"Karma" System?

This is probably a stretch, but I was wondering what people would think about implementing some sort of system to identify players that initiate combat against another player (basically some way to temporarily mark people that are prone to KoS). Possibly flagging the player by displaying their name in red for 15 minutes after attacking another player that wasn’t already flagged (or the last person to kill them).

The reason that I bring this up is probably pretty obvious at this point, but I have a tendency to at least try to communicate with another player before just blindly unloading on them. Unfortunately, my attempts at communication are more often than not, instantly reciprocated in the form of a bullet to my head. It’s gotten to the point where the focus of the game seems to be regressing toward that of a basic FPS with less emphasis on player interaction and building, than just running around and killing everything that moves without even a seconds thought. If realism is a goal, then I’m wondering if something like this would make players at least slightly more conscientious of the decision to kill another player (i.e. “hey, this guy is naked and hitting a tree with a rock… maybe I shouldn’t just walk up behind him and shoot him in the head for the hell of it”) rather than the kill or be killed attitude that seems to prevail on most servers.

I’m sure there are people out there that would strongly object to such a thing, and I respect the opinion of those people, but I can’t help but be curious if this would restore a certain amount of balance that seems to be currently lacking in the game. I’m also aware of the fact that PvE is an option, but personally believe that PvP is a critical element of the game and should remain that way. I just think it might be a nice change of pace to be able to play the game solo without roughly 90% of the encounters consisting of “hey man, I’m frien…” you are dead.

No!

I will just copy paste what I said in another topic

It has been mentioned a million times already , they will NEVER do this to the game . Liberty is what defines rust , you can do whatever you want there and it’s much more interesting to see someone that says friendly and not know if he really is or not or to trade with him and not know if he will backstab you , if you see that thing over their heads like “the bad group” or something like that it wouldn’t be fun at all.

What you’re suggesting is basically asking for EZMODE which this game most certainly is not. As with most idea like this you can expect admins of servers to mod this into their server if they really want it, and then you’ll go play in that server, and people like myself and most of the Rust community will play in the servers that don’t. Nature finds a way. Or, sorry I mean Garry. Garry finds a way.

So many players want to be spoon fed their games, its truely sad really. Use your noodle and figure out a way to form alliances, discover strategies that keep you alive, or avoid other players. Stop asking devs to ruin the game because you are lazy

Added: last i checked Obama isnt on the dev team so this is a real world not a “fair” world

Read more.

Your suggestion to facilitate the goal of realism is to implement something as unrealistic as an early warning system about someone’s past behavior…

This is backwards. A more realistic goal would be to force the players to consider even showing themselves, let alone approach someone who could potentially kill them, especially when you can’t be sure who they are. In real life, there’s no warning system for these kind of things, that while Rust doesnt go for 100% realism, this mechanic is here to stay as it should be.

in this kind of situation, some people would genuinely and openly approach the first human they saw. that does not guarantee that person is kind, decent or remotely unlikely to kill you. the reality is you cannot tell from first glances if a person is hostile or not, that is proven one way or another by their behaviors.

that said, when voice is implemented properly i think there will be more communication; for now, lets be honest, if i stand still long enough to type, i’m going to have my head cracked open if they aren’t friendly.

NO NO NO…

When I think of Rust, its spawning in a random place, and getting killed 5 minutes in my either a super geared up player or duelling it out with someone using just rocks. :slight_smile:

Yeah, I realize that displaying the person’s name in red isn’t exactly realistic, but how is it any less realistic than displaying it in white. I don’t expect to walk down the sidewalk and see “n00bblast3r187” floating above a persons head unless I’ve done a serious amount of hallucinogens. Nor would I expect myself to be building M4 Carbines from scratch to hunt radioactive bears for cans of tuna and blueprints on how to build a large wooden storage crate (though maybe this is no longer the case in experimental). I think it’s safe to say that we’ve passed the point of achieving 100% realism here.

The point that I was trying to make, is that I think it would be cool if there were some sort of system to make players actually consider the decision, rather than just clicking / killing on anything that moves. It’s getting to the point on most servers where it’s just a bunch of people running around clicking on each other and there are already a ton of excellent FPS games (Bioshock, etc.) to fill that niche in the industry.

I don’t know… I can see the point that providing some sort of early warning system would make the game less true to the unpredictable nature of these random encounters, but I also don’t suspect this would instantly turn the game into “EZMODE” as someone stated, since you need to be fairly close to a player before you can even see the text above their heads.

The real threat in this game will alwYs be other players. Thats how it is in all shooters! The difference here is that there are no teams. No visible alliances, no indication of who intends what other then to survive. This is what makes rust special in the world of computer games. If anything artificial is inserted to demish this it will be a very sad day in history. I love the decision point when i approach a house and see movement. Do i call out, do i hide, should i run or attach. Its probably the most exciting game ive played in many years for just this reason

Yeah, I get what you’re saying (particularly the point about imposing an artificial means). It’s more brainstorming than anything else, because it’s just kind of sad to see the game regress into more of a shooter than anything else and I think it would be nice to have some sort of mechanic that forces a person to consider whether or not running around blindly shooting everyone is the best tactic, because it’s one that happens to be taken by 90% of the population.

I wonder if they could implement some sort of bounty system. It seems like that would fall within the parameters of a “natural” solution and ultimately achieve a similar effect. Something that could at least make people consider the potential ramifications of resorting to KoS 100% of the time.

there is a system in place to handle this, its called revenge and it works very well.

I’m sure plenty will agree with me.

nothing like getting killed and remembering the name and coming across their base a week later and camping their ass.

I’m all for some good old fashioned revenge, but it seems like the majority of the time they’re gone by the time I get back and some of them I haven’t run into since due to the size of the map. I do like the fact that it encourages possibly grouping up with some other players to deliver said can of whoopass, but the last thing I’d want to do is become one of those people that incessantly whine in chat about getting killed… I truly despise that crap and it comprises about 50% of the chat on the server (with 40% more dedicated to hacking allegations and 10% people actually just trying to have a normal conversation).

You mentioned “coming across their base a week later”. Is there any way to tell whose base belongs to who without actually witnessing them walking into it or trying to find out from other players? If so, I’d definitely like to know.

Everyone will do better in a group so as the game gets fleshed out and people start to realize this the KOS assholes will dwindle and he groups will rise. Of course this will require people workng together and that requires some commucation and trust. It should develop naturally not be imposed, its frustrating now but we are very early in the process so give it time. Right now if two peoe worked together they would rule the server lol

“I’m offering 500 metal fragments and a rifle to the first person to kill burroinquieto tonight.” There’s your bounty system. You don’t need code for it.

You’re confusing the current state of the game with the final configuration. Right now, there is little in the way of game balance. This will change. The devs have planned for a long time to add various things such as traps and other base defenses, and their vision has player-created towns establish the server’s social order and rules, not artificial imposition of arbitrary rules in code.

When servers have a better chance to persist and develop, they will begin to form identities and grow into a community. Reputation on a server will become more important, and it’ll be less easy to just leave and start fresh on a new server. Pissing off everyone else by being that KOSer may give you the joy of the server admin declaring a bounty on killing you until you leave the server, banning you by (gameplay) harassment and social rejection instead of a single zap of admin power. Of course, if you’re really that bad, banning your Steam ID is trivial.

Welcome to Rust.

Yes! This is exactly the sort of thing I’m talking about. I’m just not quite sure how it could be implemented in a way that could ensure payment and proof of the kill for collection. Maybe some sort of escrow system and the ability to cut the other players head off afterwards (which seems a little gruesome, but I must admit, would be kinda cool).

I’m not really sure why you would think that I’m confusing the current state of the game with the final configuration, quite the opposite in fact. I’m well aware of the fact that the game is still in development and that’s the sole purpose for taking the time to post this in a community forum, in order to receive feedback and alternate viewpoints from other players that could potentially result in what the community as a whole would agree, a positive contribution to the end product.

As stated in my initial post, I don’t mind if people disagree with any of the suggestions that I’ve made (though for some reason a few seem to react with an oddly aggressive or defensive tone), they’re entitled to their opinions and again, that’s the whole point of having a public forum - “a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged”.

Thanks! (kidding… I know what you mean, people spam this constantly on my server).

I may have misunderstood the direction you were coming from, and in which case, I apologize for putting words in your mouth.

I’d like to see a way of collecting an enemy’s head as an inventory item that you can carry as a trophy for this exact reason. Especially once character customization hits, and especially if we can change the faces, because this opens up being able to stick someone’s head on a pole and deploy it on the map as a model and it’s that guy’s character’s head.

As for the escrow, no need. The person who’s offering the bounty should be aware that they’re putting a price on someone’s head. Someone coming to collect by turning in said head just killed the owner and can kill you and loot your corpse. Consider the consequences of trying to go back on deals you’ve agreed to in a game where death comes quickly. And, if you’re carrying a key to a door for anything important, death is a problem. Think about the consequences of posting bounties before you shout them out.

However, this is not to discount solutions that do make the process more rigorous and institutionalized. I could see a player-run bounty board, where forum posts on the server’s dedicated site (not Facepunch) post binding contracts that do not go into effect (i.e. the bounty is not available) until a server mod confirms that the player offering the contract has stored the reward in escrow with the official cache in the admin-run bounty board office, and then the hunt is on. I could see rules for prohibiting too many bounties on a player at one time to prevent griefing, or in fact exactly the opposite, encouraging it by automating the bounty board as an updating Most Wanted on the game’s site and piped in as a MOTD on the server using the extensability of Rust’s HTML UI.

Many legacy servers are running plugins that run a killfeed, and while it’s not something that’ll likely go into vanilla, it’s a reasonable stand-in for counting coup.

Rust is about giving players the freedom to devise their own solutions to the problems provided by the game (and by server rules set by the admin at their discretion) and allowing emergent gameplay to handle the rest. This is garry’s design from the start.

I did link this for a reason, because it’s garry’s own words about Rust’s challenges and intended player-driven solutions, and it goes into more detail.

That would be completely badass, though I probably wouldn’t use it myself in the off chance that one of the owners of previous head happened to stumble on my base and think “oh, well… ok, I guess I know who I’m going to be raiding next.” (which kind of makes it all the more badass if people do it).

Agreed, and a very good point if they couldn’t implement it using some sort of way that’s true to the mechanics and original ideology of the developers. The only thing I’m wondering is if that if a ton of people started to “abuse” the system by placing bounties with absolutely no intention of paying then eventually people may just start ignoring the system altogether (assuming killing the guy that posted the reward has nothing of value and they basically just ended up wasting 30 minutes or more tracking some guy because they thought they’d get something in return).

Definitely something to consider (and an innovative approach). I think you’re right in that they would probably need some way to prohibit placing an excessive amount of bounties on a single player. If someone were to have the misfortune of pissing off a clan with a fair amount of resources at their disposal then they could effectively grief him off of the server by repeatedly placing bounties on him. Maybe they could limit the number of bounties a player can post within a week or something, but even then it seems like the clan could just rotate through the members to effectively achieve the same result.

Yeah, I get exactly where they’re coming from and it actually makes for a very unique sort of sociological experiment in a way. It’s a complex problem. On one hand you would want a design that promotes freedom and encourages player driven solutions to any problems that may arise within the environment, but on the other, something that could possibly instill a more ethical mindset to prevent the game from being reduced to just killing everyone on sight without any thought, because it’s likely they would do the same to you (because it’s been done to them so many times). I think it would be interesting to see some sort of quantitative study on the rate at which KoS has increased (and continues to increase it would seem) in frequency since the servers first went online. I wouldn’t be surprised to find an almost exponential curve.