Manuel Pineiro

Ok so I have two hands, both capable of holding a pistol. Oh yeah, and I can shoot with either hand with rifles and single pistols. Can I matrix through windows and kill 60 guys while flying through the air in slow motion? No! I don't think dual tracking of pistols at seperate targets would be viable engine wise, nor really a good thing to have in the game. However an 'off hand' would be outstanding, Pistols and flashlights at the same time? Yes! Two pistols? OF COURSE! Soda and candy? Why not? When it comes to dual pistols, the best way to implament that would be with an alternating draw from each pistol's magazine as you pull the trigger, which would essentially just make the pistol's a single weapon with two magazine's worth of ammo. Accuracy penalties and the inability to use iron sights at all, as well as slower reload speed would compensate for the benefits of having more rounds at your disposal between reloads. Think about it, an M4 can have 30 rounds of 5.56, or even 60 if you have the broken double stack. Would letting a guy who finds x2 FNX pistols use them both at penalty so that he can fire off 30 rounds of .45 before reloading be all that OP? I especially would find that awesome as I don't use rifles and only carry a sidearm and no melee weapon. I am a friendly medic, and looking like i have no weapon keeps me from getting KoS.

While I am not opposed to removing the crosshair/dot I have to wonder why people always seem to suggest that crosshairs while firing from the hip are not 'authentic' or 'realistic'. I can tell a lot batter where my bullets are going to go when firing from the hip in real life than in most shooters. In real life you have the tactile connection to the weapon which allows you to judge and gauge where your muzzle is pointing without even looking at the weapon in a way you can't in a video game. If anything the crosshair only helps give that sort of sense to a player in the digital simulation. The point where it gets stupid is beyond 50m as a person's innate sense of alignment stops being accurate at all past that. In my opinion they should make that dot 'zeroed' for like 10-20m and beyond that make it extremely off. Reason I say that, is IRL it's a whole lot easier to dump a magazine into a target at close range and hit every shot than it is to try and aim with sights and try to pin point shot at that sort of range with iron sights. This would solve the dot being used for killing at range, but allow it's use for CQB and looting. I use it a lot for picking up hard to reach loot. Granted, without the dot some of us can learn to 'hip fire' at close-medium range anyways so I personally wouldn't suffer from it's removal. In BF3-BF4 I can hip kill people on hardcore servers up to 100m without the crosshair. On a related tangent. Anyone else ever thought it was stupid that games would give crosshairs to assault weapons, but didn't have them for sniper rifles? Because a sniper can't shoot without the scope right? =P

I keep getting attacked as well... I am restarting the game to see if that helps.

So I have stayed out of most of the 3rd Person threads in the past, but this one seems to be picking up a lot of steam. Personally I think we just need seperate servers. I have considered both sides of this argument for a long while, I have watched opinion videos and the whole nine. What it comes down to for me is the term 'realistic' everyone throws around. First Person in gaming is not 'realistic' at all, sorry. Neither is 3rd person. Fact is, one gives you none of the situational awareness you would have in real life, and the other one gives you too much. Both of them are bad for trying to present 'realism'. I am a member of the US Army and have civilian shooter training as well. I spend my weekends playing Airsoft with lots of my Army buddies and civies. I have been to Afghanistan, and South Korea. I have trained and played with Korean military and civilians as well. Fact is... different people have different levels of situational awareness than others. On the Airsoft field I spot and kill other players with all kinds of subtle methods that they often don't understand and get angry about. The tip of their muzzle poking around a corner (flagging), dust wafting around a piece of cover from their boots that I notice, the sound and direction of their weapons fire, etc. All of those things add together to paint an 'overhead' picture of the field or area I am playing at in my mind's eye. I am keeping track of dozens of angles at once and if any of myself is exposed to which angles and where. All of this allows me to move fluidly through the 'battle space' and minimize exposure to enemy fire and I often go an entire day of skirmishing without taking a single hit. Not every time, because no one is that lucky, but it's not a rare happening for me to come out unscathed. In first person on a videogame, you simply cannot have that level of situational awareness. People can run up next to, or behind you, in ways that would not have been possible in real life. The nuances of sound, light, and air pressure that I have observed in real life that allows me to make those quick snap shots at someone approaching from behind me, do not exist in a virtual simulation yet. Perhaps it -is- the existance of 3rd Person that is allowing other players to jump me to the level they do in DayZ but 3rd Person, in my opinion, better allows for more 'authentic' situational awareness. Seeing 'over' a wall in DayZ to see a zombie on the other side is only 'unrealistic' in that I can 'see' over it. In real life I am sure that zombie on the other side of the stone wall would be making sounds or otherwise be detectable without a periscope needed. Also, in real life I can pull myself up to peer over a wall discretely. I can peer around a corner with just the edge of one eye. In 1st Person I have to lean around a corner, expose my entire face and shoulder. Likewise, the small gaps in the mortar of walls, or the gaps in a bush that I can peer through in real life don't exist in a virtual simulation. All of those details most people haven't had to deal with are lost to people who argue about 'realism'. Neither view is realistic, but I feel 3rd Person presents a more authentic expression of a real survivor's situational awareness. These are survivors, not the people who perished already and are the walking dead. By definition our characters are already a cut above 'average'. As to the argument as a whole... I can see the stand point of 'making this game better' by removing 3rd Person. I agree there would be an increase in 'tension' and it would create a more atmospheric effect to the game. I can see some of the problems it does create in PvP situations. If 3rd Person was to be removed, I could get behind the community in support of that change. However, I feel when it comes to survival and normal game play outside of PvP, 3rd Person is a much more 'authentic' point of view that simulates more 'sense' than a locked 1st Person cam. Seeing as DayZ is a mainly social and 'PvP' game the removal of 3rd Person would not be the worst thing to happen to the game. Even so, it -is- a comfort level feature, and one that 'new' or 'casual' players might enjoy more. At the end of the day, this game needs to have customers and make money so that it can become even better for us all. Why remove something that can be turned into a server setting instead? Why alienate either side of the fence?

Just a note, my liscense has my Blood Type on it. Would be nice to know my own blood type and be able to save the test kits for other people I am stealing the blood from. Also +1 for the idea.

*notices pants on head comment... cannot restrain himself* To be -sure- I read this right... you are making a note of how the AS50 is 'gas' operated as in petrol fuel? As in... pour diesel into your rifle for it to work... This comment, much like so many here makes it painfully apparent many of the people here have no experience or working knowledge of -actual- fire arms. The M4A1 is not a "high powered assault rifle". In fact it is not an assault rifle at all. The M4A1 is a carbine, which is a shorter and lighter version of a combat rifle/battle rifle. The AK-47 and it's off shoots -are- assault rifles. People are talking about 'average joes' not being able to handle M4 recoil. -Child- soldiers in Africa operate AK-47's with lethal effects, and the AK has twice the recoil of an M4. During night training in the US Army, we literally fired our M4's at targets slung lightly at our waist using the IR lasers to hit our targets. M4A1 recoil is extremely easy to handle. As noted by others it's also extremely well spread and distributed across the world. Comparing M4A1 standard issue light carbines to specialized anti-material rifles is like... well... comparing a gecko to a dinosaur. As others have said, -why- have a .50 cal rifle in the game? What purpose or role does it fill? The reason they were in the mod was simple... they were in Arma2. Why were they in Arma2? Because that was a full spectrum military simulator. It could be used for all of it's intended roles in a military sim. The only 'role' a .50 Cal fits into in DayZ is for sniping. Ok so you want to snipe for good or ill. Well here is a Mosin. Maybe they will even add a Remington 700. SVD? Sure why not. All of these fill the 'needed' role of reaching out and touching your target without them knowing you are there. If these weapons serve the purpose, someone explain why a .50 Cal rifle is needed or even a good idea? I am sorry, but anyone claiming to use an AS50 for any purposes other than trolling is full of their beans. If you are shooting people at 800+ meters, I am pretty sure you are not running down there to snag their loot. Which means you are just acting like the thumb of God and smiting people for your own amusement. I played the Mod a -lot- and I have had the AS50 and the M107. I purposely used them to kill bandits in Cherno, but found it a better choice to use things like the DMR instead. Even in the mod the .50 Cal rifles just serve no real purpose. I have been killed a lot in the SA so far, but at least they have never been to snap and a 'You are Dead' screen. Also, to the gent arguing that the military had time/resources to import Hummers and 'infinite assault rifles'... Hummers are light vehicles and widely spread all over the armed forces. There are entire motor pools of the things collecting dust in hundreds of bases around the world, not to mention rapid deployment options for the Marine Corps and the like. The M4 carbine is standard issue for regular grunts. Granted not the A1 version, but really burst fire and full auto doesn't make much of a difference. My Drill Sarge emptied a 30 round magazine on target using semi-auto faster than my buddy could dump using full auto. In a containment and civilian centric operation like the outbreak would have been, they would not have had .50 Cal rifles, bazookas (AT4), claymores, or any of the like. Even if there were 'bandits' they had to fight. I have served for 5 years in the US Army including tours overseas and I have seen a grand total of -one- .50 Cal sniper rifle and it was at a zeroing range in Afghanistan. Like Rocket says, it's not about realism, it's about being 'authentic' and a .50 Cal sniper rifle is not authentic to the setting or Rocket's vision of DayZ. Period.

Ahoy all! I am sort of new to the forums, but have played DayZ for a long long time. Like pretty much everyone I am waiting with bated breath for the Alpha of DayZ Standalone. I personally completely agree with Rocket's stance on completion and even though I was sad to see the AUG release 'window' pass I am pleased with every piece of information that has come out of the dev blogs so far. With that in mind, my suggestion, or point of discussion that lead me to post this thread comes from the last two Dev Blogs. Mainly this is in regards to Ammunition, Magazines, and reloading. While playing in DayZ, I found many weapons seemed to have a 'level' associated with them. What I mean is that a new survivor who finds say... a Winchester or Enfield is likely going to snatch it up because they need a weapon and they are not going to be picky. However after finding say... an AKM or M4 at an airfield or on a dead survivor these types of weapons are immediately discarded. Simply put... the militant style weapons are superior in every way to pump action shotguns or bolt action rifles. They kill zombies as easily, they have larger magazines and often higher rates of fire. This makes them the obvious choice to carry, as you never know when you might run into another hostile player. Sure a pump action is fine for mercing the random Zed, but if you are stuck with a Remington shotgun and someone is down the road popping shots at you with a 'higher end' weapon you are crap out of luck. What this means is, the longer you survive the more you 'progress' through the quality of weapons and leave a lot of them behind you in the dust to the point you no longer even want to collect the ammo or rifle/shotgun/pistol when you find it pretty much because you have better. That there is my main point. Not because it's not your style of weapon, but because you have something obviously -better-. When I have a stash in a tent or a Ural, I will usually have dozens of guns. I will find myself slowly discarding the shotguns and bolt actions until I have a truck full of automatic weapons and 'high end' sniper rifles. This has been addressed slightly by Dean 'Rocket' in his Dev Blog when he talks about the loot tables and adding a lot more 'civilian' weapons and rarifying the military goods. However I feel there is an angle to be pursued with the included reload/magazine feature presented by the DayZ SA team. As it stands now, Rocket has shown us Ammunition 'boxes' which can be emptied out and then loaded into magazines, which you can then reload into your rifle. This is outstanding and I appreciate the detail included with this simple feature. He also in the SEP Dev Blog touched on maybe having to hold the magazine in your hand to add ammo into it, which I feel is needed. A small and subtle difference between a bolt action rifle like the Lee Enfield and say an AK-47 is the detachable magazine. Magazines allow for fast re-loading and are what make a lot of modern military weapons the efficient killing machine they are today. However, the attached magazine and breach loading of older weapons at one time used to be huge speed loading features of the more venerable weapons like double barreled shotguns, winchesters, Lee Enfields, etc. Before the time of detachable box magazines these 'easy' to reload weapons were superior to muzzle loaders and the like. Detachable box magazines are only -better- than a quick reloading breach weapon if you have a lot of them. Otherwise you suffer the problem of emptying a mag, then having to stop, open a box of ammo, then manually reload the magazine, then load it back into your weapon before finally being able ro re-engage. A pump action shotgun on the other hand, can be quick fed shells at any point during a gun fight or zombie chase. Reloading a shotgun goes from box of shells, directly into the shotgun. This means weapons like Lee Enfields, Remingtons, Winchesters, etc. Would have the benefit of being easier to logistically handle when looting and exploring than a magazine fed modern weapon. In fact it would make them superior in many situations if you don't have the magazines to properly keep your modern rifle fed. Not to mention the inventory space. Sure a magazine of 30 rounds of .223 fills one slot in your inventory, what is a 50 round box of shells fills the same single slot? The main point of my ramble here is to argue that the 'pain in the butt' feature of managing ammunition, loading magazines, and the like needs to be included even up to the point of having a 'click... click... click' reload animation of your character adding .223 rounds into his STANAG magazine. It's time it takes to maintain the use of modern weapons that you can save by using older more utilitarian weapons. It's one of those choices you make at camp when you look at your weapons and decide which to bring. "Well I am going looting, do I want to bring four slots of magazines so I can carry that AK-47? Or do I just grab a winchester/shotty/bolt action and a pocket full of bullets just in case? Obviously 'rarity' of ammunition plays a large role as well, but in current DayZ shotguns still have 'magazines' of shells that take up far too much space in the inventory to be seriosuly considered over modern rifles. 8 Shells in the same slot a 30 round STANAG takes up is not an argument in the shotgun's favor at all, even if the shells are easier to come by. To conclude this ramble a more visual examination of the point. 12 Gauge Shell Box 30 Rounds -> Straight to Weapon (Possible Inventory Space 1 Slot Used) .223 Ammunition Box 30 Rounds -> Load into x1 Magazines -> Load into Weapon (Possible Inventory Slot 2 Slots Used Until reload) Rocket mentioned magazines playing into the game economy because of this so I hope this is already an included point of contention by the team, but please we need features that keep the 'fun' weapons relevent so that we don't all have to use semi-full-auto rifles in the end game. I loved the Remington 870 with flashlight... but there was an M4 CCO with Flashlight... poor shotgun got left in a field. ~Pineiro

Well that is the point of the topic, it wasn't actually confirmed, the Dev Blogs just showed loading ammunition and he mentioned maybe adding an animation. I feel this animation should be slow and realistic to make it more of a downside for semi-auto/auto box magazine fed weapons. I spend some time at the range regularly and let me say it's more fun to shoot my pump Mossy 590 than it is my AR-15 a lot because I don't have to stop and load STANAGs, I can just throw a few in and shoot something. I would hope that it follows that loading magazines would mean that there would be a 'lack' of it when it comes to shotguns etc, but if you look at DayZ the mod, shotguns still have 'magazines' in your inventory, they just don't -look- like magazines. In current DayZ you still have to get a stack of say 8 shells to create a 'magazine' for the M1014 before you can load them into the shotgun. I am creating this topic to discuss how important the 'correction' of that feature is to keeping those less modern weapons relevent. So if a person can say... load shells directly from the box of shells to the shotgun in ones or twos, that makes the box of shells itself almost a magazine. I suppose I am just stressing that I really feel they need to ensure that ammunition for bolt actions and shotguns needs to work more 'fluidly' than magazine fed weapons and their counterparts in the Mod.

Outstanding idea. All beans belong to thee.

So I host a server and I recently have been reading the change logs of the newest patch. I noted that the AH6X and Mi17 are now 'unbanned' and have seen many videos and such of them being flown or found in DayZ. My question is, do I need to 'enable' these vehicles on my server, or will they spawn into the server by default? Or, are these for only Private Hive servers? Thanks ~Pineiro

Just as a final verification. From your response I am to assume the vehicles are 'added' back to the spawns automatically in the patch, and since I have updated to 1.7.4.4 I can assume the new vehicles are spawned and active on the server. I appreciate the swift response, thanks Fraggle. ~Pineiro