Chaingunfighter

That seems fair enough. What I'd really like are civilian pickup trucks and machine guns like the PKM or DShK that you can mount on said pickups. Hell, they even existed in ArmA 2 so some of the trucks could have NAPA or CHzDK or even CDF insignias on them.

Yeah I think they're Zastava M70AB2s, but they're still essentially AK-47/AKM variants in operation. Honestly I don't think any golden AK rifles should perform any differently than the regular one (better OR worse). It's just a thin layer of gold covering the externals, it wouldn't really affect the weapon's performance that much. A Mauser C96 would be pretty cool but I don't know if they added it whether it would be something truly rare. It's not unique in the same sense as a 1911 Engraved is to the 1911 or a Golden AKM is to the regular AKM, it's just a standard firearm. I'm not saying there can't be completely unique firearms that have no "standard" variant, but I'd be hard pressed to accept most regular weapons being put on the loot management system for the unique factor alone.

Changelogs are usually written up before the release of an update, and values are constantly being tweaked across multiple different departments before the experimental versions come out. All of the accumulated data eventually has to be put together and it's not simple to do so over and over every update. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just that it's not necessary or practical and would be a waste of time in most cases with regular updates around the corner.

Oh, I don't think that was in reference to gameplay, he was just responding with a comment I made that stated; "it's not like they're adding a Mosin with 2 M203s.... so on and so forth" Maybe he intended to make that analogy as he does, but in this specific instance probably not.

What's the point in listing every minor change in experimental updates that happen fairly frequently when they're completely tentative to change between their jumps to the regular game and the next update, and a lot of the time it's just small errors or tweaks? They list the changelog for the regular updates, which most people play on. If you really want to know everything they're adding then wait a little longer, from a development standpoint it's very annoying and time wasting to write lists of everything you've done for something minor.

I wouldn't really say that's "sad" considering anything with 20mm pictanny rails can mount an M203, it's not like there's some special case for the mosin. You'd also likely never see it, because it's nigh impossible for most Westerners to get M203s (not to mention grenades) and countries where Mosins are still prevalent in use are relatively unmodified, not to mention they probably don't have access to M203s themselves. Sure, there are always special cases, but really in any case someone's more likely to put it on an AR-15/M16/M4 or another capable select-fire rifle rather than old, tricked out WW2 bolt-actions, simply because it would be completely inefficient.

Well I mean, obviously there should only be a few helicopters around. Making vehicles "rare" is different in the sense that you don't have to search as hard to find them versus regular loot. What should be done is making all of the necessary parts rare, making helicopter maintenance and fueling difficult, and finally making piloting the helicopter or utilizing many of its features difficult (as in Take On Helicopters, which the DayZ engine is mainly built on) I personally wouldn't be opposed to a few large transport helicopters like an Mi-17 or Mi-8, or maybe an S-64 Skycrane for lifting, as the game's top tier helicopter aircraft (I'm not particularly fond of having gunships or attack helicopters, though), but requiring more maintenance. Otherwise, a few small helicopters that could be armed with GPMGs (like the PKM, M249, or M240) would be fine, as long as proper shooting mechanics were induced. I mean, people are quick to jump on the; "armed vehicles ruin the game!" train because the mod's vehicles that were armed were built for military combat rather than difficult survival, but if they were properly introduced then actually getting in a Huey and flying down the coast unloading on freshspawns would not be a simple task (nor efficient one). That being said, it could be a great advantage to those who were willing to put time in maintaining and learning their tools. Anyway, by "piper aircraft" I was implying small planes, like Cessnas. We weren't debating over helicopters.

Well, obviously a bigger map would be better for large scale aircraft, but the whole point of smaller planes would be that they can be useful, but you have to make some careful decisions because they don't have a lot of room to operate in. I'm not saying let's add F-16s or C-130s or B-52s or Boeing 757s, but do you really think a small piper aircraft is going to be detrimental to gameplay?

In terms of the balance vs realism argument, it really depends on the specific topic. For instance, lowering an M4s damage because the values are nonsensically high would be a reasonable point, but lowering it because it "kills to quickly" would be a bad reason. However, when it comes to rarity, I don't necessarily want to be seeing more SVDs and PKMs than M4s just because it's a possibility they could be more common in Chernarus (throwing aside fiction and backstory) Sure, some guns could be rare for collective or uniqueness value, but run of the mill weapons (frankly I don't think the M4A1 is a specialized rifle at all) need to have a tiered system. Sure, you'd probably find more SKS rifles than Ruger 10/22s, but in the interest of gameplay the SKS is a higher-tier and therefore has to be made a rarer weapon to accommodate for its advantages. I'm all for an asymmetric gunplay experience (A freshspawn with a Sporter should not be easily matched with someone with an AKM) but the better weapons have to be made rarer.

Small prop planes like the Cessna or AN-2 are not going to be able to traverse the map in 20 seconds, but they're fixed wing. They may have a slight speed advantage over some helicopters (although the AN-2 is slower than most modern helicopters) but there are very few places that they can land and even fewer to take off from, most of which are high traffic and generally dangerous locations. As for a C-130 or Boeing 747, the map is probably too small for them, I agree. But I don't see what's so bad about fixed wings.

It's just relative, not a perfect chart by any means. Higher magazine capacity and handling are what I tended to dictate as defensive (although I had to put the M4 and AKM towards the middle because they're the run of the mill weapons at the moment) The ability to dish out damage coupled with rate of fire and range tends to put weapons on the offensive scale (short ranged weapons tend not to fair well for assaulting). That's why the MP5-K, even though it's select-fire, is on the defensive end, because it's short ranged and does not deal a ton of damage in a short period of time, like an offensive weapon should.

Here, I propped up these little graphs with a relative rating for how firearms can be used. Basically, you should decide which weapon fits in a spot that most supports your preferred playstyle.

I would never want there to be up to 100 per server. 1-2 per server at most, although with a loot management system with a limit of 100 there would probably none of them on almost every server, which is fair enough. I should've clarified when I said "DayZ has not followed that route" and said "DayZ has not entirely followed that route". That could've changed the entire context of what I said, but regardless. I don't think DayZ is "gamey" in that it's like an RPG or FPS where you "level up" and everything has (or attempts to have) completely balanced stats. I'm just willing to go to the lengths of calling it a simulator, because they're doing more than just simplifying the wound system. The simplification of calibers, while it does benefit good gameplay, is not something you'd find in real life, in reality there'd be 9x18mm and 7.62x54mmR and 5.45x39mm all over the place in an Eastern Bloc country, but we're not getting 9x18mm and probably not 54R or 5.45 for a while. And actually, with the most recent experimental updates, optics now decrease dispersion, for some reason. That's not to mention the different M4 stocks and handguards that have done so since the beginning of the game. Also, let's not forget the fact that you can attach any part on the fly, even if it would take some time or need a special mount (see Mosin LRS). In the interest of gameplay it's better, but that's not realistic (although I wouldn't be opposed to an animation playing for swapping out parts) Dean has gone all over the place with what he's called DayZ. He calls it the "anti-game" because there's no set objectives, no quests, it's just an open sandbox where your only goal is to survive (and even that can be debated). However, he also loves the term "authenticity" over "realism" because he knows that you cannot just make everything as realistic as possible and have a good experience. DayZ is more realistic than most other zombie games, but it's not a simulator.

Whatever you're most comfortable with using, as has been said before. However, if you're looking for a specific answer, I'd probably keep the setup you have, although if you're going for a purely self defense setup then you could probably ditch a few of those mags and some ammo. Otherwise go for an MP5-K if you can find enough 9x19mm rounds and magazines, it's a great PDW, and a high capacity handgun like the FNX or CR75 should be your backup weapon (Whichever you prefer; FNX for higher damage, attachment versatility, and the fact that it doesn't share ammo, or CR75 for the fact that it DOES share ammo). The Amphibia or Magnum also work but if you're going for self defense then .22LR is too weak and the suppressed effect isn't necessary and the Magnum is too low capacity, and it's more of an offensive weapon because of high damage and fast reloads.

They've confirmed that the mosin is going to be rechambered in 12.7x99mm ammo and be made into the new anti-materiel rifle, haven't you heard? Also, you can strip it down so that the only thing left of the original gun is the barrel, where everything else is railed, plastic, and can hold two M203 laser-guided grenade launchers in addition to the LRS/ACOG/Aimpoint/Eotech/Thermal hybrid scope and a laser designator to call in A-10, Napalm, and Tsar Bomba strikes.

Well, I'll agree, to an extent. But these are just pixelated renditions of them, not real guns. Regardless, I'd rather see an SVT-40 than a G43.

MG-42 is far more likely than an MG-34, the MG-34s were pretty lightly used by the Germans as a whole, and even then, they're both extremely unlikely. You're better off doing an MG-3, because they are still used to this day (even by Germany) and are chambered in 7.62x51mm. The MG-3 is essentially an MG-42 in almost every way. The KAR-98K or Gewehr 98 I could support, but having them chambered in 7.62x54mmR or 7.62x51mm would be a pretty significant difference, so I'd rather them not. MP-40 is fine, and it uses 9x19mm rounds so there's no real reason why it shouldn't be in the game. The Gewehr 43 saw limited use. I mean, yes, it did see combat, but most of the time it's only represented in fiction to balance out the American's M1 Garands and the Russian's SVT-40s, which saw much more regular use. Even then, it was really only the M1 Garand that was fighting all the time, the SVT-40 didn't see much use until the end of the war.

I'd say they could probably swap the values for the Mosin and CZ and that would be more accurate. Of course, 5.16 MOA is still pretty bad even for a Mosin (unless it's old and incredibly worn), so maybe a solid 5.00

I'm in no way being fanatic about the gameplay, in fact I have my complaints and in no way do I think the game is perfect. I guess if simply disagreeing with a critical point makes me a "fanboi", then fair enough, I'm a "fanboi"

Because they're two entirely different issues. I mean, I can understand why people seem to question the progress, but that doesn't mean it's correct. Imagine time traveling back to the 1200s, and demonstrating all of the modern technology we have. We have flying machines that can break the sound barrier and travel miles into the air, space ships that can take us to the moon, submarine ships that can travel to some of the deepest depths, massive bombs that can annihilate entire cities in seconds.... but we still have no effective cure for the common cold. That would be incredibly surprising to someone from that time, assuming they didn't just burn you at the stake for witchcraft. The teams who work on new content are separate from the teams who work on fixing the bugs. The artists aren't just going to stop making new models and graphics because there are some annoying bugs or issues in the game, they have to keep working. Many of the issues you're complaining about have been addressed anyway. Ambient sounds were caused by a bug with how sound transmitted from zombie AI and reloading, but I haven't experienced it for a while so I'd assumed it has been fixed.The zombie pathfinding has been addressed and is being worked on, the reason it didn't work was because the zombies can't detect where solid objects are and the game doesn't have active collision for them, hence why they run through them. They're working on a navmesh build that should completely stop zombies from running into or through anything they're not supposed to, and improve pathfinding tenfold.Suppressors are broken because there's problems with trying to get the gun to switch sound effects and work differently after the suppressor attachment has been added. This issue didn't exist in ArmA 2 because attachments weren't a thing. That, and it's a low priority issue (which is another reason why some progress gets slowed, because the team focuses on larger issues and the smaller ones get pushed back)The terrible control response time & desync are both part of the same issue, and it's something that's plagued the engine and Bohemia's servers since Operation Flashpoint, it's not strictly to do with DayZ. That's why the team is so focused on optimization, because servers with large amounts of stress on them tend to just desync instead of actually lagging, since it is a serverside issue, not a clientside one. Still, it's being worked on, that's all I can say.

Then clearly you're the one who does not understand how development works, not me, even if you do use a clever metaphor.

Meh, the mosin is only good right now because there's no real sniper platform. If it loses the LRS then you'll be forced to use the PU scope or ironsights, and it's not very good with those. The PU scope is more of a DMR-type and works a lot better with the SKS and the semi-automatic fire and 10 round magazines make the SKS almost twice as effective. As with ironsights, it's fine, but because of how long it is other guns are better for close quarters or downrange shooting. Sure, it's a capable, powerful, and fairly accurate rifle, but at the end of the day (in this case development) it'll probably be towards the mid/lower end of rifles.

The development hasn't been unproductive, or slow. It's only been about 8 months since the alpha was released. Yes, they've been conceptualizing and working on the standalone for about two years as a whole, but the huge following of DayZ didn't grow until that point, and still, it wasn't until the massive success of the alpha sales that the team grew and development skyrocketed. Making loot respawn doesn't seem like a major milestone, but it's not like you can just type up a script and whoopty-do! You've got loot respawning, it takes time to actually create a system that works well and doesn't just reset a building over a span of time. Loot respawning in the mod was so bad because the detection and method was terrible so you could end up traveling into a new town and finding nothing because loot wasn't supposed to spawn for server hoppers but if you entered too quickly it couldn't tell the difference. Making it work well is the big problem. And I would never hire anyone who's going to just drone on that development is "unproductive" and "slow". I would hire people who actually work to solve the problems they find instead of just complaining about them.

"I could tell you how Chernarus isn't Russia and I could explain the research I have conducted on my own by visiting gun shops in Russia and in Czech Republic and the massive variety of guns and ammo you can find there. I could tell you that the back story of Chernarus rides on the back of ArmA2 in which there was large amounts of NATO forces and US personnel conducting an FID mission." - Scubaman3D (Chris Torchia, Lead Artist) It's practically official. Also, your argument is flawed, because Chernarus is a fictional location that exists within a fictional universe, not a real location that is much easier to describe and utilize. You're trying to say the UNSC from Halo captured the Dovahkiin from The Elder Scrolls and invaded Mordor. It's not a crossover, they exist within the same timeline save for a diversion point.

Sure it is, being the lead of a team does have it's perks. Rocket is more or less just a figure, like Notch is for Minecraft. Sure, he has a hand in development, but he's mainly left it to the 70+ other staff members. And they are absolutely not lollygagging, they're working full time on the game. Just because they don't seem to be revealing major gameplay features every update does not mean they're not making progress. Just in the last experimental update we have object persistence and loot respawn, which is a pretty big milestone considering the mod had poor and very little persistence and respawning was clunky as hell. Let's not forget that we've had hunting, campfires, herbalism, fishing, chopping down trees, an ENTIRE FUCKING CITY, a completely redesigned NEAF, helicopter crashsites & police car crashsites, a good lot of new weapons, clothes, food, and other content (many of which DayZ has never seen, like the Bow), respawning zombies, and a ton of other stuff, and that's just in the past few months. Seems like progress to me.