akafugitive

Collision sounds with all areas of the environment except just bushes.(trees, walls, garbage cans, fences, Etc.) Reverb and echo/sound reflection Environmental ambient sound redone to sound more distant then right in your ear(damn birds are louder then my weapon sometimes)

Operation flash point, Arma 2 and 3 have also been very successful games for them because they cater to an audience AAA companies don't cater to. The market BIS builds games for is not an overly saturated market and why they have a strong following.If they start catering to casual players that think they know it all, they will in fact be kicking out their core fan base and become another mainstream company that follows the same design flaw as the rest, no longer being unique.

I don't think the game is perfect as is, visit my suggestion threads, you will see I have a shit load of ideas I would like to see in the game that currently are not there. Faith in the developer because of past experience and being content with the idea that it can't be perfect doesn't make me a blind follower. Trust me simple things like audio, incapacitation, and combat based on strategy, instead of bunny hopping, while firing laser straight bullets, and twitch shooting a guy who shot you with an incapacitating shot mean probably more to me, since these are things I have truly experienced and get a rush from it being done right. Some aspects of "realism" I really don't care to see though because they add 0 value to a game, and in all reality I enjoy training with the guys because no one dies, in the field it's just a necessity. Also, I'm not your bro

In my world we call that deflection; to move away or reduce the effect by spreading over a larger surface area. Even ceramics can have a hard time deflecting the piercing power of an arrow, that's why armor piercing rounds are heavier and/or pointed and coated to defeat armor. I've given my reasons, I know my position on this. If you want to keep regurgitating the same argument so be it. My intention isn't to change your mind but to put real information out there for those who want to learn, some people may be sold on your viewpoint but others will agree with mine. Using words like "likely" proves you are going off of your level of understanding, clearly you have educated yourself a bit on the topic. I don't hold my position on likely, I have seen these effects first hand, I know how ballistics and arrows work on modern body armor, I've tested it. Even my crew, a very educated bunch, knows that they don't always need to have the answer or question things they don't understand, just follow my damn order, let me handle the why.

That's a joke, the whole argument from you guys has been about comparing the 2, since the mod would get utterly destroyed when comparing the 2 for frequency of hacking now you want to dismiss it? I'm well aware of the posts about hacking, 2 of them I created... and I never created them with intent to throw a temper tantrum, it was to explain my experience on the non BE protected, less stable builds of the early access game. Reporting my encounters allowed the devs to pull up the logs and see what's going on. You are right, nothing could be done about hacking in the mod, thanks for proving my point. Active development on the client server architecture is the difference that the SA is taking to combat this, and you still whine about that because of the lag/desync caused by it not being fully optimized and complete yet. Bottom line is, even though I myself have encountered a hacker, it is low chance isolated incidents, and BE seems to be doing its job since the hackers seem to have no power on BE enabled servers. I didn't say there is only 1 hacker, my mind is not that closed off. I assume their is more I just don't loose my shit over it, I evaluate when and where I have been encountering them and feed that information back to the people who can correct it constructively. Oh I've been on the site, the fact is most of the comments there are setup to encourage people to buy their product. Does it work, yes, but it is not as popular as you think and again BE can detect the PBO's and auto ban them. The amount of control hackers have in the SA is way less. When was the last time in the SA you have been globaly teleporting into the sky, turned into a seagull, sent to the Thunder dome, or seen parachuting cows? Oh wait you still haven't bought the game yet, just like being a sideline preacher pretending to know better then someone actively aiding in development.

Yeah the only hacker I've seen in the standalone is yesus, and only in non BE protected experimental servers. Hacking definitely is way better in the early stages of SA then it ever was at any point of the mod. Hell during early access for Arma 3 it was unplayable for awhile because of the infection hack that would invite the client then transfer from server to server teleporting you into the sky. BIS and BE solved this and I don't encounter much hacking in Arma 3 anymore, it's still a modular game though. His close minded view is defiantly strange; You want hacking to be less present, so BIS locks down modding and creates it so the central server has the most controls, this creates a temporary lag issues while the new system optimizes. Then he also still complains about hacking that is 100x less then the mod, all that while trying to fluff up the mod. I think he just is not a visionary, and his brain can only handle what is currently happening, no perception for where it will end up. If he participated in the EA for Arma 3 he would have seen how little that game had at the start and it's range of issues(totally unplayable for awhile), these were solved and content was fully added by full release. Arma 3 was also ahead of DayZ's current build when released to EA.

That's because armor back in those days was still made of tempered steel, not kevlar. Carrying 100 musket balls to the battlefield was still easier then carrying 100 arrows, muskets were still easier to point and click then ranging out a volley of arrows on advancing troops, and the sheer fear a line of firing muskets caused elevated them to taking over as the weapon on choice. This is why we saw an era of armor being removed from the battlefield for a short time, once firearms advanced so did we see armor to defeat them be redeveloped Kevlar is still designed to deflect bullets, steel was designed to deflect swords and arrows. Arrows cut through kevlar because they are an edged weapon. So yes in the right circumstances an arrow can be more deadly. You cannot generalise everything, firearms are not more effective then bows and bows are not more effective then firearms, some bows are better then some firearms, some firearms are better then bows, and some circumstances change the outcome also (range, ammo/tip used, armor, etc.)

I wasn't trying to say you are not, I don't know you. However i can also not qualify what you say to be true, nor can you qualify me aside from beleaving what is said.I was making a general statement, a lot of people have these opinions on "realism" but know nothing about what is realistic. The purpose of my original post is; I do not want to see M4's become a 1-2 shot kill unless you are precision shooting killzone(brain, heart, upper spinal), as a navy seal I don't have to explain beyond why I don't want to see this. I have studied; history of war, battle tactics, science and psychology of modern war, battlefield leadership, and other things I don't need to go into detail about. I'm experienced in field leadership, long, medium and close range combat environments, small unit operations as well as investigations, tracking and apprehension. You have no clue how qualified I am. For the record I would trust the opinions of a man who hunts with a Crossbow or some midevil war reenactor over an SF trained guy about crossbow/arrow lethality any day, some of the guys I know are experienced in both. You are right, Some firearms are more lethal for a range load of reasons but arrows are still very lethal, if I was to describe how I would like to see it handled by comparing just the 2 it would be like this: Crossbow - Damage is caused by momentum of the weight, not force, and piercing the target with a cutting edge Pros -Quiet -Pierces the target with less deflection(more resistant to armor) -less chance to pass through the target Cons -Slow to reload -Less accurate -Short range(unless volleyed) -When deflected they do very little to no damage -Superficial wounds are easier to clean and treat M4 - Damage is caused by high velocity energy transfer to the target causing tearing, and bullet fragmentation causing wound canals to open up. Pros - Accurate - Rapid followup shots - Effective over longer ranges - When deflected can still cause impairing damage - Superficial wounds can still cause massive complication over a period of time Cons - Loud - Close range pass through round poorly placed on the target may have little instantaneous effects - Gas expulsion and muzzle flash are visual identifiers - Easier to deflect with body armor For the record, I don't think the game is perfect in its current state, that should be apparent by my massive suggestion threads lol. I just don't want to see these casual gamers or misinformed views on "Realism" become a direction development goes. There are enough games like battlefield and COD out there, I enjoy this game and Arma 3 because it is not like the mainstream scene. I used to just sit in the shadows and watch these discussions like most of the informed people I know, shaking my head and not wanting to pull my life into it. I have just seen a trend in video games lately that I don't like, because I, and a lot of the guys I know enjoy them still. I speak up at this point because I don't want that trend to hit this game. Dean was a soldier and is a game designer, he know more about balancing both aspects then most, period.

I would personally like to see firearm melee come into play, bayonets prove there must be a plan for this. When someone comes in too close not following direction I will strike them with the end of my barrel in their diaphram to recoil them back before shooting them. I covers a lot about melee combat in my weapons suggestion thread also.

That's my you don't let people with nothing to loose not get close to you. If he wasn't on the coast piping off fresh spawns you wouldn't have been able to do that. I do agree to a bit that fists should knock over after a few punches(2-4) but knock out should take more(8+)

Pistols power comes from the round expansion, that's why a larger and slower .45 is more effective then a faster, smaller 9mm. When it hits flesh the rapid deceleration crushes the round, pushing the lead out the nose(mushrooming with hollow points). As it continues into the body it is tearing a larger amount of surface area internally till it comes to a stop. Pistols like you said have less raw killing power but a ton of incapacitation power because the surface area they effect is quite large just not as deep.

Bullets cause trama from kinetic energy causing wounds to tear open when entering the body and suddenly decelerating, transferring that energy to what they hit(stopping power). Fragmentation or mushrooming of the round is caused by the fast moving projectile suddenly crushing/expanding/blowing apart due to the sudden loss of speed(like a car hitting a brick wall at high speed). Organ failure and bloodloss death is what ultimately leads happens as a result of that effect.I used military firearms as an example because their purpose in design is for the highest efficiency in killing other humans, civilian firearms are designed for target shooting and hunting(does not mean they are ineffective).

If you read my posts before, I have said that the AR damage should not be increased. I haven't said they shouldn't make the arrow damage comparable but I do support a roll mechanic that gives the crossbow a higher chance to score a "critical hit". Lethality is scored in more then chance to kill on a single shot or everyone would sport a .50cal as a multipurpose weapon.It may not make sense to someone who has never been in a war zone and never seen the effects of something first hand, I have and know my position comes from experience and education.

I think the 1:1 controls are great, I'm a fit guy and have a fluid range of motion with my body. Fluid and easy to use controls are very important in any game. We just need to wait till other game mechanics catch up to the fluid controls to curb twitch response. I've covered this in other threads but other players won't be able to spin on a dime and bunny hop shoot you in the head CS style when that round you put in their back throws them to the floor. The follow up rounds you put into them while they are on the ground will leave them there permanently. I agree the slider value could be adjusted, I've also turned off mouse sensitivity but I find it comfortable, specially now that free aiming is even more fluid then it was before.

*Disclaimer* The following are my opinions of features I would enjoy seeing in the game, this thread is in no way intended to express negativity towards the current development or express ignorance towards current development plans. I am fully aware of what alpha or "work in progress" means, as such I am doing what is intended for alpha testing and making suggestions, not demands. Please keep feedback constructive, and on topic. Health CPR (idea inspired by cryptonite) Administering an IV (idea inspired by KerrSG1) Catastrophic Damage Sprinting Tactical Gestures Passports (Idea inspired by fox0rz) Logging Out/Combat Logging Gamma/Brightness VOIP/ 3rd party communications If you liked this, also read/like/comment on these: Gameplay Mechanics Pt1 - The Player(skills) Gameplay Mechanics Pt2 - The Infected Gameplay Mechanics Pt3 - Environment Gameplay Mechanics Pt4 - The Weapons Gameplay Mechanics Pt5 - The Interface DayZ - How it all began... (coming soon)

Lol thanks, I appreciate that. Like Dean said though on a recent interview, they don't need to hire me, just steal whatever ideas I have offered freely that they like/are possible. On a side not I realized I over looked some in on my health system diagram that could actually kill people from just being a slight bit hungry or thirsty.

I agree that twitch response needs to be dealt with but increasing lethality across the board will just make the medical system utterly pointless. Weapons should primarily make people dieing, not dead. Organized groups should have the upper hand and will be able to get to and treat their casualties if they are effective. Again, more incapacitation. I cover it in a lot of detail in my suggestion thread about the player posted in my signature. Edit* there is a great mod I use with arma 3 called tpw, it makes it so when you or AI are hit you drop into the sideways prone stance. It effectively pauses your momentum without killing you/them making it easier to continue to pepper them without twitch response. If you move to another target and leave them alone they do have a chance to become combat effective again though.

You are using force as your only factor, I use the science of war. Bullets kill because of kinetic energy transfer and round fragmentation, using that in comparison to another weapon that does not use force to kill is why they are less effective in that regard.The truth is that war was much more dirty and deadly when we used swords and arrows to kill each other. The game of putting your enemy at a disadvantage is in the age of firearms. When I can hit a target 300m away and we call that mid range engagement then the guy with ancient tech has no chance, period. The real simple fact is bullets cause a lot of damage and so do arrows, bullets pass through, deflect or cause high amounts of damage to the area they hit. Arrows pull themselves towards to core of what they stick in, if this is a human then there are a lot of vital components there. A military grade firearm is far superior because it can fire in rapid succession, engage at longer ranges and are much more accurate. You cannot kill a target you never hit...

Yeah that's what I mean by skeletal limitations and mass, if their legs gave out first chances are the body will tumble backwards because the knees will fold forwards, if the torso crumples they will fall forward, etc. I think some of the limitations to allowing collapse currently are the animation ties to it, when it is changed to physics based it should be less buggy and start allowing stuff like this to function as it should

That's up to the players to decide what channel becomes that frequency. I have mine turned onto the default channel almost all the time. Just not enough people are picking them up and listening to my hails. When people start catching on to change and modifying the way they behave to match the standalone these things will be used frequently.

I've seen it happen actually, my friend and I were attacked by some guy when he got shot and went unconscious, when he woke up he was not bleeding or very badly injured but his ballistic helmet was ruinedMomentum needs to play a part in how you collapse. I know the physics with rag doll will allow for this when done. Get shot when stationary and you will fall backwards based on the range of motion your body has(skeleton flexibility). Unlike another movie myth; While running forward you do not get thrown backwards, you will continue on in the same direction your momentum carries you, you still are larger and have more mass then the projectile hitting you. Even when hit by a car, most will be throw over, under, or to the side of the vehicle, not rocketed in the air in the opposite direction they were traveling.

You guys need to understand the downfall of what you are asking for. Increasing lethality does not make things more realistic, it makes a single man more capable of causing an unrealistic level of devastation. If my m4 instantly killed every time with 1-2 body shots I would be able to rapidly wipe an entire crew of guys in seconds. They would not have a chance to apply pressure on me and beat me with volume of fire because volume of fire would have no value. You see this in games like battlefield, that is why combat is fast and decisive. Your problem would not be solved, it would make it worse.

It is possible to add in more hit boxes then leg, arm, torso, head but I doubt they could hit box liver, lung, kidney, stomach, femoral arteries, spleen, cheek, eye, ear, nose, etc. I would like them to add kill zone hit boxes though, heart, upper spinal, brain. The rest I'm content with a die roll system though because even the shooter can't alway predict how the target will behave when being struck by a round anywhere else. Actually the 5.56 is used because of its lethality, fragmenting rounds are devastating to internal working and even if sone recovers from the injury they will have fragments of the bullet left in them, it leads to poisoning complications or the fragments being carried back to the heart by the bloodstream. Larger rounds such as the 30-06 used by the m1 garand in WI I were designed more for tumbling through the body and causing repairable injury effectively stopping an enemy advance while they deal with the casualty. This is the misconception that happens a lot, pointy does not mean piercing, it is aerodynamic. If you stuck your hand down on a sharpened arrow tip it would go through you hand with minimal pounds per pressure. Do the same amount of force on a bullet tip will make you feel some pain and leave an indent but no real damage.---- What is needed is more incapacitation effects such as being knocked to the ground, not an increase to lethality. There are a lot more soldiers that have been injured in combat, we're treated and survived then killed.

You guys are forgetting one of the main differences between arrows and bullets, deflection. All bullet tips are blunt(minus special rounds) arrows use piercing, weight and flex; it is the only reason why you see such a low velocity projectile being able to cause high amounts of damage that are not more but are similar to the damage caused by high velocity ballistics. Deflection plays a role because when a ballistic projectile hits something rounded, it will deflect away from it, even if the deflection still goes through what it hit. Wound channeling goes in a pathway away from the core of the body a lot of the time, even if the varience is small. When a sharp edged arrow hits something rounded, the side that makes first contact will cut in and cause the arrow to turn towards it as it enters what it hits, they need a significantly harder surface to deflect, and when deflected their is not much kinetic punch to be felt. Wound channeling goes towards the core of the body more consistently, meaning that a single shot does generally have a better chance of pulling itself towards more vital zones of the body. In the video game world they have to simulate this with dice rolls(the arrow has a higher chance of rolling a heavy hit vs the bullet), it may not be totally realistic per say, but modeling each organ with functionality and hit box modifiers is just not possible without making it fizzle and crash. Some games have done this like sniper elite but it is their core element, to do it in DayZ they would have to take away from other core elements, such as survival features. In reality you train to have follow up shots, that's why we base firearm technology on creating smaller grouping over longer and longer ranger with speed. When I deliver rounds on target I am delivering enough to cause extreme damage because one is not enough. A skilled shooter can deliver 3 rounds accurately in the speed it would take to deliver 1 arrow on the same target = much higher wound potential for the modern firearm. I can also out range them meaning if they are not able to advance into their effective range then they had no chance to begin with.

I was stabbed in the collar bone by a pocket knife, pretty superficial injury. I would not rather be shot by a 9mm in the same spot. I would rather be shot by a 9mm then have a full tang katana stab me in the same spot. I would rather be stabbed by a katana then shot by a .50 bmg in the same spot. Each with the right circumstance has a chance the kill me, the later has the highest. There are just so many factors in ballistics, wounding and individual resilience to fully replicate or generalize. I have killed every single person I have won a battle with in no more then 2 bursts with my M4, I target with intent to put them down and always follow with more then enough rounds to do the job. Putting a single round on target then being shocked when they have time to react and evade has always been an issue with rookie combatants, close quarters combat makes that even more dangerous for the shooter.