Suggestion: player killing penalties - Rust

[QUOTE=Urganite;43229629]I'm always amused by people who suggest the game have built in stuff like timeout, ugly faces, an enormous red arrow pointing at someone who shot someone else, or something else stupid like that which requires no effort on the victim's part in order to stop people from murdering them. Or, how about an invisible, magic forcefield to protect them from being shot, so they can finish building a gun with which to then shoot people (or, more realistically, just grief people until the immunity wears off). I also like to imagine they think that they thought of whatever their 'suggestion' is all by themselves and that it's also the first time anyone has ever thought of that.[/QUOTE] Why? It is not that far off from actual examples of systems used by other games. My 2 goto references are darkfall online and ultima online. In both murderers are indicated by red player names. Ultima had a skill penalties for murderers when they resurrected, unless the waited out a 4 hour cool down for each murder.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43227538]If the game is [I]player versus player survival[/I], why would you harshly penalize someone for engaging in [I]player versus player combat[/I]? Seriously, that's like proposing a Call of Duty game and making you suicide for the rest of the round if you kill a guy. What are you even thinking?[/QUOTE] The game shouldn't be CALL OF FUCKING DUTY bro, seriously that's where every survival game out now has been forced to, the only way to remotely fix this is to can the COD mentality that players have. It shouldn't be that way, a TRUE survival game would feature systems that penalize those that kill other survivors.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43227823]Welcome to alpha; the game [I]isn't even finished yet[/I]. You're complaining about an unfinished game feeling incomplete. Do you think the devs really are going to just bugfix and package up and ship Rust as it plays right now? Plenty more is coming, it just takes time, and until it arrives, you're going to have to put up with what's available.[/QUOTE] While yes this is true, people are still allowed to voice their opinions which will dictate what the devs do and do not ship the game with. Thats why its in Alpha and not Beta. I also agree their should be some indication to show the greifers before they get a chance to say they are friendly then shoot you. Irl you can tell such things from most people through behavour, how they look, dress, mannerisms etc. In a game you cant. And the people that keep saying, deal with it, its a game. irl you cant complain. Well irl you have limitations, not everything can be achievable by the same person, not everything can be so easily obtained. A game can be made with little to no limitations or many, i think thats the point here.

[QUOTE=Snapster;43228621]Just to let you know they won't be adding any type of gang/clan system into the game. The devs want players to have to option of infiltrating groups or villages.[/QUOTE] The quote you got there does not mean that they will not be adding and clang system to the game. Please explain to me. Have you ever played eve? To join their corps you need to make applications. Actual applications the recruiters will review you history in the game as well as your spending habits, your kills + deaths and your fittings. Even through all of this you still get spies. And I think that adding this sort of system to the game will not stop people from infiltrating groups. In fact, I know it wont. I think it would add to the value of a spy.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43228075]By incorporating a penalty system, you [I]force players to behave a specific way[/I]. The PvE elements at the moment are practically nonexistent, so there is nothing to temper or distract from rampant PVP. The rest of the game will fill out in time, and it doesn't need artificial and exploitable PK penalties.[/QUOTE] No matter what PvE element are put in place, if limitations are not set like in the real world then rampant PK'ing will still exist. To wahat extend depends on the limitations set and tools given. So a solution is needed.

[QUOTE=Tyrael75;43230090]The game shouldn't be CALL OF FUCKING DUTY bro, seriously that's where every survival game out now has been forced to, the only way to remotely fix this is to can the COD mentality that players have. It shouldn't be that way, a TRUE survival game would feature systems that penalize those that kill other survivors.[/QUOTE] Bad Reading x 1 You're playing the wrong game, as well, if that's what you want. Besides, wait for Rust to be more finished.

[QUOTE=hybridPanda;43230174]The quote you got there does not mean that they will not be adding and clang system to the game. Please explain to me. Have you ever played eve? To join their corps you need to make applications. Actual applications the recruiters will review you history in the game as well as your spending habits, your kills + deaths and your fittings. Even through all of this you still get spies. And I think that adding this sort of system to the game will not stop people from infiltrating groups. In fact, I know it wont. I think it would add to the value of a spy.[/QUOTE] [img]http://puu.sh/5R4vK.png[/img]

[QUOTE=Urganite;43229629]I'm always amused by people who suggest the game have built in stuff like timeout, ugly faces, an enormous red arrow pointing at someone who shot someone else, or something else stupid like that which requires no effort on the victim's part in order to stop people from murdering them. Or, how about an invisible, magic forcefield to protect them from being shot, so they can finish building a gun with which to then shoot people (or, more realistically, just grief people until the immunity wears off). I also like to imagine they think that they thought of whatever their 'suggestion' is all by themselves and that it's also the first time anyone has ever thought of that.[/QUOTE] [url]https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/[/url] The Fallacy Fallacy Presuming that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43230214]Bad Reading x 1 You're playing the wrong game, as well, if that's what you want. Besides, wait for Rust to be more finished.[/QUOTE] For 1 its not bad reading, for 2 you're basically endorsing the COD mentality where everyone kills everyone regardless and says fuck you to the loot, the only way to CONTROL said mentality in a game such as rust is to implement systems that deter from it but not stop it completely, like I said a TRUE survival game has these systems in place to make people at least think twice about their actions. Also in a real life situation if you were to see someone taking something that you want, you would think twice before acting ;) humans are a wonderous creature that require a variety of things such as HUMAN COMPANY or the company of an animal that WONT kill you such as a dog, otherwise said person would go slowly insane and become unstable to the point where they do unthinkable things, maybe even commit suicide due to the loneliness.

I think the best way is to show names alot sooner. That way you give the players tools to name and shame IF they get chance. Meaning people get a reputation. This doesnt add any kind of buff but actually resembles real life. Where in real life you can recognise a person, you can do so now in game aswell. A bounty system would also be cool :)

[QUOTE=Snapster;43230240][img]http://puu.sh/5R4vK.png[/img][/QUOTE] This, still does not show that they are against clans? I asked for proof, not a loosely worded picture of text (who does that) that defines freedom on the eyes of the public relations guy at facepunch. The clans would not force you, they are only a way of providing information that you otherwise loose while turning the work into a video game. Also adding in some connivences to subsidize things you have irl like facial differences and stature.

[QUOTE=Tyrael75;43230346]For 1 its not bad reading, for 2 you're basically endorsing the COD mentality where everyone kills everyone regardless and says fuck you to the loot, the only way to CONTROL said mentality in a game such as rust is to implement systems that deter from it but not stop it completely, like I said a TRUE survival game has these systems in place to make people at least think twice about their actions. Also in a real life situation if you were to see someone taking something that you want, you would think twice before acting ;) humans are a wonderous creature that require a variety of things such as HUMAN COMPANY or the company of an animal that WONT kill you such as a dog, otherwise said person would go slowly insane and become unstable to the point where they do unthinkable things, maybe even commit suicide due to the loneliness.[/QUOTE] Read: [QUOTE=Snapster;43230240][img]http://puu.sh/5R4vK.png[/img][/QUOTE] [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=hybridPanda;43230365]This, still does not show that they are against clans? I asked for proof, not a loosely worded picture of text (who does that) that defines freedom on the eyes of the public relations guy at facepunch. The clans would not force you, they are only a way of providing information that you otherwise loose while turning the work into a video game. Also adding in some connivences to subsidize things you have irl like facial differences and stature.[/QUOTE] They do not want to create artificial UI elements or a "friends list" where you right-click on someone and they get a blip over their name and a new UI panel shows up. Instead, give your friends the same colour shirt (once more clothing options are introduced to the game).

[QUOTE=Tyrael75;43230346]For 1 its not bad reading, for 2 you're basically endorsing the COD mentality where everyone kills everyone regardless and says fuck you to the loot, the only way to CONTROL said mentality in a game such as rust is to implement systems that deter from it but not stop it completely, like I said a TRUE survival game has these systems in place to make people at least think twice about their actions. Also in a real life situation if you were to see someone taking something that you want, you would think twice before acting ;) humans are a wonderous creature that require a variety of things such as HUMAN COMPANY or the company of an animal that WONT kill you such as a dog, otherwise said person would go slowly insane and become unstable to the point where they do unthinkable things, maybe even commit suicide due to the loneliness.[/QUOTE] Without human morals in a video game you need to implement some sort of a system to emulate them. People do not behave the same way as they do in real life as the do in video games. (no matter what your parents might tell you) With that in mind you cannot completely rely on players. Most mature games realize that. And unless rust wants to turn into cod with houses or another dayz clone then they will need to realize this too.

So, I didn't go through every comment... but basically instead on penalizing player killing (cause that would be a big no no to me) why not make player companionship more worthwhile. Maybe a "morale" style system. Being around other players for X amount of time increases morale and makes crafting quicker? Just a suggestion off the top of my head. Maybe make it effect other stuff like hunger? orrr... idk lol. To me, the problem isn't that player killing is bad its just that, as someone said, your life isnt worth more then your gear. Just need to find the right way to make other players lives more valuable.

[QUOTE=hybridPanda;43230365]This, still does not show that they are against clans? I asked for proof, not a loosely worded picture of text (who does that) that defines freedom on the eyes of the public relations guy at facepunch. The clans would not force you, they are only a way of providing information that you otherwise loose while turning the work into a video game. Also adding in some connivences to subsidize things you have irl like facial differences and stature.[/QUOTE] That came from the owner of facepunch, garry's blog. [url]http://garry.tv/2013/06/21/the-story-of-rust/[/url]

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43230367]Read: [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] They do not want to create artificial UI elements or a "friends list" where you right-click on someone and they get a blip over their name and a new UI panel shows up. Instead, give your friends the same colour shirt (once more clothing options are introduced to the game).[/QUOTE] I understand the artificial ui elements for identifying the players is out of the question. I don't want floating boxes over peoples heads as much as the next guy. Its still possible to implement clans without that... ..what if: When you add someone to your clan you give them a bandana.( it could be crafted if could appear, who cares) They wear it on their arm if the accept and equip it. When they take it off, it is destroyed and they cannot join any other clans for a day (to prevent spam) ... That also bring up the question of how would you share a door with someone? maybe some sort of key that won't drop? or will it? Can we focus on the actual ideas and not weather or not you think the devs have thought of them before. The game is in alpha its out there because they will take our feedback. Lets give them some. [editline]18th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Snapster;43230471]That came from the owner of facepunch, garry's blog. [url]http://garry.tv/2013/06/21/the-story-of-rust/[/url][/QUOTE] I am aware of the source.

[QUOTE=hybridPanda;43230501]That also bring up the question of how would you share a door with someone? maybe some sort of key that won't drop? or will it?[/QUOTE] The devs are already experimenting with a combination lock for doors: Don't tell anyone you don't trust the combination.

[QUOTE=Joeganaut;43230439]So, I didn't go through every comment... but basically instead on penalizing player killing (cause that would be a big no no to me) why not make player companionship more worthwhile. Maybe a "morale" style system. Being around other players for X amount of time increases morale and makes crafting quicker? Just a suggestion off the top of my head. Maybe make it effect other stuff like hunger? orrr... idk lol. To me, the problem isn't that player killing is bad its just that, as someone said, your life isnt worth more then your gear. Just need to find the right way to make other players lives more valuable.[/QUOTE] I like this approach. I wonder what else you could do. I personally dont think that this would be enought to solve all the problems. Maybe this could be combined with some other ideas.

Honestly, what would a "clan" actually do as a game construct? It's the same thing as a friends list: An artificial structure of the game that the devs would prefer players handle for themselves. Screw crafting special bandanas, have the recipe to make bandanas be simply a public recipe for bandanas. Why does there have to be a special feature that accomodates you? What do you fail to understand out of the words "emergent gameplay"?

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43230578]Honestly, what would a "clan" actually do as a game construct? It's the same thing as a friends list: An artificial structure of the game that the devs would prefer players handle for themselves. Screw crafting special bandanas, have the recipe to make bandanas be simply a public recipe for bandanas. Why does there have to be a special feature that accomodates you? What do you fail to understand out of the words "emergent gameplay"?[/QUOTE] [Scroll up for some suggestions] Things like the door locking, trap's, morale, further render distance on name plates for clan members. Nothing really big. But enough that it gives people a little incentive to do it.

[QUOTE=hybridPanda;43230623][Scroll up for some suggestions] Things like the door locking, trap's, morale, further render distance on name plates for clan members. Nothing really big. But enough that it gives people a little incentive to do it.[/QUOTE] Door locking: Combination locks are already in the works, like I said. Traps: I agree with traps, but not your implication that they should have any idea of friendly-fire avoidance. Place them, make sure your friends know where they are, how to disarm/avoid them. Further render distance for clan members: [B]Fucking artificial UI bullshit[/B]. Give them shirts with the same colour (once this is actually in). I really don't think you get what the devs are shooting for with Rust and are trying to change it into everything [I]you[/I] want.

SO it is my understanding that names should not be in the game because they are [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43230658][B]Fucking artificial UI bullshit[/B][/QUOTE] ? I am just trying to come up with some ideas. Care to explain why you think it will hurt the game?

You quoted this post 23 minutes ago, but I want you to read it, and reread it a few more times. It explains what kind of survival game Rust is aiming to be. [QUOTE=Snapster;43230240][img]http://puu.sh/5R4vK.png[/img][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;43230698]You quoted this post 23 minutes ago, but I want you to read it, and reread it a few more times. It explains what kind of survival game Rust is aiming to be.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the concept of an alpha/forums. If you think the game is perfect why are you here?

Just a few quick thoughts i came up with reading this discussion. To your "Morale" system. Imo it would be quite the nice addition. But dont go the way of just genereal buffs or nerfs. Just keep the specific playstyle flowing. If you keep killing people the carebears should be uncomfortable around you. Lets say you have grouped up and a few of you like raiding and killing people while some stay home building ur base. The crafters should not like the "company" of the raiders. So they get like a penatly on crafting time, specifying your certain role inside groups. Crafters on the other hand would make the raiders "uncomfortable" if they join a raid. Could be a slight reduction in aim or something simple like quieting footsteps of everyone except the crafters since you are "looking out" for them. This would not disturb you in your personal gamechoice at all but add some variety to what people would do. There could ofc be some kind of buffs for being around fellow raiders/crafter. you would simply get "inspired". Then again this wouldnt touch the sos or killing freshspawns. The easiest way to change this would be making ammo and weaponry worth a lot more. You achieve that by 2 steps. Increase the amount of time/resources you put into producing ammo. Decrease the value of basic resources. If a new players chops wood he can get a pretty good amount compared to older players. Balance this by increasing the resource cost/gathering gap. Early equipment needs only a small % of later equipment but later gathering gives you way more resources. Let me know what you think bout this :-P

Why do people always presume it's a bad thing to kill players, like it's meant to be discouraged or even penalized? Rust is a brutal survival game which doesn't hold your hand. It doesn't need to show who's friendly and who's not; it's up to the player to display some caution at all times or face the consequences. You go a long way simply by assuming everyone's hostile. Please don't try and dumb down a game just because it's challenging. I've been killed and raided more often than I'd like but if you look at it as a challenge it's so much more rewarding when you're finally the king of the hill. Also (and I really should put this as my signature due to this comment becoming repetitive) it's an alpha. Expect things to change quite drasticly over time.

[QUOTE=Appeljenever;43230758]Why do people always presume it's a bad thing to kill players, like it's meant to be discouraged or even penalized? Rust is a brutal survival game which doesn't hold your hand. It doesn't need to show who's friendly and who's not; it's up to the player to display some caution at all times or face the consequences. You go a long way simply by assuming everyone's hostile. Please don't try and dumb down a game just because it's challenging. I've been killed and raided more often than I'd like but if you look at it as a challenge it's so much more rewarding when you're finally the king of the hill. Also (and I really should put this as my signature due to this comment becoming repetitive) it's an alpha. Expect things to change quite drasticly over time.[/QUOTE] Killing is bad when people go round greifing others, continuously killing fresh spawns so people then log, tell all their freinds and family and write reviews on how shit the game and community are and to NOT BUY THIS GAME. Thats how killing is a bad thing and thats why i agree some limitations need to be put in place.

[QUOTE=produno;43230951]Killing is bad when people go round greifing others, continuously killing fresh spawns so people then log, tell all their freinds and family and write reviews on how shit the game and community are and to NOT BUY THIS GAME. Thats how killing is a bad thing and thats why i agree some limitations need to be put in place.[/QUOTE] Then this isn't their type of game, It's not suppose to cater to butt hurt kids. also They've already made more than a million dollars off the game so it's doesn't seem much of a problem imo for them to sell this type of game.

[QUOTE=Snapster;43231025]Then this isn't their type of game, It's not suppose to cater to butt hurt kids. also They've already made more than a million dollars off the game so it's doesn't seem much of a problem imo for them to sell this type of game.[/QUOTE] So they've made a million dollars by enticing people in to buy the game to then say.. fuck it, we have our money, let the greifers run rampant so others cant play. Good business directive, im glad your not in charge.

Killing is not bad. Lets get that out of the way. Without player killing this game would really be not fun. Now that we have that out of the way. there need to certain limitations on pking because in game there are no morals. If the pkers want to limitations on pking then the care bares should have no limitations on care bareing. Remove all damage from players to structures... No one wants that. That would be horrible. This game will loose the "survival" perspective if it expects players to use morals, judgement and human intuition in a video game. Those things simply cannot exist inside a fabricated world so artificial constructs need to be added to emulate them. It's as simple as that. If the game refuses to add them then it will loose players that want a real survival game. For the people that want that good for them. They will just have less people to fight. Disclamer: I love the game. I really do like playing it I am just trying to have a discussion to see if we can make it even better.