Etherimp

I like how it's always the guys with 1-20 posts that have all the harsh criticism! You guys have it all figured out. Here's an idea: Play the game more. Lurk more. Start thinking for yourself. THEN post honest criticism when it's actually warranted.

I have an idea... ...Everyones first post should be immediately forwarded to the graveyard where it is reviewed my Mods then released to the actual forums if it's worth reading. Seems like everyones first thread is a rehash of the same stuff. More on point: You haven't played in several weeks, you logged in in a bad spot, you experienced the (common) 1 minute of desync upon logging in, and as said above; you spammed keys because you lack general game knowledge and this cost you your life/blood.. All we can say is: Welcome to DayZ.. If you weren't ready for alpha testing a product and dealing with hardcore game elements then you should have probably held off on buying the game until it was Gold.

Don't diss on my hats bro.

And where did you get this information? AFAIK, the %'s are taken from the game files. Even if they're slightly off, that doesn't change the fact that DMR's were not difficult to find, and it wasn't because people were duping.

You didn't find a DMR every time you looted the barracks either... But if you didn't one time, you may another.. The more you play and the more loot spawns you check, it becomes inevitable that you will eventually find one... then another, then another. It's just a matter of odds. Actually, 90% of my play time was spent on US264, which was a vanilla server. Again, you're wrong. Taken from DayZ DB... that's the spawn chance of a DMR in a single placeholder in a single barracks.. There are about 4(?) high value military spawn placeholders in each barracks. .90 x 4 = 3.6% There's 2 barracks on the airfield.. 3.6 x 2 = 7.2% So, each time you looted NWAF, you had about 7.2% chance of finding a DMR. Then consider that there are 3 Helicopter spawns at server restart, and 1 every hour after that.. Consider that Heli spawns usually had ~3? high value military loot placeholders.. And the % chance of one spawning at a heli crash was probably similar to a barracks. I think finding a DMR 1 in every 10 loot trips is a pretty conservative estimate.. Also, DMR ammo spawned in Ammo boxes, which would sometimes spawn in heli-crashes and barracks.. Which would give you 10 DMR mags. Then consider that we had helicopters and vehicles and could easily access all of these spawns in a matter of minutes.. Annnd, of course, you could just kill a DMR sniper and take his DMR.

If you're dying to groups, you're doing something wrong. It's completely unrelated to winning 1 on 1 gun fights.

1. I never server hopped. 2. I never duped. 3. Myself and my friends always had a solid stockpile of DMR's.. Always had 1 in my backpack while I carried either an MK Mod 0, or a M16 ACOG. Your argument is invalid. DMR's were "uncommon".. You could find them in barracks or crash sites, and it took ~1 hour to run to NWAF.. If you had a vehicle or a helicopter it was even easier.

Yes.. Which was inherently broken as fuck.

VOIP programs are used in just about every game and everyone has access to them.. As much as I may be able to understand WHY people say they are, they are clearly wrong for thinking that way. It does nobody any good to run around whining about people using TS/Vent/Mumble/Skype.. If you're a lonewolf you just have to deal with the consequences of that play style, and one of the consequences is that GROUPS of players are going to have a numbers advantage. This can be a disadvantage as well.. Most people who play this game (most.. not all), are disorganized grabasstic panic stricken scrubs who couldn't communicate their way out of a paper-bag and get the shakes any time someone fires a gun at them. That's why you see so many players camping the coast and shooting fresh spawns.. most of them don't know what to do once they are the ones getting shot at. But even against an organized group with good communication, you can EASILY avoid most groups by avoiding where most groups group.. IE - high pop cities.

My current character has been alive for 10 days .. I know because I make a note of my characters DOB and their Blood type.. Character before that was alive for 6 weeks... My character on experimental has never died. And I've been in A LOT of player encounters. IF you're dying to groups, it's your fault. If you're a lone wolf you should be a ghost. Don't blame VOIP programs or the game.. It's your playstyle that's to blame. You can correct this, or you can say "this game isn't for me, and I quit".. And either choice is fine. DayZ isn't for everyone.. But don't lay blame anywhere but on yourself.

Out of game comms is a form of cheating? Please... Gimme a break and get a clue.

M4 generally has less recoil but less damage. AK has more powerful rounds and greater recoil. That was the gist of my point.

If you think that's my idea, then you haven't been reading my posts very thoroughly. I have never said we shouldn't have a wide variety of weapons. I've simply said that we should NOT have WEAPON REDUNDANCY. The Blase95 vs the Mosin is not a fair comparison. They do not fill the same role or even perform the same. The point of my original post on this topic was that a lot of people in this community are pushing gun ideas.. Everyone wants a little bit of everything. Everyone wants their favorite weapon. Everyone wants this gun and that gun, and if Dean was to take everyones suggestions, there would be every gun in the world, in the game. I'm saying the weapons that get added to the game should fit the following criteria: 1. It should fit the theme/aesthetic/location of the game. A lot of weapons which are common in the Eastern Block. 2. Most weapons should be Civilian.. Which that alone allows for a ton of variety. 3. A few high level, military grade weapons, but only those which fit into the game.. AK's, SA-58's, etc. 4. Mimimize application redundancy. As I've stated many times, we should not have weapons which are clearly the "same" except for a different model. IE - 2 weapons which fire the same round, have the same ROF, muzzle velocity, magazine, etc.. This is not "good game design". 5. There should be a balance to selecting a weapon which requires some thought.. Currently, the Mosin and the Blase95 fire the same ammo, and thus have the same damage levels, but they have different applications. The Blaze95 is better for close/mid range engagements, where as the Mosin is better "in the long run", if you have the time or survive long enough to pick up a PU or LRS, and some attachments to modify it with.. But if your life is in immediate danger, the Blase is probably a better option. The M4 vs AK is another good example of this kind of "choice".. If I had to choose between picking up an M4, or an AK, I would go based on my personal preference, and the kinds of engagements I think I would be more likely to run into.. The AK has a stronger round, but the recoil is harder to control. The M4 is better for close/mid range engagements, and the AK is better for tap-firing/single shot firing across a little longer range, and making your shots count.. Alteratively, the AK is better against vehicles/heavier armored targets, where the M4 is almost useless in those scenarios. It doesn't matter that BF3 and DayZ are completely different games. Designing a quality game uses the same concepts no matter what genre. Furthermore, to those who make the argument "some guns are going to be more common/rare!".. ...That only makes a difference for your first 1-2 hours playing the game. After that, all guns are equally accessible, especially when they introduce loot-respawning mechanics. The DMR was more rare than the Winchester... but how many people were carrying a DMR on your average Vanilla server? Probably over half. Furthermore, the SVD was one of the rarest guns at one point.. And how many people would pick that up over the DMR? VERY few. Why? The DMR was better.. you had double zoom, you could use night vision while using the scope, it had a faster ROF, more rounds in a magazine, the ammo was easy to come by and it was just as powerful of a round as the SVD. Thus, the SVD was a niche weapon that people only picked up if they REALLY had a passion for that weapon, which is FINE, but it's also bad game design.

Game design is game design. While an SUV is completely. ifferent from a performance sports car, designing both of them requires application of mechanical engineering.

Actually, bf3 has way too many guns and there's no fucking point in using the majority of them. its a bloated system rather than streamlined. By illusion of variety I mean that if 2 guns fire the same rounds from the same mag and have the same attachments then they are essentially a reskin of the same gun so why pick one over another? On the other hand if one gun can fit all attachments and another can only fit SOME attachments, then why pick the inferior gun? That's not presenting a 'choice' to the player. Given the opportunity the player will always pick the same gun instead of weighing his options.

You misinterpreted my point. I agree with you. The weapon mechanics in the game currently suck donkey dicks. which is why those should be addressed before they go adding a bunch of shit guns that nobody will use.

As long as they can keep each weapon unique and balanced in some way I don't care what they add. I'd just rather the guns in the game be interesting and aesthetic. Also, rarity is really no argument for or against guns. Random generation + enough time = any weapon you want.

Firstly, the m14 spawned in more than just crash sites last I played the mod. Secondly, there are a lot of reasons for limited arsenal. 1. Aesthetics. Only weapons that fit with the theme of the game should be in. If the game was based in China then Chinese weapons would make sense. If in the US then US weapons make sense and add to the aesthetics. As much as I may like the FN2000, it do. n't really fit in dayz. 2. More dynamic weapon mechanics improve gameplay. What I mean by this is that there is a clear trade off if you choose an ak over an ?4 or vice versa. One is more powerful, while the other has tighter grouping. Why have 10 5.56 variants? Where's the tradeoff? Why should I carry a g36 over an m4 or an m4 over a l85? Why add stuff in the game just for the ILLUSION of variety? 3. The attachment system allows meaningful variety already. as touched on above, if i picked up a stock m14 i could carry it as a battle rifle or a sniper rifle depending on attachments. Why make something like a g36 rare, when it wouldnt be any better than easier to find assault rifles which do the same thing? If you want 100 unique weapon models that perform the same go play bf3 or arma3

Right.. but is it really worth it for the dev team to spend time making new weapon models for weapons which all have the same essential mechanics? IE - Muzzle velocity, damage, caliber? Obviously, there are subtle differences between these weapons in real life.. But in game they're practically the same and it's kind of pointless to add a bunch of samey stuff just for the sake of adding it. This isn't a military sim. I'd much prefer the weapons which are added to fit with the theme of the game, which so far (aside from the M4), the dev team has done a good job.

And you'll be shockingly bored with how the M16, the M4, G36, and the L85 all perform essentially the same when you remove all of the attachments.

Right, and I don't mind it too much with the 1911 vs the FNX, because some people (like myself) will carry the 1911 for the fact that it's an iconic weapon, rather than optimizing myself for PVP.. A few "samey" weapons doesn't bother me, but the mod had a bunch of different weapons which were all effectively the same, except 1 or 2 of them were clearly "better", which meant people just used the best and nobody ever bothered with the crappier variants.

So, having 10 different assault rifles which all fire 5.56 will do what, exactly? You find an assault rifle...You hunt down 5.56 mags, or vice versa. See FNX vs 1911 argument from above. Except the difference between pistols is even greater than the difference between Assault Rifles, because most assault rifles can use the same mags.

This is alpha. There are only a few weapons available and new clothing is being added all the time. Honestly, with every patch I'm seeing people using more and more variety in their outfits.. TTSKO will always be popular, as will ballistic helmets.. Because certain people attempt to optimize their look for PVP. Adding more weapons than necessary will not really have any impact on people gearing up the same. The Mod had SEVERAL "samey" weapons, but most people carried a DMR. The MK Mod was also really popular, and sometimes you'd see people with a M16 ACOG. Having 100 weapons won't change peoples preferences. There's really no point in having several weapons which all fill the same role or have similar mechanics. Why have 10 different bolt action sniper rifles, when you can have 2 (A civilian and a military grade), and both of them can be heavily modified with attachments? What's the practical difference between two weapons which fire the same caliber, have the same scope, and the same rate of fire? It's not going to change the fact that people will hunt down the best weapons for whatever fits their playstyle. For example.. Why have an M16 and an M4 when both weapons are effectively the same? Just have 1 in the game, and allow us to modify it with different attachments. Makes more sense. Another example is the M1911 vs the FNX 45. The M1911 has 7 round mag. The FNX has 15. The M1911 can mount a flashlight. The FNX can mount a flashlight, a red dot, and a silencer. The M1911 and FNX have similar rate of fire. The M1911 and FNX fire the same ammo. (and thus, the same damage.) The M1911 and FNX have similar accuracy. So why would anyone ever use an M1911 over a FNX?

Oh, that is one thing I want back in the SA... The FN FAL.. Honestly one of my favorite guns.