Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #1Edit: OK let me rephrase, I am not talking about KOS NPCs here more of an avoidable annoyance. You would not risk killing someone for 10 stones and a bow if you are kevlared up if it meant you would be attacked more frequently by NPCs. I am not looking for a fundimental change in play style, rust is fun. But even if you don't agree the majority of real life people I talk to about the game have stopped playing because they are tired of being KOS when trying to find their friends and get a game going. That is reality. Look at server population, something has to change and I think something (even if small) being a direct consequence of killing a bunch of players would be a welcome change in game design. People have commented about players banding together against KOS players and that is really only the hardcore players. There has to be a middleground here between a 24/7 hardcore clan base operation and people that have lives and a job to go back to, to still make the game fun for them. PVE is not the answer as that is boring as shit.
One of the big problems with the game I have right now is there are no negative consequences when killing a player. It has basically turned every player into a murdering bastard and very rarely do you ever group up unless you do so off server.
With the introduction of new NPCs I think it would be a good idea if NPC aggression was a direct result of a murdering or raiding player.
I mean the logistics are up to the devs but if you kill a player you would draw NPC aggro for 10 minutes and if you blow up a wall or chop down a wooden door you draw aggro for 20 minutes.
Then group resources and NPCs together that would essentially create safe zones for players trying to build up and a challenge for well developed players to get resources.
Once you are ready you can take on NPCs and players.
As it is right now the rich are getting too rich and the poor get KOS.
-
-
Totally agree! But I don't really want consequences. I think a better solution would be to push people into co-operating with each other.
-
No, its the real jungle it's far better like that :)
-
Why do you assume there should be a negative consequence? The game is about survival. If someone kills you for your things, he has proven he is more willing to survive in a survival game.
Would you punish someone for shooting somebody in Call of Duty? no, because it's a shooting game. The same won't happen here.
-
They've already said something about not punishing players for raiding or killing people because it's part of the game and should actually be rewarded for creative solutions. If an NPC had a 10 or 20 MINUTE aggro just for chopping down a door that gives no time to raid and it'd tail you for an entire Rust day. In some sense I like it. A villager or something sees a murder and decides to act on it. But I don't really see how it would keep the rich from getting richer. The well organized and geared group will still take out the NPCs like a knife to warm butter and just make it more fun for the bandits who get to destroy a whole town. Survival is the game and when it comes down to it, you gotta do what you gotta do to make it in the Rust world; including murder and stealing. Everything is permitted. Except hacking of course...
-
The consequences are social. When there are guilds involved, then people can hunt down the bandits. I'm a solo player, and I get killed but only when I venture into certain areas. It's fine the way it is.
-
In a computer game it isn't really hard to pull a trigger though. I mean, would you approach an innocent human being and put a bullet in his/her head? Alot of guilds will hunt you down anyways.
-
The consequences are left to the players or the community on the server, which is the point. Some servers are FFA from the time you connect, some give you a starter kit, some are PvE, etc. Just have to find a server that suits your play style.
-
One time a guy killed me when I was collecting resources, a few days later after I built up a decent start in the game and had found a few guns, I found out where he lives and stalked him... I made his life as miserable as I could until he moved to another place. I feel like I won that encounter :)
-
If you think of the context of the game, of course you would. It's a game of the strongest winning. In society, we have social agreements where I don't hurt you because I don't want you to hurt me,and there is the consequence of a "law".
-
Please explain me what the use of killing caveman (without them actually comming to you so don't give me shit that he felt threathened) that has nothing? :3
-
Mainly because if you turn your back on said naked, they could run up and shotgun you in the back, or put a 556 bullet in the back of your head with a bolt action, all because you thought you'd be nice to a noob. Looks can be deceiving.
-
Negative consequences can add depth to gameplay, the same way incentives do. The game is branded as a survival title but it most surely has nothing to do with survival. Running around looking for fights just because it's fun is not a very good way to survive, unless of course you live in a fictional world where you respawn a few seconds later in your bed with no social or physical consequences of your actions. Of course the game isn't about realism, nor should it be, but making well thought out gameplay mechanics should be part of the game.
It would be nice to have some additional variables/layers of difficulty to the meta end of the game, which right now there's hardly any meta. I had always thought it would have been cool if they wouldn't have removed zombies and instead expanded on the concept, making them herd and attract to loud noises like gunfire. Would add more strategy to the game where the environment interacts with you and not just vice versa.
-
There shouldn't be a penalty for pvp. If someone kills an armed person with like a rock or a hatchet you sayin they should just be marked kill on sight? I know it sucks when it happens but damn does it feel good if you're the one gettin the loot. Don't even try to lie to me because we've all been there. The only difference is It's nothing to lose kev and a gun. Thats barely even over 50 lqm and some trivial amount of leather. Anyone with a good location and efficient resource path can pull that out of their ass in less than 30mins, meanwhile the newb is toiling running around in the dark and blueprints are scarce so they take any chance they get to research drops.
It needs a bunker full of giant quadroped mutant abominations. I know what you're thinking, "but those are just the already mutant monsters that rolled around in a bag of doritos!!!". Metal doors have what 1k health? Give em the same amount and make charges useful for something other than just blowing down doors and walls. Make them biggg, like the size of a shack so people can figure out clever and efficient ways to take them down with so much hp. But it is an early stage of the game. It's also supposed to be centered around playerbuilt communities more than npc content.
-
Had several time that i'm the one walking around, not causing any trouble and a person just comes up to me and shoots my naked face :3
-
These NPCs don't need ot be ultimate badasses, just an annoyance that a player would not risk to steal 20 cloth from a fresh spawn.
I get the survival aspect but I do believe human character NPCs are something the game will be developing it would be nice if they acted differently around malicious players.
-
Here's the punishment for killing people- you get bored and quit.
-
A quote from Garry himself from an interview:
The whole beauty of Rust is freedom; to give direct influence to a player's decision to kill or not isn't real freedom. Your survivability as a bandit will be lessened if you kill, as animals will be attracted to you and more than likely give out your position. Although they aren't a huge threat, this puts "good" players at advantage. This is not what the developers want to do, nor is it what most of us want.
With all due respect, the people who tend to complain about this stuff are the people who kind of suck at the game.
-
I Love Ruste because there is no negative consequences when i killing or raid a player. I want a PVP survival game not a PVE game.
-
NO
Rust is freedom
-
If things like natural dissasters were added then i think it could bring people together on it to try and survive them. Your thoughts ion this?
-
This was a thread i created before!
a bit confusing to understand the idea and they withdraw the heli if im not wrong.
Would aplly your idea. just for killing people not to raids
http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1353363
-
The world should absolutely be more aggressive.
Does anybody remember the first steps in STALKER SoC? Now that was a aggressive world/wild life/etc. with a great atmosphere. I want this for Rust. Crows cawing, eagles and hawks screaming while wandering in the mountains, bears standing in front of you twice as big as yourself and roaring down into your face. Places where you break your feet or fall when running (like forests).
And rare but devastating thunderstorms. Lightnings hitting everywhere, killing people and setting houses on fire. I really wonder how they'll handle fire...
-
"Survival is the struggle to remain living." - Thank you Wikipedia.
So I am hungry running down the road, you appear, I want to continue living and will gladly bash your face in with a rock. Now, there are instances where you want to be friendly, which everyone has their time. By talking to someone and continuing on, now you have a player who can aid you in times of issue. By killing that player, now your name is known to at least 1 person that you aren't to be trusted.
Just like the world spins, your moral compass will.
-
Sure some people would do some insane things to survive but the apocalypse isn't even the problem at the moment. People aren't even having a difficulties surviving. Everyone's basicly slaughtering each other for power and dominance.
-
I have suggested this in a couple of other threads, but some form of pet like a dog could be used as a tool to help identify bad players without UI elements like a red name or some arbitrary punishment.
A dog can be taught the scent of friend players (which it will ignore), will bark at an unfamiliar player and will go crazy barking at a player on its bad scent list. You could teach dogs the scents of bad players by ordering the pet to smell a body (if the murderer used melee or looted the corpse), a destroyed wall (the placer of the c4), or a looted container (the last unknown person to loot the container).
This is a system you would have to manage (feed the dogs, manage to training of its scents) and fits into the game world. It also can be countered. An attacker might approach your base from upwind and put an arrow through your dog.
-
If this was a real life situation
Yes, Yes i would... if it came down to survival, not an issue. i would probably even eat him (not trying to be funny, just being honest)
-
That is what everyone tells themselves. I am guessing you have never been in such a situation before? If not, then no, you do not know how you would react. Please do not act macho/stoic until you have actually had experience in such a scenario.
-
make it possible to add friends in game (which would render their names a different color and be seen from afar.) This would make it easier for a few solo players to group up.
-
That may be true for you, and that's fine. But you most certainly don't speak for everyone. There are enough PVE and player friendly servers out there to prove that!
Is this game going to be so limited that it is incapable of providing for both scenarios? Is that the game everyone wants?
There are games out there that allow long established players to dominate new players resulting in a significant drop of new players, as I'm sure your aware. How long does the game last then?
-
Fluffy, this is a simple solution...if you dont see PvE in the server title.. dont play on the server.. If you do and get killed... stand up from your computer...go to the bathroom...look in mirror...blame that guy
-
Isn't that what they have in Nether?
Go play that.
Edited:
Do you have experience in these matters?
No?
Then stop trying to sound like you have by trashing others basing their views on hypotheticals.
What he has stated is pretty reasonable based on the situation he presented. "In a Survival Situation" humans in general will do certain things that in any other situation, would seem inappropriate, illegal or otherwise wrong.
You do what you need to do in order to survive.... or you don't survive and you die.
And if your survival depended on taking something from an "Innocent" person, to the point of killing them for it, AND YOU DIDN'T, then you died based on principles.
If it was worth it for you in the end, so be it... but if my survival depended on having to kill someone, innocent or not, I would be hard pressed to not kill them.
Morals go right out the window when your life depends on making a decision.... it's Natural.
-
What makes you think i haven't been in situations like that, yes i have never eaten anyone, but what make you so sure i haven't killed anyone, ask any vet who has been to a real war and they will tell you how easy it is to pull the trigger, it is the aftermath that is hard.
-
I have actually been in that situation before - but I am not getting into something so personal with someone I do not even know. What I do know is that it is asinine to pretend like one knows how they would react in any given situation, when it has been proven that most of man-kind freezes up in situations of intense stress.
As for your rebuttal, you do realize that hypotheticals are a logical fallacy, right?
Edited:
Seeing as in how I am a military brat with a long line of Airforce men in my bloodline, I can truthfully say you are full of shit. I do know people that can kill easily - but it was never natural for them. It was something they were taught, forced, and eventually came to terms with. The only way someone could ever make a first kill without feeling/hesitation is a person either psychologically damaged, or someone so impossibly innocent that they were never brainwashed with modern morals.
-
I am not saying that everyone could take the first kill easily. It is a very hard thing to do. It would most likely be a last resort other wise you are right they would be
All i was saying is that if it comes down to my survival or yours hesitation would not be a concern, feeling would be, but it would also be those feelings that would pull the trigger.
You maybe a military brat, but some of us are war brats, and i can tell you, we war brats know survival.
I respect your heritage and you have the right to be proud of it and i can understand your views, but it would be your "modern morals" that would see you dead on the ground with me going through your backpack
Edited:
this is also a good point, we should just agree to disagree
-
Sorry - I did not mean to get into a bit of ad hominem here. I just have a personal issue with those sorts of comments since a lot of my friends that have gone/are going into the military have made the same claims without knowing what they were/are really getting into.
-
It's different when a person shoots back at you. Who the f**k would easily shoot a crying woman and her child and eat them?
-
We're still posting in the Rust subforum, about a video game, right? I just want to make sure this hasn't slid over into Sensationalist Headlines or something.
-
The problem with Rust is that the developers are trying to emulate a real life situation. They want bandits but they also want people cooperating by developing towns and such. The problem is that there are no consequences for any actions a player takes against other players except death and respawn. In real life, people would gain reputations for any choice they make. There's also extremely serious consequences when you kill someone in real life. This game isn't really a "survival" game. You just respawn. Usually right back in your base with all of your stuff and knowledge. This removes all potential empathy we might have for each other.
There's no way to identify people from distances. There's no way to tell if another person is equipped or truly naked. There's no tools to let a community build and report things. A reputation system shouldn't be forced but there should certainly be tools available to let the players choose if they want to use a reputation system so some sense of morality and standards can form. This exists in MMORPGs. It can exist in Rust as well.
The problem with Rust is that there is ZERO incentive to engage in cooperative behavior. There's ZERO incentive to be nice. That's not survival. Survival involves working together to overcome difficulties. This game, at the moment, is just Trollville HQ.
-
It would be nice if you could "frisk" / search people (perhaps by making a request which they then must allow) to see what they had on them.
It's nice that the names of players don't betray their positions, but I agree it would be nice to be able to customize your character (even if its just dying cloth) to allow identification from a distance.
Disagree x 28
Agree x 11
Dumb x 10
Funny x 2
Winner x 6
Friendly x 1
Zing x 1
Informative x 1
Optimistic x 1
Artistic x 1
