Suggestion on PVP disincentive

[Skeffington 1]

I've been reading the forums and many people seem to want some sort of disincentive to random murder since the benefit of killing and looting another player far exceeds any minor risk or working together. Others want some sort of psychological breakdown to counteract this. FYI I am not a carebear and the PVP makes me always on the verge of shitting my pants because clunky zombies aren't that much of a threat. I would suggest that perhaps after murdering someone you would lose X amount of blood. Seems simple enough to implement, and more factors would be needed to be taken into account before killing, such as blood left, food supply, buddy with transfusion, if the benefit of killing a noob with no gear is greater than the possible blood loss, etc. Blood lost would need to be big enough so that it plays a role in decision making, but not so much that you are fucked after 1 kill.

Yeah it's not "realistic" but neither are many other aspects of the game, this is only a shitty suggestion on a topic that keeps coming up. Also, it's not punishing bandits, but adding a new element which would encourage teamwork.

[pogoman979 4]

bahahahaha this forum is ridiculous

[fackstah 31]

i like poutine !

The end

[liquidje 38]

I've been reading the forums and many people seem to want some sort of disincentive to random murder since the benefit of killing and looting another player far exceeds any minor risk or working together. Others want some sort of psychological breakdown to counteract this. FYI I am not a carebear and the PVP makes me always on the verge of shitting my pants because clunky zombies aren't that much of a threat. I would suggest that perhaps after murdering someone you would lose X amount of blood. Seems simple enough to implement' date=' and more factors would be needed to be taken into account before killing, such as blood left, food supply, buddy with transfusion, if the benefit of killing a noob with no gear is greater than the possible blood loss, etc. Blood lost would need to be big enough so that it plays a role in decision making, but not so much that you are fucked after 1 kill.

Yeah it's not "realistic" but neither are many other aspects of the game, this is only a shitty suggestion on a topic that keeps coming up. Also, it's not punishing bandits, but adding a new element which would encourage teamwork.

[/quote']

*sigh* have you actually searched the forum. This specific suggestion has been made numerous times, the axact same one. It's very simple: NEVER EVER will a specific playstyle (PVE, cooperating, PVP, Killing for the lulz) be actually limited or punished, which you do by lowering blood.

There will be some feature of mechanic someday which would cause people to do less PvP and more cooperation, but that should be natural and not with a very obvious and powerful penalty or buff.

[Dinnj 4]

Yeah it's not "realistic" but neither are many other aspects of the game' date=' this is only a shitty suggestion on a topic that keeps coming up. Also, it's not punishing bandits, but adding a new element which would encourage teamwork.

[/quote']

Game has unrealistic elements because they are necessary; respawns, engine limitations, zombies, etc.

If you say "The game is already unrealistic, so that means adding another realistic idea won't hurt!"

You're not talking about your idea at all, you're just saying that you don't care if it gets even more unrealistic unnecessarily. You've done nothing to say why your idea is good, regardless of realism. Let me tell you, it isn't very good.

I have no idea why people want to limit one play style or another artificially, it feels so forced.

Watch, I'll give you my suggestion for the game, based on the fact that "I don't like" survivors, because this is the only reason ever given for punishing a player group:

Wouldn't it be great if when you haven't killed another player for more than 30 minutes, you start to lose blood and cannot stop it until you kill another player? That way, people would be forced more into PvP, and it would make carebears more capable of defending themselves after a while.

When put from the perspective of the opposite opinion, Skeffington, do you see just how stupid this idea is?

[Skeffington 1]

*sigh* have you actually searched the forum. This specific suggestion has been made numerous times' date=' the axact same one. It's very simple: NEVER EVER will a specific playstyle (PVE, cooperating, PVP, Killing for the lulz) be actually limited or punished, which you do by lowering blood.

[/quote']

Not really, got back after a night shift at work and I just suggested it. Also, searching for "blood loss", a common game mechanic, makes looking for specific threads a lot more fuzzy.

There will be some feature of mechanic someday which would cause people to do less PvP and more cooperation, but that should be natural and not with a very obvious and powerful penalty or buff.

100% agree.

Game has unrealistic elements because they are necessary; respawns' date=' engine limitations, zombies, etc.

If you say "The game is already unrealistic, so that means adding another realistic idea won't hurt!"

[/quote']

ugh, global chat, magically bandaging up yourself to stop bleeding, god like all encompassing antibiotics which just so happen to cure that one infection you contract, etcetera

You're not talking about your idea at all, you're just saying that you don't care if it gets even more unrealistic unnecessarily. You've done nothing to say why your idea is good, regardless of realism. Let me tell you, it isn't very good.

wat u smkon mang

I have no idea why people want to limit one play style or another artificially, it feels so forced.

dealwithitnerd

Watch, I'll give you my suggestion for the game, based on the fact that "I don't like" survivors, because this is the only reason ever given for punishing a player group:

Wouldn't it be great if when you haven't killed another player for more than 30 minutes, you start to lose blood and cannot stop it until you kill another player? That way, people would be forced more into PvP, and it would make carebears more capable of defending themselves after a while.

N/A since carebears are the minority.

When put from the perspective of the opposite opinion, Skeffington, do you see just how stupid this idea is?

u mad?

[Dinnj 4]

10/10 troll thread OP, would get mad again.

[liquidje 38]

10/10 troll thread OP' date=' would get mad again.

[/quote']

*noted

[Skeffington 1]

10/10 troll thread OP' date=' would get mad again.

[/quote']

*noted

Why would you resurrect my dead thread?