Kill on Sight Solutions?

[tolk 7]

I've seen allot of post complaining about the removal of bandit skins meaning that everyone shoots on sight. I thought I'd try to start a positive and possibly helpful for rocket (though I imagine he has his own ideas) given that this is an alpha.

So; suggest your ideas for preventing people from shooting on sight. Keep them a reasonable length and realistic (not too much work to implement), and try to list the pros and cons. Here's mine:

Everyone is sick:

Everyone is infected with the "zombie" disease but survivors carry a different strain. This strain does not zombify them, but as with the normal strain becomes active immediately after death. Exposure to recently killed survivor bodies (looting) increases your sickness level and has side effects (blurred vision, coughing, shaky hands ... take your pick) that get more severe the more contagion you carry. The amount of contagion decreases over time, so if you come across a body you did not kill yourself (likely it has been there some time), you may be ok to loot it. Side sickness decrease slowly over time and side effects can be countered with a rare military level drug (only found in dangerous places) that wear off over time.

+ Prevents people killing excessively to steal gear

+ Punishment for self defence kills is optional; you can choose not to loot the body and stay well or risk looting the body for good gear but you may get sick

+ Bandit play is still possible though more difficult; you either deal with side effects, have to raid dangerous places for drugs, or target well equipped players (more dangerous) who are likely to be carrying the drug

- Doesn't discourage killing for fun, only killing for loot

- Some people may be annoyed by not being able to safely loot attackers

- Bandits become drug addicts

[privatewolf 59]

I like the "Bandits become drug addicts part" the last thing we need than desperate survivors who are labeled bandits are ones that are high on drugs lol. Anyway, why not if a player was killed by a gun but was not touched by a zombie, a disease is highly unlikely unless if the player is already diseased by something before getting killed by a player. Looting a dead person must give you shaky hands, fast breathing(similar to running but in a more panicky way), and also why not add crying sounds? I'm not trying to make all you looters sound like a bitch. But let's face it psychologically you would think in your mind in real life that "Am I doing the right thing?" "What killed him? "Is the killer aiming at me right now?" basically those things come up while you are looting the dead body which should drastically affect your character's mental status.

[tremanarch 42]

whats with the players that just kill without looting?

[chibigoat 59]

Well, I can tell this thread is going to make a bunch of bandit fuck bags rage, so prepare for that. Most bandits (the kill for fun kind anyway) do not want this game to change at all, they don't want it to become more realistic because that makes it more difficult for them to go COD, BF3 style on everybody. This mod is meant to be as realistic as possible, they need to either understand that or go back to COD or BF3.

I'd give my opinion on what should be changed but I need to leave, I'll brainstorm while I'm gone and come back and post again. Pretty good idea, OP.

[Tegla (DayZ) 112]

omg, another carebear thread..

[tolk 7]

I like the "Bandits become drug addicts part" the last thing we need than desperate survivors who are labeled bandits are ones that are high on drugs lol. Anyway' date=' why not if a player was killed by a gun but was not touched by a zombie, a disease is highly unlikely unless if the player is already diseased by something before getting killed by a player. Looting a dead person must give you shaky hands, fast breathing(similar to running but in a more panicky way), and also why not add crying sounds? I'm not trying to make all you looters sound like a bitch. But let's face it psychologically you would think in your mind in real life that "Am I doing the right thing?" "What killed him? "Is the killer aiming at me right now?" basically those things come up while you are looting the dead body which should drastically affect your character's mental status.

[/quote']

The psychological ideas are interesting, rather than a sickness you could do a "maddness" style concept where repeatedly killing people (rather than just looting) descends you into a form of madness, with the side effects mentioned and things like seeing zombies where there aren't any etc.

@Chibigoat - I agree about Bandits flaming, would be good to suggest ideas that don't stop the Bandit style of playing but make it more difficult/less attractive. There's already significant benefit to playing as a Bandit (you get better loot in general) so it needs to be balanced with some negative effects. Bandit skins did this by instantly making you a target but were flawed because the change was discrete (you either were or weren't, with no grey area), it was unrealistic, and punished self defence kills - probably why Rocket took it out.

[Hawk24 94]

omg' date=' another carebear thread..

[/quote']

[tolk 7]

omg' date=' another carebear thread..

[/quote']

Rocket already said he has plans for the humanity system when he removed Bandit skins, it would be nice to help come up with a solution that compromises for both play styles rather than useless comments like these.

[Hawk24 94]

for both play styles

(blurred vision' date=' coughing, shaky hands ... take your pick) that get more severe the more contagion you carry[/b']

Totally not biased against bandit and towards survivor playstyle....for shizzle yo

[Imbalanxd 59]

Your suggestion doesn't punish for killing, it punishes for looting. You can kill without looting, and you can loot without killing, so essentially it does not accomplish what it sets out to accomplish.

This game strives for realism, so lets think about this realistically. If you have a gun with tons of ammo and you can kill every zombie around you without trouble, and you see someone walking around who could potentially A. have something you want B. kill you in the future, what reason would there be to not shoot them on sight? The only conceivable reason is sympathy, being a carebear essentially. And that's fine, but you must acknowledge that in such a world, those people would probably be the first to die.

If you were concentrating, you may see why its so obvious that you should just shoot the person on sight. Its because equipment is abundant, and the zombies aren't a threat. If you had ten bullets, and you knew it would take about 2 or 3 to kill another player, you might think twice about doing it. If you knew that firing your weapon would attract 20-30 zombies which actually posed some sort of threat, you would think twice about doing it. The player element is already there and working well. If you fire your gun and kill a player, and there is another equally skilled player in the area nearby, chances are he's going to kill you.

The problem is evident at every level of play, no matter what you are doing. When you go to Starey, or the NW Airfield, or Cherno, are you afraid that you might starve while scavenging? Are you scared that you will run out of ammo during your search? Are you nervous that you might alert zombies in the area? No, the only thing a player is ever scared of is other players. You are going to have a hard time imposing believable penalties on players when chances are, there is nobody else around for miles and miles.

[kieran.thorpe88@gmail.com 12]

The psychological ideas are interesting, rather than a sickness you could do a "maddness" style concept where repeatedly killing people (rather than just looting) descends you into a form of madness, with the side effects mentioned and things like seeing zombies where there aren't any etc.

Great idea, not a sickness madness, based on the humanity i thin k this idea would surely to be close to the feature rocket wants for the humanity.

have to think some more on the side effects! but yea i think that's a really good idea!

[tolk 7]

Your suggestion doesn't punish for killing' date=' it punishes for looting. You can kill without looting, and you can loot without killing, so essentially it does not accomplish what it sets out to accomplish.

...

[/quote']

Appreciate the comments; I had already listed that as one of the cons for my proposal. Back to the original point of this thread: to SUGGEST alternatives. I was trying to encourage people to list their ideas in one thread, as it might be helpful for the devs when deciding how to reimplement the humanity system.

I know my suggestion is not perfect, and maybe it does favour one style of play (though I actually switch between Bandit and non bandit myself at the moment). It's not the be all and end all, i'm looking for new ideas. Consider mine an example rather than a proposed final solution.

I do disagree with your comment about people who are not willing to kill other being the first to die out if this were a real world situation. In real life it's normally people who group up who survive regardless of their inclination to kill people (outside or inside the group), rather than the lone wolf. But that's a whole other issue I guess.

[Boss (DayZ) 1]

Well' date=' I can tell this thread is going to make a bunch of bandit fuck bags rage, so prepare for that. Most bandits (the kill for fun kind anyway) do not want this game to change at all, they don't want it to become more realistic because that makes it more difficult for them to go COD, BF3 style on everybody. This mod is meant to be as realistic as possible, they need to either understand that or go back to COD or BF3.

I'd give my opinion on what should be changed but I need to leave, I'll brainstorm while I'm gone and come back and post again. Pretty good idea, OP.

[/quote']

I think everyone wants it to become more realistic however, the humanity system is not a great system as of now.

A survivor can become a bandit in self defense is just one problem. And the most common problem.

A bandit will not out himself as a bandit. So he will not wear different attire outing himself. Is that realism for you?

Bandits wouldn't have crow/fly sounds around them. TOTAL REALISM RIGHT HERE.

There's no easy realistic solution and that is the entire problem.

[Tyrog 10]

Everyone should be blind!

No more kill on sight!

[tolk 7]

There's no easy realistic solution and that is the entire problem.

Correction; there's no KNOWN easy realistic solution. Hence the point of this thread - to brainstorm for the best fit.

@Tyrog - another very constructive comment, cheers :D

[The Killing Joke 43]

CHOOSE to not shoot on sight. If you don't, it's your fault why this continues to happen.

/thread.

[mzltv 2281]

Funnily enough, the kill on sight attitude is as contagious as the virus that plagues Chernarus.

I know that a lot of people will shoot on sight, that's why I, ideally, avoid all player contact apart from my group of survivors I play alongside - however, if I was in an unescapable confrontation with a guy I've never met before, then I could understand how he would be tempted to shoot me. He doesn't know what I'm thinking.

That works both ways as well - Since I can't tell what he's thinking, I'm gonna be more tempted to unload some rounds his way before he plucks up the courage to do the same to me.

Quite the predicament.

[underscore 12]

CHOOSE to not shoot on sight. If you don't' date=' [i']it's your fault why this continues to happen.

Spoken like the crafty banit that you are. :P

[tolk 7]

CHOOSE to not shoot on sight. If you don't' date=' [i']it's your fault why this continues to happen.

/thread.

Please read carefully before posting. You miss the point of this thread; that in real life their are down sides to killing people, which explains why not everyone goes around murdering everyone else. Usually these are psychophysical reason such as maintaining your mental stability. People put in violent situations normally have issues dealing with them (though sometime delayed - i.e. post traumatic stress). In a video game you do not have this level of connection so there is no incentive for someone not to kill someone else. It's not an issue for me on a personal level, I can still choose not to kill someone if I wish. But from the POV of game mechanics, this does not lead to fun, or realistic play in the context of a survival game. Sorry but no end thread for you.

[The Killing Joke 43]

Please read carefully before posting. You miss the point of this thread; that in real life their are down sides to killing people' date=' which explains why not everyone goes around murdering everyone else.[/quote']

Please try not to talk down to people. They tend not to continue to read on.

It is a very simple fact that people are searching, endlessly it would seem, for the 'fix' to the shoot on sight dilemma. Many profess to know that by discussing punishments - even slight ones - will curb the way people play.

I'll use your own point against you, in this example: From the POV of game mechanics, it does not lead to fun FOR YOU, but may for OTHERS.

So, unfortunately, your point is a moot one. You can't make everybody happy. You'll always have the, "if you keep shooting me, I'mma gonna quit!" players and the "if you take away my ability to keep shooting others, I'mma gonna quit!" players.

It's not a "let's search for a fix to help everybody", because guess what? There isn't one. Your solution is the same as most people's. It's a punishment, and those who don't like it, will fight against it.

Please try and understand this.

[tolk 7]

Please read carefully before posting. You miss the point of this thread; that in real life their are down sides to killing people' date=' which explains why not everyone goes around murdering everyone else.[/quote']

Please try not to talk down to people. They tend not to continue to read on.

It is a very simple fact that people are searching, endlessly it would seem, for the 'fix' to the shoot on sight dilemma. Many profess to know that by discussing punishments - even slight ones - will curb the way people play.

I'll use your own point against you, in this example: From the POV of game mechanics, it does not lead to fun FOR YOU, but may for OTHERS.

So, unfortunately, your point is a moot one. You can't make everybody happy. You'll always have the, "if you keep shooting me, I'mma gonna quit!" players and the "if you take away my ability to keep shooting others, I'mma gonna quit!" players.

It's not a "let's search for a fix to help everybody", because guess what? There isn't one. Your solution is the same as most people's. It's a punishment, and those who don't like it, will fight against it.

Please try and understand this.

Sorry if you got the impression I was talking down to you, though I find that comment slightly hypocritical (maybe I have misinterpreted too).

My point is that I'm not trying to prevent one form of playing. I am trying to encourage new forms of playing. At the moment the game funnels people towards "kill or be killed". It doesn't have to be as discrete as you make it out to be; either all the carebares quit or all the bandit quit. There is a middle ground where you can satisfy both styles to some extent without promoting one or the other.

Again, I don't mean to offend but I find your post slightly arrogant because:

a) You assume there is no right answer. The truth is two fold. We either don't know the right answer, or you are correct and there is no right answer but there is a "best" answer.

b) "Please try to understand this" - I am quite capable of understanding your comments. This statement implies your comments are de facto correct, when they are actually your opinions and obviously differ from mine. Please try to understand this :P

Anyway, I do appreciate the feedback. I was really interested in other people's suggestions rather than criticisms.

[kieran.thorpe88@gmail.com 12]

So, unfortunately, your point is a moot one. You can't make everybody happy. You'll always have the, "if you keep shooting me, I'mma gonna quit!" players and the "if you take away my ability to keep shooting others, I'mma gonna quit!" players.

It's not a "let's search for a fix to help everybody", because guess what? There isn't one. Your solution is the same as most people's. It's a punishment, and those who don't like it, will fight against it.

Please try and understand this.

You need to understand something also, i think Rocket intended for there to be some direct consequence for killing players, hence the humanity system in the first place, i think the point of this thread is to come up with some constructive idea on what could be implemented to do this.

so yea people may moan but it WAS an intended game mechanic as far as i can tell just its implementation didnt work, which is why rocket has said humanity will be back hes just not sure how yet.

SOOOOO join in give some constructive ideas dont just try and shoot the thread down.

[Oblud 0]

now here are a few ideas for both realism and satisfying as many people as possibile:

A slightly diffrent look for people that have killed other survivors is actualy realistic.

nof after one or 2 but after say 5-10 kills you would change psycologicly. you would get "harder" less emotional and that would reflect on both facial expressions and the way you act in general and the easyest way to represent that is a slightly diffrent outfit in game because you would only notice the diffrence when you are close.

now in my mind beeing a bandit or a survivor is not depending on one kill but you would slowly turn the more people you kill. that way someone who just killed someone in self defense does not become a bandit right away. you could even make the transformation somewhat unpleasant meaning that you experience some of the sideeffects mentioned earlyer for the first 2 or 3 kills and then they slowly wear off because you get a hold of the emotions.

now again this is slightly on favor of peacefull survivors obviously so why not add a little twist?

Both survivors and bandits have certain advantages. say a survivor can run faster because they feel fear a lot stronger than a bandit who has killed most of his emotions. so a survivor can probalby run faster.

on the other hand an experienced killer would not be so afraid of the zombies as the other survivors so he could probably keep his hands a lot steadyer so make aiming slightly easyer or let them surpress the effect of pain for them so they are not so dependanton painkillers.

those are just some examples the and im sure there are better ones but the main idea is punishing bandits by makeing them easyer to identify and taking a few perks away but at the same time giving them some other perks to make up for it. that way becoming a bandit would be a somewhat realistic system in my opinion.

[batcaveslimer 12]

I think better, clearer, voice communications is the key. But you have to accept that some people are just going to shoot you on sight no matter what. It's part of what makes the game so great (the moral dilemma) and the adrenaline kick of confrontation so high.

[Banicks 55]

Rocket has stated the mistrust within your own fellow survivors is part of the game he wants. Labelling or clearly giving a way to identify a 'bandit' would remove what he is trying to achieve.

Keep your wits about you :P