Eliminate the Bandit/PK'r Advantage

[fish911503 136]

All I see is the you were killed by xyz

Which wasn't the entirety of his issues.

And is also entirely ridiculous, and destroys the concept of permadeath

If by he you mean marteen or martin or whatever. First he said i was asking him to read a list and memorize it. Second he said he would have to see the nameplate....you know what I am wrong on the nameplate issue..apologies. I was confused with the original post I made about this on another thread. Where i footnoted that because you only see the players name when they kill you so there was no need for nameplates. My apologies to Marten for that mistake and thanks for pointing it out. That post also said you can report someone for helping you too, creating a database of hostile and friendly players. But someone stated in an earlier post such thing already exists. Edited July 19, 2012 by playZ

[fish911503 136]

All I see is the you were killed by xyz

Which wasn't the entirety of his issues.

And is also entirely ridiculous, and destroys the concept of permadeath

Destroys it? really? I mean you still spawn with just a band-aid and painkillers and torch. Which is still pretty hardcore. Personally I am an advocate of spawning with nothing at all

[Ivanuvo (DayZ) 117]

i think people would be fair about appeals.

Obviously not every one rags like I do....but I can see how you think they would (NOT).

Yes that is in my profile...I say nowhere though that every discussion needs to be intelligent

If you come at me with intelligence and thoughtfulness I will reciprocate.

If you came at me with insults and imbecilic logic I will insult you back and call you an imbecile.

I didn't call "every one retards" I asked those people who seemingly have comprehension problems

If they were retarded. Honest question.

I didn't call "every one assholes" I call people assholes when they are both moronic and insulting,

It saves me time.

So at the very least I can accuse you "distorting the facts" The reason you distorted them?

You know, I was hoping you'd admit that you could have approached it more tactfully, maybe apologize, but I guess you can't have everything.

Instead you accuse me of distorting the facts, even though the evidence is clearly laid out for you, in your own posts. You called people morons, ass holes, selfish little pricks, idiots and "murdoch douche bags". Just a few examples.

Asking people if they're retarded on the internet is never an honest question, it's meant as an insult. Don't try to play nice, when it's quite obvious that you're trying to insult people.

You should understand that with the way you talk to people that say it's a bad idea, you'll never get through to them. The only way is through polite explanation and reasoning, without insults. Insults never solve anything, they only make things worse.

[fish911503 136]

You know, I was hoping you'd admit that you could have approached it more tactfully, maybe apologize, but I guess you can't have everything.

Instead you accuse me of distorting the facts, even though the evidence is clearly laid out for you, in your own posts. You called people morons, ass holes, selfish little pricks, idiots and "murdoch douche bags". Just a few examples.

Asking people if they're retarded on the internet is never an honest question, it's meant as an insult. Don't try to play nice, when it's quite obvious that you're trying to insult people.

You should understand that with the way you talk to people that say it's a bad idea, you'll never get through to them. The only way is through polite explanation and reasoning, without insults. Insults never solve anything, they only make things worse.

I apologize when i'm wrong...i did just a few posts ago. And I did say I could go about it more politely on the first page(s) of this thread, and explained why Im so angry.

I don't apologize for being mean though...that's a choice i made and a silly thing to apologize for. You did distort the facts. You said I called "everyone" retards and assholes. I could call it lie but that would offend you and produce a conditioned response. You see when you twist the truth like...even slightly, all those "disadvantaged" folk who don't read through the posts to get some perspective on the conversation (or lack of) before dropping their insights assume it is the truth. I'm guessing when i say i called maybe 7 or 8 people assholes or retards in this thread (just a guess). Those slight distortion of truths are the tactics FOX news uses to influence the stupid. Which is where the Murdoch insult came from. Lets talk about truth...am I angry and mean?...yup. Do I twist truths to win debates...nope. Will I admit and apologize when I make a mistake?....yup. Will I apologize for calling a load of shit a load of shit? .....nope sorry. Am i open to dissention and debate?...yup Am i open to insults and mis-information? nope. The subtle twisting of truths like this are rampant in society and eating away at peoples ability to make informed reasonable decisions.. IT MUST BE RAGED AGAINST and dragged into the light...no matter how ugly it is

Edited July 19, 2012 by playZ

[Ivanuvo (DayZ) 117]

It's no use making American news program references to a Dutchman, so you can't blame me for not understanding that one.

I'm not trying to "win" a debate, I'm trying to convey to you that you're taking the wrong approach to this.

The "everyone" wasn't meant to be taken literally, I was just saying you'd called quite a few people that, or at least implied they were. And by insulting people that insult you, you're lowering yourself to their level. If you wish to win a debate against someone that's simply insulting you, insulting him will result in a draw. If you stay polite, and ignore insults, you'll get much better results.

Edited July 19, 2012 by Ivanuvo

[Madfast 22]

I didn't realise being a bandit gave you an advantage. I am pretty sure everyone has access to everything everyone else does, unless there is some magically new feature that rewards bandits? Also if you are dead how are you supposed to know who killed you exactly? Especially if the person takes pains to kill you without you being aware of them. People need to stop suggested there new and "totally fair/realistic" way of dealing with the "bandit problem". Rocket has said he wont add anything which punishes one valid style of play or rewards another. Like I have said countless times before, the only way to deal with this "problem", is too play the game more intelligently. I can only understand people having a problem with snipers camping spawn, and other similar "kill for a kill" bandits, if you get better at the game, make yourself a harder target, stay in cover as much as possible and move fast when not they will soon get bored at not being able to kill anyone. It is weird how that works, being better at the game means you die less.

[fish911503 136]

It's no use making American news program references to a Dutchman, so you can't blame me for not understanding that one.

I'm not trying to "win" a debate, I'm trying to convey to you that you're taking the wrong approach to this.

The "everyone" wasn't meant to be taken literally, I was just saying you'd called quite a few people that, or at least implied they were. And by insulting people that insult you, you're lowering yourself to their level. If you wish to win a debate against someone that's simply insulting you, insulting him will result in a draw. If you stay polite, and ignore insults, you'll get much better results.

I know...you are absolutely right. I can't help it though. I appreciate your trying to help

[fish911503 136]

I didn't realise being a bandit gave you an advantage. I am pretty sure everyone has access to everything everyone else does, unless there is some magically new feature that rewards bandits?

Their advantage is total disregard of other people. There two types of people those who are considerate and fair and trusting (call them stupid if you'd like), and those who will hit another person over the head with a tree limb for that shiny rock they have, or worse, because they like the sound it makes. With no system rule of law that definitely puts the branch swinger at an advantage.

Rocket has said he wont add anything which punishes one valid style of play or rewards another. Like I have said countless times before, the only way to deal with this "problem", is too play the game more intelligently.

I believe what rocket actually said was The things he tried to address it left a bad taste in his mouth, and that for the moment he was going to wait and see if the problem could work itself out. I maybe wrong as I have not gone through every thing rocket has ever said. It's just what I heard him say. And either way...I dont think indescriminately killing just for laughs is a valid play style.

Also if you are dead how are you supposed to know who killed you exactly? Especially if the person takes pains to kill you without you being aware of them.

It says in the OP When you die a message comes up "you were killed by xyz" . I know I know...this wouldn't happen in real life. :sigh:

People need to stop suggested there new and "totally fair/realistic" way of dealing with the "bandit problem"

I never said this was "totally fair/realistic" Its just a suggestion. Stop exaggerating.

I can only understand people having a problem with snipers camping spawn, and other similar "kill for a kill" bandits, if you get better at the game, make yourself a harder target, stay in cover as much as possible and move fast when not they will soon get bored at not being able to kill anyone. It is weird how that works, being better at the game means you die less.

Agreed. And I play quite well. I've been murdered three times total. Once by a sniper. Twice because i didn't shoot first. But the fact that you're statement is correct has zero impact upon whether or not the balance of the game is broken. IMO. And I may be mis-interpreting what you wrote but it looks like you said yu can undersatand having a problem with "kill to kill" which I interpret as "kill for fun". I know there are too many posts to go through everyone but I have stated this is what I have problem with. Killing for supplies is fine. My issue is with people who kill for shits and giggles. And I thought my suggestion would definitely target those people because in what I laid out a player would have to be reported for murder 50 to 100 times within a 48 hour period to be flagged.

Edited July 20, 2012 by playZ

[Madfast 22]

Their advantage is total disregard of other people. There two types of people those who are considerate and fair and trusting (call them stupid if you'd like), and those who will hit another person over the head with a tree limb for that shiny rock they have. With no system rule of law that definitely puts the branch swinger at an advantage.

If I have a Shotgun and someone else has no gun, I have an advantage, should we balance that as well? If someone is better at aiming should we give them shaky arms to balance it? Any advantage anyone has in this game is one they have made for themselves through there skill/play style, punishing someone for there aptitude at the game is never the correct solution. That is what makes DayZ so great, it is truly emergent gameplay, where the game gives you nothing, everything you have is hard won. It gives you the bare bones tools for an experience and lets you go wild, the more arbitrary systems we add to punish X and reward Y will simply detract from what it is that makes DayZ such a unique and special experience.

I never said this was "totally fair/realistic" Its just a suggestion. Stop exaggerating.

If it isn't fair, then it isn't balancing, as balancing is about making things fair. If it isn't somewhat "Realistic" it doesn't belong in a mostly "Realistic" zombie survival mod for a very realistic Tactical shooter. So one must assume you thought it was at least one of those things.

Agreed. And I play quite well. I've been murdered three times total. Once by a sniper. Twice because i didn't shoot first. But the fact that you're statement is correct has zero impact upon whether or not the balance of the game broken. IMO

Actually my statement being correct has a massive impact on whether the game is broken and needs balancing. If we are both in agreement that we don't die from bandits and player skill prevents you dying, then it isn't a problem and doesn't need fixing. Rocket saying he has no interest in balancing a game not withstanding, the only time a game needs balancing is when something is in it that is impossible to deal with by simply being good. As it stands now there is no such problem in the game.

[Derpaholic 6]

This idea could be expanded upon if you are upset about bandit awareness and reputation

http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/38469-death-notes/

[fish911503 136]

If I have a Shotgun and someone else has no gun, I have an advantage, should we balance that as well? If someone is better at aiming should we give them shaky arms to balance it? Any advantage anyone has in this game is one they have made for themselves through there skill/play style, punishing someone for there aptitude at the game is never the correct solution. That is what makes DayZ so great, it is truly emergent gameplay, where the game gives you nothing, everything you have is hard won. It gives you the bare bones tools for an experience and lets you go wild, the more arbitrary systems we add to punish X and reward Y will simply detract from what it is that makes DayZ such a unique and special experience.

The answer to your first two questions is no, and i could argue that your advantage lay not in the shotgun but in your willingness to use it. In other words the advantage is yours only if you take it. As it stands there is no X or Y in the game. That's all my suggestion would provide....the ability to tell X from Y.

And it would effect a VERY small number of players as you would need to be reported for murder 50 to 100 times in a 48 hour period to get flagged/penalized. IMO this would only effect players who are murdering everyone they find for shits and giggles. IMO this is NOT a valid style of gameplay.

If it isn't fair, then it isn't balancing, as balancing is about making things fair. If it isn't somewhat "Realistic" it doesn't belong in a mostly "Realistic" zombie survival mod for a very realistic Tactical shooter. So one must assume you thought it was at least one of those things.

I don't consider game balancing to be a matter of making it fair. I consider it an issue of playability, accesability, and staying true to original vision. I was an ARMA fan and player since first release. I knew it was unforgiving coming in but again. My suggestion would mainly (i hope exclusively) people who are murdering for count, murdering 25 to 50 people a day.

Actually my statement being correct has a massive impact on whether the game is broken and needs balancing. If we are both in agreement that we don't die from bandits and player skill prevents you dying, then it isn't a problem and doesn't need fixing. Rocket saying he has no interest in balancing a game not withstanding, the only time a game needs balancing is when something is in it that is impossible to deal with by simply being good. As it stands now there is no such problem in the game.

I don't agree that one necessarily implies the other...just because a problem is not directly effecting US doesn't prove there is no problem. That is fouled reasoning IMO. It's like saying I'm not starving so there is no reason for others to be starving therfore starvation is not a problem. Edited July 20, 2012 by playZ

[fish911503 136]

This idea could be expanded upon if you are upset about bandit awareness and reputation

http://dayzmod.com/f...69-death-notes/

I do like this idead...it adds something to the game. But I doubt it would curb the type of people I'm talking about. If I were forced to make an assumption about the type of people I'm referring to I would say they are borderline psychopaths at worst. Complete and utter assholes at best. They enjoy ruining other peoples experience...these are the people I want tagged/flagged/skinned whatever.

[Madfast 22]

The answer to your first two questions is no, and i could argue that your advantage lay not in the shotgun but in your willingness to use it. In other words the advantage is yours only if you take it. As it stands there is no X or Y in the game. That's all my suggestion would provide....the ability to tell X from Y.

And it would effect a VERY small number of players as you would need to be reported for murder 50 to 100 times in a 48 hour period to get flagged/penalized. IMO this would only effect players who are murdering everyone they find for shits and giggles. IMO this is NOT a valid style of gameplay.

Any play style is valid as long as it doesn't involve circumventing the rules of the world (Ie hacking ,exploits, duping). And there is a way to tell X from Y, bandits have a fast heart beat if you look at them. Just make sure you are in a position to see them first, and whilst this is always possible, if you can't just don't approach them/stay out of there sight. And precisely an advantage is only yours if you take it, you shouldn't punish someone for playing in a way that an the surface gives them an advantage. And I say on the surface, because at the end of the day it isn't really an advantage if you play cleverly. The way I play results in me never getting shot, and getting the drop, note I don't shoot them just introduce myself from a position of advantage, on the player regularly. I would imagine that advantage comes from years of PvP Arma and OFP experience, should we punish people who play like me or have that background, because they have an advantage they have taken for themselves from there willingness to engage is regular organized play sessions or take things a bit more slow and tactical?

I don't consider game balancing to be a matter of making it fair. I consider it an issue of playability, accesability, and staying true to original vision. I was an ARMA fan and player since first release. I knew it was unforgiving coming in but again. My suggestion would mainly (i hope exclusively) people who are murdering for count, murdering 25 to 50 people a day.

Despite how much it annoys me when other people do this I am going too, Rocket has always said this is an anti game. He created a world with no rules too see how people would react. That was the original vision. So this is true to the original vision. I would argue it is perfectly playable, but yes it could be argued inaccessible, compared to a lot of modern games once you. It can't be that inaccessible due to the fact alone of its massive player base and runaway success.

I don't agree that one necessarily implies the other...just because a problem is not directly effecting US doesn't prove there is no problem. That is fouled reasoning IMO. It's like saying I'm not starving so there is no reason for others to be starving therfore starvation is not a problem.

I would say that is fouled reasoning, I would say someone starving is a problem, because they are not on a level playing field. Everyone in this game has access to everything anyone else can get, through the same methods as them. To expand on your analogy it would be like being inside a supermarket and I am not starving but someone else is because they haven't learned to properly use the can opener yet. It can be solved by player skill alone.

Also I think I should clarify my problem isn't with your suggestion, it is one of the better " anti bandit " suggestions I have seen. My problem is with arbitrarily punishing one play style over another, because someone personally doesn't agree with it, or believes it offers some inherent advantage to another. Once one play style is punished it will open the flood gates, as it will be seen as a thing that happens. Whining will increase 100 fold, and soon this will stop being the brutal, unforgiving but brilliant experience many of us have fallen in love with, to super happy zombie fun time land coop experience.

[Marten (DayZ) 2]

Sry honestly I didn't even read ur first post correctly.

Once a murderer gets a certain number of reported murders (negotiable) they are from then on "Identified" in some way as a murderer in game.

This is not the dev's or the game punishing you for how you play it is the community.

So u want to have the bandit skins back for psychopaths.

I see how making this depend on the community would solve the problem of self defence.

And honestly I believe in the people and I don't think that abbuse of the system would be the problem.

But I see this game as a Roleplaying game, U play some survivor in a world that went to shit. And these are all the presets from the game.

Now u can decide which role u play.

U could play the psycopath role, so killing everyone just for fun.

Well I don't think those guys are a problem per se.

It's a role in this game. They were psycopaths or had phycophatic tendencies before the outbreak, but there bevaviour was suppressed by society in some way. Now society does not exist so the beast is unleashed. That's a role. And since there is no society, marking guys as murderes your sytem makes no sense, cause when u get killed by one u can't tell anyone else, cause u are DEAD. And going to some website and accusing people of murder is unrealistic, cause dead people can't talk.

So my point is this. This is a rolegame and your role in this starts with spawn and ends with death. And the next spawn is a whole new role in this game, that doesn't know the things the role u played the minute before knew. Of course u can play a role that is like the one u played before but it's not THAT role(cause that role is dead).

So the accusing part is just not reality.

And now sure u could argue there could be some wanted list in the game world, but u could only contribute to it, if u survived the murder attempt.

So playing psychopath is not really the problem it should be allowed and only maybe punished if somebody IN THE GAME sees u doing it. Cause that would the role of

"U see some murderer and want to bring him to your arbitrary law",

So u could think" I think there is no prlobem in the game". But yeah there is.

Right now everyone is playing psychopath judging on all that shoot on sight. So that is a prob cause not everyone is a psychopath in reality and humans are normally social, even if they life in a dangerous world ( look into the past),

And as I explained. Solving problems like this with some kind bandit skin punishment makes no sense cause it collides with the roleplaying character of the game. A part a game like this needs to fulfill the claim of simulating a real Zed world.(Real in everything except the existence of the infected/Zombies )

Hope I didn't skip something important u said, between insulting people. It would be much easier to discuss with u, if u weren't insulting all those people and just would ignore them. Reading all that insults takes some time u know,

Edited July 20, 2012 by Marten

[kovalhuk 19]

There's no advantage. That's it. This thing about advantage is illogical.

Everybody can grab any gun and shoot.

[fish911503 136]

There's no advantage. That's it. This thing about advantage is illogical.

Everybody can grab any gun and shoot.

True, in a deathmatch. In a deathmatch there is no advantage...just grab a gun and shoot. I'm stubborn and stuck on the idea this wasn't meant to be a deathmatch. Luckily I'm still able to play. I just need to remain invisible to other players. Which kind of sucks IMO. Thanks Edited July 20, 2012 by playZ

[DryGulch 32]

True, in a deathmatch. In a deathmatch there is no advantage...just grab a gun and shoot. I'm stubborn and stuck on the idea this wasn't meant to be a deathmatch. Luckily I'm still able to play. I just need to remain invisible to other players. Which kind of sucks IMO. Thanks

Yeah, you're just being stupidly pedantic there. The post you quoted is 100% correct, we all have the same access to the same resources in Day Z... hence there is no advantage, get over it.

[fish911503 136]

Yeah, you're just being stupidly pedantic there. The post you quoted is 100% correct, we all have the same access to the same resources in Day Z... hence there is no advantage, get over it.

In an environment with no rules...the bandit always the advantage. I have to play extra careful and be stealthy. Because i choose not shoot on site. Which puts me at a disadvantage. Which I compensate for with skill. But we are all entitled to our opinions...so call me stupid again.

[fish911503 136]

Let me try and put it another way. I think what the "OPFOR" is trying to say is that..I too have the option to play as a bandit therefor I am at no disadvantage since I am free to play the way they do. What I'm trying to say is the game design itself...is more advantageous to one style of play than to another. If you deny that you're entitled to.

[FlatulentRemedies 13]

dammit i was just murdered by this guy. I'm gonna make my players ghost go to the forum so i can tell everyone this douche took my beans. seriously dude......

[fish911503 136]

dammit i was just murdered by this guy. I'm gonna make my players ghost go to the forum so i can tell everyone this douche took my beans. seriously dude......

See 20 identical posts previous to yours for my response to your astute and clever observation. Brick

[Mourek 40]

oh my god, will you guys stop posting these dumb threads already?

[ZomboWTF 527]

not one of those QQ i got killed threads again, its a PVP survival game, not hello kittie online

there was a bandit and morality system once and it got removed because people were shown bandits without ever doing any bandit acts, turning you into a target for no reason

man up and learn to play, if you get shot at without an idea why or how to fight back, you aren't playing the right way

it's just like eve online, BE PARANOID

be as paranoid as it was you waking up at the beach with the knowledge of people just shooting people for fun

dont run into cherno or elektro without a gun or proper sneaking skills and be whining if you get kos

i highly doubt that, if you were to wake up in a hostile world like that, you would say "oh hey lets derp right into the biggest city and hope i dont get shot or eaten"

[fish911503 136]

not one of those QQ i got killed threads again, its a PVP survival game, not hello kittie online

there was a bandit and morality system once and it got removed because people were shown bandits without ever doing any bandit acts, turning you into a target for no reason

man up and learn to play, if you get shot at without an idea why or how to fight back, you aren't playing the right way

it's just like eve online, BE PARANOID

be as paranoid as it was you waking up at the beach with the knowledge of people just shooting people for fun

dont run into cherno or elektro without a gun or proper sneaking skills and be whining if you get kos

i highly doubt that, if you were to wake up in a hostile world like that, you would say "oh hey lets derp right into the biggest city and hope i dont get shot or eaten"

I'm assuming you're talking to me. If you were to read through the posts to get some perspective rather reading the thread title and thinking you know how i play the game or what the fuck you're talking about you might be a little more relevant. I don't play many video games cause mostly they are for retards. I am an ARMA player who got turned on to DAYZ. Unfortunately its turned into a deathmatch. You don't hear many like me because modt have left the game and the forums because they're above dealing with douch idiots like you and previous poster. You don't know me or how i play, you have no reference on the content of the thread. If you'ld like to have a conversation I'm game. If you're going to just talk shit without a point of refernce go get fucked. For Real. Edited July 21, 2012 by playZ

[Sentaru 1]

In an environment with no rules...the bandit always the advantage. I have to play extra careful and be stealthy. Because i choose not shoot on site. Which puts me at a disadvantage. Which I compensate for with skill. But we are all entitled to our opinions...so call me stupid again.

You do know that bandits also have to be extra careful and stealthy.

You choose not to shoot on site, but that in no way puts you in a disadvangate, actualy in some situations not shooting on site might put you in a better position than if you choose to shoot on site. Imagne if you met me face to face and choose shot me on sight, I play with 7 other friends, now shooting me would put you in a reeaaal bad position since i have 7 friends who will prob kill you and will guard my corpse until i return to them, in this situation you will be kileld loose all your gear and I will only have to run/be picked up by my friends. Now if you met me face to face and choose not to shoot me, that would be it i would prob point a gun at you to make sure you diten shoot me but that would be about it. Hey if you needed something like food we could trade or i could give you some. I know that not everyone is like this but some are.

now this is a small example of why, going the bandit way, as you said '' In an environment with no rules...the bandit always the advantage.'' is not always true.

You wrote something that i found very intersting ''Because i choose not shoot on site. Which puts me at a disadvantage. Which I compensate for with skill.'' You can compensate the ehm what to say, reaction ''shoot on sight'' , which in your opinion is a advantage, with skill how are you then still in disadvantage? And why would you still need bandits to be "Identified", when all you need to do is compensate with skill?

And I apologize if my gramma and spelling is weird to read. English is not my main language.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Sentaru