Bo0G

I like the idea for playing a "clumsiness" sound when a person spawns into the game only. They bump into something, knock something over, snap a twig. This would keep people from being taken from behind by a player who just spawned in. I don't like the idea of random clumsiness sounds. I'd like to be the one determining how careful I am, not fate.

Why do people make this argument? It is completely false. Most exploits can be used by everyone. The complaint comes from people who prefer playing the game without the exploit against those who choose to use it.

So, maybe this is your first time to an internet forum. Welcome. Try to read the actual conversation before you respond. You are obviously just responding to the title and there has been much debate since then. Thanks.

I really am starting to wonder where this desire comes from. I want to get to the bottom of it. Maybe every proponent has an MMO background, or D&D, or recent break-up? Look, you can easily say that I'm being homophobic so you don't have to address my argument or, you can actually read the following and think FIRST, then respond. Not accounting for actual women who play this game (a meager minority in my years of experience with Arma), what man is going to want to create a female character so that he can be your 'wife'-like-thing in game? Would you really want to do that? Because, for me, this game is a simulator (arma2 that is) so I play it as if it were actually ME behind the gun. That is the appeal. What is the appeal of playing the game as someone's babymomma? Not saying that families aren't an interesting aspect of post-apocalyptic life. But I just don't understand how anyone would argue that they have ANY place in THIS game? Also, cause I thought it was funny:

"What's a nubian?" Stop trolling me Bl1P, or I'll SHOW you an epeen Obligatory On Topic Subscript: But seriously, restrict 3rd users to their own sad, little, gears-of-war-inspired, world. ;)

This seems perfectly reasonable to me. I would like to see 2 or 3 clearly delineated difficulties. Easymode allows 3rd, crosshairs, waypoints, etc. on up to Pro which allows none of these. I would like to have characters started in any 1 difficulty be non-transferable to other difficulties. What is so objectionable about that? The logic of the OP is perfectly sound. This epeen contest is really pathetic. What is it with the internet attracting middle-aged men who need to feel that they have asserted their superiority over one another? Protip: No matter how impeccable your grammar; regardless how well-formed your sentences; despite the number of qualifications you boast; you are only proving yourself more the fool.

The image was meant for a laugh. You have some real issues. Reading back over this thread, I've noticed several people have left thoughtful though contrary feedback. Your response to all of them (including myself) is to try to belittle them. You either have a degree in what-the-fuck ever that makes you right and them stupid, or you are older than them (as if that matters) making you right and them unqualified to comment, or you invoke crying to an admin. The only reason I keep coming back is because I find you to be a bit of a spectacle. But yeah, I will be leaving this thread now. I've had my fill of this disagreeable little man. Carry on. PS. Bl1P, I love you more than Zebra and miss you.

Nope. No interest in buggering my fellow bandits/survivors thanks. I don't care if they are men or women. I don't care if the buggering is on screen or implied. Zero interest in seeing DayZ turn into: The only way this would fly is if the mating partners were NPC. I can't believe anyone would even continue considering otherwise. It's so rediculous but I can't stay away! (Really, I just wanted a reason to post the pic)

Agreed, though Arma2 has so many inventory bugs and problems that this one is just the tip of the iceberg.

I have a feeling that some kind of team/group system is being worked on as we speak. Hopefully something like Shactac hud or some other way to emulate your recognition of friends vs foes. As for trade: already implemented. As for comms: I would love to see ACRE/TS required on every server. I'm not sure how that would be enforced, but it would add so much realism I think.

Heard in Direct chat: Dude #1: "Hey, Brainbasher69, lets make a baby" Dude #2: "Good idea, 1337N00b. Just for the achievements, no homo." Dude #1: "My tent or yours?" Dude #2: "Gonna have to be yours, BrodoFaggins is nursing my other baby in my tent atm."

In theory, it sounds good. So long as it couldn't be used to 'scan', I'd be into this. Any way to simulate recognition would be nice. Maybe as a standalone, DayZ can implement highly customizable characters to this end.

I think that something as loud as a sniper rifle should draw zombies from klicks around. This would be a good and realistic way to prevent snipers camping an area from 500M out indefinitely. When a marksman rifle is fired, high probability proc to spawn a few zombies at min distance with a patrol path leading to where the weapon was fired. At least this would force the sniper to stay mobile.

I think the temp system is still very much a work in progress. I'm sure we will see tweaks to it still. However, if you want to experience the need for heatpacks, get in a RIB and travel from NE to SW or the other way. I can almost guarantee you or someone with you will be sick when you arrive unless you use the heatpack

I kind of agree (even though I had a blast mowing down this one campsite...) If you want to completely pillage a camp site, you shouldn't be able to do so with a "make everything de-spawn" mentality. It should be more of a "take as much with me as I can" sort of thing, I think. Still, even if tents were indestructible, people would just pull everything out of the tent and drop it on the ground to despawn anyway so...

Unfortunately, the current Arma 2 engine doesn't support global illumination, so even with a manned spot up there, you couldn't illuminate the whole town, just a circle of light, with no light bounce outside of that circle. It would be a cool, easter-eggy thing to do but I don't see much practical application (maybe in Arma 3!!)

Can we lock this useless thread to get it out of the way? There have been maybe 5 out of 25 posts that were discussing the topic. The rest have been Callaghan trying to berate those who post against the idea. Move along, there is no discussion to see here.

Good point. I forgot about the nuns. Still, I look forward to more models of infected. Male, female, children, dogs, you name it.

+1 Though I have no doubt that the devs would incorporate this without community suggestion. It just hasn't been yet.

I don't have much time to waste correcting you so I'm gonna go really fast okay? Matrimony means any state of being 'voluntarily joined' which is exactly what you are suggesting. It literally means 'motherhood' actually. Men playing female characters and men being willing to mate their female PCs with other male PCs is two totally different things. If any post here is silly, it is yours, friend. If you want to virtually shag some dude, why don't you check out second life? Leave our game alone.

You are talking about a mod built from a military sim played predominately by males and you want to introduce a matrimony/reproduction simulation? I don't think this would ever fly if for no other reason than that few men are going to choose to play a female character if it means they may have to mate with some other dude. Maybe if there were "romance-able" NPCs introduced but even then it's a bit of a stretch to me. Maybe try http://en.wbabies.com/ ;)