195]

Nerfing the smallest number of players that dies the most often is a bit of a double nerf' date=' no?

[/quote']

But is the number of bandits indicative of the KOS culture? You have to kill alot of players to keep up with the current humanity regen.

When I started out playing DayZ, it was quit common to encounter other players, who did not naturally assume I was going to kill them. Currently I meet three types of players: KOS, unarmed and people who disconnect, when they see me. It used to be interesting, becuase you never knew if the person you meet was hostile or friendly. At the moment the mystery is gone, because new players learn it's better to shoot and loot.

[Dancing.Russian.Man 1631]

Can't be bothered making yet another thread about this. But.

DO NOT PUNISH PLAYERS FOR BEING BANDITS.

NOT IN A WAY THAT AFFECTS THEIR PERFORMANCE.

What I'm talking about is the things you mentioned, slower running speed, Bandits require more food, etc.. How is that going to work? That's just bullshit.

"Aw man, I shot like 3 guys with my sniper, 500 meters away. MAKES ME SO HUNGRY."

There used to be a Bandit skin that people would get after they reached low enough humanity.

Otherwise, they played just like anyone else.

All I want to know is, why was it removed? At least it was a clear warning of who might shoot us in the face.

[tammy@papergoblin.co.uk 0]

People who tend to be bandits are generally the 'more advanced' players (obviously some long term players may choose not to be bandits of course) but it's the impression I get anyway. Perhaps rather than 'nerfing' bandits, as they are advanced players, give them another level of challenge? (So the better you get at the game, the harder the challenge becomes for you?)

Something like perhaps, when you commit a murder, morality starts to set in and you get the shakes when you aim (not a huge amount at first, but the more you kill the worse it gets). To 'cope' with that, the bandit would requiring something to keep their nerves intact (some sort of drug maybe). Once the drug is taken it resets everything back to normal. It wouldn't nerf anyone, but would set another challenge. I'd also say that if a bandit killed another bandit, it could be classed as being 'in self defence' and so perhaps then it wouldn't have any effect on an 'morality' scale.

It would just be like another stat icon (like food and water) for advanced players.

As bandits die more often than most, this would then only effect the really REALLY hardcore players who would have committed numerous murders, who might like the extra challenge if they found they had reached a point where the game had become too easy for them?

Bandits don't bother me personally, it's part of the game and the 'trust no one' feel it has (which is great), but it might solve a few common complaints about bandits and be kinda fun for those who play the bandit role themselves.

Edited July 11, 2012 by MaryLou

[LumberBack 43]

dont you just love it, when you actually play the game and realise that everybody you run into will shoot at you, then someone in a forum brings up some stats and says it aint so...

[tammy@papergoblin.co.uk 0]

dont you just love it, when you actually play the game and realise that everybody you run into will shoot at you, then someone in a forum brings up some stats and says it aint so...

If you mean me, no idea what you mean by this.

[kohliath 2]

For each day one survived, give away a token or something... and with 10 tokens he can buy in the tokenshop a bloodbag or a magazine etc...

So, not everybody risks to camp in cherno to shoot some ppl..

Sure, they will be some bandits though but maybe not as much as now.

[LumberBack 43]

If you mean me, no idea what you mean by this.

No, this was directed to the first reply in this thread... I made a thread about a bandit fix, and then a dev starts to talk about stats too, its too funny, specially when this dev is now spawnkilling people in electro...

[zipper 69]

Ok so right now everybody is a bandit. Killing other players is the main goal right now, surviving became the second one.

No they are not. If you put killing people over surviving I can begin to see why you have problems with PvP in this game.

This should be more balanced because in real life, if something like this happened not everybody would start killing each other, not everybody is a serial killer even when their own life is at stake.

You also forget that people have not really had to watch their friends get eaten alive by zombies. If you see that happen a couple times I think you would start to see peoples perspective shift just a little bit. You also aren't a serial killer if you kill someone when your life is at stake. It is called self defence.

So I think there should be an incentive for not being a bandit and a disadvantage for being one.

I think there should be an incentive for being a bandit and a disadvantage for not being one. Idea holds about as much merit as yours does.

This can be done in a lot of different ways but maybe you can add your mood level or mental condition to the debug window, if you kill a player your mood goes down, if you help somebody it goes up. You can make a scale from 0-100 where 0 would be a born serial killer and 100 would be a very helpful player.

You cannot realistically or reliably implement emoition into a video game on the software side. You would have to have the computer hooked up to the persons brain in order to reliably simulate emotion. I am all for realism, but I'm not hooking a computer up to my brain just yet. Lets give that one a couple years first.

If your mood drops below 50 you start to feel it, you need to drink and eat more, your condition suffers from it (run slower), your aim goes down while the higher you are above 50 your mental state increases which makes you run faster, don't have to drink and eat that much etc. That way, if you're, say, on 90 you can afford to kill somebody and take his loot, if you're on 10 you can't afford it. This won't prevent pvp which is good because it's part of the game, but it will prevent useless killing like spawn camping.

You are looking at this the wrong way. If you have to kill 50 people you are going to be on edge, not super depressed wanting a bucket of ice cream.

If you are shot upon spawning, you first of all did something very wrong to have to respawn to begin with, and second of all you have absolutely nothing to lose. So why would you care if you die? Just respawn somewhere else. Honestly, in all the hours I have played, I have never been shot upon spawning in. You have got to have pretty crappy luck if this is happening to you on a regular basis.

Of course this is just an example but right now surviving in this game is only physical, you need to be hydrated, you need to eat, watch your blood, temperature etc.

And that is all a simulator can provide. It can make you think, but it cannot force you to think. It can draw emotion out of you, but it cannot force specific emotions. You need to play the game for what it is.

What do you think?

I think you have written thread number 10,000,000 on this topic. Punishing people for the way they want to play the game is not a good idea. You say everyone is a bandit, that is false. There are giant incentives for cooperative group play. There are also giant risks with it. Just like shooting someone, and just like not taking a shot when you have an opportunity to kill somebody. The game revolves around risk vs. reward. Like I said there are tons of threads on this topic. You should use the search feature next time and see if any of the topics you find match up with your ideas.

Why not punish Survivors for not killing? Like over time the guilt you feel at not ridding the world of violent criminals builds up and overhwhelms you mentally and emotionally. You can't shoot straight anymore, you get hungry and thirsty faster, and you can't run as fast all because you feel bad at your inability or unwillingness to take personal responsibility for combating what you clearly feel is a dangerous and despicable blight on the world?

We are on the same page. I didn't realize you had posted the exact same thing I did, but I'm really tired of reading nerf PvP posts. Everyone should start writing buff PvP posts.

Finally, as to your asinine critique of my language and intellect, I kindly direct you to what Stephen Fry, one of the most accomplished and definitive comedians of our and perhaps all time, has to say about the

and what its use says about the intelligence of the speaker. Be warned, it neither supports your opinion nor treats it kindly.

This really is fucking brilliant.

This is pretty much what I was wondering as well after reading the first post. To get it into even more detail, while the Bandits are outnumbered big time, they also die far more often. Wait what? Yes, they die far more often. While almost 20% (18.44%) of the living characters are bandits, over 40% (43.15%) of the deaths in this game were bandits. This is likely to be caused by bandits engaging into fire fights & risk-heavy areas more often.

Nerfing the smallest number of players that dies the most often is a bit of a double nerf, no?

This is brilliant as well. I am happy I read this post now.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Zipper -82ndAB-

[tammy@papergoblin.co.uk 0]

No, this was directed to the first reply in this thread... I made a thread about a bandit fix, and then a dev starts to talk about stats too, its too funny, specially when this dev is now spawnkilling people in electro...

Ahh well, stats can be made to show anything you want depending on how they are presented. You could also say that as there's 283,420 bandit's deaths and 1,732,707 murders, it shows the complete opposite. I wouldn't worry too much about the stats. However, given that Vipeax is on the Dev team I'm sure he's done the math, so if he says they die more often, I'll take his word for it.

Edited July 11, 2012 by MaryLou

[tammy@papergoblin.co.uk 0]

The game revolves around risk vs. reward.

I totally agree, and as it should be.

Like when you murder someone, you can be rewarded with anything useful they might be carrying but of course the risk of doing this is.... umm.. wait, what was the risk again?

Currently there isn't one other than possibly getting shot back if you miss, if they have a weapon, if that weapon has range to reach your position, and if they can even see where you are.

So as I said in my earlier post, maybe presenting 'murder' with more of a challenge for the experienced player who chooses to play the bandit role is the solution. That's not a nerf, its not a QQ suggestion, it's giving another level of gameplay for experienced DayZ players who might welcome taking on another challenge.

[Ribano 46]

All thats needed is for them to add a few skins, it changes as your humanity decreases thus showing the risk of approach

skin 1 - survivor

skin 2 - has killed a person in cold blood

skin 3 - has killed 10 people in cold blood

then you can make an educated decision on whether to approach. if he has a m16 and is skin 1 and is running around with the best packs etc he's probably not a killer. or is he?

[LumberBack 43]

All thats needed is for them to add a few skins, it changes as your humanity decreases thus showing the risk of approach

skin 1 - survivor

skin 2 - has killed a person in cold blood

skin 3 - has killed 10 people in cold blood

then you can make an educated decision on whether to approach. if he has a m16 and is skin 1 and is running around with the best packs etc he's probably not a killer. or is he?

yeah they toke this out...