-Gews-

How is the AMD-65 "better"? Some cons of the design are: -little to no cheek weld -very short sight radius -short 12.5" barrel with brake means less velocity and more noise and blast -forward grip can interfere with mag changes -sheet metal handguard gets very hot The gun was designed for paratroopers and mechanized infantry. It's only "better" if for some reason you need something more compact.

"Near threatened" status. From the story it doesn't seem like the gun was super effective but then again it's a damn bison. "We kept looking at the buffalo and Gary said “This is normal, A lot of times I have had them stand like that for 20-30 mins before they go down” After about 15min the buffalo fell."

Like gianni001 said the suppressor would only increase velocity and it wouldn't negatively affect accuracy, could even improve it a bit. It would probably change point of impact though. Old suppressors used wipes which also slowed the bullet and reduced accuracy. Some integrally-suppressed guns have ported barrels (ie: Amphibian, MP5SD) to reduce velocity. Anyways the suppressor increases accuracy by about 1/3 MOA and the bayonets decrease it by the same ~1/3 MOA. Neither is an appreciable change, you would never notice it in any circumstances in this game. The pistol suppressor has no effect.

I agree this kind of thing is needed, the current system sucks when people can absorb bullets with little or no apparent effects, sprint away to safety and even keep firing back with great accuracy. More wounding effects would improve the game and realism. This would also be better than those little dots of blood which tell players their shots have hit. However I wouldn't call it "kinetic" because none of the bullets has enough force to actually knock someone over. It's the person's response, nervous system, psychological, etc, which causes them to fall. Which also would be hard to take into account ie if they were shot while all full of adrenaline or sniped while having a picnic, etc. I also wouldn't like to see something where 9mm rounds are shrugged off while the .45 flattens people, or the same with 5.56 vs 7.62.

I'd rather have them do nothing Personal preference and too many factors, is the grip close to the receiver, is it in the middle, is it far forward, are you gripping it like a broomstick or using it as a handstop, what else is on the rifle, etc We've seen what happens when the devs decide to represent small ergonomic differences in-game... for example we have the "CQB" stock, which decreases your carbine's accuracy to the tune of an additional 17 MOA because it's slightly shorter when fully extended and is named "CQB" and therefore must be useless for long range (despite the fact all the stocks are collapsible and have multiple positions). Or for example the Magpul furniture which is aftermarket and therefore increases your chances of hitting certain targets by about 35 times. This stuff often happens in games... Merely saying something like "+15% speed" or "-10% muzzle climb" just does not sit well with me... it's not satisfactory. I'd rather they just leave this ergonomic stuff to personal preference unless it's something major, like a lack of any stock at all. I'd like it so someone could stick it on or leave it off their rifle and not be penalized either way. I don't see how they can do a good representation in-game and I doubt they would either.

Hehehe.

Yeah, okay, no. The reason they aren't using expanding ammunition is because they aren't allowed to. Hague Convention 1899. Nobody sat down and designed a bullet that would only wound. Jacketed bullets were necessary for the new high-velocity rifles. They switched the round nose bullets to spitzers for superior ballistics. They didn't come up with these designs for the purpose of creating smaller wounds. They want the 5.56 to yaw and fragment because that causes worse wounds. The Russians want the 5.45 to yaw because that causes worse wounds. The British had their famous Mk VII which was designed to tumble, to cause worse wounds. You won't find any Army studies on making bullets less lethal, but you'll find plenty on increasing the lethality of small arms ammunition. FMJ bullets typically cause smaller wounds. That's not why FMJ bullets were designed.

"Zeroing" refers to the initial sighting-in process. "Holding zero" means the scope doesn't shift around randomly and throw the point of impact off. You don't "zero" at zero meters, you might zero at 200 meters, or more often something like "3 inches high at 100 meters". I'll put it this way... to someone who is doesn't know anything about physics it might seem like a reasonable idea that a cannon ball would fly straight up until it "ran out of steam", then suddenly plummet to the ground. Scholars actually believed and taught this in medieval times. To someone today, with even rudimentary knowledge of physics it's an absurd concept. And so with firearms and the idea of duct-taped scopes crafted from half a pair of binoculars...

So should we be able to improvise planes from random warehouse materials? Because I saw it on MacGyver. Binocular scopes are not a "slight" departure from authenticity. "Zeroing" in real life and "zeroing" in DayZ are two different things.

Having it even 0.5 degrees out of alignment will send the bullet flying over 2.5 feet off-target at 100 yards. Even if you managed to somehow tape it on right, the slightest bump or shake would render it worse than useless. And recoil is more than a slight bump. So just use these handy metal bits provided with the rifle...

If you have no scope just using the iron sights... if you have no iron sights just point the thing in the general direction. Either way is better than binoculars and duct tape...

I can assure you they are made to kill people.

It's the other way round

The normal having more range, more damage...

This reminds me of the French still wearing red pants in the First World War... "Le pantalon rouge, c'est la France!" Pretty soon they realized bright red pants weren't worth being shot over and so they changed to more practical colours.

*ahem* kinetic energy = ½ mv²

The game is supposed to be realistic, nobody serious about PvP is going to dump their suppressed M4 for a crossbow. Suppressors and ammunition should be rare but if you find that stuff you're not going to use a crossbow instead. Some things are just better.

Zombies have always been just an annoyance. Minimal danger. They've just been previously used as a tool to see if anyone's in towns and now to help spot other players who get aggro. I don't have any memorable moments that involve zombies. Everything important and fun has involved other players. I've never had a memorable moment fending off a horde of zombies, they've just been an annoyance until I get the glitchy bastards to fuck off. So the zombies are mostly pointless and annoying scenery. Should they remove them? Well right now alpha would be better off without them. But fixing broken zombies is what alpha is for. For better or worse it's not really DayZ without the zombies, but for me the game would be fine with or without the zeds. I didn't start playing the mod because it had zombies, it was because it had bandits. Edit: And you know what, for a terrifying zombie experience, the Dynamic Zombie Sandbox mission was far superior. Far superior.

No, I don't want them, throwing a throwing knife at a stationary target is hard enough, throwing an unbalanced kitchen knife or M9 bayonet is harder, throwing any with enough force and accuracy to stick and inflict a decent wound is even harder... People don't throw knives in combat, I can't see it being implemented in any kind of realistic way, otherwise players would start complaining "omg this sucks I can't even hit from 20 paces what a ripoff change plz" so I don't see the point and if it isn't realistic I don't want it. Throwing stuff sure, throwing weapons no. The only time people threw weapons was if the weapons were designed to throw and they had two or three other weapons ready to go. Throwing a knife would only be "effective" at only a few yards max and that's if you were a practiced knife thrower, and at that kind of distance you could sprint and stick your knife into them several times instead of (a chance of) only once.

I believe Rocket already addressed the star-spangled female underwear on reddit... he said it was something the artist did, and that they would be changing it to a standard white in the future.

Hopefully not, having that kind of Mickey-Mouse-arov would be worse than having no Makarov at all. But maybe they will.

Maybe the weapon came from special forces (if it's from Chernarussians, then it's obviously special forces since their regulars use the AK-74). And also: "All U.S. Army forces will begin replacing their basic M4 carbines and all 600,000 M16 rifles with the M4A1 variant in 2014.... Phase I of the M4 Product Improvement Program (PIP), converting all Army M4s to M4A1s, is to be completed by 2017."

You'll have to ask the devs because no one here knows. But maybe they introduced the Walther P1 (8 rounds 9x19mm) to replace the Makarov (8 rounds 9x18mm) because they didn't want to add another type of 9mm ammunition, in which case no Makarov.

Bad Good DayZ looks like picture one. I can already here the cries... "it's probably intentional, we are supposed to be untrained survivors" (roll eyes). Also all the handguns appear to use the same skeleton animation right now.