-Gews-

The 5.45 mm has hit=7.2 which makes it slightly more powerful than 9 mm (hit=7). Comparing the real-life specs to the other rounds (5.45 mm=1.4 kJ, 9 mm=0.5 kJ) it should clearly be somewhat more powerful, but this kind of thing can happen with all weapons. It's supposed to, and used to, hold 11 in the tube mag. Not sure why they changed Trumpet and Repeater to 7 rounds each. I'll assume it was a mistake. Similar to the Repeater, the Trumpet should fire 1 round per second. These are both slow. And with the new R-key mechanic, there's a delay in the action, and it seems to take about 1.5 seconds between shots. The animation is also not great, dropping the gun from the shoulder to pump. This didn't make sense to anyone, so they changed it. Riot shields aren't bullet-resistant. That would be a ballistic shield. https://trello.com/c/Eiw2OApM/121-non-lethal-weapons Talking about the stable crosshair? They made it that way because you weren't supposed to be very accurate unless using your sights. Didn't work. You just need to know where to aim it.

Getting silly? It was already silly a long time ago. "Sooner than folks think!" I think that Bohemia would be the first to admit that they did not expect DayZ to still be in alpha in 2018 and that this game's development hasn't been silky smooth. Missing roadmap goals by years doesn't mean they haven't been working hard on this game, but biting off more they could chew was a mistake in the first place. Releasing in such an unfinished state and publicly setting unrealistic goals is where the silly comes in. "Technology can break you.. And I mean that literally, because after the experience with DayZ, you very early find out that if your original design is not aligned with the technology you have at the start of the early access, and you have to have large, sweeping changes in the technology that you have to make the game possible, it's probably not a good idea to start early access. So I really suggest that you have your base tech at the release. During the pre-production, you should really consider the features that you are trying to promote to players—what's the selling point of the game—and if that selling point is dependent on a tech that you don't have, you really shouldn't have that selling point. You're gonna really cry at the end if you do that." -DayZ Lead Producer Eugene Harton

Of course it depends on weapon state, how it affects accuracy depends on what damage or wear you are talking about. For example, this won't help things. We just have one weapon health stat in 0.62 so it's not complex. That's what it says in the report. So it seems to leave only zeroing ability and trajectory. Accuracy of a weapon, it's no longer "a thing". The status report mentions "sway" and "recoil" also, but neither of those affect your trajectory. Wow, recoil! The reason given for removing accuracy variable is that dispersion is "over the top" which, when it is kept to realistic levels, is demonstrably untrue (six years of DayZ say hi, for one).

Aha, nice catch!

Generated some random numbers, put them in a scatter plot, and fit to silhouettes to make a visual of how "realistic" dispersion might look. I used the longest range. Due to the calculations I used the patterns could be quite larger than one might see in-game (ie, "1.5 MOA" rifle in diagram would put 95% of shots in 2.4 MOA circle). Sniper rifle @ 800 m (0.75 MOA for 5 shots, 20-shot pattern) 20/20 hits Hunting rifle @ 800 m (1.5 MOA for 5 shots, 20-shot pattern) 20/20 hits Mosin 1891/30 @ 800 m (3.75 MOA for 5 shots, 20-shot pattern) 12/20 hits And for fun: Mosin 1891/30 @ 2000 m (max sighting range) (3.75 MOA for 5 shots, 20-shot pattern) 6/20 hits For this last one, the bullet would take about 7 seconds to get there, end up with about as much damage as a .22, and if you were zeroed at 300 m you would have to hold almost 500 feet over the target. Although it's an extreme chop from 28-3/4" to 10", this could still be surprisingly accurate, as shortening a barrel typically doesn't have a major effect on inherent accuracy, and often the opposite. Blast and flash would be extreme. Velocity could be reduced by up to 25%. But the main problem is that hunting scope. With an eye relief of 9 cm and no stock, you would be risking serious scope eye. Also watch for this with the upcoming Steyr Scout. If they make it so you can attach the hunting scope to the Steyr (which would be inconsistent with the inability to place it on other railed weapons, but you never know) and the hunting scope placement is far forwards over the barrel ('scout mount', like so) that's incorrect and wouldn't be much use in real life—you would need to use a long eye relief scope for such a forwards placement. The hunting scope, if attached to the Scout, should be mounted over the receiver.

Some of this is due to change, or unfinished implementation. I know Peter Nepesny made a personal response about the new crosshair mechanic. But I would like to see some further developer response on the dispersion issue. Just a couple days ago there was a thread about weapon dispersion issue at the top of the DayZ subreddit, which gained about 400 upvotes and over 11,000 views, so I think dispersion is worth some more discussion in another status report.

They can do all this, but still doesn't remove the need for dispersion in the end. And if we are arguing about gameplay or workload, many of these things are more obvious to the player or harder to create, balance or achieve. Agreed.

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.