Chaingunfighter

What's wrong with RPGs? Area-of-effect weapons aren't necessarily a bad thing (especially IEDs, Molotovs, and hand grenades). I can't imagine something like an RPG-7 or M72 LAW would be that out of place, especially considering how hard to find a rocket would be. The M72 is one-shot only, so if you fuck up your aim, you've just wasted a super asset. The RPG-7 can be reused, but is much more prone to misfiring and deviation. I don't want tanks, though, but I think having some explosive small-arms as support weapons would be a cool thing to have. The mod also did have the M136. It was taken out because it was useless (replaced the backpack slot, had almost no area-of-effect damage, couldn't always take out vehicles) and also could be re-used an unlimited amount of times, which was not realistic at all.

No infected animals, please. It would ruin the purpose of hunting, as I doubt you'd want to wear clothes made from pelts carrying disease. The highest concentrations of zombies should be in the big cities (Elektro, Cherno, Berezino, and the big city to the north) followed by bases and then small villages, although actually creating a good system for this might be difficult (all zombies simply spawn from a preset number to every specific building. Some military bases only have a few buildings, so it would be incredibly weird to see like 40 zombies crowding around one barracks)

Ironically enough, Call of Duty's vehicles have a relatively minor role in its gameplay, so your argument is fallacious. There are plenty of FPS games that do make high use of vehicles, but I can't see how having even regular Ladas and GAZs is going to destroy the gameplay. However, it's entirely possible that someone manages to find a working truck and machinegun, as well as the ample parts to armor it up, and utilize it. It's going to take some work, yes, and generally it will be groups of people who have them (for all sorts of reasons). However, I doubt people's first reaction when they get their high-end pickup with a PKM working would be to take a stroll on the coast where the car is at heavy risk. Using vehicles doesn't detract from pure survival, it's a real element that does happen in real disaster scenarios. Just as quickly as you can yell "there are other games where you can fight eachother (such as CoD)", I can yell "there are other games where your highest-grade tools are axes (such as The Forest)".

You can still find fresh fruit. I don't think gas goes bad quicker than fresh fruit. Also, bicycles are vehicles, and they would still work until they rusted to the point that the parts could no longer hold. I can't foresee roving bandit drive-by bicycle clans either.

I'm not sure looks would be my biggest concern after the apocalypse. Sure, being intimidating or sending a visual message does work, and it is a video game, so obviously cool-factor is more notable. However, ultralight aircraft would be incredibly effective if you had them available, as they can take off and land in much more variable terrain than say a C-130. They don't necessarily have to add the one he chose specifically, but ultralight planes are probably the most plausible of any others (gliders could be too, but where would you launch them from?) Regular small/medium planes and helicopters are still going to be the bulk of remaining vehicles, but nonetheless.

I want that, too. But people are getting their panties in a bunch because the devs have even talked about it, so it's important to inform people that it's like talking short term. Long-run, ammunition would be much more precious if they varied it a lot. Sure, there are plenty of common calibers you can have variation in (like 9x19mm, .45 ACP, 5.56x45mm, and 7.62x51mm), but guns like the VSS Vintorez use 9x39mm which would probably only have a few guns. Imagine going on a loot run and finding a VSS Vintorez (whether it would spawn in barracks or chopper crash sites, I don't know, but assume its rare.) You already have a good .308 M700 hunting rifle with a substantial amount of ammo, but you were lucky enough to find a gun you may not have a chance for again. So you have to decide on taking the internally suppressed sniper-rifle on the chance that you may find more magazines or rounds for it, but are incredibly unlikely to do so, or your hunting rifle, which will last you a lot longer but will not be as effective and also not as limited.

Balancing has not been completed on *anything*. Balancing passes will be conducted towards the end of Alpha and again throughout Beta. There is little point in balancing systems that are subject to complete change and replacement, or you end up constantly rebalancing things. EDIT: Furthermore, it's absolutely useless to compare Arma values with DayZ because we use not only a *completely* different mechanic for control, but the values are used in an entirely different way. As an example, in DayZ dispersion is calculated using the item along with all attachments. Arma does not *have* attachments. So in the M4A1 example: the base dispersion of the M4 is very high because you have no hand-guard, no buttstock, no anything. Until you put on the buttstock and the handguard, by design, the game will have the weapon shoot extremely wide. **tl;dr: This is a classic case of "apples and oranges". ArmA and DayZ values are completely different**. - Dean "Rocket" Hall" While this post was in response specifically to the game's weapon dispersion versus ArmA 2 (which Dean himself admits is a problem, just not a priority fix or balance), it can easily be applied to most of the devs decisions; Weapons firing unreasonable ammunition (Mosin), leaving guns in development hell to cut down on calibers (AK-74M), or having game-design errors with the weapons themselves (Mosin using LRS). A lot of this will probably be changed once the core features of the game start becoming implemented and major problems such as zombie pathfinding an AI get the necessary work done. While this is completely personal, I do find that this would go well with Chris Torchia's quote, as they would probably not want to have a full set of calibers in the game which may not make it into the final product. That's just how I feel, but somehow I doubt the devs would let their work go to waste.

Why? It's hardly any different in design than your average cessna but isn't extremely out of place like these one-seat ultralight helicopters & zeppelins people want.

Militarized blimps were rather difficult to destroy, but it was rare for them to stray into the range of capable anti-aircraft fire in general. Modern-day zeppelins aren't up-armored because it isn't intended that we're going to be attacked by suicidal planes. Of course having a plane and/or helicopter will take probably a huge amount of work to maintain, my problem is that helicopters & planes are reasonably common (as are parts for them) whereas blimps have practically died out besides your few hobbyists, museums or advertising corporations who still use them. And you're right, it's a small, mostly rural fraction of a country, which means it's even less likely to have blimps. They might have one on the whole map, realistically. Sure, having one blimp would be cool, but eventually it would get boring as redundancy would become common and you'd never be able to take it further with multiple blimps. It's a cool idea, but I don't think spending the time necessary to create them would add enough to justify doing it.

I don't know what they would change on the NEAF to make it "more civilian" besides making entirely new building models. It's already very bare bones (2 hangars + an ATC and a few service buildings) and would probably be something civilians would use after a military conflict has ended. Balota is incredibly far away from the spawn points, so there's no real need to change up what's there.

Most of the time those who were legitimately interested and testing features would probably be unphased by the long times, as most people I know actually take their time to look for the new stuff rather than look through one building and then give up and hop to the next server.

Civilian weapons generally have a much larger variety of types than military ones, for logistical reasons. The U.S. military standard small-arms calibers are as follows (by order of weapons using said ammo); -5.56x45mm M16A2/M16A4M4/M4A1GUU-5/P (CAR-15)M231 FPWHeckler & Koch HK-416M27 IARMK16 Mod. 0 (FN SCAR-L)MK12 SPRM249 SAW/M249 ParaMK46 Mod. 1-7.62x51mm M24/M40A5M14/MK14 EBR/M39 EMRMK17 Mod. 0 (FN SCAR-H)SR-25/M110Remington MSRM240B/D/GM60/M60D/M60E3/M60E4/MK43MK48 Mod. 1M134-9x19mm Beretta M9 & M9A1Glock 19Sig Sauer P226Sig Sauer M11 (P228)Sig Sauer P229RHeckler & Koch MP5A3/MP5SD/MP5KHeckler & Koch MP5N/MP5KNColt M635/Colt 9mm SMG-12 Gauge AA-12Mossberg 500/590/590A1Benelli M4 Super 90 (M1014)Remington 870M-26 MASS-.45 ACP Colt M1911A1MEU (SOC)Heckler & Koch MK23 SOCOMHeckler & Koch HK-45CHeckler & Koch P11-12.7x99mm Barrett M82/M107Browning M2HB/M3TAC-50-.300 Winchester Magnum XM-2010-4.6x30mm Heckler & Koch MP7A1Now, obviously world-wise militaries vary (eastern oens are no exception), but only .300 WM and 4.6x30mm are limited, and even then, the MP7 isn't standard issue. Meanwhile, civilian weapons encompass tons of calibers, just to name a few; 9x18mm, 9x19mm, .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .45-70 Gov't, .223, .243, .300 WM, .308, .330, .30-06, .338, 7.62x54mmR, 10 Gauge, 12 Gauge, 20 Gauge, and more. Yeah, there is plenty of variation in military firearms across the board and the devs could easily ensure that the military weapons are hard to have ammo for, but realistically militaries tend to keep the ammunition they use common, inexpensive, and limited, or logistics becomes a huge problem, whereas a civilian is not constantly in combat.

It's not like they're all that complicated to fix. Sure, getting true-to-life accuracy values may be annoying, but adding a 0 after the decimal in 0.1 is not that hard. They may be waiting for environmental factors such as wind/rain, but I don't see why the M4 needs to be entirely replaced by the AKM in terms of usefulness, as all they've done now is limited the spawning of it and its attachments to crash sites. The only time we'll ever see M4s being used until something is done about it will be on people who have retained their gear and customized M4s, because I highly doubt anyone's going to give up the much more common and accurate AKM for the musket-like M4.

Browning M2HB is fine, although I'm not sure 12.7x99mm ammo would be common enough for it to be useful, but nonetheless. However, Barrett M95s? I'd rather they just do a KSVK or Grizzly Big Boar if they are really intent on doing a .50 anti-materiel rifle. The MG-36 was a cancelled weapon, so they'd honestly be better off with an M249/FN Minimi or L86 LSW, and the accuracy of the weapon would not change regardless of how you fired it, the recoil and sway would be your big problems. The SVD Dragnuov is confirmed, and the devs have interest in the VSS, although it actually shoots 9x39mm sub-sonic rounds which aren't used in a lot of guns, and the devs do not like that. 7.62x51mm is in-game (technically, even though the model is for 7.62x54mmR), so the G3 (which is another weapon the devs want) and the MG3 are plausible. I don't think a G3A3 would be any more rare than an M4A1, although it would probably be less abundant than the AKM. The MG3 would have to be incredibly rare considering it still shoots like a buzzsaw like the MG-42.

The problem with 9x39mm is it's only used in a few weapon types; the VAL/VSS/VSK-94, which are all based on the same platform, The SR-3/9A-91, the OTs-14/Groza, which also have 7.62x39mm variants, and the AK-9, which there are plenty of other AK variants to choose from. Apparently it's also used in the AK-9, but there are plenty of other AKs that use 7.62x39mm/5.56x45mm or even 5.45x39mm that would perform better. Chris Torchia has interest in the VSS Vintorez, though, so they could probably get away with having an SR-3, 9A-91, VSS & OTS-14 if they wanted it to be, at the very least, extensive.

Don't know about you, but I think the best gameplay-wise decision would be to have a plethora of different ammunition. I know your system is designed to compensate for both the devs wanting to limit the ammo (at least current) and the community whining about guns not firing the correct calibers, but on an overall I feel it would be better. They don't need to go over the top with like 60 ammo types, but it would be nice to see more than just generalized ammo types. Gameplay-wise, it might mean that some weapons will not see extensive use while others will be used a lot, but that's not something I feel is necessarily bad This could also be addressed with the rarity of the guns themselves). My best solution would be to allow 7.62x54mmR and some guns (like the Mosin) to be common, but have the spawn-rate for PU scopes, LRS, and bipods be vastly decreased.

Well, that, and turning up your gamma hardly affects environmental brightness anymore. It may slightly boost it, but it also comes with hugely distorted image quality and generally makes it harder to see. I'd rather have Deathlove's solution of natural, accumulated night vision (which could also work for interiors and underground locations) in addition to more sources of light (torches, rare NVGs, etc.) They could also do with increasing the brightness to a slight degree on some night cycles, because some computer monitors had pitch black darkness even when gamma settings actually changed stuff (My old computer monitor was awful to play Arma 2 with when it was first released)

Guys, you know you can post spoilers/shorten posts when quoting, right? No need to quote the entire lore, images included.

He's probably just assuming they made one of the two variants, which is probably what will end up happening if they add it.

I will admit that those moments would be tense, but there are also times that it would get very annoying. Glitch deaths (accidentally running off of steps and dying, or zombies beating you through a wall), uneventful deaths (someone sniping you/your friend or generally interaction-less deaths) or even hacker kills (I've encountered few hackers since I've started playing, but they are there) would get more aggravating than intense. I personally would love some kind of system like that to work, but it wouldn't sit well with me at the game's current stage (too many glitches, bugs, hacking is still notable, etc.) Maybe later on it could work, but that's for discussing then, and not now.

Anti-game =/= pure realism. The whole point of an anti-game isn't that it replicates reality as close as possible, but that it is not meant to be played for fun and is challenging without artificial limitations. Having fictional lore, such as a 5.56x45mm AK-74, is not breaking some sort of anti-game code. I'm sure most of us want the 5.45x39mm AK-74 and would like some of the inconsistencies/inaccuracies fixed, but it seems a lot of people are one-sided and over exaggerate their arguments. The devs will be much more likely to take you seriously if you effectively convey your argument and point out logical reasoning in front of your point, rather than whining and complaining that it's 'arcadey'/consoley'/'gamey'/'broken'/what-have-you. You also have to be willing to see the reasoning the devs will or will not do something, or at least consider it, because you're only going to be disappointed and look stupid when you complain that something in-game doesn't match your exact definition for how you think the game should be. Regardless, it's been clarified over and over again that these things are temporary or aren't happening yet. Nowhere has any of the devs said that we will never have correct-firing weapons, and plenty of times they have stated that they won't do it yet. People are going crazy, even when the devs just speculate on something that hasn't happened yet.

The big problem with that is it means you wouldn't ever be playing with friends when you died unless you'd joined the same server by chance. Also, it sort of forcibly dictates which servers get players and which don't (empty servers would take a long time to fill), in addition to removing people's preferred playstyles; Sometimes people don't want to play on max player servers, and they aren't always doing that simply to server hop for loot. Respawning and re-looting is really a necessary evil, because the most practical solutions are really extreme and would cause their own problems. Your loot usually gets ruined when you're killed, and hiding stuff from other people is pretty difficult. Even then, there's nothing stopping people from creating and locking their own public server that they store like 50 tents full of gear on and then moving to a different server, but I digress.

We're talking post-apocalyptic, where there's no longer laws of ownership bounding anyone to what they can and can't have. Granted, here in the US, the military is extremely strict on its weaponry, to the point of always storing the guns and ammo at two separate locations, but actual M203s are a common sight when in combat situations. You'll probably never see them on soldiers guarding places here at home, but in an invasion of a foreign country/invasion of the US/viral outbreak/whatever, you'd definitely find some in the abandoned bases. And actually, get enough cash and fill out the necessary destructive device paperwork and licensing and you can get a grenade launcher :) (never actually being able to use it, though [legally])

AK-47 is nearly identical to the AKM they have, unless you mean the AK-74. And yeah, people probably would use grenades to kill new spawns, but it would be more wasteful than anything. They already have tons of options in various guns, which would actually be much easier to use. Grenades would be saved for taking out groups of enemies. I'm not sure people would ever need to use them on zombies considering how easily bullets or melee can kill them. And I doubt too much server hopping would happen, sort of like the engraved 1911, it's pretty damn cool but I doubt most people go around server hopping just to get one of them. They have multiple guys working on guns, the bolt-action we see next will probably come alongside a few other projectile weapons, just like the next big update which will have the AKM, P1, LongHorn, Crossbow, and Ashwood bow, and like the last update which had the Sporter 22, Amphibia S, CR75, and 1911. My best guess is that we'll see the MP-133, MP5K, whatever bolt-action is being made, and possibly the Remington 870 and whatever other guns they want.

I'd personally rather they just have plenty of common calibers and mix them. As long as they are reasonably common (or justifiable) in reality, why not have them in game? .22LR, .22HMR, 9x18mm, 9x19mm, .32 ACP, .357 SIG, .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .45-70, 7.62x25mm, 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51mm/.308, 7.62x54mmR, 7.63x25mm, 7.92x57mm, 5.45x39mm, 5.56x45mm, 6.8x43mm Remington, .30-06, .243 Winchester, .270 Winchester, 4.6x30mm, 10mm Auto, .17 Remington, .338 Lapua Magnum, .300 Winchester, 10 Gauge, 12 Gauge, 20 Gauge, .410 Gauge, etc. If they were really concerned with 'too many calibers', they could simply list what ammunition type a specific weapon utilized in its description. Sure, quite a few of them have similar or comparable ballistics, but it would mean people actually have to search for ammo they need instead of having a generalized system where ammo is readily available. I doubt the devs will take it to the levels I've suggested, but I'd hope at least a few of what I'd said get added eventually, if they're not already planned or ingame.