The 'End-Game' possibility and the over-run of infected/zombies

[notdahangoverguy 19]

My name is Glenn and this topic of conversation was discussed between myself and a good friend Nick.

Now let's think of this generated server, typically if you're killed by a player the only result of one player killing another may be this

concept thoroughly brainstormed by 'Rocket' himself. i.e the bandit/hero skins depending upon the "humanity scale" concept.

IF (I'm not saying that this could be viable), but if there were to be several main servers, and that the result of "A" player being either skilled or "noob"

was to be savaged by a group of zombies/infected either by a result of complete ignorance, naivity or in-experience of such an environment or even the lack of MUCH needed assistance

from other players, this would permenantly include a single or a couple of zombies/infected.

Now, considering this was to happen far too often as a result of a break between this "mutual" need to survive, which has OR has

not been problematic in terms of unnecessary killing of noobs and the unarmed depending on your point of view.

The biggest and potentially inevitable result so to speak could be an "over-run" server. Meaning, there HAS to be something or some array of tools and possible equipment to

resolve this situation. A situation which is affecting everyone who lives and endures to survive, how can we survive a map over-run by the infected/zombies.

Ofcourse this could gradually become evidential in stages

1) small towns such as Kamenka and coast line towns will become almost impossible to enter and compose too much of a risk to gather specific and much needed equipment or resources.

2) from those small towns the infected begin to overflood the coast line and main cities (Cherno, Elektro and Berenz). From this point on gathering the needed equipment that you cannot

from smaller towns will become extremely difficult to obtain such as basic tools needed to survive much north.

3) The 2nd stage has passed, the cities are not completely condemned, it IS still possible to cleanse "this" city/Town however WILL require a great number of survivors.

4) From stage 3 up to this stage could be programmed to have a much slower pace giving survivors enough time to cleanse the cities and hold back the infected over-rinning the main cities.

5) This is the last stage, the cities have been completely over-run, almost suicidal heli or jeep missions to save "noob" survivors on the coast may need help gaining equipment and food/water

you will need others to help and this is your last stand up north. All you have is military spawns so ammo may not be THAT scarse and enough weaponry from higher loot spawns however food and water

will degrade VERY slowely as the the closer the proximity the infected is, the less animal (food) will wander the fields and the least amount of fresh water ponds (water). PUSH BACK the infected together or the server is lost.

let's look at this from another point of view, those who enjoy to help others may seek out this equipment. On the other hand however, bandits being bandits this means the

natural migration of the helpfull and the innocent would move inland...the woods which is said to be a haven from the infected therefore would potentially sabotage an act

to cleanse the town/city either out of spite or to gain a tactical advantage to keep the battle in the woods.

I liked the idea about recieving transmissions.

there could be possible co ordinates from a tool which is suggested by many other DAYZ; a radio to what could be underground bunkers not necessarily obtaining weaponary but rather evidence or operational viral experimentation labs with working equipment which will play a vital role.

within these underground bunkers could also consist of other types of loot such as special gasmasks and medical equipment incase operations are to take place within fully infected areas reducing the chance to infect other back up north

this could also contain possible equipment for what could become THE CURE.

This "cure" may consit of heavy machinery, similar to as a group of survivors may collect a great deal of parts of lets say a URAL or a HELI, why wouldn't they rather find and hold

parts to a device which would (If placed within the center of a town or city) could disperse a gas which would temporarily wipe out the infected to that specific town/city. This could provide a fighting chance to set up

bunkers or any other defensive barrier to prevent this happening again.

I apologise if there are any mistakes in terms of spelling or use of grammar or whether you can't understand certain parts as it's late and this "idea'" if you wanna call it was a conversation between a good friend of mine who would love to see this

grow. If this helped or has contributed to even a spark of an idea in the development toward what COULD be the end game of DayZ (I don't like the term end-game but I'm tired :P) then

I am happy.

Live long and survive.

[speca 193]

End game has been suggested many times but for the first time i actualy support this idea, it would add more lore and a deeper story line into the game, it will also bring players together to survive (I am a bandit). It will make the game more realistic, maybe even add in that zombies start to wander out into the forrests due to lack of food or something, making it harder to construct bases.

[Haplo (DayZ) 44]

i like this idea.. i hate that even in the biggest cities, zombies don't pose a threat.

cities like cherno/elektro should be a certain deathtrap for anyone without silenced/melee weapons, and even then it shouldn't be easy..

[notdahangoverguy 19]

Thanks for the positive responses. The fact that this can be seen as one of many logical methods of resolving this current awkward social confrontation in-game, whether it is intended by Rocket himself or as a direct result and start of any sandbox style game. I'd still love to other peoples ideas.

Keep generating thoughts guys, and thanks for the beans :P.

Edited August 14, 2012 by notdahangoverguy

[TheCoconutChef 9]

Is the increase in zombie server wide or local?

That is, say that a bunch of people get killed by zombies in a certain zone, then does that particular zone get more zombies, or is it the whole server who does?

I personnally would favor the first option, as it would give each server and each game with its own history (althought I suspect the same thing would happen to the same area from time to timem there would be this tendency). I support the general idea, however. Making server grow dynamically and respond to the players action is a good thing most of the time. I do not, on the other hand, support this idea of a gaz cure.

There is also another problem, which is that cooporation is not encouraged on a level which is individual enough. As a player, I may realize that there are more zombies in a certain place because general cooperation has been low, but then there is nothing to say that I should be the one taking responsability for it, that I should take the risk for it. If somebody else does it, I'm gonna have all of the advantages and none of the risks.

[notdahangoverguy 19]

Logical response Coconut thanks.

It would to be local to that server depending whether Rocket finally meets this @EVE server@ style with one big server or not.

Yes, when a player is to be killed or naively wanders into a city lightly or heavily populated by infected and is to die that specific area would 'accordingly' increase depending whether the death was caused by the hands/teeth of the infected.

now, given that you don't like the idea of what I terribly labelled 'gas cure' I merely wanted to show that this significant increase of the infected population could be resolved in what you could say to be an act of ritual as any survivor would do to fix a car.

firstly, we have the problem, which is the increase of zombie.

secondly, I propose that this could be resolved by players coming together to fix up some kind of device which could temporarily cleanse the infected from a specific area.

and the final being that in order to obtain this, you have to find a radio in which transmits the co-ords for the location of the bunkers.

To me this sounds logical in both the problem and resolving it, whether or not you do this in a group or on your own is up to you. you also talk about having this greater advantage over other player, just remember you HAVE the choice to participate in this so if that person is in grave danger in performing this act to actually help out, he knows the risk.

please reply, and thankyou.....p.s i love coconuts

Edited August 14, 2012 by notdahangoverguy

[TheCoconutChef 9]

secondly, I propose that this could be resolved by players coming together to fix up some kind of device which could temporarily cleanse the infected from a specific area.

It could but then the question is: as a player that has been getting all this gear for the better part of a weak, why should I risk coming into contact with people that may kill or betray me to do something which somebody else could do? If I let somebody else do it, then I'll gain just as much advantage as if I did it myself without any of the risks.

Realizing that this would be true for every player (this is the Free Rider Problem, by the way) then you must realize that you'll have a problem in the way the mechanic has been set up.

Edited August 14, 2012 by TheCoconutChef

[QuintonHeckroth 0]

why should I risk coming into contact with people that may kill or betray me to do something which somebody else could do?

You're completely right, there has to be an incentive for players to want to go out of their way to get; the reward has to match the risk. Perhaps in high areas of zombie population would spawn higher valued items, weapons or vehicles. Also, clearing zombies in these cities may increase humanity. Whilst humanity currently gives you the hero skin, in the future it may lead to say... being able to give a transfusion slightly quicker, bandaging quicker etc. The benefits can't be too overpowered, but worth the good deed.

Without turning this into WoW, having areas that simply can't be looted by new players would result in more teamwork between serious players, and end game content.

[martink8190@gmail.com 149]

Quite like the idea so far but how would you/we go around the number of zed's? I mean no everyone has got a pretty decent PC setup and it sounds like we might be rather HW/bendwith limited than the unablility to implement thisd ingame

Thing to note I do not hate on PvP elemnt of tghe game but its bit too rough and anything that would actually require some kind of team effort I'll gladly support. Simply becouse there are better PvP mods for arma, like project reality.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Colonel-Wicked

[notdahangoverguy 19]

To coconut, for me whether or not you try this with strangers you just met or guy's you get together on skype is your choice. If you are betrayed it's your own fault for choosing the part so to speak. if you are a loner in this game, there could be a much smaller element in which you would still get transmissions but would isolate the ones for much smaller bunkers in which on your own investigate and cleanse MUCH smaller towns, the ones other may not decide to do and is much small of a risk. If you're in a group, and decide to do this you will have to make sure the trust is there and that you actually know these guys, which is near enough the current status in DayZ :P

Quinton, never actually thought about the link between humanity and the cleansing of a town/city to be honest but it's a cool idea. However I think the time and effort involved you would typically want a shit ton of humanity and people will treating it as (XP) or something. To me as he idea of coming together or being alone combining parts could be implemented into something just as important than a truck or UAV. I guess one thing that could be implemented is that once the town/city is cleansed and the gas is dispersed which means the infected are gone the gas curing that particular place could also ironically kill you without proper equipment (looted from the bunkers) within the time frame of the gas being dispersed and then clearing up for players without equipment to loot there could be perhaps about 3/4 minutes of time for players who actually have that special equipment to scavenge this special loot within the cloud of gas.

Again, loners can do the same. Gather equipment on his own in much smaller bunkers if that player manages to separate the transmissions of the much smaller bunkers from the larger ones in case much larger and less trust worthy groups are there. and you would carry this similar act but gain enough for you in both possible loot and humanity.

colonel-wicked, that was the last thing I was thinking about almost 2am in the morning typing this out xD however, knowing at the back of my mind Rocket wants to achieve this one or several massive servers with the intent to make it MUCH MUCH harder than it is now I assumed he would add a ton more to the game, meaning in terms of the 'servers' they could possibly handle it especially if it's generated land.

Now in terms of your spec being able to cope, I think that's a different story and I don't actually know. However, If I were to guess it would be playable if the server/engine can handle it.

Another thing I'd like to point out to coconut, if you're so worried about trusting the people who are assembling the town/city curing device how are you still alive D: there are bandits out there who would WANT to sabotage this. but trust is hard to find in this game.

Edited August 15, 2012 by notdahangoverguy

[ChaosGuitarist 1]

I quite like this idea, will add more to my thoughts when I wake up tomorrow, late here xD

[nathiesk 186]

I support this.

Some variation is always nice :P

[nev2k 16]

Well you could also adopt the idea to make 3-4 grades of difficulty in the way you mentioned (but each with a own character), giving skilled and experiment friendly players(not playing Kill on sight) a chance of enjoing a less cod like game, as it is of now :(. as well as making camping banditery harder.

May you could also add, that players which don't move more than 10 meters in 10 minutes cause zombies spawning 200-300 meters away of them and investigating the place he is at, just like they do with campsites in the night, so noob camping would stop.

[notdahangoverguy 19]

BH nev, I like your first comment on the difficulty, I guess if there were more than one server to adjust to less experienced players. I don't however agree with you on 2 things I'm afraid. a ''COD like game'' would be the LAST 3 words I would explain this to ANY newcomer who wants to experience this game. I'm sorry but the thrills, kicks and most of the time devastating emotions I get whilst playing this mod I have NEVER gotten from any other game, period.

Secondly, I simply don't think if a person is to camp in one spot for a long period of time and the result being zombies spawning at close proximity would both help or benefit the style you call camping. In fact, what you call camping may also be seen as a tactical manoeuvre. If you want to ''camp'' on a hill with just binoculars over watching Cherno for e.g. that to me defines a player being aware of his surroundings. the other side to this however, is that the player is AFK and decides to stay in server then he is defenceless against both infected.

I will probably not include most of what you have said, apart from the possibility of server difficulty depending on the route Rocket takes with the servers, as I simply want to help toward the End-game potential whilst keeping it's authenticity, being both lure friendly and responds to some of the current problems. I'm not being negative, just honest.

Thanks for responding BH.

Edited August 15, 2012 by notdahangoverguy

[Magnum1978 3]

I like the concept, definitely. A long term 'end game' is needed. But I'm not sure servers will be capable of generating so many zombies to show areas 'overrun' if you come near. It would also look silly if you fly in by chopper only to see hundreds of zombies suddenly start spawning

And the difficulty is you that you still get griefers who simply troll noobs and don’t actually bother ‘playing’ the game. They don’t shoot zombies, they don’t loot bodies, they are there to greif. And people who say ‘it will sort itself out’ well that isn’t really the answer, its kinda like burying their head in the sand - or maybe they are griefers themselves and like it like this.

Early on there was an element of trust and co-operation, after everyone has started to get burnt, and over time getting burnt over and over, people are far more likely now to shoot first and ask questions later. If I wanted a death match game, I’d get back into playing Quakeworld. You don’t need to punish the greifers for what they are doing necessarily you reward co-operation more. At this point there is no there incentive to be cooperative, and whilst the game shouldn't FORCE you to be cooperative, it should balance out the incentive of being a cunt and long term benefit.

As I said in a different thread, I think bandit/trolls can be countered by lowering their humanity to a level where they go ‘mad’ and are unable to tell the difference between zombie and other player – i.e. the skins are randomly replaced to have zombie look like human or human look like zombie.

I also think that groups of friends should have ‘territory’ play a part in the game, and if a player is killed by another player, they are allowed to spawn with other friends inside their territory.

This wouldn’t railroad players into a certain style, but long run coupled with your end game idea, unless more people than not start co-operating they will be overrun in the long term. I like this idea, and I think with some other balancing to the game it could work quite well.

[notdahangoverguy 19]

Thanks Magnum, however there are things I don't agree unfortunately. I understand how silly it would look on this arma2 engine given that especially when in a heli that you turn down your settings things look hilarious when starting to spawn however the ideas that I and my other friend are coming up with are intended for the newer engine being used when it goes standalone. plus you don't know whether he will still use helicopters as a type of transportation. But let's not look at it from an aesthetic point of view :P

secondly, I'm a little confused when you talk about grievers. I understand the concept, for e.g. in minecraft, you waddle over to someones built house or whichever and with no consideration destroy it. ''Griefers'' as you use, within this game are playing the game how they percieve the situation. I myself have moments of madness randomly killing players and acting like a serial killer. It's fun, and it's a game letting off steam within this game is much needed when you have stayed alive for so long and die because you get shot in the back from one your friends as a result of stealing his satchel charge, you'll know what I mean xD.

If you mean ''hackers'' not ''griefers'' then yes it will sort itself out, Rocket will eventually be able to completely cut out the A-holes doing stupid shit...but you have to admit if you have ran from Cherno to the farthest NW of the map only to regain your gear that you just got killed for and start randomly dancing to techno music whilst little giggles in the background.....it's pretty funny :P

Now, the thing I have realised about this game is that it's ALL about decisions and risk assessment. ''What's more important'', ''who needs what'' and ''why do I/we need to do this'' I understand completely about the current status being similar to that of a wild west movie :P and I also really like the fact that you included that there could be both mental and physiological benefits and pitfalls to being either 'bandit or hero'.

At the end of the day, we can't take out bandits or the general idea of bandits...as much of A-holes they can be, THAT's how they want to play the game. Avoiding them, setting them up, converting them and even killing them are all but one of many ways you can have fun in this mod currently. other wise you will be playing a game where everyone holds hands. I don't hold hands bro-cookie :D.

I would eventually love to see this great struggle between 'heroes' and 'bandits' (so to speak) in which whilst the heroes/survivors are going about these missions to gain humanity bandits are there to sabotage it. Another idea is that if there are to be several servers , each time this ''ritual'' of cleansing a city/town is complete...the server as a whole gains humanity...giving the bandits who in obvious reasoning wouldn't want that and fight back. There are however many factors to include, and the idea could go wrong very quickly in terms of how we feel toward this idea.

Now, Magnum. Spawning! could see how this could work. you die, you want to get back and help out your friend more, but I have to give this a medium sized no. The only reason I stay alive, or the only reason I want to stay alive is because I KNOW I will lose ALL my shit. All of my weapons. All

of my tools and in some cases my head. BUT the next time I spawn, okay yes I will mess about and make a small video riding a bicycle playing the Destinys child song ''I AM SURVIVOR'' but I know the cost to NOT be careful. I now understand the value my life may hold. being able to spawn so close to your gear, after every fire fight, it takes away the authenticity of life, and yourself witness even more carelessness of other players knowing how cheap other players lives are.

I did however, have a similar thought. similar to that of the recon kit in BF3 (sorry for linking other games and I know they are completely different) but the Spawn beacon has an interesting concept. A one time use only, enabling your friend to spawn and then the beacon is destroyed. But I to this day, don't like this spawning idea. Let's keep it on the coast.

I hope I wasn't TOO forward, or confrontational in terms of answering and responding to your idea however I answer with all honesty and with reason.

Another thing is if you guy's really like this idea, share it with your friends and If there are other peoples ideas which I think would be a perfect addition to this then I will include them. I don't know much about these types of forums whether or not the developers read ANY of these however giving them ideas from the community A.K.A US GUY'S! then posting to see how everyone else feels can't inflict harm.

[ri_pou@yahoo.com 26]

with the zombie spawn.. why not just make it.. if you spawn them in and don't clear them.. they stay.. and if someone else pass's by more zombies spawn in.. and if they don't clear them.. they stay..

Think about it..

[notdahangoverguy 19]

with the zombie spawn.. why not just make it.. if you spawn them in and don't clear them.. they stay.. and if someone else pass's by more zombies spawn in.. and if they don't clear them.. they stay..

Think about it..

I thought about that one. If I walk past a specific place, they spawn and stay. I head North more, then come back down the same place and they spawn more it's just going to get chaotic. If there was a stable and consistent system in which when left TOO long, when a city is left un-maintained which is my main theory in solving most of the current problems, It would provide more things to be done, and of course be open to more questions.

If by solving a specific problem, you throw in a solution without thinking about what could follow, you are only solving ONE problem rather than creating something lure-friendly and covers most problems AND offers an 'end-game' probability as I suggested.

[noblebrutus@live.co.uk 26]

This sounds good. The 'bunkers' could be randomly placed per server like the helicopter crashsites (being mostly underground this could be achieved I think). One issue would be server hopping... if one server is really overrun I could always just move to a different server. Wouldn't that be an easy no risk escape? A mechanic to add a reason for loyalty to a particular server would be great, not only for this suggestion but most others that add similar forms of progression and politics.

[Daerk 8]

I like these end-game mechanics...

-- Daerk

[Borys of Ebe 6]

I really like the idea of there being some kind of reward for cooperation, because at the moment there are plenty of rewards for being a bandit. These particular end game mechanics sound like they could work. Good call...

[mikeando 19]

It's an interesting idea to get people to work together more. Although at the moment it wouldn't work in the mod as infected de-spawn when you get too far away from them. But it could be an idea for the standalone version.

I really like the idea of players building camps together and working together to wipe out infected. I especially like the idea of going on a suicide run to the coast to collect more recruits.

[notdahangoverguy 19]

It's an interesting idea to get people to work together more. Although at the moment it wouldn't work in the mod as infected de-spawn when you get too far away from them. But it could be an idea for the standalone version.

I really like the idea of players building camps together and working together to wipe out infected. I especially like the idea of going on a suicide run to the coast to collect more recruits.

Cheers mate, yes it wouldn't work in the state it is now. DayZ needs this standalone to grow a bit more :P I won't be able to play DayZ in 2 WHOLE WEEKS :'(