Isaaq

Literally any vehicle is fine for me under one condition. Fuel consumption should be realistic. Huge military trucks and helicopters use a shitload of fuel - and they would really be rendered unusable in a zombie apocalypse. So, if fuel is scarce (like it should be) and vehicles are common (like they should be) I'll be happy. +100. If I can drive a crappy little Ford Fiesta around a muddy field at 50+ in real life, no vehicle should be reduced to such low speeds just because their on grass.

I could strap a gun to the outside of my backpack with no problem. It wouldn't even take up space. Or, instead of carrying a fire axe, which is pretty large, I could carry another gun. That's how it is in real life - can you seriously argue that having a slot that is only usable for melee is realistic? How about the fact that I can't have a holster if I wear an assault vest? What about waist holsters? Leg holsters? Hell, I could even sling a chest holster over an assault vest. I'm not saying you should be able to carry 10 rifles, but really, I could have a pistol on each leg, two on my waist and one on my chest, even with end-game gear. If I didn't have magazines on a separate chest holster going the other way, I could have another one on my chest too. Then, I could have one rifle in it's normal space, a shotgun strapped to the back of my bag and a M4 in my melee slot. Then, I could fill my backpack with sawnoffs and submachine guns. You might mention weight, but that's not in the game anyway. I don't think many people could run around with a mountain backpack full of tinned food, a top full of tinned food, an assault vest full of full canteens, trousers full of tinned food, full combat gear, a fire axe and a rifle.

Zombie numbers and the loot system are being worked on though... If they get sorted to the level their making it out to be, I guarantee that a server could home 100 people without much of a problem... Obviously performance would go down there - until multi-threading is sorted, and servers of that size probably aren't a good idea. But my point is, servers could have more people on comfortably once the stuff their planning on implementing is actually well... Implemented.

As you get gear, you bleed less. At end game level, I've stood with three zombies attacking me at once and not bled for a fair amount of time.

I know man - and I can't wait for the problem to be fixed. I completely understand why people server hop - it's the smart way of doing stuff. I just don't like that that's how it works - and I'm also not looking forward to the fix... It's fairly likely they'll wipe characters when they do fix it, I think - which isn't so fun on a legit character. I don't like that term though. It's a survival game. You're meant to want to survive as long as you can - and it SHOULD bother you when you die.

I'll admit to having done it a couple of times after I've been killed by glitches, which I feel is fairly justified. However, I would point out that it's actually not that hard to collect that kind of ammo legitimately. Going to the NWAF and raiding all of the barracks, the air control tower and all the tents will give a lot of ammo. There are many ways of getting ridiculous amounts of loot without any kind of exploiting. Still not a bad idea though, might actually be worth getting a group together, camping one of the airfields on a low-pop server (cover all of the barracks and the tents, two people to each maybe) and wait. Can always empty the place while you're doing it, which gives a good amount of loot - and if you go on a loot server that restarts every two or so hours, many people will likely hop onto it - as well as the fact it restarts regularly, so you can just keep emptying it and collecting off cheaters. A timer based system is definitely the way to go in stopping it - and would fix other problems too... The timer is easy to implement though - it's the getting it perfectly balanced that is difficult - but can only be achieved by actually trying it.

Agree with you man - its actually pretty good at the moment, just needs a bunch of bug-fixing, streamlining and a couple more features to be completely playable (more zombies, some form of persistent storage) and anything else is icing on the cake. Personally, I have been killed by the world three times now in various ways. First, I was in an apartment building - end game status and just waiting around to get hungry, pretty much. I'd made it my aim to get every non-consumable in pristine and was looking for my second med-kit in pristine shape... Anyway, I saw what looked like a fresh orange on a balcony. What it was, I'll never know, as I walked out and immediately no-clipped through the railing, falling four stories and dying. The second time, I'd literally just gotten back to that point. I was running down to Khelm, where I was planning on staying and living (making regular trips to the NEAF) until I got wiped, killed or tents/storage came out. I walked off a rock, literally a meter high at the most and died. Third time, I was in Elektro. Same situation, end game, was doing well... I was scouting, looking around. I was planning on meeting up with a few friends, and, looking for them on the top of a hospital(?) roof, I walked to the other side. I then realised that despite having let go of the button, I was still walking forward. I started crazily tabbing and esc-ing, and just as I realized I should disconnect, I fell like six stories. My only other criticism is there should be some kind of spawn-timed invincibility/inability to kill. I've logged out in some bad places a couple of times (rather stupidly) and twice I've logged in to instantly get shot inside a barracks. I know that I shouldn't really log out in hotspots, but when you're in a rush, it can be difficult. I think that the best way to solve that would to make people invincible for five or ten seconds after connection - but they can't deal any damage or draw a weapon. Just my two cents. :P

That's what beta and alpha are. Minecraft is a terrible example as it does not follow the normal game development design. It's 'finished' now - not in beta or alpha and there are still regular updates fixing stuff and adding content. Using Minecraft as an example is terrible. Due to the fact I'm studying game design, I feel I can talk fairly confidently on this. The normal workflow for a game (and DayZ is the kind of game that should follow it) is as follows; Alpha - Focus on getting the base running, add core functionality like hunting, some form of bases/storage, decent stability, loot systems, basic crafting, the likes. Literally anything that was in the mod version could be considered core functionality - as people expect the game to be a step up. Basically, the standalone should be up to par in most respects with the mod version before they consider beta. Late Alpha - Add less important (but still large) items of functionality - like vehicles, though they could be argued to be core - other examples include a temperature system (allowing players to freeze) which seems to be hinted at in the description and very presence of some items (gas stove mentions giving heat, fires are planned.) and smaller bits of crafting, maintenance and the likes. Beta - Adding smaller items (maybe a weapon or two here and there, touching up late-alpha stuff and such. No major functionality should be added after this point... Like vehicles) , nerfing stuff, bug fixing. Final - Very little work should be done from here on out. Server maintenance such as further optimization and bug fixing. As it's an mmo, some stuff can still be added, but little - it's not in the style of Runescape or WoW. DLC Style - DayZ doesn't suit paid DLC, but new 'packs' of stuff could be added. Again, not really for large aspects of functionality. It could be a pack of new vehicles or weapons - or even a new town. But the core stuff should have been finished in alpha. As it's a community driven game, however, large things COULD be added if mass demanded... But things like vehicles are long since implemented. This kind of stuff would generally be added anywhere between one and three times per year - tapering off two or three years after release. Bug fixes go on throughout the entire process - even after final. However, the game should be completely playable the second it's considered 'final' and there should not be a single game breaking glitch left. That's the normal workflow for any game even reminiscent of DayZ... And similar to the workflow of just about every single game other than the occasional blip like Minecraft. Even if games do not allow early access in alpha - or even beta - they generally follow this pattern. To back me up; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Alpha 'The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete.'' Now, this is general software development so the page won't suit game development quite right, but generally, the software - or game - should be pretty much feature complete after alpha.

Well... Beta generally means that core functionality has been finished and it's mainly bugfixing and small touches... Vehicles are core functionality - they should come in alpha, along with just about everything else.

I think most people would prefer to have half assed stuff for a while - which gets replaced with actually good, specifically tailored stuff later on rather than have nothing for a long time and hope that when they finally add it it was worth the wait. Obviously the point of server and client stability need to be taken into account, but other than that, I feel that approach would be much more enjoyable for people playing.

Well... Computers do exist. Their actually moderately common in the game. Power and internet would be the problem. Some form of power system I'm sure, once bases are implemented (it looks like they might be at the moment?) there'll be some form of power. There are plenty of people who collect that kind of stuff in case of apocalypse. Seriously - and I'm sure internet would not have gone down the second the zombie outbreak started... So people would have collected as much as they could at the beginning, assuming they weren't idiots... Just saying, it makes sense. But it also makes sense for the factory made stuff to be there anyway. So it's a moot point.

Ehh, reading the wiki, it said they were rare. I never played the Mod - and did state so at some point in the forum, I'm sure. But my point is that they should be anyway. I wasn't disagreeing with you. I feel like maybe the best way to handle tents would be disallowing players who die to open the tent again... So, if they die, anyone else can get into the tent, like always, but it's locked off to them - but is removed from their count so they cane make a new one and start again. This would take more work - and could be implemented later on, but tents DO need to be added asap. I agree with the life span thing - though you should be able to repair them - and the lock idea is a nice one for other forms of storage - but I don't think makes a lot of sense with a tent specifically - just about anything can cut through one if you try hard enough. The files are most likely completely incomplete... Nice little idiom there. I'm sure that if vehicles were actually usable at the moment, they'd be rolling them out... The alpha is for testing - testing for the testing doesn't make much sense, if you catch my drift - I very much doubt their particularly close to being finished. Pointed out a solution to this above... And most people aren't talking about persistence after death. Though it SHOULD be persistent (with a way like I suggested to avoid abuse) after death, the main focus at the moment is adding the ability to use it as a base. It's not easy mode. It's realistic. Are you seriously going to tell me that people can't store stuff in real life? I could put stuff in the middle of the woods and until someone stumbled across it, it would stay there. There's no way to store stuff in game at the moment - and saying that adding one is making the game too easy or ANYTHING along those lines is pretty damn ridiculous honestly. Hoarding would be a goal in this situation with any ounce of realism - and as DayZ is a simulator, I think realism, even in a basic form is something they strive for. Not having any solution to storing stuff (or no plans to add it, which is what you seem to want) is, as I said already, frankly idiotic. Oh, and with the way things are looking, there would be no reason to stop people being able to go back to tents after they die - because once the game is running at the level that the game designers want, they'll have to gear up a lot to reach the north, where their tent would likely be, due to the much higher number of zombies and such.

Tents are meant to be rare anyway - but rare items aren't particularly hard to find. The way to control hoarding would be to limit the number of tents someone can have... But is hoarding really a problem?

I don't think tents are the actual point of what most people are saying here... People want the functionality of tents in the mod... We need some kind of extra storage which is persistent - though tents for getting out of the weather would also be nice. Tents are good for storage though... If you could have multiple (but limited to no more than maybe three per player) it could be used for both. Most people who have been camping for an extended period of time know that a storage tent is a must.

You can use water pumps - if you really don't want to find them (their in most towns in back gardens and small hamlets in isolated areas) you can google DayZ standalone map - there's one which shows all their locations.

I don't particularly like the idea of standardising ammo, but it's nothing but practical. Seriously, having every kind of ammo you would in real life would be ridiculous to manage - and take up huge amounts of inventory space once tents and vehicles are added and people start collecting each weapon.

I'm up north also... Don't understand people having problems - I never played the mod and only have 12 hours on the game... My fourth character (currently alive) is up north with seven hours play time... I've had no problems with food and such either. I agree - it's an awesome looking place, but it's pretty bare - however, I feel like as bases (tents and campfires at the most basic form) and hunting etc are implemented, it will get a lot more interesting.

Completely support - here's my two(thousand) cents. I came to the standalone with no experience of DayZ. I'm currently on my fourth ever player - with a total of 12 hours play time... Seven hours of that is on this last player. I'm fully kitted out - or as much as I can be at the moment and have nothing to strive for. I don't want to kill off my character - as the game is about surviving... But there's little to do at the moment. Adding a form of persistent storage would make a huge difference - with minimal coding. (Okay, it takes some work, but other features to make late-game more interesting would require more features and more work.) Tents are integral - no one in real life or in the game would want to, in this situation, spend all of their time walking around with no shelter (in freezing Russia...) with only the stuff they can carry on them. Having some form of base is a necessity - and while some may argue 'lol, I just use a building as a base,' it doesn't fix the problem of stuff actually staying somewhere other than your bag. With the addition of tents and similar things, it becomes possible for a 'fully persistent loot system' to at least be trialled - with the addition of hunting, crafting and the likes, I think it's fairly likely that at some point, the DayZ team will consider making something close to that. So, if they add tents ASAP, it means I can strive to store food and weapons in there - so I have every weapon available to me and can stock up on food and drink to keep myself alive. I have somewhere to head to at the end of each game and somewhere to protect. I have the problem of finding the perfect place - and setting up a base with a team. I can go specifically looking for places to raid. Tents add a huge amount of playability - with (again) a relatively small amount of work. They should be a fairly large priority - especially with the current state of the game. The only thing I would say to be wary of with tents is bug abuse. They should be watched very carefully to prevent things like tents being placed in normally inaccessible spots and underwater or whatever. The question of constant resets and the likes is completely irrelevant with how quickly someone with the know-how can rack up a full inventory even with the best possible gear. As I said, I've played DayZ for twelve hours total, having never played the mod - and I still found it fairly easy to get to this point. If a freezing kind of function were added to the game, which I see fairly likely with the descriptions of things like gas stoves, which mention heat and the idea of adding camp fires, etc, tents could be used to shelter from the cold - with one or two more pitched nearby for storage. Obviously tents would need to be limited to maybe two or three per player, but that wouldn't cause too much of a hit, I don't think - assuming they require some upkeep so they can't just be pitched and used forever - even after death. TlDr; Tents are vital. Shh.

I understand it's an alpha, there are factors slowing it down and the team want to make a more interesting base system, but I'd like to say that tents should be a fairly high priority. I've never worked with the engine, so I'm not sure how much work it requires, but I'd guess it'd be doable in a reasonable time frame - and maybe they are focusing on it. But after you make a character last a few hours, tents are something that would increase playability a hell of a lot. I'm on my fourth character ever in DayZ - and after about 12 hours of playtime total (so maybe seven on this character), I've got all the best clothing I could have - therefore the largest inventory possible. It's full - and it's impossible to loot any more without being very annoyed with the sacrifices I have to make. So, I feel that just basic tent functionality is something that is a must for the near future of the game - as I'm just stubborn enough to not kill my own character, but not stubborn enough to ditch stuff regularly. Other peoples opinions - or have I missed something despite my two-day search and have they already spoken on this issue? Preferably in my favour?

Damn, no idea how I missed that. As for the idea we don't need them currently/not used for hoarding, I disagree. Don't want to keep a second thread running on the topic, but here's why. Like I said, after a fairly short time, there's little to do in the game. Having a tent allows you to collect all of the weapons (okay, not much of a variety at the moment, but still nice) and store food and water. Just because it's an alpha doesn't mean people shouldn't want to survive for a long time... That's kind of the premise of the game, or at least how I see it. I don't see any reason people shouldn't hoard food and such - its realistic, practical and makes life easier. It also makes a nice situation for people who stumble upon it - giving them some real loot to find. The idea of sheltering in a tent, of course, is a good one - but people can make the choice themselves. Just because a tent is made to keep you warm in the outdoors doesn't mean that's what it's used for. A person could have two - one for storage and one for sleeping. That's what I do when I go camping for an extended period of time irl. Obviously there should be some kind of limit for servers sake, but two or three per person isn't really a problem.

I would agree... If the activity levels were factored in. If you were running many KM a day, you would be very hungry and thirsty all the time too. I think it's a little over the top - and some kind of algorithm with activity + time should be implemented, but this is more realistic overall than what the average person needs in real life. Because the average person doesn't do a fraction of the exercise that the average DayZ character does. Anyway, in real life, say I was eating tins of beans and sardines... I work out a bit, but I'm not running tens of KM a day - so I don't need half as much as a DayZ character. But I'd need maybe an orange and a tin of tuna in the morning, a tin or sardines and a tin of beans in the evening and a tin of beans, an orange and a tin of sardines or tuna in the night to not be tired, moody and unable to murder zombies. Obviously there can be days when I eat a lot less - or a lot more, but on average, to keep myself healthy, that's the amount I'd need. (Just thought I'd put it in DayZ terms.) I generally drink about 6 equivalent glasses of water on a not-very-active day - that's 6 canteen refills. I'm 5'3. I do eat a little more than the average healthy person, but unless your DayZ character has a base and doesn't run miles and miles all the time, it's not enough for that.

You get used to it very fast, I think it's a better system, really. DayZ's controls can be a bit difficult to get used to, but they make everything faster and easier once you are used to them.

As many gun variants as possible should be added, I think - but maybe standardize ammo a little more than real life to make it easier. Once vehicles and bases (tents, omg, want) have been added, it'd be very nice to build up a stash of weapons.

I assume the campfire would be reusable - just add wood and matches... So, you use stones to contain the fire when you place a tent down or something - so you don't burn it down. Stones absolutely make sense imo - and you can use dead grass, small twigs and all sorts of things for kindling. Paper and books would be good fuels though - so the fire has a 'health' and you can add stuff to it to improve that. You can use clothing, wood, twigs, paper, books and anything else that could be burnable - hell, you could even use shovel and axe handles. It should be possible to freeze (which I think their adding.) It's Russia, after all. I also suggest that there should be different lighting techniques - you should be able to find flint (100 uses), lighters (500 uses, 1/250 chance of breaking on each use) or even use stones to light. The way this all would work would be as such: Collect stones, craft a fire ring - or something of a similar name. Go to the area you want the fire, right click the stones, dig a small fire pit with a spade/axe/similar tool & place them down. Add fuel Light with any method. Lighter is most surefire way - matches can die on you if you don't have kindling, flint randomly fails - with 100 total uses, stones have very low success rate - but don't break or something similar.

I personally don't agree with this idea. Factory goods are, of course, very common. This is how it should be - as their common in real life. The game is meant to have a fair amount of realism - and you can go to a fire station or a house in a village and find an axe. You can go to a house and find clothes. You can find tinned foods all over the place. Obviously, things are a little more scarce after a zombie apocalypse, but the levels around right now are fine imho. The only questionable one may be guns/ammo. However, I live in the UK, where guns are very controlled - and I know several places in my small town I could find guns - and a reasonable amount of ammunition. I'm sure they would be a lot more common in Soviet Russia - especially as their limited mainly to military bases - I've never found a gun outside of a military base, even in a farm. The number of guns is absolutely fine. But I do think they should be spread out a little better - at the beginning of an apocalypse, people go to places like military bases first - and take things like guns and scatter them everywhere. They should really be least common in places like that, really.