Death should really be the end.

[schrapple 119]

So someone kills me, and they pick up my stuff. Later, I find them and kill them. Can I then pick up my stuff? If someone finds him and kills him first, can I pick my stuff off the third person? What about the fourth person an item is possessed by?

I personally know the story of an AK-74 which transferred hands about 6 times before being returned to the person who originally found it at a barracks. Would this person not have been able to retrieve his original AK-74 because he owned it several hours ago?

And finally, if two allies own the same gun, and one dies, won't those people just swap guns? This effectively means there will be no penalty for groups of players, but individual players will still be penalised.

Idea simply doesn't work.

Your arguing against an idea because there are a few red herrings that won't get caught in the net? Very rarely does a fix solve every tiny aspect of a problem but that is a poor reason not to implement it.

So if someone found a solution that would reduce crime by 99% you'd be against it because there would still be 1% crime remaining?

[harley001 315]

You are taking it to far. I have a base that i share with 9 other bandits. When we were setting up somone said "leave all you're stuff here and get us some tents while we get supplies" so I dropped everything i had expect for my pistol and hatchet. My freinds picked it up. I came back with some tents set them up. Rinse and repeat. In the end we had four tents each for diffrent types of items. I set all of them up. If this is put in the game and i die its a f*ck you from the game and to my freinds. Because they lose you're stuff to. WTF IS THE POINT OF TENTS IF YOU LOSE THEM IF YOU DIE!? God here is what i notice from dayz.

The so called pros/hard coreys.: WA WA DAYZ IS TO EASEH MAKE IT HARDER! *you do not know what you are asking for!*

Teh newbs: DAYZ IS TO HARD MAKE IT EASYIER! *get some backbone*

People like me: "DAYZ IS FINE JUST FIX THE FREAKING BUGS BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE!"

[schrapple 119]

You are taking it to far. I have a base that i share with 9 other bandits. When we were setting up somone said "leave all you're stuff here and get us some tents while we get supplies" so I dropped everything i had expect for my pistol and hatchet. My freinds picked it up. I came back with some tents set them up. Rinse and repeat. In the end we had four tents each for diffrent types of items. I set all of them up. If this is put in the game and i die its a f*ck you from the game and to my freinds. Because they lose you're stuff to. WTF IS THE POINT OF TENTS IF YOU LOSE THEM IF YOU DIE!? God here is what i notice from dayz.

The so called pros/hard coreys.: WA WA DAYZ IS TO EASEH MAKE IT HARDER! *you do not know what you are asking for!*

Teh newbs: DAYZ IS TO HARD MAKE IT EASYIER! *get some backbone*

People like me: "DAYZ IS FINE JUST FIX THE FREAKING BUGS BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE!"

You should probably read the entire thread before posting, getting rid of tents is the point. If you can die and two minutes later be back at the same point then what is the point of even having death in the game? There are no skill trees or the like, you don't lose anything when you die so what you have is basically resurrection. You die an minutes later your character is in the same position with the same equipment he was before death.

As I keep repeating but no one has been able to answer yet. What place does resurrection have in a survival simulator? The main focus of the game is to not die so why would you make dying of no real consequence? It defeats the whole purpose of the game.

[JamesR 74]

The concept of permadeath shows us who the carebears really are. lol

[harley001 315]

You should probably read the entire thread before posting, getting rid of tents is the point. If you can die and two minutes later be back at the same point then what is the point of even having death in the game? There are no skill trees or the like, you don't lose anything when you die so what you have is basically resurrection. You die an minutes later your character is in the same position with the same equipment he was before death.

As I keep repeating but no one has been able to answer yet. What place does resurrection have in a survival simulator? The main focus of the game is to not die so why would you make dying of no real consequence? It defeats the whole purpose of the game.

Even it does. THIS IS NOT WHAT DAYZ NEEDS! STOP TRYING TO ADD MORE THINGS TO DAYZ IN ITS CURRENT STATE! DAYZ IS BROCKEN! THE GAME ACTALLY SUCKS! Because half the time you glitch and die. Rocket needs to fix the game breaking bugs FIRST! All this other stuff can be added later.

[RapturJesus 90]

How about if you die, you are banned from this specific server for 24 hours?

*joins a server*

Finally. Took me forever to get into a ga-

*shot by a sniper out of nowhere*

[schrapple 119]

Even it does. THIS IS NOT WHAT DAYZ NEEDS! STOP TRYING TO ADD MORE THINGS TO DAYZ IN ITS CURRENT STATE! DAYZ IS BROCKEN! THE GAME ACTALLY SUCKS! Because half the time you glitch and die. Rocket needs to fix the game breaking bugs FIRST! All this other stuff can be added later.

You do realize this thread is posted in the "suggestions" section don't you? If the forum was run as you suggest the only things in the suggestions section would be a thread suggesting that the bugs get fixed. If it infuriates you to the point of typing a screaming session then perhaps you shouldn't read the suggestions, try sticking to the bug reports section for the sake of your blood pressure.

[NFK 102]

As I keep repeating but no one has been able to answer yet. What place does resurrection have in a survival simulator? The main focus of the game is to not die so why would you make dying of no real consequence? It defeats the whole purpose of the game.

Even if it's a survival simulator, It's still just a video game. There's always going to be resurrection in some form or another, unless you want to lock people out of the game after character death. You are arguing that reacquiring your gear equals character resurrection. Obviously the stats earned by your character mean nothing to you. That means you believe your character is merely an inventory loadout, and once you replicate the loadout, you have resurrected the character. Let's explore the implications of your assumption.

So what does it matter if you replicate the loadout from a prior life's tent, or from collecting the same gear at loot spawns? Both involve using the player's prior knowledge (tent location, loot spawn locations) to replicate the loadout and "resurrect" the character. In fact, assuming you aren't duping, the gear in the tent was all collected from loot spawns at one point, so either way the loot was legitimately collected by the player, and merely transfered between characters.

So now you are trying to enforce permadeath with gear restrictions, in the form of non-transferability of loot between the same player's characters. You want a player's character to have access only to the gear he or she collects in the character's lifetime. Killing tent and vehicle storage won't do this for you. People will play in groups, and if their group wins a battle, they will transfer their dead friend's loot to their packs so the new character can take it back later. If you counter by making backpacks unlootable, they will just drop the dead character's loot on the ground so the new charcater can pick it up. People will still regear. They will still "resurrect." You would have to kill every method of character-to-character loot transfer, even barring characters from picking up dropped loot, to be sure a player's dead character's loot didn't transfer. This would also kill ALL trading between any characters ever, period, and seriously hinder co-op play.

So let's say you tag the loot so it cannot be used by the same player using a new character. The game records every item a character picks up and assigns it to a specific character's life. Instead of an AKM, it becomes Tommy's AKM (Life 1). Tommy dies, and goes back for his corpse. But the game disallows Tommy (Life 2) from using Tommy's AKM (Life 1). That means every item of loot in the game ever picked up by a player becomes unsuable to any of that player's future characters. Even if someone else takes the loot, and Tommy later finds it on his or her corpse, or dropped on the ground, or stored in a tent, he can never use it again. Result: The more a player collects loot and dies (i.e., plays the game), the greater the chance his future characters will run into unusable loot. If a player spent a lot of time on the same server, this problem would ramp up quickly.

So let's say fuck it, all a character's loot vanishes when he dies. Simple solution? Well, again, the game would have to tag the loot to distinguish it as belonging to the player, so it would know which items to delete upon character death. Tommy finds a DMR, so he gives his old AKM to Jenny. They get in a firefight with bandits and Tommy dies. Jenny then loses the AKM, because it vanishes upon Tommy's death. But wait, you say, why not tag the weapon as Jenny's once she picks it up, so it won't vanish? Okay, but now we're back to friends holding a dead character's gear so the new charcater can get it later. After all, if it become's Jenny's AKM, Tommy's next life can pick it up, thus regearing and "resurrecting."

I could go on, but I think it's now obvious that making gear non-fungible introduces a whole new host of problems to the game. If you want players to care about their character's deaths, we should probably add something to the life that's not related to gear and non-transferable, and then take it away upon death. The old arcade games had a very simple way to do this; you had to pay for each life. How's that for permadeath?

[schrapple 119]

Even if it's a survival simulator, It's still just a video game. There's always going to be resurrection in some form or another, unless you want to lock people out of the game after character death. You are arguing that reacquiring your gear equals character resurrection. Obviously the stats earned by your character mean nothing to you. That means you believe your character is merely an inventory loadout, and once you replicate the loadout, you have resurrected the character. Let's explore the implications of your assumption.

So what does it matter if you replicate the loadout from a prior life's tent, or from collecting the same gear at loot spawns? Both involve using the player's prior knowledge (tent location, loot spawn locations) to replicate the loadout and "resurrect" the character. In fact, assuming you aren't duping, the gear in the tent was all collected from loot spawns at one point, so either way the loot was legitimately collected by the player, and merely transfered between characters.

So now you are trying to enforce permadeath with gear restrictions, in the form of non-transferability of loot between the same player's characters. You want a player's character to have access only to the gear he or she collects in the character's lifetime. Killing tent and vehicle storage won't do this for you. People will play in groups, and if their group wins a battle, they will transfer their dead friend's loot to their packs so the new character can take it back later. If you counter by making backpacks unlootable, they will just drop the dead character's loot on the ground so the new charcater can pick it up. People will still regear. They will still "resurrect." You would have to kill every method of character-to-character loot transfer, even barring characters from picking up dropped loot, to be sure a player's dead character's loot didn't transfer. This would also kill ALL trading between any characters ever, period, and seriously hinder co-op play.

So let's say you tag the loot so it cannot be used by the same player using a new character. The game records every item a character picks up and assigns it to a specific character's life. Instead of an AKM, it becomes Tommy's AKM (Life 1). Tommy dies, and goes back for his corpse. But the game disallows Tommy (Life 2) from using Tommy's AKM (Life 1). That means every item of loot in the game ever picked up by a player becomes unsuable to any of that player's future characters. Even if someone else takes the loot, and Tommy later finds it on his or her corpse, or dropped on the ground, or stored in a tent, he can never use it again. Result: The more a player collects loot and dies (i.e., plays the game), the greater the chance his future characters will run into unusable loot. If a player spent a lot of time on the same server, this problem would ramp up quickly.

So let's say fuck it, all a character's loot vanishes when he dies. Simple solution? Well, again, the game would have to tag the loot to distinguish it as belonging to the player, so it would know which items to delete upon character death. Tommy finds a DMR, so he gives his old AKM to Jenny. They get in a firefight with bandits and Tommy dies. Jenny then loses the AKM, because it vanishes upon Tommy's death. But wait, you say, why not tag the weapon as Jenny's once she picks it up, so it won't vanish? Okay, but now we're back to friends holding a dead character's gear so the new charcater can get it later. After all, if it become's Jenny's AKM, Tommy's next life can pick it up, thus regearing and "resurrecting."

I could go on, but I think it's now obvious that making gear non-fungible introduces a whole new host of problems to the game. If you want players to care about their character's deaths, we should probably add something to the life that's not related to gear and non-transferable, and then take it away upon death. The old arcade games had a very simple way to do this; you had to pay for each life. How's that for permadeath?

Firstly, why would you write such a lengthy post without reading the thread first? Secondly, how do you manage to get through life when you collapse and throw your arms in the air at the tiniest hardship?

So here are the short hand answers you should have been able to find yourself (i'd also apreciate it if in future you didn't put words in my mouth or assume what I mean).

Never suggested locking people out after death.

Respawning anew after death isn't resurrection, being able to return to the point you where at minutes after you died is unbelievable close to ressurection.

Yes I value my character as more than a loadout, I also value the starting period where the game can easily destroy you and I love the fact that each new character is exactly that, a unique character with no ties to my previous one ( I don't go back for my old gear).

Completely stopping someone from benefiting from prior knowledge would be a massive task, but just because you can't completely fix the problem doesn't mean you shouldn't do what you can about it, If someone discovered a way of curing 99% of cancers tomorrow would you speak out against the treatment because it doesn't cure 100% of cancers?

Transferring loot from your dead character to your current one is a form of ressurection, espeacilly in a game that has no skill system or character development.

Never said backpack should be "unlootable"

Everything can still be traded, you just can't pick up something you owned at or near your time of death (once again it won't plug every hole but it's a vast improvement)

"Result: The more a player collects loot and dies (i.e., plays the game), the greater the chance his future characters will run into unusable loot. If a player spent a lot of time on the same server, this problem would ramp up quickly." Seriously? loot is not perpetual in this game, if it was you wouldn't be able to move for discarded objects. Things are constantly disappearing and new gear spawning.

" Tommy finds a DMR, so he gives his old AKM to Jenny. They get in a firefight with bandits and Tommy dies. Jenny then loses the AKM, because it vanishes upon Tommy's death." Really, were you even trying? Thing don't disappear out of other people's inventory because the person that found it dies.

" But wait, you say, why not tag the weapon as Jenny's once she picks it up, so it won't vanish? Okay, but now we're back to friends holding a dead character's gear so the new charcater can get it later. After all, if it become's Jenny's AKM, Tommy's next life can pick it up, thus regearing and "resurrecting." No, once you have given someone something and they have owned it for a period of time it then becomes theirs and they can give it back if they wish, you would only be blocked from owning it again if you gave it to them shortly before your death,before a long enough period of time had elapsed for it to be considered as theirs and no longer yours (and no I don't have a figure in mind for that time period, if I did it would only be a guess since the game we are suggesting for (the standalone) doesn't even exist yet).

"I could go on, but I think it's now obvious that making gear non-fungible introduces a whole new host of problems to the game. If you want players to care about their character's deaths, we should probably add something to the life that's not related to gear and non-transferable, and then take it away upon death." Now your talking about skills or something equavilent, that's a whole different topic and not something mentioned by me in this post.

I'm more than happy to discuss and debate this idea but in future do your homework, inventing red herrings that have already been dealt with is a waste of everyones time. To completely stop someone benefiting from having played a game before is a massive task, just because this suggestion won't achieve that massive task in a single step doesn't mean it won't make a positive impact in game.

[Smiric 11]

How about if you die, you are banned from this specific server for 24 hours?

I think this would cause issues, especially if people only have good ping on a select few servers and are playing with friends for example.

Problem is that between being robbed of all your gear and dying, it's the same thing. There is no mechanic currently to make staying alive valuable. Most players will fight to death because they can't lose MORE by dying than what they can lose if robbed.

Maybe the longer you stay alive your body becomes more hardened to the elements and you need food and water less often, are less likely to catch colds/fevers and have improved stamina (when stamina is added). Obviously there should be a limit on this - don't want it unrealistic so you can survive for weeks without water, but a slight increase in time before needing each of those may make you want to stay alive, as they will be reset to default when you die.

In reply to OP I think this is a good idea, however if this were real and you were to die your items would benefit friends/other people that come across them so maybe, rather than removing ALL of the items, a percentage (say half) would disappear.

[schrapple 119]

I think this would cause issues, especially if people only have good ping on a select few servers and are playing with friends for example.

Maybe the longer you stay alive your body becomes more hardened to the elements and you need food and water less often, are less likely to catch colds/fevers and have improved stamina (when stamina is added). Obviously there should be a limit on this - don't want it unrealistic so you can survive for weeks without water, but a slight increase in time before needing each of those may make you want to stay alive, as they will be reset to default when you die.

In reply to OP I think this is a good idea, however if this were real and you were to die your items would benefit friends/other people that come across them so maybe, rather than removing ALL of the items, a percentage (say half) would disappear.

I've got no problem with others benefiting from your death, I just don't think reclaiming stuff from your last dead body fits with the game.

[NFK 102]

I'm more than happy to discuss and debate this idea but in future do your homework, inventing red herrings that have already been dealt with is a waste of everyones time.

First off, you aren't discussing or debating anything. You are stating a position and then deriding anyone else who criticizes it, hardly a discussion at all.

Second, YOU proposed adding an idea to the game. But IDEAS are a dime a dozen, what's valuable is a SYSTEM. I tried to explore the implications of your idea and what kind of system it would create. That's not putting words in your mouth, that's logically mapping out the implications of your idea to the game. Welcome to game design, by the way.

Finally, YOU do your homework and propose a workable SYSTEM if you want to support your IDEA. If you can't do that, or adapt your system as others find flaws with it, then all you're doing is petulantly repeating the same idea over and over again while denouncing your critics.

[schrapple 119]

First off, you aren't discussing or debating anything. You are stating a position and then deriding anyone else who criticizes it, hardly a discussion at all.

Second, YOU proposed adding an idea to the game. But IDEAS are a dime a dozen, what's valuable is a SYSTEM. I tried to explore the implications of your idea and what kind of system it would create. That's not putting words in your mouth, that's logically mapping out the implications of your idea to the game. Welcome to game design, by the way.

Finally, YOU do your homework and propose a workable SYSTEM if you want to support your IDEA. If you can't do that, or adapt your system as others find flaws with it, then all you're doing is petulantly repeating the same idea over and over again while denouncing your critics.

Oh good another game designer hey? How unusual on this forum :rolleyes: .

The very idea of a debate is that you put your case forward then your opponent puts his own case and rebuttal forward, you said nothing original that hadn't been raised before, you made (incorrect) assumption about what I was proposing and then created inherently flawed examples that were not inline with the original idea. If you have a specific question or if you would like to point out what you either don't fully understand or don't believe will work I will gladly address it, but you made no valid points. What you wrote had either been addressed earlier, made literally no sense or was a complete fabrication.

As for a system (which is another point you have criticized while offering no examples of what you mean, just stated that it is not there), it's quite simple. Every item gets tagged as belonging to someone as soon as it is first discovered and picked up (if the item is dropped your tag will drop off after it has been on the ground for a period of time), When another character picks up an already tagged item after a period of time the ownership tag changes to the current owner. Anything you have when you die or have given to someone just prior to dying (before enough time has elapsed for the ownership tag has been transferred to them) will have been permanently tagged as belonging to you ( items will have only one current owner tag but may have many permanent tags attached). Your new character can't pick up anything that has a permanent tag on it form your previous characters. Simple hey?

Now as I've already stated but feel the need to reiterate, this is not a silver bullet, it will not fix every little detail. But surely a game designer should understand better than anyone that every implementation of something new in a program will not only have positive and negative effects on game play (and will often affect every player differently) but will also have it own vulnerabilities to being exploited or abused by users.

[bazbake 456]

@schrapple

What you don't realize is that many people are personally invested in the current system staying as it is. While your arguments are actually quite valid and the basic ideas easily supportable (just check the polls on whether or not tents and vehicle storage should be thrown out completely, for example), there is a group of people that finds the game unplayable without a significant advantage over new players and a sense of constant progressive accomplishment. The irony is that the original concept behind the game punished failure with starting over from scratch.

It doesn't matter if your ideas are closer to what was originally envisioned or if it would ultimately provide a surprising amount of game balance and constant tension and excitement, this group of people doesn't want to play with permadeath at all. It doesn't matter how much more faithful to the original idea and how easily implementable it is, they don't want the discussion to even take place. So it's not necessarily a knock on your planning skills, it is more an attempt to stop you from even planning. There will be no counter-idea that accommodates their concerns because the point of the concern is to stop the ideas from even appearing.

So don't take it too personally.

[NFK 102]

You do realize that I just got you to finally cough up the full system for your idea, on page five of the thread? All of that should have been in the OP.

This is how you've been arguing it, starting with the OP:

No more gear stashing, no more saved vehicles, no more getting your stuff back from your body or having a buddy pick it up for you. Once you die you start again at the coast with only the starting items and you will be unable to pick up anything you owned in your previous life. It will really add to the desperate survival aspect of the game.

So no storage of any kind, no looting your corpse, and no transfers of corpse loot from a buddy to your new character. That's it. That's all you started with. No explanation of how this would work, no exploration of what knock-on effects it would have on the rest of the game.

Then you added tweak 1:

Easily fixed, anything left on the ground will vanish in a few minutes. You can only keep what you can carry. No more storing anyhting anywhere.

So now we add vanishing loot to the mix.

Then there was tweak 2:

It would have to be a standalone feature but all you need is to make it so an item you owned at the time of your death ( or near to time of death) is tagged and can't be picked up by you once you have respawned. It doesn't fix 100% of the problem but it will fix most of it, which is a lot better than the current system.

First appearance of the tags. Now we finally have the beginning of a system, but the implications aren't mapped out. MykeMichail asks you about those implications:

So someone kills me, and they pick up my stuff. Later, I find them and kill them. Can I then pick up my stuff? If someone finds him and kills him first, can I pick my stuff off the third person? What about the fourth person an item is possessed by?

I personally know the story of an AK-74 which transferred hands about 6 times before being returned to the person who originally found it at a barracks. Would this person not have been able to retrieve his original AK-74 because he owned it several hours ago?

And finally, if two allies own the same gun, and one dies, won't those people just swap guns? This effectively means there will be no penalty for groups of players, but individual players will still be penalised.

Idea simply doesn't work.

Instead of working out the details in answer to his legitimate questions on how your tagging system would work, you blithely reply with:

Your arguing against an idea because there are a few red herrings that won't get caught in the net? Very rarely does a fix solve every tiny aspect of a problem but that is a poor reason not to implement it.

So if someone found a solution that would reduce crime by 99% you'd be against it because there would still be 1% crime remaining?

You dodged all of his questions by dismissing them as red herrings. They were not, his questions were a perfectly logical exploration of your system, and completely relevant to the issue presented. You didn't even bother to tweak anything here, just ducked the questions because you can't be fussed with the details.

Next there's tweak 3:

No, once you have given someone something and they have owned it for a period of time it then becomes theirs and they can give it back if they wish, you would only be blocked from owning it again if you gave it to them shortly before your death,before a long enough period of time had elapsed for it to be considered as theirs and no longer yours (and no I don't have a figure in mind for that time period, if I did it would only be a guess since the game we are suggesting for (the standalone) doesn't even exist yet).

So now you introduce a tweak where the person CAN trade you back your past life's loot ("they can give it back if they wish"), so long as an unspecified period of time has passed between the original transfer and your subsequent death. Not only did you duck the details again, but this tweak undermines the entire point of the system you are building (i.e., preventing the transfer of prior life's loot to current life). Organized players would simply use dedicated accounts as mules to hold their gear for them. These mule characters would function as mobile tents, without the buggy drawbacks of current tents.

So finally, buried on page five, you try to put the whole thing together:

As for a system... it's quite simple. Every item gets tagged as belonging to someone as soon as it is first discovered and picked up (if the item is dropped your tag will drop off after it has been on the ground for a period of time), When another character picks up an already tagged item after a period of time the ownership tag changes to the current owner. Anything you have when you die or have given to someone just prior to dying (before enough time has elapsed for the ownership tag has been transferred to them) will have been permanently tagged as belonging to you ( items will have only one current owner tag but may have many permanent tags attached). Your new character can't pick up anything that has a permanent tag on it form your previous characters. Simple hey?

Now you introduce multiple, permanent tags on the same item. On a busy server where loot changes hands frequently as people die repeatedly (refer to MykeMichail's story about the AK-74), this will create a situation where people will encounter their unusable past life's loot through honest gameplay. How does this absurdity promote the survival aspect of the mod?

Other posters have already pointed out that killing storage reduces the persistent-world aspect of the game, so you can refer back to them on that issue. For that reason alone your system is a bad idea, and all it would accomplish for that huge downside is an absurd game experience where you could kill another player only to discover that his weapon is unusable because your hands touched it in a past life.

[schrapple 119]

Thanks for the vote of confidence BazBake, you've hit the nail on the head and done so quite eloquently also.

@schrapple

What you don't realize is that many people are personally invested in the current system staying as it is. While your arguments are actually quite valid and the basic ideas easily supportable (just check the polls on whether or not tents and vehicle storage should be thrown out completely, for example), there is a group of people that finds the game unplayable without a significant advantage over new players and a sense of constant progressive accomplishment. The irony is that the original concept behind the game punished failure with starting over from scratch.

It doesn't matter if your ideas are closer to what was originally envisioned or if it would ultimately provide a surprising amount of game balance and constant tension and excitement, this group of people doesn't want to play with permadeath at all. It doesn't matter how much more faithful to the original idea and how easily implementable it is, they don't want the discussion to even take place. So it's not necessarily a knock on your planning skills, it is more an attempt to stop you from even planning. There will be no counter-idea that accommodates their concerns because the point of the concern is to stop the ideas from even appearing.

So don't take it too personally.

@NFK ^ this.

I'll try to keep it brief and to the point.

Long first posts filled with excessive detail lose peoples interest very quickly, it is far better to put your idea across as briefly and simply as possible. The fact you are the first person in five pages who has had serious trouble grasping the concept demonstrates that for the large majority the first post was adequate.

As for all the other crap, as I've said creating a change to a game that is faultless is quite a substantial job, there are going to be negative effects and still holes will remain, to prevent that is a mammoth task. These changes are simple and will have large effect on game play and the only genuine problem identified so far is that you do stand the chance of legitimately coming across your old weapon and not being able to pick it up, loot is not persistent, if it was you would not be able to move in this game for spawned items, the chances of coming across your old weapon legitimately are astronomically tiny. Considering the massive effect such a change would have on the game and what a tiny chance of such an insignificant incident occurring where you can't loot a weapon off someones corpse because you previously own it is a tiny price to pay, arguing that such a change should be stopped because this insignificant event has a tiny chance of happening shows that your true motive for stopping such a change can't be mentioned.

There have been no other legitimate problems put forward, just catchphrases. I openly invite all comers to put forward situations in which this system would fail or exactly how it would have a serious negative effect on game play. If your going to just spew rhetoric to hide the fact that you enjoy the current flawed system because you can exploit it, then at least be a man about it and say so.

[Lady Kyrah 1109]

Corpse looting isn't so much of a problem.

For me the big problem si that there isn't enough "good" items leaving the system, mostly because no one is crazy enough to leave a DMR behind. We need some form of item degradation, currently only the lesser pieces of equipments get reclaimed by the game, and any gun you get is your forever provided you do not die.

I'm all for item degradation in order to stimulate gear cycling. Item degradation, but also weighted weapon spawning chances, ideally when there is more than a certain percentage of players with top tier weapons, top tier weapons and ammo should almost stop spawning.

[bazbake 456]

@schrapple

Next time you'll need to put your subject in the title clearly so everyone knows what they're supposed to be discussing. Your thread has now officially been derailed and at least half of the responses are to ideas you never even put forward.

Steps to thread attrition.

1. Pose an idea.
   
2. Someone agrees with the idea/disagrees with the idea.
   
3. If they agree with the idea or disagree with it somewhat, they may try to modify it.
   
4. If they mostly disagree with it, they either pose a new/unrelated idea or never read the idea in the first place and argue against something different. See step 2. Add new thread to current thread.
   

Eventually you end up with 10 threads going on at the same time.

The issue is, a lot of people have their own ideas but they don't want to test their ideas by posting them in new threads where people may ignore them or, sometimes, they have already been ignored. Occasionally your idea inspires their idea and they feel that since they came up with the idea while reading your idea that the two ideas must naturally be related, which is actually an honest mistake.

The key, of course, is to state early and often what you're discussing, so that, for example, a discussion about Afghanistan doesn't turn into a debate about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.