Beans should be gold dust; hunger a possibility

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

Living in an apocalypse and supermarkets will still have literally days worth of food for you, let alone robbing any old barn or residential.

There is currently nearly no value in food since it's extremely easy to find more than you can carry for yourself.

Limiting its supply makes starvation a genuine possibility, and would be a step towards making low scale trades feasible.

Hunger/Dehydration times would be doubled to slightly compensate, though sustenance drops could massively drop past that.

A disincentive for beans-related murder, and incentive to share would be splitting up each food object into multiple rations; which perish in time to deter soloing.

[UndeadAssassin 23]

NO NO NO NO NO :facepalm:

[Snort (DayZ) 340]

NO NO NO NO NO :facepalm:

What an excellent contribution! Fucking twot.

I don't think it's that bad of an idea. There is far too much food just laying around, I find the shit everywhere. I've not once starved or even been close to starving. The only time I had been relatively close to starving was the patch where they accidentally made the tinned food one of the rarest spawns in the game...good times. I genuinely had to kill a friend to get some beans...he wouldn't fucking give them to me!

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

Rather than strike this down at least give a reason; as far as I see it, hunger and dehydration are 99% of the time decorations and irrelevant.

[SystemiK 366]

to deter soloing.

You lost me right there. Solo play is a viable method of play which many people enjoy. There are a multitude of ways to play this game, all of which are viable. Lone wolf play does not need a deterrent.

[01da 218]

[UndeadAssassin 23]

if you spawn nice and new then you will have no weapon so it will be alot harder to get food before getting killed.

plus its just nice having 5 cans of sardines in your pack at all times and i hate sardines but my character loves them so shame on him

[warex (DayZ) 3]

beans-related murder

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

You lost me right there. Solo play is a viable method of play which many people enjoy. There are a multitude of ways to play this game, all of which are viable. Lone wolf play does not need a deterrent.

Soloing and banding together are mostly mutually exclusive in a game like this, due to the forces that drive each, and to encourage cooperation, yeah, soloing had to take a hit.

My suggestion never made lone wolfing impossible or unreasonably hard either, it is still manageable, I've just put some relevant disadvantage to lone wolfing

Edited July 29, 2012 by jwjw

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

mispost

Edited July 29, 2012 by jwjw

[SystemiK 366]

Soloing and banding together are mostly mutually exclusive in a game like this, due to the forces that drive each, and to encourage cooperation, yeah, soloing had to take a hit.

My suggestion never made lone wolfing impossible or unreasonably hard either, it is still manageable, I've just put some relevant disadvantage to lone wolfing

They are not mutually exclusive at all. I spend much of my time playing lone wolf, but that time is also spent doing logistical things which come into play when my friends and I get together on the weekends. So yeah, I take offense when you take it upon yourself that...well.... "soloing had to take a hit". Luckily, you don't get to decide shit as far as what takes a hit and what does not.

Hopefully the devs will understand that solo play is already somewhat gimped when compared to co-operative play. Co-operative play is something to be desired in the game, but not at the expense of other viable methods of play.

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

They are not mutually exclusive at all. I spend much of my time playing lone wolf, but that time is also spent doing logistical things which come into play when my friends and I get together on the weekends. So yeah, I take offense when you take it upon yourself that...well.... "soloing had to take a hit". Luckily, you don't get to decide shit as far as what takes a hit and what does not.

Hopefully the devs will understand that solo play is already somewhat gimped when compared to co-operative play. Co-operative play is something to be desired in the game, but not at the expense of other viable methods of play.

I don't see how your evidence in the first paragraph, is evidence. As far as I'm concerned its logic, an incentive or advantage to do one thing (band together) will naturally pull people from soloing.

You completely ignored my latter part where I was explicit in saying that soloing is still feasible. Infact - if an absolute pessimist consider this - solo'ers mantain a status quo and difficulty has not changed, but groups get an advantage.

As to solo play being gimped? Hardly: much more freedom without burdens of coordination; much harder to spot; much less supplies and meds needed; nobody to question the morality and wait of sniping...

Edited July 29, 2012 by jwjw

[Hiptu 1]

Idea's solid per se, but you'd have to do summit about hunting knife, matches and hatchet. Ya don't need to go to anywhere (for loot) or anyone if ya got those (+ water bottles).

So, no.

[Sergeant Squatt 58]

The Devs are still pushing co play due to murders and other reason so this post right here dosnt change a thing whether you like it or not

[jameswjwong@gmail.com 14]

Idea's solid per se, but you'd have to do summit about hunting knife, matches and hatchet. Ya don't need to go to anywhere (for loot) or anyone if ya got those (+ water bottles).

So, no.

Of course, its not a massive leap that if you slim down food drops, then live animals become rarer too. As for water, I know that lakes and ponds cannot be scorched away - but hopefully that should drive people to actually use watering holes, maybe I'm not seasoned enough, but I see far, far more carrying pepsi than water bottles.

[JerFeelgood 34]

They are not mutually exclusive at all. I spend much of my time playing lone wolf, but that time is also spent doing logistical things which come into play when my friends and I get together on the weekends. So yeah, I take offense when you take it upon yourself that...well.... "soloing had to take a hit". Luckily, you don't get to decide shit as far as what takes a hit and what does not.

Hopefully the devs will understand that solo play is already somewhat gimped when compared to co-operative play. Co-operative play is something to be desired in the game, but not at the expense of other viable methods of play.

cooperative play has an unfair advantage because of telepathic comms anyway,

nerf food spawns and give fresh spawns a can of beans so they don't starve initially, now this would probably lead to people slaughtering spawns for spawns. Another simple idea might be assigning different nutritive values to varying food types so they stave off hunger for varying lengths of time, a portion of beans, 4 hrs, pasta 6hrs, steak 8hrs etc... and weight spawning accordingly. Provide a reason why a spawn has a belly full of steak and pasta and has twelve hrs to get to his next meal and he doesn't need to start with a can of beans....

beans and bullets should be ultra rare because all ready consummables would be consumed right off the bat. Heavily restricting both would force people to interact, but I still feel comms are the critical factor....

[A.J. 2]

I don't have the same experience with food and water. I never find any. I mean it. I find awesome gear all day long but food cannot be found anywhere. I went to cherno last night and desperately tried to find at least something to drink hoping no one would notice me and found bubkiss for nearly a half hour wondering how I wasn't dead yet. Finally went into the church and found a full canteen, Turn around facing the door to drink and as soon as I hit G a guy pops into the door and head shots me. Awesome times in Cherno. Haha.

Edited July 29, 2012 by A.J.

[GodOfGrain 191]

OP is right, food / water is mere decoration. The only reason I carry 3 of each with me is that I may spawn in the debug plains sometime... There is just an abundance of supplies everywhere.

[The_Man 393]

Beans are a good source of protein but definitely not enough for humans. They lack all the amino acids our body needs when compared to meat. I think Beans should be marked as less effective than meat even more than less blood point increase. It should only delay hunger rather than restore it to green. Good points you bring up about frequency of food. It will definitely raise the amount of people killing each other on sight for food though and I'm sure low scale trades wouldn't be anymore frequent than they are now. This is an assumption based on what I've seen in game.

[Aira 22]

No -.-

Not even more reasons to murder...

[kurtthecobain 10]

Living in an apocalypse and supermarkets will still have literally days worth of food for you, let alone robbing any old barn or residential.

There is currently nearly no value in food since it's extremely easy to find more than you can carry for yourself.

Limiting its supply makes starvation a genuine possibility, and would be a step towards making low scale trades feasible.

Hunger/Dehydration times would be doubled to slightly compensate, though sustenance drops could massively drop past that.

A disincentive for beans-related murder, and incentive to share would be splitting up each food object into multiple rations; which perish in time to deter soloing.

Hunger and thirst is already ridiculous anyways... No one has to eat food every 30 minutes or starve or drink every 20 or dehydrate...

[dippman 1]

You completely ignored my latter part where I was explicit in saying that soloing is still feasible. Infact - if an absolute pessimist consider this - solo'ers mantain a status quo and difficulty has not changed, but groups get an advantage.

Except groups already have several advantages- Huge ones. Groups already have the manpower to cover more ground and get more loot, and trading with each other so each gets the best equipment that best suit them. But the biggest advantage is a group of 4 will always trump soloers in combat, they don't need any more advantages. I do think food is far to common though.

Edited July 29, 2012 by dippman

[The_Man 393]

Hunger and thirst is already ridiculous anyways... No one has to eat food every 30 minutes or starve or drink every 20 or dehydrate...

You should actually hydrate every 20 minutes of running.

[JerFeelgood 34]

what about food and hydration fuel tanks, something that steadily depletes over time but which will ramp up depended on the level of physical activity.... with different foods adding different volumes of fuel?