-Gews-

With hundreds of users online at a time, wouldn't it be flooded?

Logically so would anyone else looting a fresh corpse... even if they didn't kill the person.

Pffft it hasn't bothered me, zombies don't feel much deadlier, the only difference is the chance of infection. As for glitchy zombies, they're here to stay and probably always will be. If you've played the game you already know all the glitches zombies are capable of, so I say deal with it. If you know they can walk through walls and glitch hit you, keep that in mind and you won't have any trouble. It's a fact of the game. If you simply ignore the potential for zombie glitches, well... :huh:

DayZero does it. 30 second logoff timer. Disconnecting early means your character will stay ingame and "surrender".

Zombies mostly ignore me now. I can run within meters of them without getting any aggro. I was more scared of them in 1.7.6.1. I already know what would happen if zombies were deadlier in standalone: it would be a better game.

M59/66

SVD should replace the DMR. As for the Mk12: It has a 3-9x scope and better inherent accuracy than a normal M4. It lacks adjustable zeroing. Personally I prefer the M16 ACOG. 9x magnification isn't very helpful when your gun does low damage, the high magnification encourages you to take shots from too far away and give away your position. Also it is slower than the instant 4x zoom and stadia lines of the ACOG.

Anti-vehicle only.

It's like g000gle English... Easy mode remembering: unzoomed: 120 meters dead hold zoomed: under 400 meters +1 mil 400 meters dead hold 500 meters -1 mil 600 meters - 2-1/2 mil 700 meters bottom mil 800 meters under post Not exact but if you're spending time trying to judge 0.15 mils you're probably wasting it.

Apologies, not the smartest idea.

I don't get this part... So it's perfectly fine for me to run up and senselessly gun down survivors with a belt-fed machine gun, but if I use a bolt-action hunting rifle to place my bullets with surgical precision it suddenly makes me a douche? As I said; don't get it.

Here's a snippet from some WW2 documentary. No gore as such, but viewer discretion is advised. REMOVED Shot at very close range by multiple .30-06 rounds, but no visible blood spatter. At all! Yet the impacts are quite clear through the motions of his body and clothing. That's what I'd prefer to see. It's both more realistic and less shocking than action movie blood spatter (of course, depending on the location of the wound). Also, players might not know whether someone has been hit or not. That adds tension (or at least it would if death messages were disabled).

Guns should only break through user error, IMO. Stocks don't magically snap, you have to drop them. Your gun won't get muddy and wet unless you take it to a muddy and wet place. It will function fine if you keep it cleaned and lubed. Etc etc. Natural or automatic wearing out of parts should be beyond the scope of the game, IMO. Is anyone going to actually keep the same gun for two years of playing until some little spring starts wearing down? No.

Good idea, I also think the same. Shooting someone produces that exact same blood effect every time. And it's really basic. That's bad. I'd probably prefer some kind of dust or other impact effect. I think it's unrealistic to immediately and very clearly see blood magically appear from backpacks, under clothing, etc, etc. I think the blood should start dripping after the shot, but no little generic impact circle of blood. Another part of it is the lack of reaction - when a living creature gets shot it generally reacts very quickly. That can mean dropping like a stone or leaping into the air and sprinting away. This part is hard... players don't react that quickly because they haven't just been shot. In fact, they can't. This is probably the biggest issue. When you shoot someone it should look and feel like you've just shot someone, not like you've clicked your mouse... that's where immersion and things like this come in. tl;dr: needs less obvious blood impact effect (leaking blood instead please) and more reaction effect.

g000gle motherfucker.

It depends what kind of optics Kyrah is talking about. Communist bloc scopes? Basic hunting scopes? They shouldn't be impossible to find. Modern Western optics should be more rare, and not simply because they are modern and Western... but because they are usually far more expensive. Also I kind of hope you won't be able to instantly mount an ACOG on a ratty old Mosin and have it perfectly calibrated, like what happens in ArmA 3... certain types of optics should match various guns and mounting systems, if not then they should not work properly or should not be able to be attached at all. Edit: also, I am not fully understanding how removing all forms of scopes would improve either gameplay or realism? They even had scopes in the American Civil War. Fixed-power optics can be extremely rugged. Even variables, if you're willing to pay. Edit: whoa, that first sentence above makes me sound like I just learned English. :huh:

I would like this Enfield: Actually no I just can't condone harming milsurps It is a good idea. Especially for clothing, vehicles, and weapons.

I haven't found the new RPK either. They need to switch it so people are saying "I've never found a DMR or an M249... plenty of SVDs and RPKs though." Then I'll be happy.

Hehehehehehehe

Only happened twice, once someone asked in side chat, the other time was in Wasteland where someone said "wait, is that actually Gews?" I didn't answer because I was lazy.

I wouldn't say scrap it if they'd already done it. It just seems like something that would be very low priority. Theoretically you could find anything in the world. It's... the world. However I don't think it's worth modelling extremely obscure firearms / items when that time could be put to use in better ways. Some weapons need to be more rare, but I don't think we need to have something that's so rare only one player will ever see it at a time.

One thing to remember is that crossbows are short ranged affairs. Even with some kind of optic it's best to be very close to your game. 60 meters would be a long shot.

Yep, it definitely has to be looked at far more in-depth due to the nature of DayZ. I have been reading Georgian gun blogs lately and they do seem to have a fair amount of Western rifles from the big companies. However, looking at the DayZ mod, there are many more Western guns than Eastern guns and I feel a lot of it simply doesn't make sense - for example, why so many USMC DMRs and barely any SVDs (basic non-camo SVD isn't even in mod) ? Another example would be the lack of the PKM. So for the standalone, where the team has been able to make any new weapons they choose, I just hope the weapons list makes sense (fitting the realistic nature of the game) without requiring any great suspension of disbelief. I don't need every weapon to be over 30 years old with Cyrillic markings. :lol:

That's the only part that prevents me from playing it... a 7.62x51 machine gun should do the same damage as a 7.62x51 rifle, and a Lee-Enfield shouldn't be totally underpowered simply because it's common... Ya, 95% of players couldn't care less but for me that type of balancing is the worst - possible - thing. Especially in ArmA. Edit: my new mission is to get them to change it back. ^_^