slow positive health regeneration.

[Hiddenshadows57 2]

This isn't complaining about the difficulty or anything.

It's mostly because the health system is based around your blood.

Since I'm assuming that the number for your health(12000) is based around Males blood capacity(12 pints)

Anyways, blood naturally increases, people can naturally regain blood after blood loss.

So I think if the game is aiming to be as realistic as possible, then regenerating health makes sense.

[Nick8478 166]

Agreed. A slooow health regeneration if you're not hungry or thirsty would make a lot more sense than gaining back a ton of blood by eating cooked meat.

[wok 25]

I like the idea. Also drinking should also increase blood.

[DemonGroover 8836]

I remember reading somewhere that if you donate a pint of blood it will naturally regenerate back in around 6 weeks!!

Not really a gaming mechanism.

In realistic terms, if you lose blood to a gunshot no amount of beans, pasta or cooked meat will sponateously regenerate blood.

But we've got to have something, right?

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

I like that, but it should definitely be very very slow.

I also believe you shouldn't dehydrate for three days.

Or die of starvation for 10!

[wok 25]

I believe starvation happens much faster than dehydration, not sure about the timeframes but it's kinda common knowledge that you can live a lot of days without eating anything, but only a few without drinking.

[motocross 49]

I believe starvation happens much faster than dehydration, not sure about the timeframes but it's kinda common knowledge that you can live a lot of days without eating anything, but only a few without drinking.

Other way around mate, you get thirsty faster.

[wok 25]

Other way around mate, you get thirsty faster.

Mmmm, maybe my english is not good (sorry i speak spanish). But that's exactly what i meant.

If you drink but don't eat you can live longer than if you eat but don't drink.

[motocross 49]

Mmmm, maybe my english is not good (sorry i speak spanish). But that's exactly what i meant.

If you drink but don't eat you can live longer than if you eat but don't drink.

Ohh ok, sorry mate.

[Womb Raider 92]

No thanks.

I like the current blood transfusion and hunting for blood, game mechanics.

[bazbake 456]

I did the math elsewhere using starving to death as an example (I may have been off).

So dying in the game means you lose 12,000 blood. Dying of blood loss in real life means you lose about 40% of your blood...or about 4 pints.

So 1 pint of blood is the equivalent 3,000 blood points.

Donating blood gives up about 1 unit which is almost 1 pint. So a single blood pack should have about 3,000 blood in it.

It takes 4-6 weeks to regenerate that blood. So blood should recharge in the game equivalent of 4-6 weeks.

In real life, you can be expected to die in about 45-60 days of starvation...or 5-8 weeks.

Hunger drains down in about an hour to half an hour I think (from my experience getting to red and then others' stories of how long after blinking before you take damage) although running and hyperventilation speed that up. Once drained, you lose 20 blood per second.

So 75 minutes + (12,000 blood/20 damage per second/60 seconds = 10 minutes) means a fully healthy player starves to death in 85 minutes.

So in-game health scales at 85 minutes for 5-8 weeks. If it takes you 4-6 weeks to regenerate the equivalent of 3,000 blood, then broadly related numbers give us...

3,000 health regenerated in an hour. 50 health a minute. A little under 1 point of health per second.

I could get behind something like this myself, if we got rid of food restoring health in any form and instead had food just restore your hunger. The greater your hunger icon is filled, the more health restored per second.

So...if your hunger is green, you restore 1 blood per second. If it's white, you get 0.5 blood every second. If your hunger is red you restore 0 blood per second. If your health is blinking, you're about to starve to death. When your health goes black, you lose 20 blood per second.

My concern:

This would make the game a whole lot easier.

My idea:

1. Get rid of the health restoration from food.

2. Rebalance blood packs. Currently you can restore all of your health with a blood pack. But if, instead, you have a unit of blood restore the equivalent of a real life unit of blood -- 3,000 blood -- and let everyone use them. Currently 1 blood pack heals equivalent to 50 cooked meats but can only be used to heal other players. By having everyone capable of using them, limiting the health return should balance them.

3. Blood transfusions. A 6,000 health boost that can only be delivered by another player at a cost of 3,000 health.

Some consequences:

1. It would make eating a lot more important. Since the only way to reliably restore health is to make sure that you're always being fed, and if being fully fed means you can recover 3,000 blood in 50 minutes, people will constantly be eating food and hunting to stay topped up.

2. Also, it would be interesting if cooked meat, instead of restoring more health, just restores more hunger instead. So a can of beans might fill you up for about 1/4th of your hunger meter, but a steak could fully top up your hunger. This also means you won't be eating a can of beans every hour and a half, you'll be eating a can of beans every 15-20 minutes. But you'll only need to eat cooked meat at the same rate you usually eat meat.

...

Of course, the damage scaling for weapons would have to go down before any of this is implemented. There's a good thread on this right here that links damage to status effects and bleeding and would tie perfectly into blood regeneration. Since lethality on weapons would go down under this system if you have an attentive medic, the health regeneration replacing food healing would work nicely.

[Obsolescence 129]

This isn't complaining about the difficulty or anything.

It's mostly because the health system is based around your blood.

Since I'm assuming that the number for your health(12000) is based around Males blood capacity(12 pints)

Anyways, blood naturally increases, people can naturally regain blood after blood loss.

So I think if the game is aiming to be as realistic as possible, then regenerating health makes sense.

It takes several weeks to regenerate blood cells. When you donate blood they list your red blood cell recovery time at 4 - 8 weeks. Honestly, unless you want to bring some superhuman CoD/Halo bullshit, your blood recovery should be less than 100 points per day. I'm not against that, but honestly, go kill a cow and eat the meat for 8x800=6400 blood. The game is easy enough, and realistic blood recovery won't make a noticable difference.

[bazbake 456]

It takes several weeks to regenerate blood cells. When you donate blood they list your red blood cell recovery time at 4 - 8 weeks. Honestly, unless you want to bring some superhuman CoD/Halo bullshit, your blood recovery should be less than 100 points per day. I'm not against that, but honestly, go kill a cow and eat the meat for 8x800=6400 blood. The game is easy enough, and realistic blood recovery won't make a noticable difference.

Like I mentioned in my post, it takes longer to die from starvation than it does to recover blood after a donation. And yet we still have a hunger meter.

Just saying, some of the scaling is off so that hunger and thirst are useful as game mechanics, even if they would never be that important in the real world. Just scale blood recovery with thirst and hunger and it would work.

[Lukio (DayZ) 24]

Just saying, some of the scaling is off so that hunger and thirst are useful as game mechanics, even if they would never be that important in the real world. Just scale blood recovery with thirst and hunger and it would work.

The scaling may be off, but you will not die if your hunger meter is blinking, you can actually go pretty far without finding food. If hunger and thirst both are blinking, then you will eventually loose blood/health, but still are far from dying. Seems alright to me.

[drseptapus 49]

I made a thread about this a little while ago (in the sig). My idea was that we would have a slow base rate of regeneration at around 25 blood per minute. Food and water levels would cause it to fluctuate, starving = less regeneration. Eating would temporarily boost the rate of regeneration to around 150 blood per minute for varying durations (longer for steak, shorter for beans). If you are bleeding you have no regeneration, you need bandages to stop bleeding, and then you need to rest and stay well fed and hydrated in order to recover.

My reasoning for this was that

1.) getting healed instantly by eating is stupid.

2.) We will never have a realistic health system. This is about as good as an emulation as I think we can get.

3.) It will allow you to recover slowly, but you won't be able to tank those hordes of zombies.

[bazbake 456]

The scaling may be off, but you will not die if your hunger meter is blinking, you can actually go pretty far without finding food. If hunger and thirst both are blinking, then you will eventually loose blood/health, but still are far from dying. Seems alright to me.

You'll die from starvation and blood loss from starvation in 85-100 minutes in this game. If you scaled blood regeneration to be on the same timeline as starvation, you would heal about 1 blood/second. So in that way, a blood regeneration-based health system would make more sense than healing yourself with food and would also have the effect of making zombie fights incredibly brutal.

Of course, with weapon damage being BIG BOOM based instead of bleeding-focused, it favors first-shot gun combat even more than the current healing system. So an entire damage overhaul would need to be in place.