Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-17, 05:46
Safe Zone: CLOSED

Sign in to follow this  
Nova_Ethridge

RP2 Considerations (Long)

Recommended Posts

I play more on RP2 than RP1 (I prefer Taviana as a map), and I was thinking about the various people that did indeed want RP2 to be a more "hardcore" RP server, so after taking several things into consideration, here's how I feel about the various aspects of RP2.

Forced First-Person Perspective

I'm mostly in favor of this. I do actually feel that it helps immersion, and what's more, third-person camera allows for...well, let's just call it what it is: cheating. Third-person allows you to lie prone and look over obstacles, or look around corners. It makes things like cover-fire irrelevant because people that are forced to put their heads down can still see around whatever they're hiding behind. I know people like to see their skins, myself included, but I think RP2 should force first-person.

Vehicle Amount

I support raising the vehicle cap on RP2 from 60 to somewhere around 80-90 if we stick with Taviana for two reasons, one of them logical, the other practical.

Practical: Taviana was designed for vehicles. It was intended to be used with vehicles, hence the clearer roads, long highways, and expansive terrain. The map wasn't really designed to traverse solely on foot, which is why it can be frustrating to some not to have access to a vehicle for extended periods of time.

Logical: Taviana is an island, Chernarus is not. It makes sense that, in the panic of the outbreak, people swarmed into their cars and drove away from the chaos. However, because Taviana is an island, cars have to be ferried, shipped, or flown in. In a panic, people wouldn't have time to load up big ferries with cars. In fact, it's fair to assume that the local government (or relief forces) wouldn't permit people to bring vehicles anyway, instead limiting evacuations to people. A lot more cars would be left on Taviana, many of which would likely still be in operational order.

Trade Post, or something else?

As others have mentioned, a "Trade Post" doesn't make much sense as some sort of sanctuary. A small, fortified village acting as a (relatively) safe zone. Trading could be done there, sure, but its primary purpose would be like a refuge or a survivalist's compound more than a place of business.

The new "TP" should consist of one or more permanent buildings rather than just tents and stalls, even if said building is ramshackle. Perhaps the post can be build around an existing structure. There are plenty of mountains that would serve as a suitable spot, as well as numerous wide-open areas (such as farmlands) where such a compound could exist.

Base-building mods?

It's entirely unrealistic to pretend that people wouldn't attempt to build structures away from the infestation, even if they're little more than open-ended shacks to sleep in away from the cold and rain, therefore I think the ability to construct some sort of structures should be added in. Chernarus may be a little too small and/or cluttered for this, but Taviana has an abundance of wide-open areas to build in provided this can be implemented without stressing the server.

Death? Not likely, but something...

I've gone over this before, but I feel that it still needs to be brought up. Permadeath (that is, when you die, your character is dead and you're a new person) simply doesn't belong in a roleplay environment. Too much time and effort goes into creating and fleshing out a character (at least, for us hardcore roleplayers) to have them die to a buggy engine or the whims of another player. As others have pointed out, there's a line where realism and enjoyable play must be kept separate.

Death needs to carry more serious drawbacks than it currently does. Simply respawning in perfect health takes a lot of the pain out of screwing up badly enough to die, especially when you're in a clan and your friends can replace your gear in a matter of minutes.

I've already suggested things such as a respawn timer, forcing severe "debuffs" on respawn, and respawning with only 25% blood and in pain, and nobody seems to like those suggestions. I guess most people want death to be nothing more than a minor inconvenience.

I can't come up with a suggestion people are going to like, but I still feel that something more serious should be done.

More Variety

Is it possible to import the vehicles and weapons from DayZ Origins? More variety would certainly make the server feel more...alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tomeran    3

I did get the impression that its fairly settled with Panthera as a new rp2 map so im not sure how much of the discussion will matter, but on the off-chance it will I'll try to respond to your points as well as possible.

I play more on RP2 than RP1 (I prefer Taviana as a map), and I was thinking about the various people that did indeed want RP2 to be a more "hardcore" RP server, so after taking several things into consideration, here's how I feel about the various aspects of RP2.

Forced First-Person Perspective

I'm mostly in favor of this. I do actually feel that it helps immersion, and what's more, third-person camera allows for...well, let's just call it what it is: cheating. Third-person allows you to lie prone and look over obstacles, or look around corners. It makes things like cover-fire irrelevant because people that are forced to put their heads down can still see around whatever they're hiding behind. I know people like to see their skins, myself included, but I think RP2 should force first-person.

[/Quote]

No. This one's been argued to death recently(and before) and personally, I'll just have to say no. If the intention is to create a "haven for roleplayers", having forced 1st person will effectivly alienate a lot of people, many of them potentially great roleplayers. The "cheating argument" has been used before and stands as the -only- argument as to why one would not allow both options, and against the -severe- effects such a forced descicion would have, it does not hold enough ground to make up for it, by far.

I would LOVE a hardcore roleplaying server, but I will blatantly refuse to join a server with forced 1st person. I have significant experience with it in Arma2 and dayz, I have tested it extensivly and I have tweaked settings and whatever else, and I still absolutly loathe it.

If you want to prevent Taviana from being a deserted server and instead a roleplaying haven, forcing 1st person on it is probably the last thing you should do. I am of course not refering to myself in that regard, but rather that many polls seems to suggest a strong dislike for the "feature".

Vehicle Amount

I support raising the vehicle cap on RP2 from 60 to somewhere around 80-90 if we stick with Taviana for two reasons, one of them logical, the other practical.

Practical: Taviana was designed for vehicles. It was intended to be used with vehicles, hence the clearer roads, long highways, and expansive terrain. The map wasn't really designed to traverse solely on foot, which is why it can be frustrating to some not to have access to a vehicle for extended periods of time.

Logical: Taviana is an island, Chernarus is not. It makes sense that, in the panic of the outbreak, people swarmed into their cars and drove away from the chaos. However, because Taviana is an island, cars have to be ferried, shipped, or flown in. In a panic, people wouldn't have time to load up big ferries with cars. In fact, it's fair to assume that the local government (or relief forces) wouldn't permit people to bring vehicles anyway, instead limiting evacuations to people. A lot more cars would be left on Taviana, many of which would likely still be in operational order.

[/Quote]

This one I agree with. A major common complaint on Taviana is that it "feels empty", and its size definetly adds to that. Vehicles should be more common to help provide more player-to-player interaction, and the IC explenation certainly adds up.

Trade Post, or something else?

As others have mentioned, a "Trade Post" doesn't make much sense as some sort of sanctuary. A small, fortified village acting as a (relatively) safe zone. Trading could be done there, sure, but its primary purpose would be like a refuge or a survivalist's compound more than a place of business.

The new "TP" should consist of one or more permanent buildings rather than just tents and stalls, even if said building is ramshackle. Perhaps the post can be build around an existing structure. There are plenty of mountains that would serve as a suitable spot, as well as numerous wide-open areas (such as farmlands) where such a compound could exist.

[/Quote]

An interesting idea, and im sure many would think the same. The question is however if it is possible to construct such a trade post. The fact that any real building has automatic zombie spawns(that seems really hard if not impossible for devs to alter) is a significant obstacle, but im not an expert here, just saying what I've heard.

It being a "settlement" of sorts is an idea I greatly favor and leaning towards a (another) project I've been planning and pondering on for a while. Of course security remains the primary concern for such a project, but if the "settlement" would hold the same rules as the TP then it wouldnt really be a major issue.

Base-building mods?

It's entirely unrealistic to pretend that people wouldn't attempt to build structures away from the infestation, even if they're little more than open-ended shacks to sleep in away from the cold and rain, therefore I think the ability to construct some sort of structures should be added in. Chernarus may be a little too small and/or cluttered for this, but Taviana has an abundance of wide-open areas to build in provided this can be implemented without stressing the server.

[/Quote]

A couple of months ago it was suggested that dayzrp tried out a base-building mod that would allow for a wide variety of base buildings to be constructed the same way as sandbags, tank traps, tents and wire.

Unfortunetly the tests prooved that the implementation of the mod was unfeasible, due to major bugs and glitches. I dont know the full technical details, but the server staff descided that it wasnt feasible to implement without major damage to other server functions and stability.

Wether that's changed since then or if there are other more stable basebuilding mod alternatives, I dont know.

That being said, I very much favor the idea.

Death? Not likely, but something...

I've gone over this before, but I feel that it still needs to be brought up. Permadeath (that is, when you die, your character is dead and you're a new person) simply doesn't belong in a roleplay environment. Too much time and effort goes into creating and fleshing out a character (at least, for us hardcore roleplayers) to have them die to a buggy engine or the whims of another player. As others have pointed out, there's a line where realism and enjoyable play must be kept separate.

Death needs to carry more serious drawbacks than it currently does. Simply respawning in perfect health takes a lot of the pain out of screwing up badly enough to die, especially when you're in a clan and your friends can replace your gear in a matter of minutes.

I've already suggested things such as a respawn timer, forcing severe "debuffs" on respawn, and respawning with only 25% blood and in pain, and nobody seems to like those suggestions. I guess most people want death to be nothing more than a minor inconvenience.

I can't come up with a suggestion people are going to like, but I still feel that something more serious should be done.

[/Quote]

Im not sure on the neccecity of this. Imagination and flexibility are two key qualities absolutly essential in roleplaying in a game like this. I dont see why people would have to consider every single moment ingame in character. The key word is flexibility: If you want to avoid a character "true death", then there's the relativly simple option of simply claiming a knockout or that your character fled, and was in fact not robbed silly or executed.

Most people, including bandits, are usually fairly understanding and flexible when it comes to their actions and "true character deaths". I've yet to see a bandit or even hear of anyone else demanding that a player(0 blood) death must result in a permanent death for that character. It is unreasonable to the max to expect so due to the nature of Arma2 and dayZ.

The fact that your toon spawns on the coast upon death is purely a game-mechanical feature, and shouldnt really have any impact on the story of said character. I fully believe in the ability to go "out of character" until the moment the in-game toon is placed in a reasonable position to go in-character again without screwing up some geographical detail in the storytelling.

Keyword is flexibility.

More Variety

Is it possible to import the vehicles and weapons from DayZ Origins? More variety would certainly make the server feel more...alive.

Cant comment to this with any real authority since I've never tried dayz "origins".

But more variety is always nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blizzard    0

I like most of these ideas, but tomeran is kinda right . some of these things would make rp2 even more deserted, but it would bring the few hardcore players to rp2.

As for getting rid of the zombie spawns/lootspawns that is rather easy unless they changed the script for it, all you do is when you place a building is set a radius for it then in the buildings init line place the zombie spawn script, from there just change the true value to false, and there you go a zombieless building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did get the impression that its fairly settled with Panthera as a new rp2 map so im not sure how much of the discussion will matter, but on the off-chance it will I'll try to respond to your points as well as possible.

Panthera would suck and if we change to that I'll never set foot on RP2. Panthera is a terrible map. I took a tour of it for a few hours and was completely unimpressed with it.

No. This one's been argued to death recently(and before) and personally, I'll just have to say no. If the intention is to create a "haven for roleplayers", having forced 1st person will effectivly alienate a lot of people, many of them potentially great roleplayers. The "cheating argument" has been used before and stands as the -only- argument as to why one would not allow both options, and against the -severe- effects such a forced descicion would have, it does not hold enough ground to make up for it, by far.

I would LOVE a hardcore roleplaying server, but I will blatantly refuse to join a server with forced 1st person. I have significant experience with it in Arma2 and dayz, I have tested it extensivly and I have tweaked settings and whatever else, and I still absolutly loathe it.

If you want to prevent Taviana from being a deserted server and instead a roleplaying haven, forcing 1st person on it is probably the last thing you should do. I am of course not refering to myself in that regard, but rather that many polls seems to suggest a strong dislike for the "feature".

Fair enough. I prefer first-person over third myself, makes me feel far more immersed, but to each their own, I guess.

An interesting idea, and im sure many would think the same. The question is however if it is possible to construct such a trade post. The fact that any real building has automatic zombie spawns(that seems really hard if not impossible for devs to alter) is a significant obstacle, but im not an expert here, just saying what I've heard.

It being a "settlement" of sorts is an idea I greatly favor and leaning towards a (another) project I've been planning and pondering on for a while. Of course security remains the primary concern for such a project, but if the "settlement" would hold the same rules as the TP then it wouldnt really be a major issue.

Yeah, the idea is that it would have general "no hostility" rules, possibly with the inclusion of suspending KOS rights while within its borders. I definitely think that a settlement roughly half the size of a small town would be good, since Taviana has more than enough room for such a thing.

A couple of months ago it was suggested that dayzrp tried out a base-building mod that would allow for a wide variety of base buildings to be constructed the same way as sandbags, tank traps, tents and wire.

Unfortunetly the tests prooved that the implementation of the mod was unfeasible, due to major bugs and glitches. I dont know the full technical details, but the server staff descided that it wasnt feasible to implement without major damage to other server functions and stability.

Wether that's changed since then or if there are other more stable basebuilding mod alternatives, I dont know.

That being said, I very much favor the idea.

Well, I know on Origins you can construct a house that actually has a secure door, an interior, and (if you build it) an attached garage. However, building one requires an immense amount of work, including collecting a cement mixer, bags of cement, stone, wood, and the rest of the components to build it.

However, given that the majority of the server is against any form of security (despite the fact that plenty of heavily-populated, active Origins servers prove that it's not game-breaking), I doubt seeing it anywhere on DayZRP.

Im not sure on the neccecity of this. Imagination and flexibility are two key qualities absolutly essential in roleplaying in a game like this. I dont see why people would have to consider every single moment ingame in character. The key word is flexibility: If you want to avoid a character "true death", then there's the relativly simple option of simply claiming a knockout or that your character fled, and was in fact not robbed silly or executed.

Most people, including bandits, are usually fairly understanding and flexible when it comes to their actions and "true character deaths". I've yet to see a bandit or even hear of anyone else demanding that a player(0 blood) death must result in a permanent death for that character. It is unreasonable to the max to expect so due to the nature of Arma2 and dayZ.

The fact that your toon spawns on the coast upon death is purely a game-mechanical feature, and shouldnt really have any impact on the story of said character. I fully believe in the ability to go "out of character" until the moment the in-game toon is placed in a reasonable position to go in-character again without screwing up some geographical detail in the storytelling.

Keyword is flexibility.

I agree, but again, my biggest complaint is merely that a lot of bandits metagame, because taking risks you normally wouldn't take specifically because you know that your death won't set you back much falls well within the definition of metagaming.

Cant comment to this with any real authority since I've never tried dayz "origins".

But more variety is always nice.

Origins has a few additional motorcycles, more trucks, more vans, as well as some "scrap" vehicles that appear to have been slapped together out of junk, as well as the ability to bolt on reinforcements like window armor, windshield armor, a plow on the front to reinforce front impacts, etc.

One of the things I'm really looking forward to in Standalone is the ability to modify existing things. I'd like to see that on DayZ and DayZRP too, since standalone is currently in indefinite limbo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blizzard    0

how come we cant make (or the existing ones) a group for protecting the tp/base. same no kos rules but if someone says they have kos rights they would have to bring it up to the trade post police and work something out. Ie... If it was anti bandits going after bandits, they would have to talk to the local tp police and work out a unique roleplayed way to deal with it. weather it be some sort of jail or prison time or a full out execution, it would also give the group that they had kos right on time to get out before a decision is made and possibly escape.

now for bandits looking for kos rights it would have to work out differently as the police should be looking to keep kos outside of the trade post.

Or as another idea entirely we could make a small fight arena and just make crowbars spawn next to it (spawns for crowbar can be placed in mission editor) and when 2 people have an argument and say they have kos rights, you have them both go into the arena and fight it till either one gives up or is killed. Any deaths inside that little arena do not carry any revenge rights or kos rights after wards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm all for having a group of people that are excluded from some of the rules if (and ONLY if) they have oversight from admins to ensure they're not corrupt, such as:

1. Any enforcement activity they take MUST be recorded, regardless of whether or not it's routine or could cause a problem.

2. They're ONLY permitted to enforce TP rules within the TP. Furthermore, they are not allowed to execute KOS rights on people outside of the TP for slights made in the TP. For example, if there's a shooting in the TP and the perpetrators escape, TP defenders are not permitted to pursue them out of the TP, nor are they allowed to kill them later if they're encountered outside. The TP Defenders are ONLY defenders of the TP and its rules, they're not police that can run off arresting people anywhere they see fit.

Essentially, the group would act as sort of pseudo-staff but have severely restricted authority that only pertains to enforcing TP rules, and because their official actions would require logs and recordings, their activities would be transparent to the rest of the player population, which would help limit corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about giving RP2 a much stricter whitelist, and a tougher set of rules regarding roleplay?

Here's a whitelist I found while browsing around:

lTF5SqB.png

Ignore some of the irrelevant shit, left or right handed doesn't really seem that necessary to RP, but you get the idea. More detailed whitelist with much higher standards for RP2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Goz    2

2Jv7k.png

I find this more amusing :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tortov    0

2JuUm.png

Wat :D

I lol'd , what ??? ahah

It applies to you Leon :)

Just kidding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×