DayZ has become Deathmatch / Team Deathmatch

[pvtjohn 0]

That's my point. It's up to the players to sort out the bandits. The players keep whining about bandits being 'unbalanced' and that they should be 'punished'.

How about the players do the punishing? The mod is all about forcing players to adapt to situations and deal with them as they pop up.

I agree with you completely that the players should do the punishing. However' date=' because of the anonymity of being amongst thousands of players, the bandits cannot be identified as they would be in real life.

My solution below allows players to deal with the situation, and in a way consistent with the game universe.

An even better way to implement a reputation system would be to color code the cursor when a player is spotted. His name is green if he's relatively free of murders in the last X number of days, yellow if he's somewhere in the middle, and red if he's one of most notorious bandits. I would think of this in terms of a bell curve distribution, with green being fairly exceptional and red being fairly exceptional (perhaps the lower 15% and upper 15% in murders per hour played). There would be no consequences for shooting someone in the red -- perhaps even a benefit (as shooting a notorious murdering psychopath in a community would indeed be looked upon positvely).

I think this solution would have the following benefits: 1) Easy to implement and try out; 2) Mimic real life consequences; 3) Since most people (70%) would be yellow, it would preserve the mystery/surprise/nervousness when meeting people, and thus the feel of the game would remain unchanged.

Good discussion here. I hope the devs find all the brainstorming useful.

[Krusteh 1]

there is a difference between balancing aspects of play and punishments for playing a particular way. Unlike real life certain aspects of the game itself make it difficult for players to place trust in others and favor playing as a bandit (not a recurring interaction, unable to see the players expressions, etc). I have suggested that you might need to tweak things to get the balance right. some of that might provide a hint as to the players character to make up for the lack of normal ques you would have when interacting with folks in life. Other options would be providing other incentives for working with other players...objectives that need to be undertaken as team, loot that might only be available from doing so, or making the zombies themselves (by numbers, or type) more lethal. In the end the solution in playing the game for someone plagued by bandits is to kill the bandits. But you want to keep the balance such that not everyone plays the game the same way.

[-LF-Nym 0]

Players need to get over the whole bandit thing. IRL anyone could turn and shoot you, in game anyone can turn and shoot you just deal with it. So sick of people trying to measure trust with a bar or a skin... Find friends band together work together, problem solved.

[lexxer 25]

Find friends and band together? If you have to do that outside the game then the game is flawed.

OMG its a SANDBOX! I've played a lot of sandbox games...I cant recall one that didn't have some penalty or at least indicator that someone is evil or has done evil things.

I liked the bandit skins. It was a good indication of a persons intentions in an environment that gives you no other indication of a persons intentions. People keep saying "but in rl...blah blah". In real life if you went around murdering people you would eventually earn a reputation.

Humanity was an interesting game mechanic. Now it means nothing.

Put bandit skins back, but allow 3-4 "accidental" kills before the skin change.

[Carbon (DayZ) 10]

I giggle at people who complain about how DayZ "has turned into DM" and that "bandits should be punished" it's part of the core gameplay.

If you can't handle that go find another game, because you're playing the wrong one.

[Sveglia 2]

I giggle at people who complain about how DayZ "has turned into DM" and that "bandits should be punished" it's part of the core gameplay.

If you can't handle that go find another game' date=' because you're playing the wrong one.

[/quote']

Enjoy your empty deathmatch.

[bovine3dom 0]

I can't believe people actually think some sort of many hour re-spawn timer would be beneficial. Apply that to any other game you play and ask your self if it would work. BF3? CoD? EVE? WoW? No one would play it' date=' except for those that found a way to exploit it (sooner or later someone would).

[/quote']

Pretend I'm a five year old: why wouldn't it work for DayZ? Essentially what you said there was "Don't be such a smegging moron, of course it wouldn't work" without offering me up a reason.

Those games you mentioned are, thankfully, nothing like DayZ. Many ArmA milsim groups operate with 0 respawns until the next exercise. A long respawn timer is equivalent to that.

[dirtystinkinninja 3]

Yeah, it's kind of getting annoying, I know we kind of ask for this by entering coastal cities, but it's people that shoot on sight that are ruining this game.

[Sveglia 2]

I can't believe people actually think some sort of many hour re-spawn timer would be beneficial. Apply that to any other game you play and ask your self if it would work. BF3? CoD? EVE? WoW? No one would play it' date=' except for those that found a way to exploit it (sooner or later someone would).

[/quote']

Pretend I'm a five year old: why wouldn't it work for DayZ?

Those games you mentioned are, thankfully, nothing like DayZ. Many ArmA milsim groups operate with 0 respawns until the next exercise. A long respawn timer is equivalent to that.

That's the problem, DayZ is slowly turning in those games. And that's what some of us don't want, the majority is happy about it.

[Zoop 343]

Enjoy your empty deathmatch.

Why? It's only the vocal minority who complain about being killed. The rest are too busy immersing themselves in the game.

And no. Artificial dis/advantages for players are not in tune with the scope of the mod project. If a player comes across you, he should have no idea whether you are good or bad. It's one of the main driving points of the game.

Having cursors that indicate whether you are a good or bad guy is detrimental to the entire scope of the game.

Also, stop saying 'but other games have this/that'. Shut up. This isn't 'other games'. This is DayZ.

[logan66 3]

Sorry for the long post. Editing is not my strong suit.

-------

tl;dr - Use game mechanics to equally facilitate alternate play styles by improving communication & recognition, resource sharing, and possibly a humanity-to-reputation system.

--------

I'm not sure I agree with changes that would encourage or discourage a particular play style. Rather, I'd like to see some mechanics changes that put the differing styles on an even footing.

I think there are two primary axes (axis plural, not chopping tool) of play style that are out of balance in terms of game mechanics support: communication and resource sharing.

Communication is easy to support for the lone wolf, kill-everyone style of player; it's not needed. Meta-teaming using 3rd party tools is also easy to support since no game mechanics are required. Impromptu, in-game communication is where the problem lies with the current system.

Direct communication seems like a good way to handle this - if it worked. Direct VOIP seems very hit-or-miss in my experience. Most of the time, I see no evidence that people close to me hear anything I'm saying. I'm not sure if that's my problem or the game. Direct chat doesn't work at all. Even if they both worked, they would be difficult to distinguish from all the meta-chatter going on. While I see the appeal of non-RP social chat, it tends to diminish the immersion.

Another aspect to communication that's lacking is the ability to recognize other players. You may play for days with a team, but it's terribly difficult to recognize your teammates by sight. A new person could run into your view that looks virtually identical to your teammates and you would never know until too late. The constant "is that you" also disrupts the immersion for me.

My solutions to communication: 1. Fix direct VOIP and chat. 2. Either remove or significantly differentiate global VOIP and chat (perhaps allow unsubscribe to channel?). 3. Find some way to share tags between players- either explicitly using a "share tag" feature, or as a result of close proximity for a defined length of time (perhaps add a range of visibility to prevent miles away identification).

Resource sharing is also problematic. For the lone wolf, it's not needed at all. For people working together, it's a real challenge (not in a good way). Bugs cause drops to disappear, and every time I've tried to put more than one item in another person's pack most of the items disappear.

Collecting and protecting resources is also not possible, unless I'm missing something important (entirely possible). AFAIK, tents are big 'ol "hey come loot me" signs since they are very difficult to place, especially in hidden/protected areas.

My solution to resource sharing: I'd like to try it with existing systems, but without the bugs. Until I do that, I'm not sure adding more items or functions is necessary.

As a side note, I think the humanity-to-reputation system has merit and would approximate some of the natural consequences of extreme behavior. Mass murders and saints would get a reputation and become recognizable, while the majority of the masses would remain anonymous.

[CosmicOsmo 1]

But why dividing stuff with some ladders and whatnot' date=' when everybody would play on normal servers then. I tell you, big ass spawntime for everybody. And how is not fair. Its equal for everybody, its much more fair than spawning into the workd and getting killed for shits and laughts 5 seconds later. Not that i have been, but apparently somepeople were.

If your ladder system was implemented, and if i were a prick, i would deliberately go to a ladder server and take as many survivors/bandits down with me as i can, just to prevent them on playing there, and be the boss, and then continue on normals.

[/quote']

I don't think it has anything to so with valuing your life. In fact most of the folks who would kill on sight are the better kitted out folks who have been playing that life for a long time.

The reason people won't wantonly murder eachother in a real life zombie apocalypse is because (A) killing carries a risk of death' date=' and (B) people don't want to die. If we can replicate these two conditions sufficiently, deathmatching will be suppressed.

A. Killing should be risky. It's already a bit risky because your target can shoot back, as can his friends. If people group up, then suddenly backstabbing your teammates will lead to a swift retribution from the teammates you failed to kill. There's an added bonus here, the other side of the coin: grouping up is safer than being alone!

Adding small zombie numbers in [i']all areas, and making zombie more dangerous by fixing their indoor speed also makes killing risky because you'll draw zombies onto yourself.

B. I addressed how to make people not want to die in my last post. A world where you only get 1 life is a world where people don't want to die, just like the real one. It's a very simple, realistic, and immersive mechanic. Reset the world every few weeks and the serious players will jump in to race to the wilderness, the military spawns, and the vehicles, encounter eachother, and have meaningful and emergent interactions.

Some kind of reputation system would mimic real life best. If there really were only 50 people in an area the size of Chernarus' date=' people would get to know things.... You'd hear things like "Those three brothers with the red hair around Vyborg are scum, stay away or shoot on site."

An even better way to implement a reputation system would be to color code the cursor when a player is spotted. His name is green if he's relatively free of murders in the last X number of days, yellow if he's somewhere in the middle, and red if he's one of most notorious bandits.

I think this solution would have the following benefits: 2) Mimic real life consequences[/quote']

Ideas based around a humanity score are inherently unrealistic and also impossible to implement properly. If a killer murders someone IRL and gets away with it (no witnesses), you don't get a red tooltip when you pass him in the street. If you want word to get around that certain people are evil, spread the word. This is a sandbox and that sort of thing should fall onto the players. This is why the bandit skin was removed in the first place, you're not going to talk anyone into bringing it back, because it was wrong for the game.

[NobodieCro 11]

Well the "bandits" and "survivors" aren't balanced good enough ..

[Guest]

All this crying about players killing others. If you can't deal with it then play something else.

Chernarus life ( aka arma farmville) would probably be better suited to people like that.

[Sveglia 2]

But the scope of the game isn't kill everyone on sight either. Because this is what is happening, you can't know if this guy is a bandit or not, so, they shoot first. No interaction, no time to ask "friendly?", no chance to know the other people, paranoids everywhere. And that's an empty deathmatch.

Removing bandits turned everybody into one.

[capnrory 1]

It's been said before, but I'm convinced the problem stems from a lack of zombies. I've never died from a zombie, only other players and glitches, so why would I risk trying to team up with my most dangerous foe (other players) to take on my least dangerous foe (zombies)?

[underscore 12]

So, players shouldn't be punished for the choices? Wait a tick, why did rocket include a humanity score in the first place? If having a low or high humanity does not carry any penalties or rewards, then it's just window dressing and should be gotten rid of altogether. I don't know, but it sounds to me like some of you want a consequence free environement where everybody can do whatever they please and trololol off into the distance? Now who are the carebears?

But, there is something to the line of reasoning that the game mechanics themselves should actively seek to exert the least amount of social influence and policing, instead enabling players to do these things themselves. Ok, how about this then:

Allow a player to 'investigate' another players' humanity score.

It would work pretty much the way "study body" does right now, except on living players. This way it's possible for players to assess the character and trustworthiness of strangers they meet. Of course, just like the "study body" mechanic, this info would only become available at point blank range. So, you'd still have to take a tremendous risk if you want to "sniff" the other guy out, but now at least it'd be possible for "good guys" to trust each other, or conversely for "bad guys" to verify the true extent of one another's badassery.

Also, if you want to make this extra immersive, then instead of revealing a humanity score, this technique would infrom you something along the lines of "This dude is the Care-iest of Carebears" or "Holy Shit, this dude is the Ted Bundy of Chernogorsk!"

[CosmicOsmo 1]

It's been said before' date=' but I'm convinced the problem stems from a lack of zombies. I've never died from a zombie, only other players and glitches, so why would I risk trying to team up with my most dangerous foe (other players) to take on my least dangerous foe (zombies)?[/quote']

Everyone who is running around solo getting killed and whining about it is missing a key point, a lesson from EVE and other places. You don't team up for security from zombies, you team up for security from players not in your team.

Finding the team in the first place can be tough. Functioning direct chat could help, but the best way to do it will remain out-of-game. Find some friends, protect each other, adapt.

[machine77 0]

Dunno if this has been suggested. How about the characters humanity scores ties in with zombies awareness to them?

A character that continuously murders others gets a higher zombie awareness, makes them more prone to being noticed and chased by zombies. That would be a good incentive to avoid murdering people with your good loot. Although it doesn't stop you from doing it.

[lexxer 25]

"a lesson from EVE"

Umm in EVE you KNOW who the "other" team is via many in game indicators.

[CosmicOsmo 1]

"a lesson from EVE"

Umm in EVE you KNOW who the "other" team is via many in game indicators.

The lessons from EVE:

1. Grouping is for PvP, not PvE.

2. Make friends out of game if you can't in-game.

When you're lying in the brush with 5 friends on teamspeak engaging an enemy force of similar size, laying down cover fire for shoot-and-scoot maneuvers, dragging wounded allies to cover, and checking over your shoulder for zombies while trying to ignore the nagging fact that you're starting to get low on ammo, DayZ is a pretty fucking awesome game. People shooting on sight is only a problem when you're trying to run around solo in a city completely oblivious to everything. And yet the victims still come here to whine about how it's a "deathmatch." It's a deathmatch for a large number of people that are too stupid to make the game work for them. And that is another lesson from EVE.

[Z_Metzger 0]

I think that the main problem here lies in the fact that players do not need each other to survive in this post-apocalyptic world. Your character is an expert marksman, can fix helicopters, fly them, perform a blood transfusion, expertly bandage himself, gut a wild animal with just a knife.... you get the point.

In real life, people would prefer to stay in groups because that would be the only long term method of staying alive. Currently, you play as a god like uber metch who has all the knowledge necessary to stay alive on his own. To be honest, when playing in a team I feel less safe than when traveling solo.

So in my opinion, you should not penalize the bandits, you should just make surviving on your own really hard (but not impossible). And having a group of people should open up more possibilities and more ways to play this game.

[underscore 12]

After having a bit of a think regarding my previous post, I'm no longer keen on the idea. Honestly, how would being able to "read" another player's humanity score differ from the survivor-bandit skin thing we had going on before? In theory, that should have led to a self-policing situation, but descended into anarchy regardless. And, here's why:

In real-life you would have word of mouth ultimately catching up with you in a locale. In real-life people can only be trusted when you will have a series of recurring interactions with those folks.

In a multiplayer game where you can just server hop constantly' date=' there is no possibility of developing a negative social reputation. Policing cannot occur because the perps cannot be identified, nor hunted down. So, no consequences.

Which leads us back to:

But the game should allow all types of play. Playing as a bandit isn't wrong. Its a fundamental part of the game. but its just too easy right now....there should be some trade-offs.

Yes. All the Internet Tough Guys will cry and call it punitive, but the game simply needs to make mass murder harder. Don't dare get rid of it, but make it more of a challenge. Make it so that becoming a psychopathic bandit is going to require some serious balls. Or, I guess we could just overrun everybody with zombies to the point that they barely have time to shoot at other players.

[Arnoldio 2]

I can't believe people actually think some sort of many hour re-spawn timer would be beneficial. Apply that to any other game you play and ask your self if it would work. BF3? CoD? EVE? WoW? No one would play it' date=' except for those that found a way to exploit it (sooner or later someone would).

[/quote']

Those are games for retarded kids, except EvE. Aimed at masses of morons and sheep. But BF3 and COD have 15 sec spawn or so on HC mode. Dayz has none.

Project Reality has 20 sec -5 min, depending on deaths and penalties. And even that isnt enough in my eyes. Despite it being a realism game, people tardrush, and generally fail to comprehend what the game is about, and ultimately paly it like COD. Once, there was an one-life event hosted, where if you died, you would get kicked off for the remainder of the event.

Nobody wanted to come close to the enemy, tension, checking corners etc. Best time of that game, and i didnt fire many shots if any, beofre my internet timeouted and i was kicked off.

[Wakko 0]

As long as I can get some way to see who might/might not be trustworthy im happy. With the removal of bandit skins, everyone kill everyone on sight just to be safe.