Chaingunfighter

Unless they move the spawns back along the Southern coast, I see no reason to make Balota into a civilian airfield. It may need some modification, but the only reason I ever see people in Elektro or Cherno now is because they've been heading to or from Balota. The southern coast would be essentially obsolete save for the odd person in Elektro if all of the loot was pushed into the North, because places like Zelenogorsk or Green Mountain aren't huge enough loot spawns to justify traveling there alone. Now, if they wanted to move spawns back towards the south, then I can see them changing Balota. However, it should still remain a small military airbase. That way, the NEAF, Balota, and NWAF are all unique in their own respect; civilian airport complex, small military base with an airstrip, and a huge international airfield.

It's a different hunting rifle. Also, probably will not be 7.62x54mmR. Functionally they're both bolt-action rifles but this will probably have different individual performance. Also, the Mosin will probably be a bit rarer towards the later stage of the game (or maybe it doesn't have to, if they decide to stop letting it usethe LRS) Could this also be a Zastava M48? They look fairly similar, although this definitely matches the CZ-527 more. Just asking that because they could've just modified the models.

Ah, yes, I forgot about copy/pasting.

Using a sniper rifle would be essentially pointless at actual sniping ranges unless someone was firing at you... with another sniper rifle. Sure, you can fire any gun at any range, but the long distance capability of a good few rifles would be moot when you're not "supposed" to fire at people who aren't shooting at you first. Speaking of the whole; "Who fires first" system, this would allow most people to ignore others' warnings to "stay back", as they would not suffer any penalties if they did die and would be okay if they did win, as the other person who told them to stay back would've likely attacked first. When I say "impossible", I was exaggerating the fact that it's heavily discouraged to make friends with someone you've robbed in the past (the time of which that even lasts you haven't made clear.). Yes, I know it would be weird to become friends with someone you've probably hated in the past, but implementing a system to try and deal with that is odd. And yes, you would still get an increased time for murdering someone, but you clearly state; "You kill a player and as long as you loot the corpse, it reduces your death timer(s) by 15 minutes. The murder still costs you 10 minutes." You'd still get a five minute reduction to your time for simply opening up someone's loot (not necessarily taking anything). That's not a good system, all it means is that people have to another minute or two before hunting people so they can run over to the body/bodies and press the inventory key twice. And how would you define whether your allies are "involved" in an action? Do you both have to initiate the robbery action? Does everyone involved have to open up the person's inventory after they're alive, or dead? I'm not sure how the game would keep track of this. Either way, it's too much of an RP-like solution to try and limit the KoS. "You want to kill people? Well, you've gotta open their corpses, or you have to wait more time before you can play again." Let the disadvantages come from a more realistic standpoint. Most gear gets ruined or damaged (or it should, the whole "everything is ruined" concept is pretty bad) on death. Make ammunition and weapons rarer. Yes, people can server hop, and people can choose to waste their bullets on random coast spawns, but that's up to them, it would just make it more ineffective, but not artificially limit it.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! I believe you should message a moderator if you wish to help translate the game. I remember them pointing out where you could go if you wanted to help, but I'm not sure. However, I know the developers are gladly open to people translating.

Well, yes. I did feel the need to point out that mindlessly insulting a group because they're "not hardcore" or "don't want to let everyone play how they want" is pathetic. It's also against the forum rules, but I'm not trying to be the harbinger of the moderators.

The public hive is a pretty integral part of DayZ, you'd be hard pressed to convince the developers to take it out of the game. While this would be the "end all" solution to server hopping, it doesn't give a lot of incentive for people to keep playing. If a server that you've been fully geared on for months slowly dies off and runs out of players, what are you supposed to do? You're now out of luck and stuck with nothing, simply because people migrated elsewhere.

Hopefully we can still "look into" the PBOs to see the new models and stuff :)

The big question is - did they do it for the M4 too? It's the only gun I've actually ever seen a problem with the accuracy. The pistols could probably have used some improvement, too, though. And by good quality, I'm assuming you meant "pristine" or "good" condition items, rather than specific items like the MAGPUL handguard or stock.

I opened the thread with the intent of seeing (hopefully) good ideas or productive discussion. I did not. The whole "if you don't like something, don't x it" argument is invalid, anyway. How am I supposed to know whether I don't like a song if I haven't listened to it. or whether I don't like a book if I haven't read it? Sometimes there are very good or new reasons that come up as solutions or ideas on this forum, and I'm willing to give threads like these a chance, because I might gain valuable insight. It just tends not to happen. I was very well ready to contribute an argument, but as I've said before, all I saw was people producing the same old concepts, or insulting the other group. Don't assume that because I don't offer anything that it was my intent to come here to complain.

I sincerely hope this thread gets locked soon. It's more insultation than it is actual, valid discussion and suggestions (and all of the suggestions have been given countless times before).

It's not actually a Kimber Warrior, it's a mixed-up 1911 that resembles and has the most features of one (hence why it's identified as one on the Wiki & IMFDB). The slide serrations are straight, which is not a feature of the Warrior, and it's got a different rear sight. However, the Kimber Warrior is a Colt M1911 variant. The gun in-game is just as "not a 1911" as the CR75 is "not a CZ-75". It's actually a CZ-75 SP-01 SHADOW, not an original CZ-75 as the name suggests. They just generalized the name to avoid copyright issues.

Murder 1 person = No penalty Murder 2 people = 15% Damage Penalty on all weapons & attacks Murder 3 people = Zeds are attracted to you within a small vicinity with priority over other players Murder 4 people = Zeds have 25% damage resistance to you and are attracted within a larger radius Murder 5 people = Zeds will now begin spawning nearby and chasing after you Murder 6 people = Zeds will be nearly immune to all of your attacks, and spawn in increasing numbers Murder 7 people = A bright red glow that can be seen across the map is shown, and your active location is given to all players. You die in one hit. Murder 8 people = Helicopter gunships and fighter jets with napalm begin spawning and chasing after you, doing everything they can to kill you. Murder 9 people = All of the previous effects will now permanently affect your character, even after you respawn. Murder 10 people = You are temporarily banned from all servers Murder 11 people = A hitman is sent to your home and kills you, you cruel pixel-murdering monster!

What's your definition of a playstyle? It seems pretty arbitrary if you are trying to say that it needs interaction, and even then, killing someone is still interacting with them, just in a negative manner.Why does defending yourself from one person grant you immunity from their other allies? Someone could have easily just made a friendship with someone and is now free to be killed because their ally was stupid and fired on someone they couldn't killWhy is killing someone without using the "rob" interaction psychopathic, but using the rob interaction and then killing them somehow better.And how is it any less psychopathic if you kill someone but open up their loot afterwards? People could do this and get reduced timers.And why is it impossible for you to "ally" with someone you have robbed in the past? Apparently forgiveness doesn't exist anymore.Why do all of these things apply to your allies? Congratulations, your ally is a douchebag and has given you a 30 minute timer for something they've done halfway across the map! Hooray!I can't see why people want RP elements to discourage the whole KoS manner. They're supposedly fine with killing until it happens for seemingly "no reason". Then it's wrong. This solution doesn't even stop it, it just means that using long ranged combat is no longer a viable option unless you want to wait half an hour before you can play again. As long as you're able to get close enough to someone to initiate a "robbery", then you're free to do whatever the hell you want. Except make friends, of course.

The weapons become zombies? I don't think so. That would be an interesting concept, though. Being attacked by guns themselves is something I've never seen before. It'd certainly destroy the "guns don't kill people argument" :P The Syrian Rebels got the F2000s from soldiers that were killed or captured them from bases. And I agree with you, the game should not be based around super modern weapons (although I think a few wouldn't be bad considering they can be rare). However, I don't think adding bulletproof vests, leg holsters, or hydration pouches is turning the game into a "military game". If anything, things like the anti-stab vest and chest holster are more out of place (not that they're out of place, just moreso than what this thread is suggesting). What's wrong with having more military gear? Should the variety of in-game items be limited because the focus needs to be on civilian items? As long as they can limit the spawn-rate of things, I fail to see why having more stuff is going to cause problems. Military gear doesn't have to be more common for there to be a better selection of stuff. Besides, things like bullet proof vests and holsters are fairly basic. It's not like anyone is asking for XM8s or Strela AA launchers.

You're right, in real life they don't have to deal with a viral infection that kills off a large percentage of the population and turns many into infected creatures. Real military bases in places like Afghanistan and Iraq are able to clear out swiftly because there is not a looming threat just outside. In instances where bases have to clear out because of an attack, equipment often does get left behind, and shortly gets captured by enemy forces (Why do you think Syrian rebels have been seen with F2000s? They certainly didn't buy them themselves) In an environment where there are zombies all over the place, nations would act to defend locations of importance. Yeah, the NEAF is not a major base of operations, but it wouldn't be very difficult for them to keep a few guards posted and have the rest of the on-site personnel ready to fight with AKMs. It's not like you're finding heaps of weapons inside barracks at any bases, I've never seen more than 5-6 guns (most of which are pistols). That's not an extraordinary number for a base. You're not taking into account that evacuations don't always happen in an orderly manner. Most of the time a force can pull out long before the threat reaches the base, but if they instead try to fight off the attack or are caught in a surprise attack, people will die, and you won't always get weapons out. It happened all over the place during Vietnam, that's why the NVA & Viet Cong had M16A1s & M14s that they had no other way of getting. If all of the soldiers in an area are dead, what happens to their equipment? Does it just disappear? You're not taking into account the fact that no soldiers are still present in the area, but there are plenty of military zombies & remnants of chaos around. And what would the solution be? Remove the military loot from the game? Run a simulation of the pre-apocalypse before the game starts & build the map off of that? (A cool idea, but the resources necessary for that would be extraordinary)

Somehow I doubt animals would go close to cities that are still full of zombies. After an apocalypse that just kills most people, that would happen, but in this instance there are still a bunch of people around, just infected ones who shamble around. Even if the zombies don't attack or eat the animals, they'd still shy away from the large masses of moving infected out of instinct.

I was being sarcastic to the guy who thought that adding more objects that can be associated with the military should not be in the game. Even if the devs had no military loot, plenty of non-military people have hydration packs and holsters, and even bullet proof vests (don't forget the police force, and the many military bases and camps scattered around the map). This stuff would make a good addition to the game.

The Marlin would be a weird choice, but somehow I think there are more .357 guns than just lever-action rifles they can do. I'm almost certain there will be one at some point, but I'd say the best bet would be the Winchester 1895 if they wanted one. Sure, it's not the best, but neither is any other lever-action, and I highly doubt the devs will end up not making one. The SKS being a Yugo is probably pushing the semantic argument too far, even though I ironically held the position that it should have been a Siminov in a different discussion with you. I mean, the M59/66 isn't even a bad choice of a weapon, but if I had to guess I'd say it was because the specific grenade-launching model was more common without the bayonet than the 1945, or because they thought the different flash hider looked cooler. Somehow I think that they chose the former option so they didn't have to include a bayonet on the rifle, but that would still be a pretty bad excuse (because even Yugo SKS rifles almost always had the bayonets, they were just more prone to having them off.) I'd say most of the weapon's choice, save for the pistols, has been fine thus far. The Mosin-Nagant, SKS, AKM, IZH-43, SVD, and MP-133 are all considered to be "Eastern" weapons. The M4A1, Ruger 10/22, P1, Remington 870, 1911, and CZ-75 are all acceptable, even though they're not Eastern weapons. (The CZ-75 technically is, but the Czech Republic is generally regarded as Central European rather than Eastern, after the separation of it and Slovakia, and the variant they chose is a new version from the CZR, so that's why I listed it there). There are some oddities with the weapons, like the M4A1 being from CMMG rather than Colt, the SKS being Yugoslavian, the Mosin having the really odd bolt and hexagonal receiver, the CZ-75 being the prototype variant which is probably the only one you wouldn't find in Chernarus, etc, but at that point I think we're getting a little over-zealous with our firearms. Yeah, having accurate and well-depicted firearms is great, but it's not really fair when we start finding issues in the smallest things. And I think they chose the B95 for the looks. As practical as that Baikal probably is, it does not look that good.

What's wrong with the MP5K? (if you just don't want it because we might not be able to give it a stock, I wouldn't make the judgement this early) I also don't see why the 1911s and T/C would need to be replaced, they aren't bad (even though they're sitting right on the border of possibility). They probably could have been better off with an M1911A1, but the version they chose is fictional (though it's close enough to a Kimber), so there's nothing really wrong with it. The Blazer, FNX-45, Python, and Amphibia are probably stretching it too far, but I like the variety they add to the game. The B95 fits pretty much every characteristic of a gun that should be in the game. The only demeaning factor is that the real gun is expensive and uncommon. It's an annoyance to people like us who need weapons to be depicted as well as they can be, but I think the B95 just works so well with the game that I can let it slide. But then again, that's probably because I have a soft spot for it, not for any rational reasons.

Yep, it's common knowledge that all objects & weapons associated with military and government (or places of leadership in general) will completely vanish, without a trace, after social collapse happens. If a military has it (or has had it), it shouldn't be in DayZ.

What guns would you get rid of? Most of them are somewhat reasonable, just to a lesser degree. The only things you'd actually probably never find are the FNX-45, Colt Python, and Amphibia. The Blaze 95 & LongHorn are not likely either, but because of how popular hunting seems to be in Chernarus, you can imagine that some of them would make it there. The CR75 & 1911 are odd variants to have of their respective weapons, but they're definitely plausible. The P1, Mosin, SKS, Sporter-22, AKM, IZH-43, & M4A1 are perfectly acceptable. Yeah, you can rattle on about every small detail of the weapons ("Oh, the Mosin's bolt is wrong!", or "Oh, that one specific tactical variant of the 1911 only exists in this many countries!", etc.) but the weapon's choice as a whole has been fine. I guess if people want to take the effort of making good quality models of weapons not in-game, though, I'm certainly for it.

That mainly stems from the fact that the original M16s offered very little more than the M14 did, because they didn't have 30 round STANAGs in good quantities at the time and were plagued with terrible reliability issues (on the XM16E1 and M16, that is). It was also an odd jump considering the M60 was the go-to support weapon (all automatic support was done by this rather than M249s, unless you count the few USMC, MFR, and SEAL units who had Stoner M63s). But yeah, the whole point of the M16 was to create a lightweight weapon that allowed soldiers to carry larger quantities of ammunition and remain energized in the fight for longer periods of time, and it's done a fairly good job at that. Their modern universal-type magazines (STANAGs are used in tons of guns, even M249s!) and extreme variety in customization has definitely helped.

It wasn't realistic at all to begin with. The AS50 in the mod had almost no recoil from any firing position, could be fired from any position, allowed you to sprint at full speed (in addition to all of your other hundreds of pounds of gear), allowed you to turn and maneuver at the same rate as with any other gun, and also had almost no deviation at any range (because there were no environmental factors in the DayZ mod affecting ballistics). If they really wanted to have the AS50 in the Standalone, they could easily correct all of those problems, and suddenly it would be more or less a support weapon with incredibly rare ammunition and that's not very useful if you can't get a clear shot. I'm not saying I want an AS50 (I don't), and the devs don't either, but arguing why stuff was removed from the mod is pretty poor considering the mod's shooting elements were unrealistic in themselves.

Good luck maintaining consistent, automatic fire, on a battle rifle (especially the G3). Sure, you might have an advantage in close quarters where recoil is not as much of a problem, but you wouldn't use a Mosin in CQB unless you had to either way. Also consider the fact that they don't have to make optics for the G3, so you're not necessarily going to see everyone sniping with them like they do the SKS. And magazines for the G3 are huge, so good luck carrying a large surplus of them. Rarity introduced properly would mean that these guns wouldn't be "overpowered". Chris Torchia has mentioned that the G3 is something they want to make (as well as the FN FAL). And it's actually one of the best fitting battle rifles they could do (again, like the FAL). These things appear in almost every major conflict nowadays that AKMs and other AK variants are still appearing in. Yes, it's too a lower degree, but just looking at footage of recovered weapons in Iraq & Afghanistan, a good portion of the weapons are G3s or FALs or other non-AK rifles. Yes, Chernarus isn't Afghanistan, but it's historically rife with civil war, and some G3A3 rifles would be perfectly acceptable to that end.