ZedsDeadBaby

Umm, that's kind of the point, Sherlock. If he's not on the latest version of the game then his tests are completely worthless and totally unhelpful to the developers. Like "Oh, something weird happened on your 3-month old code that no longer exists. Can you go back and check it?" Test the latest version or you're not testing. And if you're not testing you're about as useful as tits on toast.

If you've got 0 ammo and you're not willing to server-hop all night to farm the clips then dropping it is the wise choice in some cases.

It's shocking that the second half of that paragraph is actually intelligent and reasonable because the first half is absolute horseshit. I'm going to call it a draw. But, seriously, Admins have power against Bandits? Why would they ever? Why should admins have power over anyone who plays the game besides those who are in violation of the rules? You're server admins, not game designers. If you don't like the game rocket has designed, why not just go host another one? That off my chest, the notion of private servers isn't distasteful provided you stick to your own hives - though I find the whole thing kind of silly since the uncertainty of playing with strangers is kind of the heart and soul of the game from where I stand, but it's a "to each their own" situation. If you actually follow through with competitive private servers and FvF competitions, cool too. Though, I fail to see why that stuff isn't possible on public servers with some planning. Anyway, drop the "99.9% Banditry" bunk and the "admins should be able to flex their power" and you might have a reasonable post here arguing for official recognition of the private server/private hive setup.

I hate to post such a seemingly complaintive thread, but I feel this issue is rather important and have noticed more and more servers coming online that are locked indefinitely or for long periods of time. Allownaces must be made obviously for people who have technical problems and must lock their server for a time to try and work things out (and it's understood people might have other obligations which require this lockage to last awhile). However, it seems more common lately that these lock-outs are not technical in nature. Servers with 2-10 players online, often sharing a clan tag, but password locked are becoming more and more common on the server list. It's hard to overstate the impact these servers can have on the integrity of play. So I think any server that remains locked for a period of time deemed appropriate (60 minutes seems reasonable to me) should be added to an "audit" and investigated by staff at their convenience. Servers found to be running private "safe zones" or clan servers should be dealt with accordingly. Warning(s) followed by blacklisting for repeat offenses, perhaps?

Oh, well that's a far simpler solution. Here's hoping that becomes a standard and we can put the issue to rest.

Honestly I think an almost universal rule of thumb in DayZ is don't do ANYTHING next to ANYTHING ELSE. Seriously. If you are about to do X next to Y, consider whether you can remove Y from the equation. Case in point: One of my squadmates got out of a vehicle next to a tree. He appeared at the TOP of the tree and fell to his death, losing his gear and a motorcycle in the process.

If newbies were being slaughtered so readily, then the recent massive influx of new players we have seen would have caused murder rates to skyrocket. Instead, they have fallen as a percentage of overall deaths. Most serious PvPers do not bother with new players because they have no worthwhile loot and the southern coast is ridiculously dangerous. Nobody wants to give up an M249 w/ 1200 rounds, NVGs and a GPS to some lack-wit with a Winchester who just happened to come around the corner at the right time. So I think the notion that newbies are being targeted is a bit of a myth. You have the random bored sniper hitting Cherno or Elektro, but for the most part PvP takes place around helo crashes, Stary Sobor, the NWAF and other high-value northern locations. Hospitals are a bit of a mess because even veterans need to hit those once in awhile to keep a steady supply of morphine, but again most smart ones hit-and-run and don't stick around looking for Beanatas to pop.

The day I realized 3 zombies means 3 gunshots which means 3 chances for a player in the area to get a bead on me, move in and take me out. Terrifying, really.

Just a general note: as a veteran player, the harder the game becomes the less willing I am going to be to group up with random people in the game. I already have difficulty enjoying the company of random people because: They will not stay close, resulting in confusion and often friendly fire. They refuse to take direction in combat, again creating dangerous cross-fire scenarios. They run. Everywhere. Wasting my medical supplies and drawing undue attention. They shoot. Constantly. Again, drawing undue attention. They mooch off of me because I had the wherewithal to farm up basic supplies while they ran around in circles yelling "Friendly!" They get lost because they either don't have a map or can't read it. The harder the game becomes, the less I will want these kinds of people around. They are already a liability to my survival. Making the game harder will make them LESS desirable as companions, not more. I will play with my friends whom I trust to play quietly, remain unseen, fire only when necessary and stay in formation so nobody gets shot in the back of the head by mistake. I really think this notion that making the game more difficult will suddenly have everyone playing grab-ass and kissy-face is a pipe dream. No matter how many cooperative elements get added and no matter how difficult the game becomes, it will always be better to group with people you know and trust. Why? Because you know them and trust them. Those words mean things. You can't "game design" trust. It has to be built through demonstrated behaviors and unfortunately not everyone is capable of demonstrating trustworthy behaviors.

Hey fancypants, guess what? This is an open alpha test. This is rocket doing his research. So basically you're complaining that he didn't do his research before doing his research. Stunning. And to put a cherry on top of your shit sundae, you're also completely wrong about the reasons they were removed. He took them out because they made no consideration for mitigating circumstances and would be applied in many cases to the defensive party or player. There are countless scenarios in which an innocent or defensive player would be labeled a bandit for acting in the interest of their own lives or property. Likewise, it goes against the core tenet of the game not to judge and punish players for a particular style of play. Giving players the means to make their own observations and judgements about other players fits with DayZ. A magical divine entity that whispers in your ear from 1000m away whether someone is naughty or nice does not. Bandit skins are gone because they were the game design equivalent of a dunce cap. A broken, lazy, inelegant, brute-force solution that did more harm than good and your suggestion does not improve them in any appreciable way.

I can honestly say I've never seen someone use the phrase "CoD kid" and then go on to make a post that wasn't a pile of steaming shit. Anyway. Characters Alive: 489,886 Bandits Alive: 87,707 18% of players are bandits and only ~16% of player deaths are caused by PvP. So your 90% figure is slightly off. Just slightly. Perhaps we shoot down calls to "discourage" banditry because it's a key part of what makes this game compelling and different from other generic cooperative zombie survival experiences? Maybe it's not all a "CoD kid" conspiracy, but just regular 'ole gamers who are excited about a game that finally has the balls to do something with PvP besides rope it off behind closed doors and treat it like some kind of add-on or spectator sport. A designer who actually wants to *gasp* make it part of normal game play instead of some kind of bonus mode. It's cool, though. If it makes you feel better to pretend we're all just 14-year-olds out to ruin your evening then you can go right on. Eventually you will adapt, or get bored and leave.

I'm not entirely opposed to passworded servers with private hives. I think it's kind of a silly way to play but if that's your thing and as long as you don't expect support from the team in setup and maintenance I say go for it... But, yeah. Hive-connected locked servers kind of break the game.

Slightly change the rule set? Seriously? Passworded servers connected to the hive completely undermine every core element of the game. Clans will use these servers as "safe houses." Every vehicle on the server parked on the coast, filled to the brim with 15 of every weapon in the game, hundreds of grenades, medical supplies, tools, backpacks, ammunition, etc. all farmed in complete and utter safety with no threat of loss or theft whatsoever. Then the clan members will go out on to public servers and use their gear to assault other servers and clans. As soon as they lose a couple members or get out-numbered, they can retreat to their safe server, re-equip, re-gear and worst of all reposition themselves for a counter assault. Their safe server would also provide for a means of safe, easy travel. Want to get from Zelonogorsk to Berezino in 8 minutes instead of 40? No sweat, just hop on the server where you know you're safe, jump a motorcycle and drive there in complete and utter safety with no concern for fuel since you can casually stop anywhere you want to refuel... no concern for stealth. No. Just no. The fact that you don't understand how damaging a passworded server can be to this game calls into question your ability to really evaluate the existing hosting rules with any kind of reason or sense (as if you're asinine comparison to Nazi Germany didn't already do that handily).

Right. So add one more thing so you can get that too and then have EVERYTHING again and then be bored again except now instead of driving down to the coast to harass newbies you will be able to fly there. Sounds like a great plan. I'm all for helicopters (when they're fixed), but they probably have better things to work on right now and if you and your buddies can't come up with anything better to spend your time on then I suggest taking a little time away from the game and returning when new mechanics have been implemented.

12 extra NVGs on top of the fact that I'm guessing every clan member has a pair? Yeah, these guys are definitely legit, up-standing gentlemen out for a fair fight. My advice is find another server.

Sounds like some seriously corrupt character data. I would tell your friend to post a detailed bug report in the BR forums including is player id. I'm sure Ander or someone else with DB access can "wipe" his record and get him a fresh start. Might have to wait patiently for a response though.

Suddenly Chernarus is 62,500km2. Better stretch my calves.

Would like a word:

Oh, hey perestain. Welcome back. I missed you and your complete nonsense posts. 16.5% of total survival attempts have ended in PvP. This is clearly more than a deathmatch game. Also, murder rates are down, banditry rates are down and life expectancy is up since bandit skins were removed. But, yeah. Welcome back! Your posts are always worth a chuckle or a facepalm. Usually both. Funny. I'm entirely immersed when I play with my friends. When I try to cooperate with random strangers and they run around in circles giggling like idiots and end up shooting each other in some elaborate friendly fire fuck-up my immersion goes to shit. So, to each their own sort of immersion I guess.

So what you're saying is the entity who decided to revoke the server was actually the hosting service and not the DayZ dev team? If what you say is true then the dev team couldn't possibly have been responsible. They made a request which the host saw fit to fufill. Obviously they would not have done so if they thought it was not a justifiable request or that it would negatively impact their business. It's encouraging to know that server hosts are cooperative with the dev team and willing to take measures to put an end to whatever it was going on that required such an egregious intervention.

If he has the hourglass he's not dead. Have you tried an epi-pen? Or waiting ~10 minutes? It can take a long time to clear.

"Hey guys. I got out of bed, got dressed and brushed my teeth. Now I'm bored. Someone please tell me what to do."

My guess is he's part of a clan that was probably trying to run a private server and password lock or kick/ban anyone who played on it not in the clan. They probably got blacklisted from the hive and now they're all up-in-arms about it. Just speculating. I'm sure OP can correct me if I'm wrong.

Umm, nobody is losing servers. They are losing the ability to host DayZ. So a better analogy would be that I loaned you a ping-pong table with the understanding that you would rent a space and hold a ping-pong tournament and instead you try to hold a beer pong tournmanet so I take the table back. You're not losing anything. It's my table and you used it in a way that broke our agreement so you don't get to have it anymore.

Why should they? That's okay; DayZ isn't going to be on the ARMA 2 engine forever. I seriously doubt ANY significant mechanics will be implemented on top of the ARMA 2 engine. It's being retired no doubt. You don't seem to understand how the proposed system would work. And you wouldn't have to "wonder" around - you just encounter players in your normal course of play as you're doing other things, and try to identify them visually. So basically a bandit skin? the thing they already had and took out specifically because it didn't work and accopmlished nothing? Yeah. Let's go back to that...