Chaingunfighter

Then wouldn't the obvious solution be to just make military gear rarer, instead of just not including it?

I'm the same way, but normally something has to make at least a tad bit of sense for me, or at least be somewhat explainable, but I can't really see why these would ever be built. They'd still be cool and I'm not opposed to them, at all, but I'd rather the devs spend more time on something more sensible like an oil rig, which could also spawn high valued gear - since you could argue that the military would repurpose them or use the oil.

Only problem is, what if you killed someone at their stash? Then you basically get poor quality gear that was completely unrelated to the firefight. Or worse, what if someone abruptly dies across the map while you're looting it, should the stuff all just randomly become damaged?

Uzi is a must have There are a lot of general .308 weapons, though. What he's saying is that there should be dedicated rounds for dedicated sniper platforms so that regular rifles can be distinct, and we can have them without screwing up the gameplay. Otherwise, guns like the Blaze will be pointless because you have to use a round that's rare for sniper rifles.

Well, good luck convincing them to remove content that they spent a good amount of time working on, and are very passionate about. Dean: "Sorry artists, we have to remove your tents from the game" Artists: "But... but, why!?" Dean: "A couple of players feel that they personally violate DayZ's ULTIMATE 100% REALISM SIMULATOR ANTIGAME RULE" Artists: "But..." Dean: "Nope, sorry, the next patch is removing persistent items from the game completely, that goes for you too, programmers" Programmers: "But we've been working on this since the Alpha was released" Dean: "Well, when I stated that I'm not going to cater to the majority, I obviously meant that I am going to cater to the minority. Artists, delete the models from your computers, programmers, get rid of that code. Now." The game doesn't need to be as realistic as possible, to the point of completely violating "fun", in order to add "immersion" (which is completely subjective). I'm able to feel immersed in the game as it stands. Sure, there are things that can break it, but I don't think the fact that people can place tents and store items in them is going to ruin my experience.

I don't know about making the M24 a crashsite weapon, the M24 wouldn't really be any different performance wise than the Mosin is now (before 7.62x54mmR and .308 become separate). In fact, besides optics and the ATLAS bipod, the M24 wouldn't really have that many attachments. I'd say it could just be a rarer military spawn or possibly police station spawn, it doesn't really warrant being a super high-end rifle. Also, I believe the M4A1 is now spawning back at regular bases, I found a pristine M4A1 with no attachments (as they spawn) at a police station, and it doesn't appear to have been dropped, since I was the East Coast, far from any crash sites. (Not to mention on a 12 player server)

FNX is definitely not a police weapon, it's more of a NATO weapon. CR75 isn't near useless and is probably the "military equivalent" of a 9x19mm handgun at the moment. It has 15 rounds, just like the FNX-45, and can also use the flashlight and suppressor. I'd be fine with moving the Makarov, Magnum, and P1 to civilian spawns, though, but I don't think everyone should be running around with them, they should still be fairly rare, just more common than they are now.

Does that mean we may get some ArmA 3 gear? Haha, just kidding, but that's probably the best estimate. I don't know why people want to say it's the 90s, that would require almost half of the game's content to be removed in order for it to actually make sense

Actual Chernarus is much bigger than the map is, which just shows a part of it called "South Zagoria" And onto adding those other maps - That really wouldn't work. Namalsk was situated in the very far North, on oceans probably in the sub-arctic zone. Lingor is a jungle island situated near Africa, somewhere close to the equator. Chernarus is a temperate post-Soviet country located in the far south of eastern Europe. Lingor doesn't match either of them, and Namalsk hardly goes along with Chernarus. That's besides the fact that these were user created maps, and there's much more potential for the devs to simply add their own unique islands with their own touch rather than copying something else.

Why does it need to be complex? Besides, that's not the only evidence. There is also Chedaki (ArmA 2 Communist insurgent faction that opposed the CDF) gear, including a beret with their red star. They don't need to say anything more than "DayZ rides on the back of ArmA 2" for that to be true. They don't need to explain the whole damn plot to you for it to be true.

The only problem with the seafort idea is that they would be of little practical use to a country like Chernarus. During WW2, Chernarus was part of the Soviet Union, and Soviet naval warfare against Germany was fairly limited, and it really only occurred in the far North, not around where Chernarus is likely situated. Likewise, the Soviets didn't focus on naval defense, but rather trying to eliminate German fleets, and forts like this were only purposed in the Western Theatre (and only in a very few specific example). No doubt it would be cool to see, but there's no real plausible reason for them being there. Oil rigs and derelict ships, on the other hand, are a very good idea.

I'd imagine something like this being more common than the M203s or GP-25s, simply because the mounted grenade launchers can be used concurrent to the rifle platform without any real drawbacks (unless they make weight and weapon maneuverability more affected by attachments) while with this you'd be essentially forced to carry it as a primary weapon. Not saying either should be common, but the standalone GL is less versatile than the mounted ones overall. Well, considering that in ArmA 2 special operations forces were the primary group in Chernarus, and the rest were Marine Force Recon, who are still a pretty specialized group, and guns like the Amphibia S appear, you could say that they were left behind. Obviously you'd only have a few at best, but the numbers tend to be exaggerated so that there's actually a point in adding them. This could go concurrent with limiting most of these types of weapons to helicopter crashsites, so you at least have a semi-plausible explanation. That, and they were used by the Takistanis in Operation Arrowhead (not on any of the character models, but they are in ammo crates), so it's quite possible Takistani arms dealers gave weapons to the Chernarussian insurgents, among them M79s. And lest we forget that the M79 isn't obsolete, it just stopped becoming a general carry weapon because soldiers were more vulnerable carrying just a grenade launcher whereas mounted M203s were found to be more practical. However, that didn't stop the M79 from going all over the place, including Europe (see Greece, Portugal, and Spain).

I never really got why you could only store related items inside those containers. Even gameplay wise it's just a bit wonky, I can understand why, but I'd rather them just be different choices for storing items with possibly different levels of protection. The first-aid kit would offer less protection than the ammo crate and protector case, but spawns with medical items.

What about an LMG like the M249/FN Minimi or RPK/RPD (considering the drums for RPKs are already in place) Far Cry 2 had mounted M249s and I absolutely loved em.

Absolutely 100% yes! We get the Nagant and a .22LR revolver in one package, that's awesome.

I'll admit that .357 was probably a poor choice, but a large handgun caliber was probably necessary, and it's better than .44 magnum or .50AEI'd love for all of the guns to fit, I just don't think every gun that fits needs to be added, :P

I don't think it's any different adding western weapons than eastern weapons. In a game, the only difference is the appearance, otherwise they're all just .p3d files attached to our character models that can shoot. As I told you, I'd rather have a Sterling than a Sten And the Czech Republic may be modernizing today, but DayZ quite clearly takes place at some point I the future, so would it not be logical to suggest that Chernarus is modernizing too? As long weapons are accordingly rare, there's nothing wrong with them being added

The "they fit the setting" argument doesn't really convince me, as much as I agree. Two or three relatively unspectacular guns don't warrant their own caliber being created. And whether we'll only have one or two other guns, maybe, but you can ONLY have a few 7.62x25mm guns; the Tokarev, CZ-52, PPSh-41, and maybe the PPS-43 With .380 ACP you can at least get more interesting variety with things like the Skorpion, even if there aren't too many other guns. .45 ACP allows for a ton of SMGs, even if "none of them fit" I'm not at all saying I'm OPPOSED to it, I just do not feel it's anything special or priority, or honestly necessary

You're missing the point, though. The round itself might be unique, but the weapons it's available for are very limited. How many of all 7.62x25mm guns do you really think the devs would add? The PPSh-41 and Tokarev TT-33 are probably certain, but the other guns are just extremely similar derivatives or guns that can be added without a whole new ammunition type. There's little point in adding it when there are very few guns that can use it. Wouldn't it be more efficient to add armor piercing rounds of a preexisting caliber rather than make a whole new one for 2-3 firearms that (besides the PPSh-41) aren't really unique performance wise? It'd be different if the weapons involved were truly interesting or extremely rare, like the 9x39mm VSS, which I do think would be nice, but it's just common handguns and submachine-guns, the only thing that makes them special is that realistically they're fairly common across the former Warsaw Pact. I'm not opposed to the idea of having it, in fact originally I supported adding as many ammunition types as possible (though I no longer agree with that because I don't see DayZ as a simulator and can agree with the gameplay argument). I just don't see the necessity. It'd be cool, but there's no real reason to add it.

Yes, but it uses a significantly different 35 round magazine. I'd rather them just add the .380 variant, because it's virtually identical to the regular Bizon, and .380 ACP is already ingame. Either way, it's just one more SMG that uses 7.62x25mm, and it's one that can be done with pre-existing calibers already ingame. Nearly every gun allows you to play dress up? What? Most of the pistols in the game have no attachments, and the only three pistols that can take attachments are the 1911, CR75, and FNX45, and they're limited to basic flashlights and suppressors (the 1911 doesn't even use the suppressor), besides the FNX-45, which is the only real modular handgun, with a whole one extra attachment.The Sporter-22, CR-527, Blaze 95, and the sawed-off Mosin 9130 have no attachmentsThe SKS and Mosin are limited to a small number of attachments. The SKS gets a bayonet and the PU scope, both of which exist for the SKS. The Mosin has the PU Scope, M44 Compensator, and M91 bayonet, all of which were designed specifically for it, and the LRS, which is still possible with modification. The burlap and grass wrap I hardly consider an attachment.The AKM and AK101 aren't too modular, they only get the PSO-1 scope as an actual attachment, and otherwise they just get to swap between plastic, wood, or folding stocks, and plastic, wood, or railed handguards, and that's just to give the attachments more uses. These are all fairly normal for AK rifles.The M4A1 is modular, but that's how it should be.The PM-73 has no attachments, and the MP5-K only accepts sights on top of its rails, like it should.There's nothing excessive about what's ingame, attachment wise. Onto your actual pictures. You showed two Tokarevs (One actual TT-33 and a Yugo M57 Tokarev), a CZ 52, and three submachine-guns all following a similar design; the PPD-40, PPSh-41, and PPS-43. That's basically all 7.62x25mm is used in; Tokarev TT-33s and M57sCZ-52sOTs-27 Berdysh Pistols (the 7.62x25mm variant isn't available, while 9x19mm variants are)PPD-40 submachine-gunsPPSh-41s, PPS-43s, K-50Ms, and Zastava M49sSA Vz.23 SMGs (also available in 9x19mm)Vietnamese modified MAT-49s and MAS-38s (The MAT-49 is available in 9x19mm)Some Chinese Norinco knock-off P226 (The P226 is available in quite a few other calibers, including 9x19mm)7.63 Mauser C96 pistols that can technically, although aren't supposed to, fire the cartridge (again, also available in 9x19mm)What do all of those guns have in common? They're all submachine-guns and semi-automatic handguns, and almost all of them are derivatives of the same design, or incredibly similar. The TT-33 and CZ-52 look quite similar, the PPD-40 looks very similar to the PPSh-41, and the rest of its variants don't perform too differently. The SA Vz.23 comes in 9x19mm, as does the MAT-49, P226, and OTs-27 (which wasn't really used by Eastern European countries, and the 7.62x25 modifications were done specifically in Vietnam) Do essentially 2-3 handguns and SMGs really warrant adding a brand new caliber to the game for the simple fact that they "accept no attachments"? (which is completely wrong, by the way) .380 ACP seems to have done that job already; the Makarov and PM-73 have no attachments, and they're both common Warsaw Pact handguns and submachine-guns. And they're not the only ones. There are thousands of different 9x19mm and .45 ACP handguns and SMGs that are also not very modular, many moreso than 7.62x25mm Tokarev. I'm not opposed to it being added, but there's absolutely no real compelling argument for adding it, besides "it's realistic", or "I really want these specific Soviet guns!"

I don't remember there being flashbangs in ArmA 3, but I haven't played in a while so I don't know. The RGD-5 is a new model, though, it wasn't in before the new update.

Yeah - including the Czech Republic, one of Chernarus' biggest design influences. Not to mention that the Czech Republic was heavily influenced by NATO long before the end of the Cold War because of the heat that would eventually result in Slovakia and the Czech Republic splitting. And let's also not forget that most of the weapons ingame are Eastern European, or simply ones that are internationally common (like the MP5 and M4A1). The only guns you can really say stand out are: The FNX-45, but the FNP series of pistols is quite popular as is, and we don't know how far in the future DayZ takes place, so it's very possible they became common. And they were in ArmA 3, so assuming DayZ followed the same timeline until the infection, it's logical to assume that NATO might've just started procuring them.The Amphibia. You probably wouldn't find as many as you do in DayZ, but it's certainly possible SEALs went on covert ops during ArmA 2 and possibly post-apocalypse and left them behind. That, and Rugers are popular all over the place, so they might've just picked this one for gameplay reasons.I won't comment on strictly civilian weapons because it's not fair to say no one in Chernarus would've saved up money and bought expensive firearms. In fact, it's actually something you see all over the place with people who make under average amounts of money, they buy expensive stuff to show off. And that's just assuming everyone in Chernarus is poor, even though there are clearly plenty of people who make a good amount of money and would've lived comfortably at the worst. The Mi-8s were just re-used from ArmA 2 and placed around the map at specific spots, but they do spawn some low-end loot. I wouldn't mind if they (and maybe any random Eastern/CDF chopper crash) were the only place for the ZSH-3 pilot helmets, so you'd still have some incentive to go look into them (and the fact that finding pilot helmets in military barracks is just odd) But they did add those random wrecked V3S Command trucks, so maybe they're the current equivalent of some Eastern crashsite. I don't think regular explosives like hand grenades warrant being super rare, since using them effectively is not too easy when you're not playing against large groups of enemies, like in ArmA. I don't think you should be finding them everywhere, but a few now or then would be cool. Special types of weapons, like Claymores, or remotely detonated explosives, like C4, could probably be much rarer. The same goes for rocket launchers, like the RPG-7 or M72 LAW, since you have pretty good control over where you're going to hit. That's true, it doesn't really matter. I was actually fairly surprised when I saw that the RGD-5 was in the files, because I don't see how it's really going to make a difference over the M67. All it really adds is more variety, but I'm okay with that, especially because a hand grenade is a small prop that doesn't take terribly long to model. Maybe the M67 will be made rare for simple unique factor, or perhaps they have plans for doing more splitting up of Eastern and Western stuff. Who knows?

Maybe, but if we're going under the assumption that the helicopter crashsites are from NATO or special operations, it may be better for the M-18 to be added. Then again, I did find an M4A1 at a police station after a server restart on 0.48, so the crashsites might just be for general rare loot like they were in the mod. Of course, with the fact that we're eventually going to have an RGD-5 grenade alongside the M67, they might add both and put the M-18s at crashsites and MON-50s in barracks, or something like that. They're both essentially the same thing so it doesn't really matter, but I'd think something like a claymore would deserve reservation to a crashsite.

This all the way. I don't want any sort of weapon discrimination. Besides the obvious advantages to character progression (gear wise), variety, and overall gameplay, the entire spectrum of weapons needs a fair representation (only in such a way that benefits gameplay) simply so that people get a better chance to play how they want. People might scream; "DMRs were OP in the mod, they shouldn't be included because they'll be OP here" (highly debatable, but regardless), but in order to promote a true asymmetric experience, guns should be across the board. Instead of just having everyone run around with a small selection of weapons, people can actually specialize in the role that they want, in a way that it can still be balanced. With a DMR, say the M14, you'll (usually) outclass someone with an AKM, but people still use the AKM. Why? Because it's balanced out by rarity of the gun, the ammunition, and attachments, alongside the fact that the AKM has the advantage in closer environments with a larger magazine and select-fire capability (The original M14 can be fired on automatic, but many later models removed the feature, so it doesn't need to represented in DayZ. Either way, the M14 was awful to use automatic, and that's considering most troops never even use the burst function on M16s with far less recoil and more ammunition) So what if it's a western gun? Realistically speaking, DayZ is a fictional game, and yet the fiction argument is a last resort point at best, while still completely valid. Globalization, illegal arms trade and smuggling, powerful countries supplying smaller countries (and capturing weapons, ala Israel) and simple legal firearm ownership by civilians, are all real things that happen. People want an AK? You can have your AK. People want an M4? You can have your M4. People want a bow? You can have your bow. No need to discriminate.

I don't think we should have every weapon that exists, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it, were it actually (reasonably) possible to make detailed models of every firearm ever made. The tale isn't particularly fitting for an overall variety of weapons, because I'd consider DayZ more of the buffet rather than the cake. You can choose whatever you want, and there's a lot to pick from, but you can't, as a player, hold onto everything. The only WW2-era gun I mentioned was the Sten, and that's not even in the picture. I was just commenting on how an SMG with a magazine on the side would be cool, to add to the variety. The Sterling is more realistic (you still see them in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, sometimes), but I made a generalized comment. I wouldn't call the Browning Hi-Power, M72 LAW, or M16 "modern oddities". The Hi-Power is a very popular civilian pistol all over, the M72 LAW is used by quite a few foreign armies, and M16s of all kinds are all over the place. The L1A1 specifically is probably not something you see too often, but I'd rather have the FN FAL anyway, which is used everywhere (for pragmatic reasons, though. There are plenty of other semi-automatic 20-round DMRs) With WW2-era western weapons, you may have a point. Besides the fact that most of them use calibers that probably won't be added (Save for .30-06), you're right in that most of them didn't make it far into Eastern Europe. However, quite a few M1 Garands and M1 Carbines, used by West German, did fall into East German hands, and naturally spread around Europe. The Thompson is also not too odd either, because the Chinese and Vietnamese manufactured unlicensed copies and oftentimes sold them to European countries. Likewise, the M3 Greasegun, which remained in service for a very long time (and was very cheap to manufacture), is not bad, either. You are more likely to find German and Soviet arms, but I wouldn't ever count western arms out. Claymores are a must have, IMO. Even if they're a helicopter crashsite spawn, they'd be the perfect ambush weapon.