eleventhavenue

But DayZ is not real and you will not always be there to man it. Why solve this with magical disappearing fortresses?

How many medieval enactor organisations are there? Considering the population of Chernarus, for there to be one on average in the map area, there would need to be approximately 20 000 in Russia...

What? No... If I build something, and then log out, will the items magically disappear? That is the non-cheap and unrealistic alternative? Everything magically disappears?? How about this: If you want to be able to defend your base, you need people manning it. If not, you will not be able to defend your base. I'm not sure how people imagine base building, but some people seem to imagine it as some kind of Field Fortification with a huge pile of supplies, weapons and vehicles that have been hoarded for two weeks...

Why not just KOS'ers? People who, upon spotting you, immediatly open fire or engage in an otherwise hostile manner, usually without communication or any other purpose than to kill you. ´´Raider´´ makes it sound (in my opinion) like they atleast kill you to get your stuff, which may be right sometimes, but not always. ´´Bandits´´ in my opinion is an umbrella term for pretty much every ill-doer except for KOS'ers. But ´´Bandits´´ are also used by many for KOS'ers, therefore the confusion (I guess).

I recently tried to play on a 3rd person server. I got KOS'ed literally after two minutes. A guy with an M4 was just sitting behind a stair in a random house, just waiting for people. Judging by the corpses, I'm pretty sure that he'd probably been there for 30 minutes... ... and recently on a 1st person server, a guy with an SKS surprised me on the coast. I traded a can of food with him for a few 7.62x51's for my Mosin... I can pretty much only recall being KOS'ed once or twice on a hardcore server... Maybe 1st person is more friendly? In my experience: Yes.

No, the opposite, I am tired of people just assuming that more realism leads to a lesser experience, and that you have to make some kind of tradeoff between realism and ´´gameplay´´. I understand that people think some problems with game mechanics should be solved in a way which might not be realistic, but some people seem to assume that ´´gameplay´´ and realism exclude each other.

Am I the only one who heavily dislikes all this ´´realism vs fun´´ talking...? It assumes that less realism objectively leads to more fun and vice versa...

Well I'm sorry but this grinds my gears horribly. People say: ''You can't compare apples and oranges!'' But you can! And you can compare BF3 with DayZ! Sure they're different, but that is exactly why you can compare them! BF3 is more arcady, which is a good thing, because then we can reflect over how arcadyness changes gameplay, and that is nice. Why are even discussing this question at all? I can empirically prove that it is possible to compare DayZ with BF3, because there's a comparison in the OP! In fact, I would say that what we really should be discussing (and we did not) is whether or not this comparison has a conclusion that can be constructively discussed (which I think it has)

We all know that ´´we haz no trainingz´´is the perfect argujment for stupid ballistics. Everyone who ever used a gun realizes that all guns have magical noob detection systems that makes bullets magically veer off course whenever someone inexperienced operates them. Aiming the gun itself is obviously very easy and anyone can do that perfectly.

I also want that composite turban-looking Iranian helmet from Arma 3, so i can look Ko0ol while Sn1pzorz1ng. This is truly the things the design department should spend its resources on. Digital Urban camo fits so well with the Post-Soviet countryside!

Essentially, I think the word essentially can be used to justify anything. Essentially, do not moustaches remind you of George Bush?

I must praise you americans for your composure, the way he just said ´´Triple Threat´´ without wavering... :D I do think that LMG's certainly could have a place in DayZ. Unless it's (for the game scope) some ridicilous weapon like a 500 kg air-dropped bomb or a 9M113 launcher. I think the biggest question when adding weapons should be ´´Will it fit the setting?´´, not ´´Will it be OP?´´ I don't really think a weapon truly can be OP in a game like DayZ. But if LMG's are coming, I would like a weight-based encumberance system coming as well, if nothing else because such a system would impact potential LMG users a lot.

Sorry for bringing this off-topic... but who calls their shotgun ´´Triple Threat´´?? It sounds like something you find on the ´´Boys Between 8 and 10 years´´ Shelf in a toy store...

Or, I guess you could sneak around zombies? I haven't played the latest version at all, so forgive for my ignorance, but back in the mod DayZ I often looted towns without attracting zed attention a single time, before I realised that it's much easier to just run around. If the Zed spotting mechanics still work like usual, then I understand that this doesn't work.

Say NO to the humanity system!

I think much of this is just remnants of old stuff... I really don't want a SAW. I don't get why people think that the American forces from harvest red would be able to clean up every single trace of the events in Arma 2, but leave tonnes of american weapons lying around in the Chernarussian barracks. Altough, if we have an encumberance system, I doubt that a LMG would be very useful. I wonder, can the PKM take single rounds and AKM magazines or only belts?

I suggest we remove eating too. That way no mean griefers can forcefeed us poisoned stuff!

That picture... It just shows exactly how I want the so called ´´end-game´´ clothing to look like. A few random hiking clothes, mixed, often worn military stuff form different nationalities and decades, tanker hats, ballstic helms from the early cold war, the late cold war and the 2000's, as well as ushankas... Just a rag-tag partisan-ish look.

If I find a game with good graphics, and tell everyone on the forum that DayZ should run with that engine instead, then surely everyone would find my suggestion to be well thought-trough and intelligent. As we all know, porting a game to another engine is as easy as buying the license and uttering a few magic words. The only reason that the DayZ team doesn't do this is because they are so greedy. Totally.

Oh dear... SAY NO To xp system.

Bushes should block zed LOS, but not sound, in my opinion. Have zeds keep chasing you to the last place where they saw you, as well.

I heavily doubt that even the most poorly equipped nuclear powerplants lack an automatic shutdown system... most nuclear accidents as far as I know was because of the operators, not the lack of them. I don't really like the idea of radiation, however. It's kind of hard to include in a realistic way, and what if you didn't have a geiger counter? Would you just walk blindly into the radiation? What I would like, instead, is some kind of large oil-fired powerplant. You get all the monstrous structures and gigantic turbine halls, and such, without having to care for implementing something like radiation. Or how about, if we do implement nuclear powerplants, we make it safely shut down? I don't think I've ever seen a game with a nuclear powerplant that is undamaged...

In ye olden Arma, shots would ricochet when they hit your weapon? I find it strange that this doesn't happen in the SA

What is it with these people who get knocked out when fully geared, by a newspawn? How does this even happen?? You can even run, with your weapon on your back you will not even be slower.

Back in the mod, you had a system where you had a certain visibility rating and a certain audio rating. Standing still prone, you were practically inviisible to zeds unless they touch you. Of course, if you started moving, you would get visibility and sound, and if you went to far out on a road by mistake, it would rise to a 2, and then zeds would aggro you pretty far away. I remember some very tense moments before I realized that it was much more easy to just run around.