DayZ: an exercise in gaming nature (warning, wall of text incoming)

[Virfortis 111]

As for the topic: I'm going to have to agree and disagree here. Yes the issues are bad, yes everyone and their cousin is out deathmatching, but no there's not much to stop that in-game through arbitrary systems. I have always been a fan of making guns extremely rare, and the survivor washing up with only 2 magazines to his name, but I don't see that happening anytime soon because Rocket wants a mechanic to deal with it. He won't change the "balance" of the game via loot table alteration because he wants it that way. He WANTS everyone decked out in Rambo style armaments, spraying bullets at each other, because that's how his fantasy works.

Sure, that's fine because he's making it, but then he needs to stop touting this as a zombie apocalypse survival mod, that's all. I'm not saying the game sucks, just that it's mislabeled.

[CrossShade 4]

Sorry' date=' but if you can't get your point across in a few concise sentences, the point isn't worth making.

[/quote']

In other words, you expect him to use memes and trolling? That's the only way to make a thought as complex as meaningful gameplay boil down into a couple sentences. If the internet, subsequently you, would not straw man him at every corner for being concise, he wouldn't have to be so drawn out. He has to flood his argument with disclaimers and further arguments JUST to keep his point on track. A thought does not have just a thesis, it also requires reasoning.

He doesn't need to be more concise, the internet needs to be more respectful.

People like you, someone has a different point of view, or a more efficient system, doesn't suit you?

Start to be uncivil, best way to solve the situation.

If you really want people to start trolling this thread, continue.

Want it to be civil? Post your opinion, stop using stuff like "lack of reading comprehension" "noobs" "idiots".

Civility is better than FU FU FU FU U NO CONFORM TO MY POINT OF VIEW FU FU FU FU.

[Virfortis 111]

Want it to be civil? Post your opinion' date=' stop using stuff like "lack of reading comprehension" "noobs" "idiots".

Civility is better than FU FU FU FU U NO CONFORM TO MY POINT OF VIEW FU FU FU FU.

[/quote']

Here again, I didn't post a disclaimed and large wall of text, so it turns into a condescending attitude.

Here's my opinion: If you posted just to say "too long, didn't read" then get off a forum and go back to your PvP only chatroom.

Yes, DayZ isn't worth playing right now because it's a tech demo. Rocket's going to add a ton of stuff later down the road to fix many of the problems. The main, underlying problem is that when those come out, the community as it is now will disregard it as either a "carebear" feature, or rage about how it's making the game easier. Consequence increases difficulty, not decreases it, but the "hardcore!!!" community doesn't want difficulty right now, just griefing. That's a discussion for another time.

If anything, this is the point where we need to start working on community. Long, clear thoughts should be the rule, not the exception. We need to start putting down the "tl;dr" stigma attached to this forum, and call out anyone that sits there and thinks/posts in one-line thoughts ala memes. This is a complex topic that requires a complex structure, not two sentence statements, followed by mass trolling.

[CrossShade 4]

Want it to be civil? Post your opinion' date=' stop using stuff like "lack of reading comprehension" "noobs" "idiots".

Civility is better than FU FU FU FU U NO CONFORM TO MY POINT OF VIEW FU FU FU FU.

[/quote']

Here again, I didn't post a disclaimed and large wall of text, so it turns into a condescending attitude.

Here's my opinion: If you posted just to say "too long, didn't read" then get off a forum and go back to your PvP only chatroom.

Yes, DayZ isn't worth playing right now because it's a tech demo. Rocket's going to add a ton of stuff later down the road to fix many of the problems. The main, underlying problem is that when those come out, the community as it is now will disregard it as either a "carebear" feature, or rage about how it's making the game easier. Consequence increases difficulty, not decreases it, but the "hardcore!!!" community doesn't want difficulty right now, just griefing. That's a discussion for another time.

If anything, this is the point where we need to start working on community. Long, clear thoughts should be the rule, not the exception. We need to start putting down the "tl;dr" stigma attached to this forum, and call out anyone that sits there and thinks/posts in one-line thoughts ala memes. This is a complex topic that requires a complex structure, not two sentence statements, followed by mass trolling.

To basically TL:DR this one for you.

Anyone that disregards my opinion is (insert some form of derogatory comment here). They should go to (insert some place that will be regarded as socially unacceptable here).

Cut the Op into pieces like I originally could have (I didn't have any issues with it by the way, I simply argued against the part I did read).

Then do a complete turn around contradictory uber hypocrite move and say I'm against what I just did.

Bravo. Flame away, I lose the ability to be civil when my peers refuse it unprovoked.

For my civil part, In the future, stop insulting, speak in a civil manner, offer your point of view, they will offer theres /end.

[septuscap 42]

He WANTS everyone decked out in Rambo style armaments' date=' spraying bullets at each other, because that's how his fantasy works.

Sure, that's fine because he's making it, but then he needs to stop touting this as a zombie apocalypse survival mod, that's all.

[/quote']

Just needs more zombies. I'm not a fan of spawning zombies in towns as players approach. It's too easy to deal with, and it feels like the videogame equivalent of breaking the fourth wall. No suspension of disbelief if you see zombies just pop into existence as you approach.

I think HORDES (50+) should just be dropped into the game and be "attracted" to areas nearby with the most players (ie. sense of smell). Maybe increase aggro range for certain weapons.

Players should be worried that the next gunshot will bring 100 zombies rushing from the tree line, trapping you in a building.

You don't *need* to have 200 zombies rushing at every player because players wouldn't know where the zombies ARE (and thus will always operate with the ever-present THREAT of 200 zombies) -- compared with now where players DO know where zombies are for the most part.

[Cach 0]

Interesting post by Virfortis, I have not really seen any community control in these forums. Hence the all too often derogatory remarks. Maybe the dev should start hiring moderators either volunteers or people voted. Though I'm unsure whether the devs vision of total anarchy extends towards the forums as well. A cut down on the name calling would make this a much healthier place to conduct arguments. A mature attitude might even spill over into the game through the forums.

@Septuscup

Zeds that hone in on wherever the most number of players are? I can see this working though it has a few issues namely grouping together with people would be a pain with zeds constantly honing in on you. Increasing aggro range is always a plus (the harsher the better, up to a point at least). Maybe even have walkers that are capable of clambering up stairs, or have the monkey types capable of climbing ladders.

[wynarator 0]

tl;dr

[tso 5]

I like the idea of increased difficulty and no weapons on spawn.

but I see a group of bandits getting easier kills in any town they take over along the coast.

I would still consider that a improvement.

[flyingmonkey (DayZ) 0]

tl;dr

Then why even bother with a reply.

The OP has some good points in it, if you are too lazy to take a break and have a read, then don't bother posting in the thread.

You aren't contributing in the slightest, only telling others how lazy you are.

Ontopic: Increasing the zombie count was okay, it did stress the servers a bit, but the players hated how often they respawned.

Balance out respawn time and a larger amount of zombies, and you'll make firefights have their own penalties just from starting one up within earshot of a town.

[septuscap 42]

Zeds that hone in on wherever the most number of players are? I can see this working though it has a few issues namely grouping together with people would be a pain with zeds constantly honing in on you. Increasing aggro range is always a plus (the harsher the better' date=' up to a point at least). Maybe even have walkers that are capable of clambering up stairs, or have the monkey types capable of climbing ladders.

[/quote']

They don't have to "hone in" on players. They just need to have some pathing; spawning a horde in the middle of the forest that just sits there is pointless.

The point is to not let players know WHERE the zombies are; so they play in perpetual fear of them. Right now players have zero worry about zombies unless they are dead in the center of a town (and even then, just get in a building and cap the 5 or so zombies you aggro'ed).

This dynamic changes if you could potentially aggro 50+ zombies (or more with a few unlucky horde spawns)

Also zombies can already climb stairs/ladders, they just have really bad pathing.

Ontopic: Increasing the zombie count was okay' date=' it did stress the servers a bit, but the players hated how often they respawned.

Balance out respawn time and a larger amount of zombies, and you'll make firefights have their own penalties just from starting one up within earshot of a town.

[/quote']

You don't have to increase the total zombie count. That is the idea behind the random spawn locations. If they just spawn IN a city then I know exactly where every zombie on the map is. Right next to buildings. And it's extremely predictable and easy to game/play around.

If I don't *know* where the zombies are (they could be lurking in the forests, one hill over out of sight, in BETWEEN towns on the road, etc), I will play as if there are ALWAYS zombies in the area. And because of that you can afford to have 100 zombies in ONE area instead of having to put 20 useless zombies, easily dispatched, in every city.

[duddbudda 33]

read the entire thing, think OP is stupid for even caring about the idiots who get themselves involved in the bean wars

I play inland - my tribe hits NWA, Stary, Polana, Berez, NEA, Novy and starts over again

When I engage in PvP it's to protect the tribe

OP's suggestion to nerf starting equiptment wouldn't hurt us at all, sounds OK

Removing military grade gear from the balota airfield? wut? no - I don't even go there, but when I did it was thrilling

Decreasing high-tier spawn chances? wut? high tier loot is already rarer than a good analogy for a rare thing oh my god

But rather than M107s and MP5 SD6 es, do you mean AKs and ting? AKs shouldn't be rare - the AK is the most widely produced weapon in the world, with somethinglike 150000000 in circulation

Eastern Europe, wartime, AKs? they go hand in hand

[flyingmonkey (DayZ) 0]

You don't have to increase the total zombie count. That is the idea behind the random spawn locations. If they just spawn IN a city then I know exactly where every zombie on the map is. Right next to buildings. And it's extremely predictable and easy to game/play around.

If I don't *know* where the zombies are (they could be lurking in the forests' date=' one hill over out of sight, in BETWEEN towns on the road, etc), I will play as if there are ALWAYS zombies in the area. And because of that you can afford to have 100 zombies in ONE area instead of having to put 20 useless zombies, easily dispatched, in every city.

[/quote']

The reason zombies are prevalent in and around towns/buildings is because that is where the loot is.

People have to go to towns to get anything, while having random spawns all around the map is good -(all for it, getting lonely in these forests)- without also increasing the amount of zombies in the pool will just make towns easier to raid, as of now we get about 300-500 zombies on a full server depending on how many players are near towns.

Before it was reduced, it was up in the 1000-1500 mark, and it was golden. Getting supplies required a lot of stealth, shooting anyone meant you were most likely going to get swarmed and it felt a lot better than what it currently is.

Forests are far too safe, and at the moment, most towns are too.

[septuscap 42]

The reason zombies are prevalent in and around towns/buildings is because that is where the loot is.

People have to go to towns to get anything' date=' while having random spawns all around the map is good -(all for it, getting lonely in these forests)- without also increasing the amount of zombies in the pool will just make towns easier to raid, as of now we get about 300-500 zombies on a full server depending on how many players are near towns.

Before it was reduced, it was up in the 1000-1500 mark, and it was golden. Getting supplies required a lot of stealth, shooting anyone meant you were most likely going to get swarmed and it felt a lot better than what it currently is.

Forests are far too safe, and at the moment, most towns are too.

[/quote']

Looting towns is hard not because of zombies but other PLAYERS. Who has ANY trouble dodging zombies? The danger of cities is that you are very likely to run into other PLAYERS.

I wouldn't mind having 1500 zombies, but I recall there being quite a bit of lag because of it. And the point is you should try and squeeze as much out of the 1500 zombies as possible.

I have no qualms with shooting some one IN A CITY. Worst case, 10 or so zombies will aggro me and I'll shoot them one at a time in a building. Zombies don't even enter my decision process. In the forest? Magically I *never* have to worry about zombies. Take a guess at where I shoot most of my marks. Right as they leave town after looting it for me.

Now recently there has been 200-700 zombies, and you still have to sneak through towns if you don't want to aggro zombies (and you don't, since doing so means you fire your weapon and alert other players to your presence). But what to do with the other 800-1300 potential zombies? Should they also just sit idly in town adding nothing to the game? Wandering hordes of zombies would add a whole new dynamic to the game.

[maizel 1]

I agree with OP that this community is one of the worst I've seen so far. Any suggestion gets met with buckets full of elitist crap.

I'd like to see some changes in the game. I'm sure Rocket will make the game as he likes, but I don;t see anything wrong in discussing these matters.

[septuscap 42]

I agree with OP that this community is one of the worst I've seen so far. Any suggestion gets met with buckets full of elitist crap.

I'd like to see some changes in the game. I'm sure Rocket will make the game as he likes' date=' but I don;t see anything wrong in discussing these matters.

[/quote']

Most of the ideas suck. Some people have posted good ideas and by some miracle they aren't flamed. Strange how that works.

[_triumph_ 1]

I stopped reading after the bandit skin fallacy.

[lunakhod 8]

Sorry' date=' but if you can't get your point across in a few concise sentences, the point isn't worth making.

[/quote']

In other words, you expect him to use memes and trolling? That's the only way to make a thought as complex as meaningful gameplay boil down into a couple sentences. If the internet, subsequently you, would not straw man him at every corner for being concise, he wouldn't have to be so drawn out. He has to flood his argument with disclaimers and further arguments JUST to keep his point on track. A thought does not have just a thesis, it also requires reasoning.

He doesn't need to be more concise, the internet needs to be more respectful.

-I never said anything about trolling, do not put words in my mouth.

- Straw man? wut? I don't think you even know what that is. I pointed that out his entire post was overbearing and disgustingly inefficient, in the fewest words possible.

- More words makes you more likely to go off on another tangent, not the other way around. The best ideas are as short and simple as they can possibly be. They are fast, hard hitting, and memorable; such as "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". They explain complex concepts in only a few words.

-It's also easy to write a wall of text, regurgitating every idea in your head. On the other hand, cramming all of that text into only a few phrases is extremely difficult, and admirable when someone actually has the courtesy to do it.

-"A thought does not have just a thesis, it also requires reasoning." Now you're just throwing random words into a hat.

[flyingmonkey (DayZ) 0]

Looting towns is hard not because of zombies but other PLAYERS. Who has ANY trouble dodging zombies? The danger of cities is that you are very likely to run into other PLAYERS.

I wouldn't mind having 1500 zombies' date=' but I recall there being quite a bit of lag because of it. And the point is you should try and squeeze as much out of the 1500 zombies as possible.

I have no qualms with shooting some one IN A CITY. Worst case, 10 or so zombies will aggro me and I'll shoot them one at a time in a building. Zombies don't even enter my decision process. In the forest? Magically I *never* have to worry about zombies. Take a guess at where I shoot most of my marks. Right as they leave town after looting it for me.

Now recently there has been 200-700 zombies, and you still have to sneak through towns if you don't want to aggro zombies (and you don't, since doing so means you fire your weapon and alert other players to your presence). But what to do with the other 800-1300 potential zombies? Should they also just sit idly in town adding nothing to the game? Wandering hordes of zombies would add a whole new dynamic to the game.

[/quote']

That's what I mean, there aren't enough zeds in towns for anyone to really need to worry about them, you only every worry about running into another player.

If you are out in the middle of nowhere in some small town with no other players in sight, you should still be as fearful of it as if it was a big town populated with zeds and players.

Any shot you make out of panic should mess you up.

At the moment, if you are caught off-guard and get an aggro, you can run from where ever you are in the town to the outskirts and only aggro about 3-5 more zeds, make a run to the hills and take them out without alerting any more.

Aggroing a zed in a town should be hell to try and escape, not childs play.

People should be running around searching for mags for their guns, or having to swap them out because they simply cannot find any for the amount of zeds they have had to kill, making ammo harder to find is one way of doing it, but that will only make it harder for people who don't server hop. Increasing zeds in any loot spots will make it harder for everyone.

People shouldn't be asking "Who's shooting in Cherno?" but instead "Why isn't anyone shooting in Cherno?"

Is raiding that town for a chance to find some mags for your low ammo gun going to be worth using up the last of your bullets? That should be something that goes through your head. Right now, everyone's a fat cat fully decked out with tonnes of ammo, and if you aren't, you obviously haven't moved around enough.

I strongly agree with having zeds in forests, but if you just make a few large roaming mobs, people will spot them and avoid them - the chance of you happening to shoot at your mark just as a mob is in earshot would be fairly low, you would scout the area first, and follow your mark until your a fairly sure you are safe - it would be another thing if your mark didn't get out of the town he just raided because he ran out of ammo trying to defend himself from the zombies.

Sorry if it's a bit of a ramble.

TL;DR:

Towns are easy, ammo is everywhere without a need to use most of it, forests need zeds, people need to be more fearful of zombies just as much as they are of players.

[imagelesskjc 35]

I like the idea of not spawning with a weapon. I feel like most of the most memorable moments I had ingame was when I was vulnerable.

[prometheus111 1]

What the devs need to implement is a stress flow system.

Flow in games usually has to do with narrative, puzzle, mini enemies, bosses (in order of stress level). Designers then ensure that the levels provide a compelling variety and change to the flow by adding puzzles after firefights and narratives and then more fighting and bosses...etc.

A flow system in regard to DayZ zombies would possibly look something like this:

Zombies can be from 0 to 30 around a single player. Thus some players would have 5 some 0 some 14 some 30 or more. Players on the low side of the flow would give up their unused zombies to the players in the high stress side of the flow. Thus effectively rotating zombies to make the most out of less.

Example: Player 1 is in medium stress flow and the system is spawning a few zombies near them as they travel. They dispatch them easily enough and the system decides to take their stress level to low, thus spawning no zombies for a little.

Player 2 is in low stress for a while with no zombies spawning near them. The system decides that they've been in low stress flow for a while and need some zombie companions. So it sends them into high stress flow and spawns many zombies (borrowing from player 1 since player 1 is in low stress and requires no zombies near them). Player 2 could then effectively run into a horde of 30 or so zombies in the woods or on a random field or in a city.

Say then you had two players near each other...they could both be in medium stress and have 15 zombies each (equaling 30 and thus combined they are technically in high stress)... Or they could both be in high stress and thus have 60 zombies in their area at once.

The flow system would be required to always use a total of 500 zombies or whatever. Thus playing in low populated servers would increase the zombie count of each individual player (thus making it difficult to loot on low pop servers). The system would ensure that the player would not go hours without encountering a zombie nor would go hours without having a breather.

[flyingmonkey (DayZ) 0]

I like that idea, a lot.