character bound per server?

[Nymphetamine 2]

I think it would be an amazing thing

[steelbruh 0]

Yes, then we wouldn't have snipers hopping to high population servers from extremely low population

[sostronk 334]

Private hives IMO.

[Grodenn 53]

Both yes and no, it would defiantly limit the amount of cheaters how ever it would also suck balls to see that the server you are playing on suddenly got shut down.

[lordopeth 274]

Both yes and no, it would defiantly limit the amount of cheaters how ever it would also suck balls to see that the server you are playing on suddenly got shut down.

[Inception. 9443]

What do you mean "limit the amount of cheaters"

That wouldn't change shit.

What happens if a server is being bombarded with hackers? You would have to wait hours--perhaps day to be able to play on that server/character again.

[Nymphetamine 2]

people wont server hop in spots just to get gear then log onto high pop on a clif and snipe people then leave... yea servers go down but that goes for any game its such a win idea

[Tegla (DayZ) 112]

no! what if the server becomes laggy for you or your friend? and if you just cant connect? or..

[Nymphetamine 2]

find a lag free server before hand just like when ppl play wow there all differnt pings/locations and thats how me and my friends play now nothing new

[llodka 4]

no! what if the server becomes laggy for you or your friend? and if you just cant connect? or..

Play on another server maybe?

Use brain?

[Nymphetamine 2]

Play on another server maybe?

Use brain?

^

[gywidion@msn.com 80]

I think without another fix for ghosting, combat logging, and loot farming, it would be a decent option. Not too different from having your Avatar die if you have to switch servers.

[venthos 605]

No. At least until higher server populations are possible. When it's 40-60 per server, you're going to consistently run into slot cap issues if characters don't work between other servers.

Rocket talked about wanting 100+ slot servers to be viable for DayZ Standalone. In those cases, sure. It would make some sense then and help foster a bit of a community. But as it stands with the current DayZ Mod's capabilities, I don't see per-server characters working well without the forum exploding in an ocean of tears of "I can't login to my server, it's full! This is bullshit, bring back the universal character profile!"

[w_epley 37]

Private hives stop ghosting and discourage disconnecting in combat. I think private is the way to go.

[Warped_Jack 16]

This already happens in private hives.

When a server is down for a bit, start a new character on another hive, or go back to the main hive for a bit knowing you're still doing your bit to provide all that information the devs need to improve the game.

Also, private hives do give you some hacker protection in the form of restarts and rolebacks being possible when everyone gets script-killed. (Which you can do in hive servers, it just won't do any good. Your character is still dead on the hive)

Plus you avoid ghosting, server hopping etc etc

[enforcer1975 1111]

I'm for it, too. Keeps the community on a "personal" level. No assholes hopping, griefing and whatever that destroys the game for the majority.

To finish of the doubters about losing your character when your favorite server shuts down. Rocket could make it that you can transfer your character once a week/month/after shutdown so you can still play with that one on another server, but the info has to be transfered from the hoster to the hive directly and not by the player to avoid possible modifications.

[Zombie Jesus 723]

Unless the servers are maintained by BI I am definitely not in favor of this. Had a Ural almost fixed and was heading back with only a tire when all three in the group got kicked. Tried to join and two of us got bans, we hadn't even murdered anyone and were playing 100% legit. So if we still have admin abuse at least 10% of players will lose everything due to some pissy admin, also if hackers to pop up we are stuck or have to start over.

Simple solution, coast spawn on any new server. That gets rid of server hopping, ghosting, and logging into sniper spots. But it will save your hard earned loot so you don't have to start over from scratch, everybody wins.

Long story short most of you are missing the extremely easy middle ground that would please both groups, one group gets to see less nonsense in the form of server hoppers, griefing snipers logging into good sniping positions from low population servers, and ghosters. The other side will not lose everything just because another server is down, has been hit by a hacker, or has run into one of the many abusive admins.

Or we could do it your way and create a shit storm.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Zombie Jesus

[Thadeum 103]

I would be against, if there were different maps on servers containing different items that can be found on a map but not on another. It could be cool to put your geared survivor on a new map. However, considering there is officially only one map, that would not be an issue and I think I could second this.

[Warped_Jack 16]

Unless the servers are maintained by BI I am definitely not in favor of this. Had a Ural almost fixed and was heading back with only a tire when all three in the group got kicked. Tried to join and two of us got bans, we hadn't even murdered anyone and were playing 100% legit. So if we still have admin abuse at least 10% of players will lose everything due to some pissy admin, also if hackers to pop up we are stuck or have to start over.

Simple solution, coast spawn on any new server. That gets rid of server hopping, ghosting, and logging into sniper spots. But it will save your hard earned loot so you don't have to start over from scratch, everybody wins.

Long story short most of you are missing the extremely easy middle ground that would please both groups, one group gets to see less nonsense in the form of server hoppers, griefing snipers logging into good sniping positions from low population servers, and ghosters. The other side will not lose everything just because another server is down, has been hit by a hacker, or has run into one of the many abusive admins.

Or we could do it your way and create a shit storm.

You can still get admin abuse in the current system y'know. None of the current servers are maintained by BI in any way except guidelines, and a blacklist for reported servers. Reported by players, whom this has happened to. Just avoid them.

Also, if by new server you mean "changing server at all" then I'm leaning towards quite liking your idea. It'd be annoying in many ways, but better than creating an outright new character on a new hive, while also stopping the ghosting problem. BUT also does screw immersion a bit. At least a new hive == new character, rather than your current character waking up on the coast, geared up, with no memory of how they got there.

However if by new server you meant "one you haven't visited before" then wouldn't that allow people to ping between 2 servers they frequent, saving their location on each and progressively hopping the entire map?

And I'm lost as to where this shit storm is.

I would be against, if there were different maps on servers containing different items that can be found on a map but not on another. It could be cool to put your geared survivor on a new map. However, considering there is officially only one map, that would not be an issue and I think I could second this.

Erm. This also already happens. Some servers are running the Lingor Island map, on a private hive. First, the items are the same. Second, even if they were different, everyone on the server still has access to those items. There's no unfair advantage here, so what's the problem? At the moment, a map change also leads to a new database being used for characters anyway, so characters don't cross over between maps (as far as I'm aware).

Edited August 27, 2012 by Warped_Jack

[Zombie Jesus 723]

Warped_Jack, sure you could hop between servers like you said, but that would be a pain in the ass. It could always work as anytime you change servers you spawn on the coast, but either way it removes 99% of the problem (most people will not walk two or more characters to the same spot on different servers just to server hop, they will not be able to ghost or get to sniper positions so two problems solved and one almost solved).

The shit storm would be if they completely bound a character to one server using the current system, like I said admin abuse happens quite often right now so unless you remove the admins and server owners that problem will continue. While the standalone should fix many hacking problems no game is foolproof so what happens when a hacker is running loose.? Or if the server just becomes incredibly unpopular but you do not want to lose high tier items obtained through weeks of looting. This would flood the forums with angry customers when they could have just gone a middle road and allowed for gear to be transferred between servers but not location.

[Tigger (DayZ) 24]

You already have a choice. Hive or non-hive server. Doesn't need to be only one or only another.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

i say NO until servers stop disappearing..

i routinely have to scan for new servers as my old favs seem to be offline/full or just plain gone..

[Warped_Jack 16]

Warped_Jack, sure you could hop between servers like you said, but that would be a pain in the ass. It could always work as anytime you change servers you spawn on the coast, but either way it removes 99% of the problem (most people will not walk two or more characters to the same spot on different servers just to server hop, they will not be able to ghost or get to sniper positions so two problems solved and one almost solved).

The shit storm would be if they completely bound a character to one server using the current system, like I said admin abuse happens quite often right now so unless you remove the admins and server owners that problem will continue. While the standalone should fix many hacking problems no game is foolproof so what happens when a hacker is running loose.? Or if the server just becomes incredibly unpopular but you do not want to lose high tier items obtained through weeks of looting. This would flood the forums with angry customers when they could have just gone a middle road and allowed for gear to be transferred between servers but not location.

Don't worry, you misread what I typed, but this reply answers my question anyway. I agree with you. Heh. Yeah spawning on the coast after a server change would fix 99% of the issues. Might get a bit more hectic down south, but eh.

And maybe. Right now that theory is really being put to the test by the rising number of private hives around. I've so far had few to no problems at all, with the worst being the server was down for a few hours longer than normal. Maybe more issues will come to light, time will tell.

[Shaimou 49]

Finding a decent server would take a long time. Hacker enters the server or it is full? No playing today. Server is shut down because the owner is fed up with it? You'd need to start over. Server appears to have lots dupers and douchebags? No fun playing. I would not like the idea, infact I wouldnt play anymore.

[Zombie Jesus 723]

Warped_jack, does playing on a private hive server mess with your public hive character. Have wanted to try but don't want to lose all my legitimate high tier gear.