Semi Perma Death.

[zorkmid 2]

Would you want to sit and click connect over and over when there are two thousand people who are linked to one 50 person server?

A very very interesting idea. I definitely think that it is worth a look' date=' and maybe a trial to see how it affects and is received by players. I think that a logical next step for this would be that your character can't switch servers at all.

[/quote']

I don't see how this would increase the number of players on a given server. Also, I don't see why you couldn't start a character on another server.

[A Man Named GOB 1]

If one or two of us were shot and killed and then banned from a server, we would leave the chopper behind and head to the new server. Fixing that chopper would have been MUCH harder if we werent a team. You can always fix another chopper ;p

And yes I agree, it would be interesting to incorporate a mechanic that encourages interaction. I do not want to be forced to though. I play solo quite often and if looting my own body is what you guys are worried about, then by all means make it impossible to loot your own corpse.

Btw, Im not trying to shit on the idea like its bad, I disagree with it but it is still an interesting concept. Games like The Witcher 2 have single life characters but playing that way is an option. If its an option that some servers can set then knock yourselves out.

"But I can state without a shadow of a doubt that me and the group of guys I play with would loot a friends corpse' date=' and all log off to find another server with them."

What about that helicopter you had finally built? :) Or maybe you wouldn't be allowed to swap until you die?

" I enjoy this game solo but it is infinitely more enjoyable when playing with a few friends and this mechanic seems aimed squarely at team play. "

Yeah me too, what i'm saying is that maybe.... just maybe the game would be better if you were untethered from the safety net of your mates and you had to make new allies from the survivors you met in the game.

It's food for though anyway.

[/quote']

---

You have one character linked to your account. I do not know that Arma2 would ever support different characters. Even in the character menu, all you are doing is changing names and faces. When you join a server you are still the same character you were when you last logged.

Also, what I am saying about the servers is if you are permanently linked to one server, that means a few things. first, if you do play with friends, you have to make sure you all link to the same server or you would be irrevocably unable to play together. There would be thousands of people registered to the same server. It wouldn't be the way it is now where when a server is full, you just select another one and go play. You would be forced to wait in line and if that line is very long you would not even have the ability to play on a different server.

Would you want to sit and click connect over and over when there are two thousand people who are linked to one 50 person server?

A very very interesting idea. I definitely think that it is worth a look' date=' and maybe a trial to see how it affects and is received by players. I think that a logical next step for this would be that your character can't switch servers at all.

[/quote']

I don't see how this would increase the number of players on a given server. Also, I don't see why you couldn't start a character on another server.

[zorkmid 2]

I was wondering about that. If it's not possible to have more than one character, then it may not be a feasible fix to server jumping, it's too bad though, it would have been a great way to deal with it.

It seems like the only way to fix it with ArmA2 limitations might be to keep characters in the game motionless for 15-30 seconds when they alt-f4.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

That's what discussion is all about.

And I agree with you in one way. Playing with your mates is aces.

But what if the game was better if you couldn't. I mean your supposed to be a lost and confused survivor. Not a guy with a built in radio in his head talking to the people he knew in a past life so they can come and fetch him in a UAV and give him the loot off his old corpse.

There are tonnes of games you can play with your mates as a team. But there are NO games that force you to be on your own in a virtual apocalypse and make new friends in order to survive.

People are looking for solutions to reduce the amount of KOS.

You have to admit that there is a possibility that a mechanic like this would create new previously unseen gaming interactions, rather than the old, get on a server with your mates and essentially do the same thing with the same people just in a different game environment.

[mikyjax 3]

Good idea, but just make that we can't join the server where we died.

People must not be forced to play on one server since everything is very unstable for now. But yes, you can't log back the server you dided for like 24 hours.

So if you had a chopper or tents in that server, they become useless.

[A Man Named GOB 1]

Oh I agree that it is an interesting idea and pretty cool in some ways. I also agree that this game by its very nature very well might have the ability to go places other games never have. Rocket has stated that it is art more than a game and I can see that point of view.

Let me ask you this though. You are hypothetically banned from playing with friends and you meet a total stranger and group up. You play together for a couple of hours and then you die. What happens then? You should never be able to strengthen the bond you made with that person during that life because all communication ceases?

That's what discussion is all about.

And I agree with you in one way. Playing with your mates is aces.

But what if the game was better if you couldn't. I mean your supposed to be a lost and confused survivor. Not a guy with a built in radio in his head talking to the people he knew in a past life so they can come and fetch him in a UAV and give him the loot off his old corpse.

There are tonnes of games you can play with your mates as a team. But there are NO games that force you to be on your own in a virtual apocalypse and make new friends in order to survive.

People are looking for solutions to reduce the amount of KOS.

You have to admit that there is a possibility that a mechanic like this would create new previously unseen gaming interactions' date=' rather than the old, get on a server with your mates and essentially do the same thing with the same people just in a different game environment.

[/quote']

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

"Let me ask you this though. You are hypothetically banned from playing with friends and you meet a total stranger and group up. You play together for a couple of hours and then you die. What happens then? You should never be able to strengthen the bond you made with that person during that life because all communication ceases?"

Well you not banned from playing with your friends :) Imagine wandering through Cherno meeting a guy you know :) "Holy crap its you!".

As for the longevity of relationships ? Well life in Chernaraus is short and brutal you cant rely on anything lasting for long ? :)

[A Man Named GOB 1]

I can rely on Mumble forever! ;p

"Let me ask you this though. You are hypothetically banned from playing with friends and you meet a total stranger and group up. You play together for a couple of hours and then you die. What happens then? You should never be able to strengthen the bond you made with that person during that life because all communication ceases?"

Well you not banned from playing with your friends :) Imagine wandering through Cherno meeting a guy you know :) "Holy crap its you!".

As for the longevity of relationships ? Well life in Chernaraus is short and brutal you cant rely on anything lasting for long ? :)

[patluk@sasktel.net 1]

I could see this being plausible if there were more servers available, because of technical reasons I can only get a handful working good for me. However, I think the loot reclaiming could be done away with in a more graceful fashion.

I don't think there is a big problem with teams being able to salvage someone's loot for them. This is kind of like a passive reward for teamwork.

[A Man Named GOB 1]

I agree with the teamwork and as for the other points with the servers, I think people are more and more thinking of this game as an MMO.

I could see this being plausible if there were more servers available' date=' because of technical reasons I can only get a handful working good for me. However, I think the loot reclaiming could be done away with in a more graceful fashion.

I don't think there is a big problem with teams being able to salvage someone's loot for them. This is kind of like a passive reward for teamwork.

[/quote']

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Your sort of missing the point Gorgen. Its the spirit of the game. At the moment it still ends up being much like other online games where you team up with the same guys and do the same stuff.

Whereas Dayz is supposed to be about evoking feelings.

Fear, frustration, loneliness , desperation.

I notice immediately that the game becomes less scary if im on Mumble with my mates and we are bundling around. And ive noticed that noobs we introduce to the game don't experience the same anxiety i did learning the ropes on my own. Having your clan mates online to tell you what to do, where to go, where to avoid etc.

Rather than just focus on one of the mechanical issues like, returning loot try and think about the emotions the game evokes. Instead of thinking "fuck that I want to play with my mates" think baout what made Dayz so compelling when you first played it.

[Survivor-Kyle 148]

As a player who has no friends in game (all my buddies are console whores these days), DayZ is tough. Every 3 days or so I die (usually due to some sort of glitch) and I lose EVERYTHING. it's frustrating as hell, but it also greatly impacts the way I play. If I had a buddy who could recover my stuff for me and meet me at point X, I'd definitely play differently.

A temporary server 'death'/ban would slow things down some, but it won't really change anything. If anything, things may get more chaotic, because you'll have people who are just killing time until they can return to their friends. If I die on Dallas 1, and have to vacation on Dallas 2 for 2 hours, why would I care about anything? I'm rejoining my friends shortly and they'll stock me up with better gear.

I'm afraid this system would create more reckless CoDers, while not fostering any new relationships.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

That's a possibility as well Kyle.

It's very hard to forsee the outcome of these decisions. Look at removing bandit skins!

I was thinking a couple of days maybe for a "vacation".

It would slowly split up groups of people I think. Imagine you start with your mates, your trying to hook up. One guy is gone to a random death. He waits for a day or two on another server but another dies and joins him. Group is now split over two servers. Now original guy dies and is now on a third server. Pretty soon they are split and unless no one play on the orignal server and dies for a day or two they cant all get back together.

I know that if I die and my mates are near by I go for my gear everytime. but if something happens and I cant get it I carry on playing solo until im up and running again.

And I really enjoy that bit the most I think. Once you get over the frustration of not being able to stick together and get your loot back when you die the game is actually more enjoyable.

You just have to let go.

[Malleovic 3]

I think that this is an excellent idea, but I don't think it's really feasible given the current technical situation. We already have to wait for the crapshoot of whether or not a server will even let us in, and whether it will be synced properly or not. I'm afraid that this would just result in a process like this:

1) Connect to servers until you find a stable one

2) Get killed (happens eventually to everyone)

3) Connect to servers (excluding the one you got killed on) until you find a stable one

4) Get killed (happens eventually to everyone)

etc..

The net effect will be a shrinking number of servers that are playable for a given person, leaving them with the increasing possibility that if they want to keep playing at ALL, it will be over a shitty connection with low FPS. I agree that death should have consequences. Low engine/connection performance should not be one of them.

But like I said, if this could be reliably implemented with consistent results showing high performance even after a large number of deaths, I'd say put it in immediately. It's an excellent idea and I like it.

I'll probably steal/modify it enough to re-post it later without feeling too bad. But thank you! I'm sure I'll remember to give you credit for the inspiration.

[VonMike 7]

Of all the shitty ideas, this has to be the shittiest of them all. It's still a game and we all bought it to have fun, most often with our friends. Implement this crappy concept and I will no longer play the game.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Well done Two post Mike lol :) Same post in two different threads no less. I particularly like your well reasoned argument, it would be a tragedy to lose one such as you.

You might be right Mall, but then I look at the choice of servers I have availible and I think I could happily play on 30 right now ? There is quite alot of choice.

[ElemenoP 60]

People don't seem to understand that "making the game a pain in the ass" is not a good way of enforcing anything.

Rocket said it won't happen.

This is a bad idea and you should feel bad.

[tzero316 1]

There needs to be a way to make people care more about their lives, this isn't one of them. I will agree that I don't feel the same thing as when I first started playing anymore now that I TS with my mates it never gets that tense. Don't forget the cons of group play tho: higher chance of being spotted by players, taking more time to move around, easier to aggro the hoard, ect.

"This is a bad idea and you should feel bad."

Things like this are what give this server its reputation.

[ZombieGrin 3]

You'd still be able to play the game' date=' if playing with friends is so important you'll need to be a bit more careful won't you.

[/quote']

Sometimes careful isnt even enough. Ever had a thermal scoped .50 cal ghillie suit snipe u from a tree line in the middle of no where at 1300 meters? Nothing can save you from that kind of dedicated faggotry

[Scerun 227]

And I agree with you in one way. Playing with your mates is aces.

But what if the game was better if you couldn't.

Whoa. My mind has been blown. WHAT IF YOU COULDN'T?

Now that there's an interesting notion.

GET SOME TEST SERVERS UP IMMEDIATELY FOR THIS.

[wo0kie (DayZ) 16]

Terrible idea.

[Techercizer 82]

If you want to stop cheapening the survival experience by running back to your friends and old loot, then stop running back to your friends and old loot. We don't need a mechanic to hold our hands for this. Just play Day Z how you want to play it.

[leo235 2]

YES

I really like this idea' date=' but I guess it comes down to what experice you want when you play this game, authentic survival horror, co-op, or a no-holes barred experence - its all fine. It comes down to choice.

So my solution: Let server admins designate if they have death timers or not. Those that like it can join them, those that don't find another.

[/quote']

OPs idea is brilliant, This is the brilliant addition to it.

But my opinion is that evrything should always be customizable. People should be able to play without zombiespawns if they wanted to and whatever.

[Heme (DayZ) 0]

Interesting idea, I'd be willing to try that out. Being established on a server I also feel the death is just a minor nuisance when I can just run to my camp and re-equip myself. I know the way there even without a compass by now so it's really no trouble at all.

Also, I play mainly with a friend so am not just some ignorant solo'er who has nothing to lose. This system would really add some dread back to death and that way add some great depth. I can always tell bud to switch to my new server so it wouldn't completely ruin that aspect either.

[DeanBandit2450 0]

Whatever the answer is to not being able to instantly retrieve your own loot is a good answer. Perhaps it would be possible that if you get any of your old items, they are just destroyed or something. Items seem to be pretty easy to destroy items anyway...

Ps. Absolutely love how everyone is so quick to reject good ideas by sounding hardcore when the idea itself actually makes the game harder. Good job society.