-Gews-

I don't believe it can be much work. If stumped on research they can look at ARMA 3 values, lots of similar weapons, and some identical ones. If by "missing implementation" they mean it's not working at all, I'm sure they can fix it. In the end it is just picking a random number within a specified range. We could speculate about time constraints and dropped features, but this is not the reason stated in the status report. Also, if I recall correctly, which I might not, they claimed they will support the game for 5 years after release... this leaves plenty of time for patches.

Of course. But it seems strange to remove inherent dispersion, something that just happens automatically, when they are doing things like changing it so you need to take every item into your hands before being able to perform any functions with it. It's not even worth talking about being "too realistic" as inherent dispersion doesn't affect gameplay in such a way. As I mentioned a few times, even CS:GO, the benchmark competitive game, has weapon dispersion. It's a Source game so it can be easily disabled, but they put it in by default. I don't play a ton of games but still, I can't think of any current-gen or last-gen title that lacks weapon dispersion on all its weapons. And going sillier, you don't see Tracer mains complaining about the dispersion of her blasters. It's just how they work. If titles like PUBG and Fortnite manage to have weapon dispersion and thousands upon thousands of casual players enjoying them, while DayZ says realistic dispersion ruins gameplay, despite having had realistic dispersion and just about zero complaints about realistic dispersion, either in ARMA or DayZ, since the first day DayZ mod existed... I don't know what to say.

It could actually take a good while, seeing as we don't have any magnifying scopes, and have only 60% of the eye zoom compared to DayZ mod or ARMA. And also what this implies is that dispersion not over the top. Ha. Found this in old status report: Status Report: Week of 28 July 2014 Firearm dispersion was also tweaked to bring accuracy of weapons back to sensible levels and there will be more balancing passes done in the future which will address attachments and projectiles as well. Again this statement goes against the idea that dispersion is somehow excessive. Different people writing the 28 July 2014 and May 8 2018 status reports, but dispersion can't be both "sensible" and "random nonsense" at the same time!

I don't think so, most of those arguments pertain to the gameplay in some way. And as mentioned, I can't think of any game, at least in recent generations, without weapon dispersion—even CS:GO. Apart from the wacky days in early standalone, I didn't notice any irritating over-the-topness in the SIX YEARS of slinging dispersing bullets since DayZ mod. And I didn't see people complain about it either, in either ARMA or DayZ. And all this is a pretty strong argument that there's nothing "over the top" about a realistic dispersion, and if it is not over-the-top, their stated reason to remove it doesn't exist, no? I would like to see some response for elaboration on this idea to remove dispersion, that was for me a bombshell that was casually dropped and not mentioned again. Maybe some dev had a mental picture of bullets flying wildly left and right and all around and thought, we don't need that? I don't know.

Agreed. It was the same in the mod to some extent—if no bloodbag, hide behind object and eat the cooked steaks in your backpack. I'm okay with speeding up the healing process, but I don't think people should be healing mid-firefight. So if you do it yourself, you should be vulnerable for quite a good while. And maybe there should be a real decent cooldown before you get any health back, too.

It's a problem with the zeroing system. Lower speed + higher airfriction = breaks sooner. It would probably be helped a fair bit if 7.62x39 had more realistic "airFriction" value (closer to -0.0015 than current -0.00195).

That sounds strange. Not the kind of dispersion I'm talking about. For most rifles realistic dispersion would be something 0.5-5 inches / 100 yards. Maybe a ricochet? For the bullet to go 2 metres away on a 4 MOA weapon (Mosin or SKS-like, not particularly accurate, let's say dispersion=0.00125) the target would need to be something like 2 kilometres away. We can see (4 m diam/0.00125) = 3200 m.

I was also able to beat up people very nicely, partly because of the huge punches, and also, I think, because the controls really aren't obvious and therefore many people don't even know how to block.

It seems you're talking about PiP, in which case I wouldn't count on it. As for 3D scopes, they can be okay at low magnification. But note that none of the 3D scopes have proper magnification. PU is 2.3x instead of proper 3.5x. ACOG is 2.6x instead of proper 4x. Not sure why this is, as they seemed to look fine at higher magnification back when we could monkey with the FOV slider. 2D scopes usually seem to *work* better for me. ARMA 3 also uses 2D for high magnification scopes. But their overlay is much nicer looking.

That would be more annoying, hearing people hacking and coughing, keys constantly clacking, cries of "JUST A MINUTE MOM!". My mic like most mics has a handy button to turn it on and off. And obviously there's more than just the default communication device. Just need to deal with it. You can't prevent 3rd party VOIP. Even the game's developers use it. Some servers don't allow third-party communication, for example, "DayZ Village". Very hard to enforce, but if you have enough evidence...

I've seen some people claim they often walk everywhere in DayZ. You never know!

If I spawn on the east coast it's going to take 1 hour, 22 minutes to walk to NWAF, as the crow flies. And that's assuming flat ground and no obstructions, which isn't the case. If I jogged the whole way, only 30 minutes. I'd rather the latter.

https://dayz.com/blog/status-report-may-8-2018 Relevant portion: "Another thing is that after the rewrite of the weapons we are missing implementation of dispersion - random cone-shaped spread defined by angle. Previously it was used as kind of an inaccuracy from the manufacturing process where long barrel weapons were most accurate and short barrel ones were least. We are not using it anymore as I think ‘fighting’ some random nonsense on mid to long ranges is over the top, as players are already challenged enough by mechanics like sway, recoil, zeroing, actual bullet speed and drop - all that combined with character movement, which is enough." He says they are missing 'implementation'. It could mean they don't have the dispersion mechanic working at all. Or it could mean they have it working, but went and changed all the values to "0". I will disagree with this for the reasons I've previously listed, which include: -some guns are more accurate than others, and this should apply to DayZ's weapons -if DayZ's weapons don't have something as basic as an "accuracy" value, DayZ's weapon simulation is in no way authentic -dispersion was in BI games since Operation Flashpoint without complaint -dispersion was in DayZ mod without complaint -dispersion was in DayZ standalone post-0.47 without complaint -dispersion is in many other games both realistic and unrealistic—without complaint -lack of dispersion takes away from depth, character, and realism of weapons I don't see any reason to defend the dev's decision here. It's a bad one. Would this be defended if a random dude came to the forum and suggested it one year ago? If someone went to ARMA's subreddit or forums, and suggested they remove dispersion from every weapon in the game, I suspect many people would assume he was a massive troll. I think that says something. All weapons vary. Yet the average Mosin is less accurate than the average Tikka. And the average pistol is less accurate than the average rifle. No one will argue such points. So you put a reasonable value. Off the top of my head for the average Mosin it's probably 3-4 MOA. For a Winchester 70 anywhere 1-2 MOA would satisfy me. For a pistol or shotgun, 8+ MOA. That took 15 seconds, woo. It's not too hard to come up with such things. If they have trouble they can even simply go to the ARMA series and pull approximate values from there. Better than nothing! Just because we can't get it perfect (something which is not even possible) we should not try to represent weapon dispersion at all? For an average pistol something like 3" at 25 yards is appropriate. Shooting off a bench rest. According to my notes that's about dispersion=0.00375. And you're right, at 100 yards it can still hit a half-metre circle approximately 93% of the time. But a 0.2-metre circle, the hit percentage drops to 1/3. That's a fair difference if someone is just poking their head out. ---------- What about a Mosin, let's say it makes 3.5" at 100 yards. Maybe give it dispersion = 0.00109. At 300 m it can hit the 0.5-m circle with 97% confidence. But the 0.2-m circle? The number drops to just 42%. Meaning a skilled player would aim for centre-mass. And if you need to snipe heads rather than torsos, you had better find a superior weapon. And with the new hitboxes shown containing lungs, heart, liver and spine, accuracy starts to matter more. A few inches could be the difference between a heart shot, a punctured lung, or even a flesh wound. Weapons losing accuracy if they are not maintained or become shot out is a neat idea but doesn't assuage concerns with removal of dispersion. I don't agree with giving any weapon precision of 0 MOA under any circumstances. If we are talking mechanics a neat thing would be to have match-grade vs surplus, for certain types of ammo (eg, in this game probably not necessary for pistol rounds.) In some circumstance a surplus rifle with match-grade ammo could equal a match-grade rifle with surplus ammo.

It's stated in the status report that they don't plan to add it at any point. I think it's an important feature so I will endeavour to get people talking and hopefully community feedback can change their minds on this one.

I mean, Peter Nepesny just said "DayZ is meant to be authentic ...". But that statement ended with "..., not realistic". Which I take to mean, they aren't going to add mechanics that are overly complex or frustrating just for the sake of realism. But weapon dispersion isn't one of those insane hardcore mechanics. It's always been there. It's in at least dozens of other popular games.

It doesn't seem "over the top" in Operation Flashpoint, ARMA, ARMA 2 or ARMA 3. Or Squad. Or whatever realistic game, since all have this. Even more 'arcade' titles like PUBG or Insurgency have this. The dispersion is based (or should be based) on real life spread. Therefore, like I said in another thread a short time ago, that statement says that real-life weapons are too inaccurate, and that is ridiculous. It seems right that a shotgun has the same accuracy as an SKS, which has the same accuracy as a Model 70, which has the same accuracy as a derringer? Not to me. One thing many people like about DayZ is the relatively 'authentic' weapon simulation. It's no good to toss components out the window, ESPECIALLY those components no one has complained about. If you don't even have a value for 'accuracy' how can you claim your game has 'authentic' weapons? .

It says in the status report: "Our goal with it is to reach the state, where it’s nearly impossible to distinguish it from the realistic behaviour of shooting along the direction of a barrel of the gun." If they achieve this goal, I don't see a problem. A fun fact: bullets in this game never exactly followed the bore axis (where the barrel is pointing).

There is no wind in DayZ. Dispersion is typically set to represent the inherent accuracy of the weapon, based on real life. Or usually, what a competent marksman would achieve with the weapon under ideal conditions. Typically not taking into account wind and various other factors. So if you are firing a rifle off a bench, on a rest, maybe even from a machine rest, and this rifle is shooting 5-round groups which average 2 inches extreme spread at 100 yards, the dispersion would be: 2/100/36 = 0.00056 That's approximately the maximum level of accuracy this weapon can achieve with whatever ammunition and sights you are using. In status report it says they want to remove the feature, making all weapons perfectly accurate. Horribly unrealistic. What the status report says to me is that we can't have real life accuracy because real life guns are too inaccurate. Which is ridiculous. Hopefully with enough feedback they will change their minds on this one.

Wind would be added via a mod in this case. The item you mentioned sounds like the Kestrel.

No wind in DayZ, or ARMA, so it's only bullet drop.

Checked how dispersion would look for a typical hunting rifle @ 1.5 MOA. Not much random nonsense there, and not even the most accurate rifle. For an assault rifle of 3.0 MOA you have a 95% chance of hitting a 20-inch circle out to 400 m. For a hunting rifle of 1.5 MOA you have a 95% chance of hitting a 20-inch circle out to 800 m. For a sniper rifle of 1.0 MOA you have a 95% chance of hitting a 20-inch circle out to 1200 m. Can't see how this is objectionable.

"we are missing implementation of dispersion" "we are not using it anymore" Guns have dispersion. Some guns have less dispersion and some guns have more—most people call this 'accuracy'. If they deliberately removed weapon dispersion to give all the guns perfect accuracy? That means their weapon simulation is no longer realistic or 'authentic'.

Yes. It seems like everyone's talking about bullets not following the weapon's bore axis. But bullets never did follow the weapon's bore axis. Removing weapons' dispersions is much more concerning.

I'm more concerned about the ones taken away.

Most in 1. I think the second furthest took 2 or 3. But the furthest shot, was on the first try, surprisingly. I usually aim down the sights at long range but sometimes I use the crosshair for fun. You shouldn't be able to make things like this without using sights IMO. It feels nice to play with. But it's unfortunately, too nice.