Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2020-11-01, 00:59 HALLOWEEN SALE
Sign in to follow this  
Lori

"Safe" Zone & Suggested Hostility Change

Recommended Posts

So with the upcoming .63 patch, getting supplies is going to get harder. There's going to be a stamina system, no more apple tree glitch, more people will be coming in, ect. A lot of new and interesting aspects are going to be introduced to the game. I feel like how the server is currently set up, it's going to cause more OOC strife than interesting RP with how stuff is set up. Considering how much more difficult getting supplies will get, I want to suggest possibly going back to allowing people to rob others for supplies.

Now, I understand, "But a lot of us dont like being randomly initiated on and sometimes it's GearRP!" Well, I have a suggestion for a possible solution.

Introduce a "safe" zone. Now, this isnt going to be a "NO PVP" zone. It's going to be a zone where ICly the foot traffic would be so heavy that realistically it'd be very difficult to simply rob someone without serious threat of being caught by someone passing by. Initiating on someone in this zone would have to be made worth it by having an actual IC grudge or conflict to do it for. So it'd basically be a zone where the initiation rules are how they currently are while the rest of the map would be open for bandit RP. So people who'd rather not be robbed could stay in this zone and do their own RP. 

Now, where should this zone be? It'd have to be in a zone where people can find supplies, weapons and be easily accessible. Thus, I suggest this:

 

XqvOTCt.png

 

By having it on the coast, people can still find the basics they need to survive. There's no shortage of food, weapons or clothes there. Sure, the weapons there aren't military grade, but this is the safe area. If someone wants to be fully kitted with military grade weapons, there should be some kind of risk in getting them. Plus, it's where a lot of people spawn, and it's one of the safest areas with easily navigated land. Thus, it makes sense that there would be a lot of foot traffic, thus making it harder to rob people. 

So it gives people a nice sizable place to run around in without having to worry about theft while providing a challenge. Do they want to risk going in land for better supplies but it's more dangerous? People should be rewarded for travelling long distances with the new stamina system, but there should also be a threat in the game constantly. After all, with supplies becoming scarce, it's only common sense that banditry would happen. Furthermore, this could provide a fun and nice area for people to set up trading posts while more reclusive people can go further into the map.

I understand Rolle wants RP first over PvP, but when supplies get harder to find, it becomes more of an issue to validate not robbing people for them. 

Edited by Lori

Share this post


Link to post

Thing is, we had a Safe Zone and no one went to it. At all, ever. ;( 

I mean, we can always try again but I have a feeling no one will go to it and it'll be empty like it was last time...

Share this post


Link to post

Now with "Safe zones" I believe they were experimented with a while back just above the severograd dam and it felt forced and people being hostile anywhere near there would find themselves getting smashed by the report hammer pretty hard. I understand this would be a more natural RP area but without someone with a solid answer of "Why is this here" and no one knowing why it would never work. It's up to players to create and man hotspots, if people don't turn up to them then that's that. The only issue with player made safezone the only way a group holds it for a long period of time is PvP and that leads to more and more until it gets so complicated it creates RP but with OOC means its just there and I doubt anyone would visit it.

Helping each other will just have to stay a fight for survival!

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Gaylaxy said:

Now with "Safe zones" I believe they were experimented with a while back just above the severograd dam and it felt forced and people being hostile anywhere near there would find themselves getting smashed by the report hammer pretty hard. I understand this would be a more natural RP area but without someone with a solid answer of "Why is this here" and no one knowing why it would never work. It's up to players to create and man hotspots, if people don't turn up to them then that's that. The only issue with player made safezone the only way a group holds it for a long period of time is PvP and that leads to more and more until it gets so complicated it creates RP but with OOC means its just there and I doubt anyone would visit it.

Helping each other will just have to stay a fight for survival!

In my suggestion I mentioned the reasons why it would be an area to naturally not want to kick up shit unless you have a really good reason. It's where the most foot traffic is and thus where you would naturally be more likely to be caught doing something. It wouldn't be a NO HOSTILE zone, it would be a zone where banditry wouldn't be allowed- because frankly, it would be kind of NVFL to try robbing someone in an area widely known for heavy foot traffic. So it'd have to be something worth it to do hostile RP there. 

10 minutes ago, Brayces said:

Thing is, we had a Safe Zone and no one went to it. At all, ever. ;( 

I mean, we can always try again but I have a feeling no one will go to it and it'll be empty like it was last time...

This wouldn't be like a "SAFE ZONE NO PVP!" this would be a place where robbing people would be harder because of the heavy foot traffic so people wouldnt be able to do bandit RP there and rob people. Furthermore, this is where everyone spawns in and it's a nicer, more spread out, area so people aren't forced into a smaller region where they might have to deal with people.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Lori said:

In my suggestion I mentioned the reasons why it would be an area to naturally not want to kick up shit unless you have a really good reason. It's where the most foot traffic is and thus where you would naturally be more likely to be caught doing something. It wouldn't be a NO HOSTILE zone, it would be a zone where banditry wouldn't be allowed- because frankly, it would be kind of NVFL to try robbing someone in an area widely known for heavy foot traffic. So it'd have to be something worth it to do hostile RP there. 

I understand where you come from, good idea of paper but from past experiences from this kind of safezone won't work with people. We'll see what others see though! Just for dramatic purposes I dont think calling it a "Safe zone" would be a wise choice, more than just a populated area.

Share this post


Link to post

1. Only if it was actually run by a Lore group.

2. If it was temporary so people wouldn't live there.

3. As long as it wasn't a magical forcefield.

Even with that I really have doubts.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Gaylaxy said:

I understand where you come from, good idea of paper but from past experiences from this kind of safezone won't work with people. We'll see what others see though! Just for dramatic purposes I dont think calling it a "Safe zone" would be a wise choice, more than just a populated area.

True, it wouldnt be a "safe" zone, but rather a place where bandits wouldnt be allowed to rob people so any hostilities would stem purely from previous conflict RP.

Just now, Major said:

1. Only if it was actually run by a Lore group.

2. If it was temporary so people wouldn't live there.

3. As long as it wasn't a magical forcefield.

Even with that I really have doubts.

1. The logic would be that it wouldnt need to be run by a lore group. If you're looking to rob someone, you wouldnt do it in a place where obvious witnesses will most likely come strolling down the road any minute. The coast is the most traveled area currently and when stamina is introduced, a lot of people would end up sticking around it more.

2. Why wouldnt people be able to live along the coast? They'd still be forced to go further in land for more advanced goodies. Furthermore, it'd be a pretty shit place to live due to the heavy foot traffic. Pretty sure nay tents would be insta raided constantly by people passing by. So it'd be a kind of win/lose scenario. Sure, you wont be mugged, but your camp wont exactly be secure.

3. It'd be more like "This area is a really bad place to kick shit up over a can of beans or some ammo because anyone could be here at any time" not exactly a magic force field and nothing stopping people from attacking people for reasons that would drive them to do it for personal stuff like... "You killed my sister, hands up!" or "You tortured my best friend, hands up!"

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Lori said:

True, it wouldnt be a "safe" zone, but rather a place where bandits wouldnt be allowed to rob people so any hostilities would stem purely from previous conflict RP.

1. The logic would be that it wouldnt need to be run by a lore group. If you're looking to rob someone, you wouldnt do it in a place where obvious witnesses will most likely come strolling down the road any minute. The coast is the most traveled area currently and when stamina is introduced, a lot of people would end up sticking around it more.

2. Why wouldnt people be able to live along the coast? They'd still be forced to go further in land for more advanced goodies. Furthermore, it'd be a pretty shit place to live due to the heavy foot traffic. Pretty sure nay tents would be insta raided constantly by people passing by. So it'd be a kind of win/lose scenario. Sure, you wont be mugged, but your camp wont exactly be secure.

3. It'd be more like "This area is a really bad place to kick shit up over a can of beans or some ammo because anyone could be here at any time" not exactly a magic force field and nothing stopping people from attacking people for reasons that would drive them to do it for personal stuff like... "You killed my sister, hands up!" or "You tortured my best friend, hands up!"

For number 2, I meant more in the sense of a compound. Back in Modtm people spent most of their time in the trade post and never left.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Major said:

For number 2, I meant more in the sense of a compound. Back in Modtm people spent most of their time in the trade post and never left.

Hrm true. I'd say maybe no larger compounds there because it'd be very unrealistic? Unless it's run by a lore group, I think? Otherwise, the IC reason for no larger settlements could be that the heavy foot traffic means sometimes dangerous people show up or it's hard to keep your stuff secure. 

Share this post


Link to post

This isn't necessarily a direct critique on the idea but just an observation from past experience.

If anyone remembers the .55 patch supplies were extremely hard to come by and I think it changed the dynamic of the RP in an unexpected way. During this patch you would have thought that "aggression levels" would have rose because of lack of supplies but from my experience it was exactly the opposite. I think this had to do with the fact that (whether this is the right or wrong mentality) people didn't want to risk losing what they had because it took them so long to get it. People were a lot more cognizant of actually robbing someone out of necessity and weighting the pros and cons of their actions instead of going in guns blazing. I think it generated more RP in general and even more great hostile RP because people were more likely to RP a situation then use bullets.

If I recall there were a lot of people that didn't like the lack of supplies but I thought it gave the game somewhat of a more authentic feel. All in all It might be an idea to actually see how .63 plays in reality before trying to incorporate something like this but that's just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Simon said:

This isn't necessarily a direct critique on the idea but just an observation from past experience.

If anyone remembers the .55 patch supplies were extremely hard to come by and I think it changed the dynamic of the RP in an unexpected way. During this patch you would have thought that "aggression levels" would have rose because of lack of supplies but from my experience it was exactly the opposite. I think this had to do with the fact that (whether this is the right or wrong mentality) people didn't want to risk losing what they had because it took them so long to get it. People were a lot more cognizant of actually robbing someone out of necessity and weighting the pros and cons of their actions instead of going in guns blazing. I think it generated more RP in general and even more great hostile RP because people were more likely to RP a situation then use bullets.

If I recall there were a lot of people that didn't like the lack of supplies but I thought it gave the game somewhat of a more authentic feel. All in all It might be an idea to actually see how .63 plays in reality before trying to incorporate something like this but that's just my opinion.

That's a very valid point! Thanks for sharing it!

Ultimately, whenever I post up a suggestion, I'm just spit balling random stuff ^^ I dont expect it to actually be implemented! I just enjoy opening the floor to discuss things and maybe new ideas can come from it. Thank you for giving your experiences in the game! It helps a lot!

Share this post


Link to post

No safe zones. They have never worked and always end up as a loot zone for those that go there.

Edited by Eagle

Share this post


Link to post

No, No, No.. We had a safezone in .62 and it did nothing.. No one went to it, no one cared about it and it was a whole waste of time.. 

I haven't read anything about what you've said and am just going to go off of what I already know (correct me if wrong). What you're doing is obviously best for the community and If you're suggesting this for BETA I would normally agree with you! Maybe if base building/implementing settlements into the game is added then fair enough.. We've already had safezones in the past and it doesn't work. It will either go, people will abuse it and sit in the zone of people will wait on the edge of safezone/wait for people to leave and rob them. Safezones are terrible for RP sake, it makes it horrible for situations as "Oh you're my worst enemy in the world, you've slaughtered my people, killed my family, but I can't do shit because of a magical power that stops me from doing anything" 

Overall in the past we've begged for safezones but they've been removed because no one used them.. Pointless to go through all that again just for it to be removed.

Edited by Lucass

Share this post


Link to post

Image result for it's a no from me gif

We already had this, it didn't work and it makes no sense without a lore group to protect it. Its a no from me.

Edited by KyleRP

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Lori said:

So with the upcoming .63 patch, getting supplies is going to get harder. There's going to be a stamina system, no more apple tree glitch, more people will be coming in, ect. A lot of new and interesting aspects are going to be introduced to the game. I feel like how the server is currently set up, it's going to cause more OOC strife than interesting RP with how stuff is set up. Considering how much more difficult getting supplies will get, I want to suggest possibly going back to allowing people to rob others for supplies.

Now, I understand, "But a lot of us dont like being randomly initiated on and sometimes it's GearRP!" Well, I have a suggestion for a possible solution.

Introduce a "safe" zone. Now, this isnt going to be a "NO PVP" zone. It's going to be a zone where ICly the foot traffic would be so heavy that realistically it'd be very difficult to simply rob someone without serious threat of being caught by someone passing by. Initiating on someone in this zone would have to be made worth it by having an actual IC grudge or conflict to do it for. So it'd basically be a zone where the initiation rules are how they currently are while the rest of the map would be open for bandit RP. So people who'd rather not be robbed could stay in this zone and do their own RP. 

Now, where should this zone be? It'd have to be in a zone where people can find supplies, weapons and be easily accessible. Thus, I suggest this:

 

XqvOTCt.png

 

By having it on the coast, people can still find the basics they need to survive. There's no shortage of food, weapons or clothes there. Sure, the weapons there aren't military grade, but this is the safe area. If someone wants to be fully kitted with military grade weapons, there should be some kind of risk in getting them. Plus, it's where a lot of people spawn, and it's one of the safest areas with easily navigated land. Thus, it makes sense that there would be a lot of foot traffic, thus making it harder to rob people. 

So it gives people a nice sizable place to run around in without having to worry about theft while providing a challenge. Do they want to risk going in land for better supplies but it's more dangerous? People should be rewarded for travelling long distances with the new stamina system, but there should also be a threat in the game constantly. After all, with supplies becoming scarce, it's only common sense that banditry would happen. Furthermore, this could provide a fun and nice area for people to set up trading posts while more reclusive people can go further into the map.

I understand Rolle wants RP first over PvP, but when supplies get harder to find, it becomes more of an issue to validate not robbing people for them. 

Way I see it we shouldn't have a safezone at all. Hotspots sort of create that kinda of "dont rob people you'll get fucked on" type thing. I love when an entire town gets initiated on and everything is confusing, and I think it seems really unrealistic to have these safe zones. It creates a feeling that the rest of the map is for PVP, when in reality it isnt. In short, it just adds another layer of rules that arent really necessary. 

Share this post


Link to post

safe zones are bad ideas and rather dumb ty

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Lori said:

So with the upcoming .63 patch, getting supplies is going to get harder. There's going to be a stamina system, no more apple tree glitch, more people will be coming in, ect. A lot of new and interesting aspects are going to be introduced to the game. I feel like how the server is currently set up, it's going to cause more OOC strife than interesting RP with how stuff is set up. Considering how much more difficult getting supplies will get, I want to suggest possibly going back to allowing people to rob others for supplies.

Now, I understand, "But a lot of us dont like being randomly initiated on and sometimes it's GearRP!" Well, I have a suggestion for a possible solution.

Robbery for gear should have never been removed anyways. We've essentially stripped a massive component of DayZ out of DayZ simply because people were getting upset because they lost their M4. A solution would be to meet halfway, use common sense if a report goes up, and change it to where you can't strip everything away from someone during a robbery, only take their gun, or their backpack with its contents and just leave it at that. That way we can actually be, I don't know, bandits on a zombie survival game that is all about survival through any means. 

As for safe zones? I just don't see them working until we have modding and base building. One problem with the safe trade zone was when everyone is logged off you have ding-bats who want to raid everything because they know they can't be stopped as no one is online, which in return sometimes kills the trade-zone. If someone actually organizes a group the safe-zone can be pulled off, but a lot of the time people don't put in %100. I'm okay with a safe-zone. Settlement rules worked out just fine but some people got mad because they couldn't attack the popular settlements 24/7. 

Edited by Zero

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Zero said:

Robbery for gear should have never been removed anyways. We've essentially stripped a massive component of DayZ out of DayZ simply because people were getting upset because they lost their M4. A solution would be to meet halfway and change it to where you can't strip everything away from someone during a robbery, only take their gun, or their backpack with its contents and just leave it at that. That way we can actually be, I don't know, bandits on a zombie survival game that is all about survival through any means. 

As for safe zones? I just don't see them working until we have modding and base building. One problem with the safe trade zone was when everyone is logged off you have ding-bats who want to raid everything because they know they can't be stopped as no one is online, which in return sometimes kills the trade-zone. If someone actually organizes a group the safe-zone can be pulled off, but a lot of the time people don't put in %100. I'm okay with a safe-zone. Settlement rules worked out just fine but some people got mad because they couldn't attack the popular settlements 24/7. 

True orz I made this thread to try and maybe find a middle ground between the people who want to allow robbery and the people who didn't. But I guess it might be harder than I thought.

Share this post


Link to post

Safe Zones just don't work at all. We've done it before and it don't work. I think it would be cool to see a couple of groups allied at NW with a security team or something which they can call a safe zone but there shouldn't been any rules. But people will just run from hostile acts into the safe zone and it ruins things. The whole stamina and food system just means that people need to value their character more and cant run around all the time. I'd say no to this idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Eagle said:

No safe zones. They have never worked and always end up as a loot zone for those that go there.

This pretty much.  Even the safe zone that was implemented before was only used by about 10 people... 

Share this post


Link to post

As people mentioned before we had a safe zone before. No one went to it and visited other hotspots instead of the safe zone. It would just become abused and wouldn't work. I'm sorry it's a no from me.

Share this post


Link to post

I remember there being a safe zone a few months back, people never really used it. 

-1

Edited by Lady In Blue

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, DrMax said:

Safe Zones just don't work at all. We've done it before and it don't work. I think it would be cool to see a couple of groups allied at NW with a security team or something which they can call a safe zone but there shouldn't been any rules. But people will just run from hostile acts into the safe zone and it ruins things. The whole stamina and food system just means that people need to value their character more and cant run around all the time. I'd say no to this idea. 

 

17 minutes ago, ExoticRP said:

This pretty much.  Even the safe zone that was implemented before was only used by about 10 people... 

 

4 minutes ago, lukaszxe said:

As people mentioned before we had a safe zone before. No one went to it and visited other hotspots instead of the safe zone. It would just become abused and wouldn't work. I'm sorry it's a no from me.

Yep! A lot of people expressed that! I'm happy everyone's able to come to a consensus :D!

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Eagle said:

No safe zones. They have never worked and always end up as a loot zone for those that go there.

 

1 hour ago, KyleRP said:

Image result for it's a no from me gif

We already had this, it didn't work and it makes no sense without a lore group to protect it. Its a no from me.

 

1 hour ago, Dan said:

safe zones are bad ideas and rather dumb ty

Kindly summed up by previous people. 

Safe zones just won't work unless enforced by players. But everyone will just have to cope and see how things go.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Chief said:

 

 

Kindly summed up by previous people. 

Safe zones just won't work unless enforced by players. But everyone will just have to cope and see how things go.

Yep! I'd request the thread be closed since there seems to be a general consensus, but I'm interested to see if anyone else has anything to say or an idea from this! It'd be a shame to close it so soon!

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...