No respawn as alternate game mode?

[pack.wolf 0]

What if there were servers where you only had a single life? How would gameplay change and would you enjoy playing on servers like this?

It would work as follows:

You'd have to connect before the mission is started.

As soon as all slots are filled the mission is started.

If you die, you can't respawn and noone else can connect until the server is reset again, so with every death there is one less player and no way to replace him.

Would it cause the players to band together and protect each other to survive as long as possible?

Would such a group turn on members that cause to much noise or are careless?

Or would there be factions that are at odds with one another / players trying to kill everyone else to be the last man standing?

I think it would be a nice addition to have such a mode. What's your take on this?

[killertom3 1]

If you made the map smaller that would be awesome.

[zoomie 0]

ITT: make a gamemode which would be so overrun with griefing no one would ever play it.

[bayers 28]

Hows about: If a person dies they get perma banned from every DayZ server? :P

[pack.wolf 0]

ITT: make a gamemode which would be so overrun with griefing no one would ever play it.

I don't think there would be excess griefing, since as soon as someone dispatches a griefer, he's gone for good. Since the by far larger percentage of players is not interested in that but only in legitimate play I don't think griefers would be able to do much damage before someone eliminates them from the equation.

Ofc if you think bandit equals griefer, then you may have a point. But I'd strongly disagree with that, since as soon as the bandits killed all the survivors for all their loot, there's noone left to go after. So even bandits would (to some degree) be interested in most of the people on the server surviving. Maybe they'd form some kind of more aggressive faction, while more survivalist oriented players would form a more defensive one.

It's exactly that social dynamic that I'd like to be able to explore, since honestly, idk what would happen. I also think it would be very much in the spirit of the mod as a social experiment. Think of such a modification of the mod as similar to the different versions/iterations of the Milgram experiment.

[viranth 0]

No. Because then there would be tons and tons of servers with very few players and no way to connect to them.

I think it's fine they way it is now. You lose everything once you die, and I for one treasure the life I have once I find anything to put into my inventory. I'm not good at dayz, so everything I find is worth a lot to me.

[pack.wolf 0]

Ofc it would be really bad if such a change would keep you from playing because of lack of servers you were allowed to join. That's why I think it should not replace the current system, but be an alternative.

In fact it could even help by adding a lot of new servers, since they would not have to be connected to the central database. Every server running this mode could be set up on the fly by everyone that happened to feel like it in a very short amount of time and without the need to coordinate with the dev team, since everybody joining the server would get a new, server-exclusive character.

Exploring attachment of a player to his characters life is something the mod in it's current form does really well already (although not perfectly), but in my opinion allowing (for lack of a better word) 'non-centralized', no-respawn servers might provide a better perspective into what kind of social structures can emerge in a sandbox environment and other inter-player relationships.

Why do I think that? An environment like this would offer two advantages. Every's players actions toward another player can never be undone and it would always be the same group of players on the server, allowing them to form much more complex and deeper relationships with each other than those you get on servers that are basically populated by different random people every time you connect.