Dagwood

No, Mercules, it's like forcing hard alcohol down someone's throat to teach them the hazards of alcohol consumption. They would have figured it out for themselves; these saints are just speeding up the learning process.

In an effort to educate the masses, the guy that I play with joins regular servers and murders everyone he sees at point blank range and says "if you were on a first person server, this wouldn't have been so easy for me" and then runs off. I tell him he's a dick, but part of me hopes he's changing peoples' lives...

What would happen if the devs disabled first person from all servers for one week, and then disabled 3rd person from all servers the following week? I think it would be very interesting to see how gameplay and player behavior would change as a result. Ideally this would be done at the same time that zeds got a big boost in threat level (increased numbers, infection reimplemented, etc) And most importantly, it would be REALLY interesting to see which hive (regular or hardcore) would have more players returning to them once both hives regained their respective 1:PP/3:PP status. Anyone else think this would bring a biblical shitstorm down onto the devs? And who thinks it would increase hardcore populations in the long run?

Right? I think the rage and the videos of kids getting mauled by zombies in the middle of the street would be amazing. The player base has always conquered every patch in the past. There is always griping, but in the end everyone gets over it. I think the perceived power ratio between the community and the development team could use a shock. When the community is begging for the game not to be so hard dean will have his antigame.

Moderator vacation planning? What?

I think that we need to see crazier variations in gameplay from patch to patch at this point in development. Like switching spawns from the south coast to the east coast: everyone hated it but it gave us a lot of insight into player behavior and adaptability. If the devs are even thinking about removing 3rd person at any point (which I doubt) they should probably experiment with it sooner rather than later. What's the worst that could happen?

3rd person rewards those who are the most patient. In firefights, there is zero advantage gained from exposing yourself. If you know where your target is all you have to do is wait for him to move first. Combining permadeath with a feature that allows players to minimize the risk to themselves when engaging one another was a mistake. All it has done is promote camping and formed a community where the skilled players are more afraid of immature exploiters than they are of other skilled players. Thankfully, all of this led to the formation of a separate hive and a segregation of players.

When you die, exit server. Then, rejoin same server. Then, when you respawn, try not to die again so you don't have to deal with it. Just an idea...

How are they going to prevent people from posting profanities all over the place?

Hopefully the M4 will continue to be the most versatile weapon available. Full auto for close range engagements, bipod and acog for long range engagements. While it doesn't have the stopping power of the other weapons, it's precision more than makes up for it. Well done devs

When logging out, imagine you are in Kodiak country and making camp. Check your surroundings thoroughly before logging out. Anywhere within 500 meters of a high priority loot spawn is not safe.

You don't understand the wrath of a shotgun in an American hands, do you?

It's all about that double barrel! People underestimate it currently because of the woeful inaccuracy of the sawed off version, but it's actually a force to be reckoned with. While the magnum has the same one hit firepower at close range, the buckshot of the shotgun leaves more room for user error in those scary, point blank encounters. Also, it makes dealing with sprinting freshspawns a bit more manageable.

In the dayz mod aftermath, M4s and AKs spawned in two pieces like you are suggesting. It was a cool feature and it made acquiring an assault rifle that much more difficult and ultimately rewarding. Beans.

Being able to see exactly what gear is in my backpack, pants and jacket while jogging with an M4 in my hands is pretty unrealistic. Yes, I could REMEMBER exactly what gear I had, but I would not be able to dig through my backpack to know for sure. What I suggest is that which "containers" of clothing we can see the contents of depends on whether our hands are free and how quickly we are moving. If I am running with my hands empty, the contents of my shirt and vest will be available to peruse via the inventory menu. If I am carrying a rifle, I can only see that I am carrying a backpack and wearing clothes. The only way to check your back pack should be while not moving, or while slow walking. Is any of this making sense? Am I onto something?

I don't see how this feature would be the one to break the tedium camel's back...

You've already fallen back onto the "it's a game" argument. How predictable. Some of us wan to play in a playground that isn't cut out for every type of gamer. Maybe we want more infections to cope with. Maybe we want more difficulty in navigating the map and getting lost sometimes. These might not sound "fun" to you, but they add realistic depth to an already immersive experience. In addition to that, these "tedious" additions to the game like infections and uncontrollable bowel movements, make the time between violent interactions with other players that much more of a chore. What's my point? If you have to disinfect all of your clothes, purify your water before drinking it, cure yourself of multiple, obscure viruses, and then finally find a gun to kill someone, you're going to eliminate a large portion of the "my only option in this game is kill or be killed" players that are present at the moment. TLDR Adding tediousness to the survival aspect of the game keeps the kids looking for cheap thrills out of the way. The argument that this is a game and must only include fun features is just plain wrong.

Why does remembering what's in your pack make this useless? Remembering what's in your pack is what you would have to do in real life. While it might be "annoying" to more casual gamers, I think this kind of mechanic would force players to really evaluate what goes where in their inventory. If only the items in your vest and pants were quickly accessible while on the move, I think the game would have a more immersive, authentic experience. While I hated the clunky UI in the mod as much as the next guy, I must admit that it limited the speed with which we could shuffle gear in a fairly realistic manner. Hardcore servers need this implemented.

Being able to see exactly what gear is in my backpack, pants and jacket while jogging with an M4 in my hands is pretty unrealistic. Yes, I could REMEMBER exactly what gear I had, but I would not be able to dig through my backpack to know for sure. What I suggest is that which "containers" of clothing we can see the contents of depends on whether our hands are free and how quickly we are moving. If I am running with my hands empty, the contents of my shirt and vest will be available to peruse via the inventory menu. If I am carrying a rifle, I can only see that I am carrying a backpack and wearing clothes. The only way to check your back pack should be while not moving, or while slow walking. Is any of this making sense? Am I onto something?

Is the problem that people can't actually navigate across the map to find locations off of the coast? I honestly think that might he the problem. With the removal of placing map waypoints, land navigation skills have become a necessity (finally). I say keep the spawns on the east coast and force new players to learn how to navigate if they want to find the better loot spots.

Avoid creative gaming first person server. Got into a panicked firefight with what I am guessing was the admin. My friend barged into a brick building, saw him, and the two of them blew eachother away on full auto. While my remaining comrade and I began to secure the area, the server restarted. This wouldn't have been suspicious except that the server had restarted just minutes before. Upon relogging my friend discovered that he was still alive and fully geared. Again, avoid the creative gaming server.

While I would prefer to play on first person only servers, I rarely played on them during my time on the mod. Why? Because the servers that you could find with 3rd person disabled were empty. BUT, a mod called dayz caribou (by dayzero) had all first person only servers and the servers were usually full. What is my point? Someone needs to lead the way to set a populated foundation for other players looking to play in first person. The point of this thread: I would like this to be a place (hopefully tagged to end all of these "remove third person" suicide missions) where people can pledge to play on first person only servers when they are available. Hopefully a current/potential server host will see the demand that there is for first person only servers and advertise their wares here. Converting entrenched 3rd person advocates is about as easy as forcing every American driver to ditch their automatic for a manual. They have become accustomed to a more comfortable, relaxed style of gameplay and change is scary. Let's start advertising our manual sports cars to men who want a challenging, adrenaline pumping ride. TL:DR If you are a player that would be willing to commit to playing first person only servers, please leave a comment below.

I found my first magnum tonight and I was able to fire it without a speed loader. And it didn't even take that long to load without one. It sounded like he used a speedloader and it loaded fairly quickly. Bug?

You're trying too hard.

Just found a magnum in a hanger up north somewhere. How rare of a find is this?