Jump to content
Server time: 2018-09-26, 09:40

Roland

Upcoming community changes - February 2018

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, GaryCash said:

The group requirement should be lowered to two players it’s the way to keep this fair to the people who role around with just a friend or two — group pages be like character pages in that sense and should show the dynamic between the characters and why these characters would be willing to fight and lay their lives on the line for eachother

 

Yeah that's the kind of thing I was going  with and if the group become bigger then it becomes an official 

Share this post


Link to post

—snip extraneous info not needed-

Edited by GaryCash

Share this post


Link to post

-snip-

Edited by GaryCash

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, GaryCash said:

I still believe there is ASBOSLUTELY NO REASON to give big groups any more advantage then they already have over small groups.

What advantages do big groups have over small apart from numbers? I think it's a great idea to give people an incentive to come together and create an official group.

 

Share this post


Link to post

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer

This has a whole list on what griefing means, in this case, it is being referred mostly to:

·        Actions undertaken to waste other players' time.

·        Any method of reversing another player's progress, such as destroying or modifying other players' creations in sandbox games like Minecraft and Terraria.

Griefing in regards to this, means destroying a campsite (removing resources) with no real intent, especially if it’s at an hour when nearly no one is online.
 
I would like to see @Rolle please clarify here, because this can also mean groups. This was an extreme problem at the trading post.

Example-

People have created an RP hub in an area. Or a camp of some kind. Other people or a person waits until everyone has logged to return to the area. They then take everything out of the tents and throw the tents around, so they despawn. Some people do it once, but most do it repeatedly, even on a daily basis.


In short, you are destroying time and effort other players have put into finding these supplies and gathering/organizing etc. This then disrupts intended RP as players have to repeatedly spend time to regather the supplies you are destroying, for no reason other than your own enjoyment of making them. 

 

So, you find a random tent in the middle of the woods. You look inside, there is useful stuff so you:

1.      Take it all and then take the tent because you need it.

      a.      Not griefing, you are taking supplies with an intent to use them. 

2.      Toss the stuff but take the tent

     a.      Not griefing, again, intent to use the supplies

 
3.      Leave alone/take no action

      a.      Not griefing, as you have done nothing to change the situation

 
4.      Take all of the stuff out and pack the tent, leaving everything to despawn

      a.      Griefing. You are intentionally destroying items that someone took time to gather and may impede their RP experience. ESPECIALLY if this is done repeatedly. Say you come back the next day or a few days later and they replaced the tent. You then repeat getting rid of everything. This is griefing.

 
“I, whenever I come across a tent in the middle of nowhere filled with High end gear steal it all and drop it around in the forest if I can't carry it all”. 

Then I tell people where the tents are IG

Would that be a ban now?
 
Toss high end gear because can’t carry it- yes, should result in a ban

Tell other people where tents are- no, not in itself should result in a ban

Griefing has been an issue where people spend time (time which some have very little to spend) gathering resources with intent to use for rp purposes- like trading, food, etc. Then, someone or people while everyone is asleep or away from camp, destroys all of it. It’s beyond frustrating.

 
Like the trading post repeatedly had all the tents and items destroyed when everyone had logged. Repeatedly. Why? That is not retaliation (what are you retaliating against? People trying to trade and promote an RP space?), that is flat out being an asshole.
 
Annoyingly there is always going to be stealing of items. Griefing is a mentality of ‘I don’t want them to have it’, or ‘because I can’t take it all, no one can’ and destroying the items entirely. 

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, Bubbles said:

What advantages do big groups have over small apart from numbers? I think it's a great idea to give people an incentive to come together and create an official group.

 

Well with numbers come many advantages and with this new rule they have share-able KOS rights, over ANY distance...  Pretty huge advantage.

 

And I get that, I understand that we want to give incentive to people to play together and make interesting and unique groups for the servers, but groups are also a style of play that is very different for what many people look for in day z.

 

I understand and I love the RP that can be gained by working and playing in a large group, but that is a completely different style of play from operating alone or with just one person.  Different style, different feel.  Playing alone, or with one other person can be a pretty terrifying simulating experience in this game, which is what some people, like myself look for in the game when we are playing.  I bought this game because I thought it was a Zombie MMO Horror game when I bought it and I wanted to be scared.  When your operating in a large group, vastly different and great kinds of RP occur that you can't have when alone or operating in a small group, but its also, again, VERY DIFFERENT.  Working with other players in a large group is hardly scary game play at all, it becomes much more like an action war game, then it is a horror game, the same feeling of being all alone is taken out of the way, which is after all in the games, name, Day Z Standalone.  All I'm saying is that I don't think we should force our players to join massive groups if thats not their particular play style and they prefer being lone wolves -- one thing that comes with being in a group a lot of the time is Teamspeak, which I usually avoid all together when I'm RPing cause I find it immersion breaking most times.  I know people can be in a group and turn off their TS, but you get the point, its a different kind of play style. 

 

There's also the whole beauty of organic dynamic groups forming in game through pure role play, which I think this will likely have some sort of effect on.  Hopefully people will still form their groups just as often in game even if they then have to take these naturally forming groups onto the forums eventually if they want to have the same advantages as others when they are playing

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, GaryCash said:

Well with numbers come many advantages and with this new rule they have share-able KOS rights, over ANY distance...  Pretty huge advantage.

 

And I get that, I understand that we want to give incentive to people to play together and make interesting and unique groups for the servers, but groups are also a style of play that is very different for what many people look for in day z.

 

I understand and I love the RP that can be gained by working and playing in a large group, but that is a completely different style of play from operating alone or with just one person.  Different style, different feel.  Playing alone, or with one other person can be a pretty terrifying simulating experience in this game, which is what some people, like myself look for in the game when we are playing.  I bought this game because I thought it was a Zombie MMO Horror game when I bought it and I wanted to be scared.  When your operating in a large group, vastly different and great kinds of RP occur that you can't have when alone or operating in a small group, but its also, again, VERY DIFFERENT.  Working with other players in a large group is hardly scary game play at all, it becomes much more like an action war game, then it is a horror game, the same feeling of being all alone is taken out of the way, which is after all in the games, name, Day Z Standalone.  All I'm saying is that I don't think we should force our players to join massive groups if thats not their particular play style and they prefer being lone wolves -- one thing that comes with being in a group a lot of the time is Teamspeak, which I usually avoid all together when I'm RPing cause I find it immersion breaking most times.  I know people can be in a group and turn off their TS, but you get the point, its a different kind of play style. 

 

There's also the whole beauty of organic dynamic groups forming in game through pure role play, which I think this will likely have some sort of effect on.  Hopefully people will still form their groups just as often in game even if they then have to take these naturally forming groups onto the forums eventually if they want to have the same advantages as others when they are playing

This puts the problem perfectly. Many people enjoy the small group or solo life that they can have without being forced to be with that group on a daily basis. Removing dynamic groups cuts that experience out with a machete.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, GaryCash said:

 

 

7 minutes ago, BSJasonGames said:

 

I'm not trying to force people to make groups to enjoy the game. You can play alone, with a friend or as a massive group, it's up to you. I just don't think giving official groups an advantage or two is a big deal, but we'll have to see how it works out in-game.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Bubbles said:

 

I'm not trying to force people to make groups to enjoy the game. You can play alone, with a friend or as a massive group, it's up to you. I just don't think giving official groups an advantage or two is a big deal, but we'll have to see how it works out in-game.

The have enough of an advantage as it is. I don't care too much about the non limited kill rights but when the power of people who don't run with groups is completely stripped from them, it just makes it pointless to want to do anything but join a group. But you are right. We do need to see how this plays out in game.

Share this post


Link to post

Like other people said on this, it gives more advantage of Official than non and it also pushes people away and that would leave you have less and less people on here. Because non official will be robbed daily. ESPECIALLY getting robbed of barrels or tents. And with your friends who is also non-official can't do shit about it even if they are standing next to you or near. That is stupid thing to do. And having KOS is even worse since non- officials can't do it. Also forcing people to make groups will make groups shit and all so they can able to play - roleplay and get rights.

Like I said, people will be like "fuck this community and join other because this rule is stupid" and then you will unable to keep this server. 

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Paradox said:

ESPECIALLY getting robbed of barrels or tents.

lol yeah man, that's a definite problem in and of itself

gotta be on the lookout for those pesky barrel bandits! damn them.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, NateRP said:

lol yeah man, that's a definite problem in and of itself

gotta be on the lookout for those pesky barrel bandits! damn them.

xD Damn you pesky barrel bandits xD
You still never told me why you needed them xD lol...

Share this post


Link to post

I'm still dying to know what the supposed benefit of turning non-offs into easy prey is. Anyone? 

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Dakotaen said:

I'm still dying to know what the supposed benefit of turning non-offs into easy prey is. Anyone? 

I’m also keen to hear the reasons behind this, is it anything more than trying to get more official groups?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Dakotaen said:

I'm still dying to know what the supposed benefit of turning non-offs into easy prey is. Anyone? 

58 minutes ago, Sandy said:

I’m also keen to hear the reasons behind this, is it anything more than trying to get more official groups?

This is holding it down to extra interaction, as a non-official group you can still reinitiate. This creates what is known as a standoff, more RP for everyone on an RP server, I know, shocking, right? This pretty much requires you to do one whole extra step, I know, hard. Don't like it? Make an official group. Oh, and you can't have someone running in from 500m that is part of your "dynamic group" (for 3 seconds at that point) and gat everyone they see.

To those worried about people abusing it to initiate on a particular person, isn't it against the rules to bend and abuse the rules to your will intentionally?  I can't remember.

tumblr_owtba8hxJ31rg3vrmo1_500.gif

Edited by Hebi Kotei

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Hebi Kotei said:

This is holding it down to extra interaction, as a non-official group you can still reinitiate. This creates what is known as a standoff, more RP for everyone on an RP server, I know, shocking, right? This pretty much requires you to do one whole extra step, I know, hard.

Except that's not what's going to happen. When a person in a group will initiate on a person who's not in a group but with some friends, they already have their gun up, and most probably their group mates too. They already have the advantage there, but wait there's more. The people being initiated on don't know if the person initiating on them is in a group or not, so they can't even tell if the other guys pointing their gun at them have to initiate too. Confusing much? Now you're telling me that my friends just need to reinitiate and raise their guns before the people who ALREADY have their guns up just fucking gat them right there and then. Sounds pretty fucking fair tbh. With these rules in place, not even a fucking alpha release with base building and tamed animals would convince me to log on to DayZRP.

Edited by SomeWeirdAssGuy

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Hebi Kotei said:

Don't like it? Make an official group. Oh, and you can't have someone running in from 500m that is part of your "dynamic group" (for 3 seconds at that point) and gat everyone they see

no, not now they can not but official groups can come from  other side of the map is this right 

 

9 minutes ago, Hebi Kotei said:

This is holding it down to extra interaction, as a non-official group you can still reinitiate. This creates what is known as a standoff, more RP for everyone on

no, it will not because as soon as they re-initiate then the official group will just gat everyone in site there no Rp 

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Reaper said:

no, not now they can not but official groups can come from  other side of the map is this right 

1

That's true, I'm against that shit in all fairness. They shouldn't be able to run in from the other side of the map, not that it really matters because you couldn't realistically run from one end of the map to the other for a firefight, could you? Could be interesting though as you could have multiple fronts of negotiations between groups and then multiple fronts of a firefight as well if you wanted too.

13 minutes ago, Reaper said:

no, it will not because as soon as they re-initiate then the official group will just gat everyone in site there no Rp 

2

What part of this didn't occur already? And check my last comment, because depending on the circumstances it could fall upon that. How about, take cover and initiate? If they hold a weapon and initiate on a particular person and not the entirety of the group, their initiation does not go to you. Now if they are pointing a gun at you and initiating on a particular person that may be a different matter.

If Group A initiates on all of unofficial group B, unofficial group B still gets kill rights to fight back with. All that changes here is that people can't run in to help you.

If person A initiates on person B and leaves person C alone, but next to him, Person C initiates in person A. 

If group A initiates on player Z, who is a part of Group B, group B takes cover and reinitiates creating a standoff between 2 groups.

The agony I know.

Edited by Hebi Kotei

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, SomeWeirdAssGuy said:

Except that's not what's going to happen. When a person in a group will initiate on a person who's not in a group but with some friends, they already have their gun up, and most probably their group mates too. They already have the advantage there, but wait there's more. The people being initiated on don't know if the person initiating on them is in a group or not, so they can't even tell if the other guys pointing their gun at them have to initiate too.

 

That entire thing works vice versa as well. How do I know that the person I'm initiating on is a part of a group or not? Moving on, it is pretty damn clear that everyone that is not in an official group would have to initiate, so if everyone is standing there pointing weapons at you, assuming that they are official at that point is fair game. If anything else occurs, that could actually be a rulebreak (like someone shooting someone else when not having initiated on them and being outside of an official group), so you can report it.

Quote

Confusing much?

 

 As said above, no, not really.

Quote

Now you're telling me that my friends just need to reinitiate and raise their guns before the people who ALREADY have their guns up just fucking gat them right there and then. Sounds pretty fucking fair tbh. With these rules in place, not even a fucking alpha release with base building and tamed animals would convince me to log on to DayZRP.

1

Well, you have to raise your gun on people still did end up on people dying because they did it stupidly. Raising a weapon ended up in death when being initiated on anyway. Has everyone forgot about demand as well. If you initiate on them and they did not demand it, in negotiation format, the hostage can't really be killed. However, if they are pointing weapons at you and they say, "don't you fucking dare do anything" to you when they initiate on your friend, that kinda sounds like an initiation, so you could retaliate in theory (not saying it is a valid initiation, but there are multiple ways to initiate, it is not all just "drop your weapons, hands up"). Remember the cliche of an initiation is a demand and a consequence (even though that is not really in the rules) think of "don't do anything" as your demand and the weapon pointing at you as a clear hostile consequence. That entire post is just fear mongering in general. There are always multiple ways you can RP as well, negotiation, etc.

I'm done here.

Edit: Make an official group then, play with your friends. Have the benefits that these do.

Edited by Hebi Kotei

Share this post


Link to post

Now that I’ve thought about it, it really changes nothing if you are standing together as a group when another group initiates. Either comply (me) or, if you are one of those filthy PVP’ers (said with love), fight the hell back the second guns are pointed your way and you hear the initiation kick off. The window of opportunity closes the moment you take time to figure out if only one person in your group or the entire group is the target. That was true before the rule change and is still true after the rule change.  Besides, 99% of the time the agressors will initiate on the whole group to gain control over the situation. They aren’t going to give you the opportunity to walk away fully armed so you can initiate from behind cover. 

What does change is the ability to take out the agressors if you are not standing with the group when the initiation kicks off. Then you would have to initiate before you could engage.

Please, gamemasters and staff, let me know if my thinking is wrong.

Edited by Darra

Share this post


Link to post

MOSHI MOSHI! KAWAII ADMIN AIKO DESU! Ogenki desu ka!?

Anyway to the subject at hand.

You all seem to think the only reason we are doing this is to create more groups, well that isn't completely why. If you remember correctly we mentioned doing this a while ago, before the SMART system was even thought about. I will link a few post about said topic and reasons why it was brought up.

As you can see in the posts above, Rolle mentions back in July of last year about removing the dynamics. Because of people jumping onto alts and robbing everyone under the sun with no consequence to their main character. Another reason was of course so people could create groups and rp together and focus on RP and not simply whom they would rob next. If you read through that thread, you will see that Rolle wants to promote rp through this rule not the other way around. Some of us at the time disagreed and the admin team tried to come up with another way to go around this. So that we didn't have to remove the rule because, we agreed that many of our members liked dynamics. So because of that, we tried to make a rule that would prevent the constant changing of characters. Below is another thread dedicated to Dynamics staying after some thought we had gotten rid of it.

Most people agreed they wanted them back, and really we get it! We understand you want dynamics but with how people are abusing them is the main reason we want them gone. Its not simply because we want you all to make groups. We want to stop people from abusing it as it is now.

We went as far as making the 48 hour rule as seen below, but even then no one liked that. An that was how we were trying to combat this problem, but we got complaints and had to lessen the time. Which in turned went back to people abusing the dynamic groups:

Now as you can see, most people seemed to have forgotten that we had the 48 hour cool down to stop the abuse of the dynamic groups that we had been experiencing. It has been a issue for a while, I have found post from before July. An there was even recent posts about people wanting the dynamic groups gone:

There is clearly something wrong with dynamic groups if we have people wanting them gone, and people creating alt after alt to by pass having their main chara affected by it. So we are open for suggestions, it seems a lot like the whole defensive. But we have tried to give alternatives before doing this and now it has come to this. 

Keep in mind also, this will be a trial and its not set in stone. So relax guys, and maybe help come up with a solution that can let us keep dynamics and end the abuse of it. That is all! ^_^

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Aiko said:

There is clearly something wrong with dynamic groups if we have people wanting them gone, and people creating alt after alt to by pass having their main chara affected by it. So we are open for suggestions, it seems a lot like the whole defensive. But we have tried to give alternatives before doing this and now it has come to this. 

Keep in mind also, this will be a trail and its not set in stone. So relax guys, and maybe help come up with a solution that can let us keep dynamics and end the abuse of it. That is all! ^_^

I don't so much think that dynamic groups - the way they have been for a while mind you - have been the problem, moreover that the people abusing dynamic groups have been the issues.  Not saying that this change won't work, but if it doesn't perhaps it is time to look more closely to the people who abuse it and help promote this change compared to trying to fix something that might not be broken to begin with.

I hope the test goes well, I hope that a happy medium can be found and people don't end up loathing this change made.  It hurts a lot of people removing dynamic groups like this.

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, Darra said:

Now that I’ve thought about it, it really changes nothing if you are standing together as a group when another group initiates. Either comply (me) or, if you are one of those filthy PVP’ers (said with love), fight the hell back the second guns are pointed your way and you hear the initiation kickoff. The window of opportunity closes the moment you take time to figure out if only one person in your group or the entire group is the target. That was true before the rule change and is still true after the rule change.  Besides, 99% of the time the agressors will initiate on the whole group to gain control over the situation. They aren’t going to give up you the opportunity to walk away so you can initiate once you find cover.

What does change is the ability to take out the agressors if you are not standing with the group when the initiation kicks off. Then you would have to initiate before you could engage.

Please, gamemasters and staff, let me know if my thinking is wrong.

you're correct :)

We still have to see how it will play out ingame but the situation you described would be a common one. 

Share this post


Link to post

We did just fine before we had dynamic groups, with rules such as these.  If I still played, I'd be looking forward to these new rules.  :)

Share this post


Link to post

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×