smoq2

I was rather trying to appeal to those saying that DayZ needs a proper sniper rifle, and it's getting one. Speaking of the matter, it is very probable that it will get its own bipod. And it's very probable it still won't negate sway as well with its first implementation. It should, but it doesn't. At least not right now. I'm not saying this to undermine the value of this conversation. I just noticed from some of the posts that some people around here may not be aware of the state of things regarding the bipod's functionality in this stage of the development and are asking for a placebo.

Hmm, I don't think I'm even capable of coming up with such a scheme. I'm practical, not statistical.

A couple of times I asked a friendly bystander to take care of a zombie that was chasing me. When they agree I usually shoot them in the back. It's easier to shoot them that way. Otherwise they tend to run around in circles around you - very annoying and you run the risk of missing and wasting a bullet. Never trust a guy with a gun in this game.

I doubt to see it in the final game. However, I'm 100% sure we will get a mod (or mods) with gun straps, holsters, belts for melee, etc. That will either work as weapon attachments or apparel with specific, weapon only, sockets. I assume a character has 9 slots - feet, legs, chest, "vest", head, eyes, hands, gun, melee. If those slots are fully customizable and repositionable, it's a matter of hours to move e.g. the melee slot to the waist, make it accept only apparel of type e.g. "belt", slap a belt model (that would actually take more time to create) and make the belt accept only melee, much the same as the chest holster accepts only guns.

Hate to break it to you guys, but the bipod in DayZ doesn't negate sway :P. It makes the weapon more accurate, which the Mosin is already 100% (not including bullet drop) with the compensator due to what we have as placeholder config values, so installing a bipod on it would give you no benefits at all. :P That and SVD is coming, plus I assume a rework to increase the magnification provided by various scopes we have in the game.

The system doesn't work as it should since it's not designed accurately according to human physiology. hungry -> energized thirsty -> hydration This is wrong and confusing. Being hungry and thirsty are nothing more than signals our bodies send to our conciousness that it's time to eat something (similar to an addiction urge), only slightly related to whether we are in a energized or hydrated state. The minute we would get "stuffed" in real life, the signal would shut down, and we would assume we're not hungry any more. When are low on energy, we actually don't feel hungry, but tired, sleepy and distracted instead. Many of us actually do that eating crappy food. The system should look like this: De-energized -> Energized (condition) Dehydrated -> Hydrated (condition) Hungry (signal strength) Thirsty (signal strength) Stuffed (condition) Where having a hungry or thirsty statuses (or signals) would "pull" the respective condition towards lower values. Next, energy value should rise slowly and drop slowly, depending on the amount and speed of movement you make and intervals between your meals. The longer you don't eat, the more severe your "hungry" signal is, the more energy you loose every minute (or game "tick", to be more technical). I guess several hours in game should be enough to reach the full energized status from de-energized, this includes eating quite a few times (assuming 1.5 can of beans would make you stuffed, as it should). There's a reason why people who suffered severe starvation can spend a couple of days in the hospital, and that's being served most of nutrition directly to their veins. Hydration should rise quicker, and fall quicker, while running should increase the "thirsty" signal. A 3 kilometre jog should make you quite thirsty, but not necessarily make you dehydrated. "Hungry" and "Thirsty" signals should have some minor negative effects, in order not to be ignored by players, as they are hard to ignore in reality, despite of your level of energy or hydration. There is also the problem of the mixture you actually consume. Eating and drinking at the same time should have your stomach process it slowly, resulting in keeping the "stuffed" status longer, while having a stomach stuffed with just water shouldn't be a problem in a fairly short period of time. Food is also processed quite fast if your digestive acids are not thinned with water or other liquids. Oh and the "Eat" and "Eat all" options are bugged. The latter does not provide the full nutritional value of the consumed item. My advice is: Consult a doctor regarding the design. You'll have a complete system designed within minutes. Nature actually did a good job here. ;)

There is no way repair protector cases currently. Not sure whether it will be so in the future.

A summary of facts for the OP/anyone else: 1. All chest pieces protect you in the same way, regardless of what is written in the description, or whether it's a Chest Holster, UK Assault Vest, HC Vest, Press Vest, Leather Vest or the Plate Carrier. The values for protection are defined solely by numbers in the config files and right now they are all copy 'N paste. Don't use real life logic when you want to guess usability of any object in any game. The only thing you should consider when choosing a chest piece in DayZ is the amount of slots, camo and quality (the better the more bullets can be absorbed, i.e. 1-2) 2. There is no stamina system in DayZ. The values of "weight" are added as a base for a future stamina system. Right now you can just ignore them altogether. 3. Someone provided surviving an IZH round with a vest as an argument... You can survive an IZH round in a T-shirt right now (in DayZ), unless one of the pellets hits you in the head. Shotgun rounds do very little health damage and a lot of shock damage (hence they break limbs so well). However, if you shoot a round point blank in someone's chest, you'll ruin his/her chest gear and do as much harm as tickling.

I'm 100% sure the ultimate goal (the best/unreachable/utopia scenario) is to provide a server architecture that does not require restarting at all. The outcome will probably be that servers won't need restarting unless the software/hardware on the machine collapses, not due to faulty design. Most private shards I played on already do that. I.e. provide 1h, 5min and 1min notifications prior to scheduled restarts. Of course unscheduled crashes screw that all up. :)

This... They just added one (or a couple) of sound files to synch with a hitting animation and check whether you, your buddy, and the guy who's trying to kill you can hear anything being played at all in a given scenario. I'm sure once the system works they'll add specialised sound for each weapon and synch the timings correctly with the animation. My problem is that I actually didn't expect melee sounds to be ever added to the game, nor did I ever thought it was necessary. I chopped quite a few logs in my life and never heard the axe make a *swoosh* during a swing. A machete would make some sense, but an axe? I have a disturbing feeling that the concept of a realistic simulator of a zombie apocalypse just took one step towards becoming "video-gamey"(?)

The best answer I can give regarding the OP: I haven't seen the devs addressing the matter officially since Rocket himself made a hint they are thinking about nullifying the amount of differences between 1PP and 3PP. Then again, I wouldn't assume (as some in this thread did) that they are not talking/thinking about it - it is a pointed out issue after all and a distinctive one. I'm pretty sure the dev team has some 1PP advocates itself. I'm also pretty sure it's (very?) low on their priority list, as while being determinantal to the gameplay, it's not determinantal to keeping a large group of players (i.e. testers) invested in the game in this time and spiting out test results. Someone thrown in Rust as an example of positive impact on unifying one perspective, but DayZ has a much bigger player base and community, therefore it has to cater for a much wider array of tastes, excluding most or any extreme decisions from the process, or at least making the outcome much less foreseeable - another reason why we shouldn't expect them to bother with perspective changes any time soon. I am a 1PP player myself, mainly for the reasons posted in this thread (an so many similar ones), but I understand being in the minority. I won't blame BI for not doing anything regardless the 3PP "exploits". They are a regular commercial entity after all and they have to maintain a compromise between fulfilling their vision and keeping the target base.

How do you find the ability to do 90* turns in full sprint with your mouse? Personally, I find it a bit awkward and unrealistic, although I used the "run in circles" tactic when unarmed (and shot at) countless times. No, let me be blunt here... I find it outright stupid that you are able to sprint circles around your opponent in hopes he/she won't hit you, which is what happens most of the times, unless the aggressor has a high RPM weapon or really good "twitch" skill. If you believe it's a problem, regardless whether through lack of immersion (as in my case) or simply a bad competitive aspect, how would you propose it should be solved? I know Heroes & Generals has some kind of "inertia" factor, which I find ok, but many find it unintuitive. Most games lower or lock your mouse input, so turns become sluggish when sprinting - this seems quite ok IMO too. Something more original perhaps?

I don't believe Danmyr's post, despite being his first one, deserved being moved to this thread. He stated his/her observation and a valid opinion, shared by many around, might I add. It was neither "whiny", nor in demanding tone. Moving an uneasy opinion to a less frequented section of your forum is not exactly a PR master trick. Mods, please tone down your "entitlement" filter.

The game being in Alpha development stage is irrelevant when you loose "testers"... Let's just skip the dubious terminology and call things as they are: PLAYERS. And players tend to jump ship for better performing titles, like H1Z1 in this case. It's enough to check the DayZ steam chart to see what was (and is) the interest tendency since the game was launched - is it ok to say "launched" at this stage? I think so, since the product's market life cycle already started. In my opinion, they should focus on optimisation sooner rather then later to keep the player base invested. Maybe not in a thorough manner, but at least improve the performance in urban areas, even if this should include workarounds, or they might not keep the desired amount of testers in mid beta.

Not in the game, it's not. There was a time when the only vests in the game were "UK Assault Vest" and "Tactical Vest". The latter was later removed from the spawn tables. I know that both items are de facto tactical vests, but since in the game those were two separate items at a time, you can expect to rise a lot of confusion if you use the term "tactical vest" in a general reference to all the vests in the game. Ask anyone a question "Where can I find a tactical vest?" on this forum (incorporating your understanding of the term), and 9 out of 10 people will answer "They don't spawn". They will simply think in a more specific and accurate manner than you. P.S: The Tactical Vest had identical stats as the UK Assault vest. Code wise, it was basically a copy and paste, with different name, description and mesh references. P.S. 2: The Anti Stab Vest is the worst vest in the game. It can absorb the least amount of damage out of all chest addons before going to a ruined state. It's literally better to just wear a chest holster as additional armor. :)

Yeah, I know we're in alpha. Hence I wrote the whole temperature system is bound to change. The only thing that bugs me are opinions that the system is ok as it is now, since it's working illogically to a degree. As for the "sick" scenario I wrote, I meant that in a logical system you hypothermia would be a rare occurrence - a one you would really have to ask for. Normally you would just get an infection, like you said, from a hindered immune system, which in turn would be lethal. It's not a setting preset. It's a bug that is a side effect of some other setting which probably shouldn't even be related to weather. If we're talking about now, then yes - it's suppose to be putting you through all the stages (cold>freezing>hypothermia) very fast in order to allow for gathering the data quickly. Yes, the system is biased and I assume it's either for testing or bugged, or both. No matter the reason, one should not advocate for it to stay that way forever. I did not rant about the devs not fixing the system. I rant about people saying that the system is great as it is, which is just the first iteration. I know it's easy to bring someone into a state of hypothermia, if intended. However, you can't do that by making him stand in the rain for 5 minutes though, unless you're playing DayZ. ------ To sum it up again... I know it's alpha, I don't think anything should be changed to the system now. I just don't like people defending a buggy/incomplete system just because it's something new - it's basically giving false feedback. IMO, temperature should be lethal, but not directly as we have now. It should indirectly lead to illnesses, which in turn would be lethal in an environment where no adequate treatment is possible. I hope the design goes this way and not stay as it is.

I'm sure they didn't intend it to be irritating. I'm also sure they didn't intend players to die just from running in a t-shirt for 15 minutes. It might surprise you but what they are aiming for is this scenario cold -> freezing -> sick -> dead rather than cold -> freezing -> hypothermia -> dead The second scenario would only be viable if you somehow decided to do a 15 min naked swim with only a couple of degrees Celsius outside. In reality you wouldn't get hypothermia that easily. You would get pneumonia though. Ergo, what we have now, and I'm sure it's bound to change (maybe not nerfed or buffed, but rather overhauled, for those who fancy terminology), is neither realistic, authentic, nor balanced. It's broken. That's what led to a false denomination of "warm" and "cold" servers - there is no setting here, just some variable destabilises the whole whether system on some servers.

:D:D:D Please just, for the love of God, admit that the system (as is) is either bugged or unbalanced. Instead, you try to painstakingly find flaws in the way the OP is playing. Same goes for getting instantly soaked after peeking out the door for 1 second during a mild shower. I know that time passage is faster, therefore we should be getting hungry/thirsty and warm/cold faster, but the way it is now, Chernarus still feels like a polar region, despite only in early autumn colours. Before you start blaming me for not knowing how to play, I didn't die once from hypo/hyperthermia, despite it working wrong. I just don't like when people try to blindly defend something that isn't clearly working as intended, especially when you can plainly see the system behaving differently (to opposite extremes) when playing on different servers.

The only concept of collaboration in my mind is with my mates on Team Speak. Other players are, if anything, just a supply of rags. :D But on a serious note, don't try to find friends within the game. The chances of success in the matter are very slim. If you want to play with others look for clan recruiters. Moral of all of the stories that were/will be posted here: Adapt to the mentality of the player-base. You'll survive longer. ;)

Impossibly hard - the car will vanish the moment the server restarts. ;) But on a serious note, I don't see cars being added to the game before they solve all the issues with the servers. I mean, look at the mess server owners are in now - servers freezing every 15-20 min, persistence causes various other issues so owners just turn it off, etc.

It is fairly easy to become at least proficient with most melee weapons after some practice. My problem is that the system is still overwhelmingly clunky. Games like Dead Island would be total garbage if they used melee mechanics like in DayZ. I know that I can't expect a system like in e.g. Dead Island or Dark Messiah to ever be in DayZ, however I believe there is much more room to improve. I'm fairly positive though, that the current implementation is scrap worthy (by modern game standards).

Because it adds something different to the game. Why do some people play CoD, others BF and others a yet another different shooter? Because they all differ to a certain degree. One has good competitive action, the other enhanced squad tactics, another is e.g. in a WWII setting. This one has a fun gearing up process. Yes, I find gearing up fun. Makes PvP kills even more rewarding. I'm sorry, but the game does not offer much more than that at this point.

Exactly, your killers survived by killing you. Despite your intentions, they chose the best outcome. Read the answer below, it should give you a brighter picture on what the game you're actually is marketing wise. Yes, you're playing the game wrong. DayZ has only one goal - to survive, and is advertised as such - "survival game". Furthermore, the concept has numerous media remarks that "other players are the biggest threat in this game". Now to recall on your previous post - you died because you acted naive, therefore, failed to survive, therefore, failed to reach the only goal this game has. (To be a bit more specific, we all fail in this game, since we all die. The point is to live as long as possible and not die in a way worthy of a Darwin award nomination.) Now to elaborate on your new arguments: Players in DayZ do all the things you describe - raid towns together, build campfiers, make brawls, fool around. Hell, I do that too. However, they do it with others they already trust. You basically walked up to a random stranger and asked if he wants to go with you to [insert any preferred destination here]. What did you expect? He did a quick maths check, and you ended up as excess luggage. Do you make friends by walking up to random people and asking them to be your friend? (I'm not trying to mock you here). You have to have something in common with the person you're trying to befriend, a mutually beneficial circumstances. Otherwise you just become a "who the hell was that?" person.

I wasn't speaking about the forum, but the game (DayZ) - FYI, those are completely different things. Are you trolling? Or are you actually somehow "playing" the forum? Look, I'll paraphrase my previous statement for you so you can grasp the concept ok? "This DayZ is not a social network service, it's a pvpve game." Get it?

As always, don't blame the community for your playing the game wrong. This is not a social network service, it's a pvpve game. Level your expectations accordingly. Personally I don't even like people who run up to me with the usual "Hello! Friendly?" - bullet/axe to the face for that. Anyone who does things differently usually leaves alive. You got killed cause you deserved it, be it by being to naive or careless.