The Unofficial "Teamplay Reward" Suggestion Thread

[esaciar 1]

So, we all know that team play needs to be more actively encouraged and rewarded in Day Z to combat the increasing banditry within the game.

Whilst consequences for banditry would be difficult to justify in a world of desperation and deceit, rewards for group play and active collaboration with fellow players would be inviting and the potential in such a regard is vast.

I have some possible suggestions but I would be very intrigued to know what others consider to be effective ways to promote more team play within this wonderful mod.

Could gestures of "goodwill" be registered and promoted by a point system that rewards players with larger pack inventories or better equipment?

Could collaboration with strangers be rewarded by a rank system? Call it collaboration or even leadership. The higher your rank, you eventually earn equipment that allows you to entrench and even construct a team base of operations.

Maybe items in trading posts would be discounted as a gesture of trust and promotion of collaboration within the wider world.

Could "heroes" be actively celebrated in the community by medals or the attachment if a moniker to players who specialise in some aspect of the game?

I do not wish this to be a thread that encourages punishments for bandits - this is about rewarding team play and collaboration.

Bandits will remain and are essential to gameplay. But so is this.

I am only making suggestions also. There will be holes to pick in my suggestions as there will in the comments of others. Can we keep our comments civil, constructive an continually working towards a real solution to this?

I wish to be a valued and progressive contributor to this community and I only hope this thread engenders that.

Over to you.

[Refried 14]

the organic benefits from playing with other people has been posted numerous times

it does not need any artificial gamification or additional rewards

any system designed to reward you for interacting with strangers non-violently would break the 'realism' of experience, as you wouldn't be walking up to random strangers going HURRP FRIENDLY? in an actual survival scenario

[vanilladragon 1]

the organic benefits from playing with other people has been posted numerous times

it does not need any artificial gamification or additional rewards

any system designed to reward you for interacting with strangers non-violently would break the 'realism' of experience' date=' as you wouldn't be walking up to random strangers going HURRP FRIENDLY? in an actual survival scenario

[/quote']

you know this how? the last zombie apocalypse you were in?

[guidez 180]

Agree to Refried. There have been many suggestions to making the game more "game" like, and generally this is against Rocket's and the general consensus' view of realism. Anything that is automatic/reward based is simply thrown out.

A more realistic approach, I think, would be to have safe havens/safe zones with NPC guards. People that have not been performing bad actions and being caught at them (IE; a reporting system, I saw so-and-so shooting so-and-so, don't let them into town, enough witnesses and it's shoot on site). Just another suggestion, but as you can see, not so much reward as keeping a benefit already in place. And having safe havens isn't against realism: Though society would breakdown, there still would be those who try to re-create it.

[Sminky 5]

think the're some good sugestions, espcially a NPC gaurded safe zone (ala Eve online) where you could meet people to arange an exhibition / grouping.

It is a game and far from real in the first place, and yes if you look at any human disaster in history people do tend to band together (it's out nature), but there will always be 'dicks'

It is a game and needs certain mechanics to make it more enjoyable and rewarding, otherwise it will jsut stay as an incredible fun, short, novelty.

[vanilladragon 1]

the problem with the current state of it is people are forced to play as a bandit and survive or play as a survivor and die. there needs to be incentives to not kill people beyond a sense of morality with no bearing on the game.

currently playing as a survivor you get all the risks and none of the rewards.

i would like to see a mirco-tech tree for bandits/survivors/...nomads (stay hidden, keep to themselves, dont help or hinder)?

survivors get rep for giving transfusions (or more team based exercises which dont exist at the moment, like joining rescue parties or something, there is just no other example of altruistic behaviour), bandits get rep for killing survivors and nomads get perks for staying neutral.

survivors get body armour, bandits get high end weapons, nomads get camo

just an example.

obviously this would need a bandit system that is a little more fluid than 'kill a survivor and you become a bandit'. more like you start out neutral and after a few actions you start to slide to either end of the spectrum. given the life expectancy i cant see a tech tree involving more than one or two perks for each 'type'.

like give surviviors either body armour or fortifications. give nomads really good camo or motion sensors, and give bandits a good gun or a claymore. put the perks on cool down and a timed limit so you have to be tactical when using them. eg body armour before a gun fight, or a claymore when you first start sniping.

[sneed 1]

the organic benefits from playing with other people has been posted numerous times

it does not need any artificial gamification or additional rewards

any system designed to reward you for interacting with strangers non-violently would break the 'realism' of experience' date=' as you wouldn't be walking up to random strangers going HURRP FRIENDLY? in an actual survival scenario

[/quote']

I'm curious, how do you feel about blood bags/transfusions requiring a second player then? Is this unrealistic to you? Would you be against any additional mechanisms like the bloodbags which require 2 or more players to operate?

And why wouldn't people seek out friendlies in a survival scenario? Seems plausible to me, a lot of the behavior I've seen in the game to me is much less realistic than that. "Realism" is so subjective anyway and it rarely serves to prove a useful point.

[esaciar 1]

Phenomenal suggestions vanilladragon - you really have given this much more thought than myself.

I have little knowledge of how these processes could be implemented as I am not a programmer, but I do want to keep this experience as organic and realistic as possible. The suggestions thus far could well be implemented with some subtle changes in order to maintain that equilibrium.

Very impressed and hopeful.

[Refried 14]

I'm curious' date=' how do you feel about blood bags/transfusions requiring a second player then? Is this unrealistic to you? Would you be against any additional mechanisms like the bloodbags which require 2 or more players to operate? [/quote']

this falls under the 'organic benefits' i already mentioned and is fine

but adding a tech tree and cooldowns and super powers goes against everything this mod stands for as an anti-game

[vanilladragon 1]

I'm curious' date=' how do you feel about blood bags/transfusions requiring a second player then? Is this unrealistic to you? Would you be against any additional mechanisms like the bloodbags which require 2 or more players to operate? [/quote']

this falls under the 'organic benefits' i already mentioned and is fine

but adding a tech tree and cooldowns and super powers goes against everything this mod stands for as an anti-game

you need to specify who the 'other players' you are getting these 'organic benefits' from, because they certainly arent randoms on a random server.

you join with predetermined out of game friends with predetermined out of game allegiances or you kill everyone you see. there are many benefits to teaming up, but its not happening within the day z community itself. its just a deathmatch at the moment.

[esaciar 1]

Who mentioned superpowers? I suggested reputation degrees. Which is prevalent in our world now.

[vanilladragon 1]

if people are happy with having a community of 800 people, leave things the way they are. arma 2 will go slip into oblivion along with the people who want a deathmatch only game with zero support for altruistic actions.

who wants to play a deathmatch where you take 30 minutes to find an effective weapon then have to run for 30kms to get to the action? zombies or not the novelty will wear off very fast for a lot of people

[joecheeze 0]

so basically you want to turn this into what the stalker multiplayer should have been.

nah. I think this mod/future DLC will have a its own niche in the gaming community. Though, I can predict that some other company will find this mods success intriguing and attempt to create something similar. Then, and only then, will the other part of this community get what they were looking for, a more gamier atmosphere and reduced realism/simulator feel.

for now though I think ill probably play this for another 800 hours on top of the 800+ i already have for the arma 2 OA game. Methinks i definitely got my moneys worth.

SteamID: kok-mastercheeze

[Boombastic320 0]

Absolutely horrible idea, i believe everyone plays Dayz for both the aspects of a realistic FPS (There is pretty much only one, and that is Arma II), and the great unknown... Exploration and the feeling of being just a man in a game is refreshing with all the random bullshit game mechanics people implement, and magical gear that makes you unique, just like everyone else.

[FieldMedic 7]

I'm personally of the opinion that one style of play shouldn't be directly rewarded over another. However I believe one of the solutions to encouraging group play is to make a living survivor more valuable to you (in most cases) then a dead one. I'm not exactly sure how to achieve this, but currently the gear on a player's back is often more valuable then the player themselves. This needs to change.

I like the real world example of meeting a person with medical training. A person who can treat major wounds and perform surgeries is worth more alive then anything he might be carrying, because it's his personal skills, not his equipment, that you value most.

[Refried 14]

that is never going to change as long as there are hordes of ignorant/unskilled players

it's not the game's fault that people play too poorly to be trusted in groups (even if they are "friendly")

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I agree that certain skill sets "classes" that a player can choose at spawn or like gender choose once for their account would lead more people to group up and still preserve "realisim".

As it is now you can make it all on your own. Get your matches, knife, and hatchet and you really don't need bloodbags. Other players can usually supply morphine so you will usually have enough to save you from crawling around the map. Vehicles don't work on most servers so there isn't a reason to band up to achieve some greater goal. Grouping up now basically allows you to more effective in pvp and keep your gear because once you die your friends can guard it while you hike back.

Classes should not eliminate loan wolf play but make group play easier,

Medic/Doctor- Can treat broken bones w/out morphine, bandage w/no bandages, create blood bags from full health players, treat players so their blood increases slowly. (All abilities on other players only)

Mechanic- Can fix vehicles w/half supplies, can make vehicle operational w/all red status with no supplies

Hunter- Gets 2x meat from carcas, can start fire w/out matches

Engineer/Handyman- Build structures w/half supplies, can build fences from woodpiles

Gun nut- Can break down ammunition to create other ammo types

Electrician - Can turn power back on at Stations and towns

Cook- Can cook food to create 2x food from original

Military/Police- No shock status effect

I think player made structures need to be implemented, they already exist in the game and other mods, this would give players a reason to group up. I also think a "switch" located in small towns should allow you to stop zombie respawns & loot respawns. This would allow players to take over locations and attempt to rebuild society within them.

[esaciar 1]

What if players chose designated roles before spawning? Or were given roles?

A player might be a medically trained character who can surgeries/bandaging much faster.

Another player might be an engineer and be skilled in weapon modification or mechanics.

Another player might be a pathfinder and be equipped with greater visibility or binoculars.

It would behoove players to assemble a squad that would complement their skills and thus extend their facets and chances of survival.

Just like the real world, individuals would bring something unique to a group.

Again, it's a suggestion. I know not everybody seems a fan. I don't want a CoD on our hands either, but I believe we need some balance here. No facet or style should be preferable or possess greater emphasis than another; but we need equilibrium.

---

Mr Two, far more eloquently, made my point as I was typing it.

Agree wholeheartedly.

[kaeus3@gmail.com 8]

There certainly needs to be a reason to collaborate with other players, however I'd probably still take the attitude I have now of either avoiding if I can or killing any player I'm not currently on TS with. With the exception of one encounter (where we both simply avoided each other), most attempts at using direct communication to declare "friendly" have resulted in the other party simply shooting me at point blank range.

[bddy420 0]

the organic benefits from playing with other people has been posted numerous times

it does not need any artificial gamification or additional rewards

any system designed to reward you for interacting with strangers non-violently would break the 'realism' of experience' date=' as you wouldn't be walking up to random strangers going HURRP FRIENDLY? in an actual survival scenario

[/quote']

You sir.... are pro. "It does not need Gamification or Additional Rewards"

I and another fellow posted in suggestions the mental stress all of this would have In a real situation and how working with someone would help you keep your nerve. In the thread it also states how alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, painkillers, or just relaxing away from bloodshed for a whiiile will degrade your mental stress/anxiety and bring you back to a norm. Whilst one could be 'rewarded' for playing with people (Slower stress buildup and the like) Lone wolves don't usually cause a lot of havoc as it is and would be able to manage stress fairly easy so long as they don't spend to much time side by side with dead-walkers and bloodshed. Check it in suggestions.

---

But please rocket please for the love of God do not start a 'class' system. Ever. Start everyone off THE SAME. THE SAME as when you die... No 'leveling' no 'skill points' no 'talents' no 'experience' Just simulation mechanics please. Stress, Fatigue, injuries, infections.... all viable reasons for why one would want to be in a group.... but someone who is cautious and knows how to play smart can easily avoid all of the said conditions.

Which is probably why newbs QQr's New Toons (Did I make anyone angry with my terminology yet?) Rager's Currburr's Pansy Ass sissies don't like bandits..... they are kind good at being solo (I dont like em either.... But its the name of the game and I'd rather go out with dignity than go out with "YOU FUCK, I WAS FRIENDLY.... ENJOY my NO GEARZ noooob"...... because THAT right there..... THAT is why I actually WOULD kill players.

Please no out of char type rewarding. Skin. Nothing. The fear and Anxiety of not knowin who it is in front of you and having a 2v2 Standoff is unlike anything I've experienced in any other game world....

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

the problem with the current state of it is people are forced to play as a bandit and survive or play as a survivor and die. there needs to be incentives to not kill people beyond a sense of morality with no bearing on the game.

No matter how many times you post this ridiculously retarded bullshit and I refute you with a list of 50+ benefits to cooperative team play, you just stick your fingers in your ear and go right along posting. You are a cancer on this forum dude.

[wasrad 42]

think the're some good sugestions' date=' espcially a NPC gaurded safe zone (ala Eve online) where you could meet people to arange an exhibition / grouping.

It is a game and far from real in the first place, and yes if you look at any human disaster in history people do tend to band together (it's out nature), but there will always be 'dicks'

It is a game and needs certain mechanics to make it more enjoyable and rewarding, otherwise it will jsut stay as an incredible fun, short, novelty.

[/quote']

Yeah and jsut like EVEO, the second someone goes through the 'gate'....popped by a sniper at 800M

[karbiner 29]

Go in 50 slots server > try talking to as many as possible > often 4-5 respond, so the other 45 are either ignoring you OR in GROUPS working TOGERTHER on TEAMSPEAK ;) There are larger groups than you would expect ;) and enaugh with the QQ about bandits, bandits dont even exist ;)

[clever 12]

There should be no benefits or punishments for playing a certain way besides the already set in place organic ones. There are already many benefits for being in a group, more people to cover your back, see where you can't see, and of course a bandit is much less likely to attack a big group.

[Sarcasmo 2]

So' date=' we all know that team play needs to be more actively encouraged and rewarded in Day Z to combat the increasing banditry within the game.

[/quote']

No it doesn't.