fig0451
-
Content Count
137 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by fig0451
-
-
Yes everybody mainly spawns on the cost, think once i have spawned near a town buddy. there sint anyway you can change it as its basically random
Is the Stary/Novy Sobor spawn still a thing? I haven't died in a while so I'm not sure.
-
Because items still spawn at specific locations. There might not be a "next house" for miles.
With the exception of being on the north edge of the map, I don't think there is anywhere like that on the maps. And even there, you can still move to a new loot area quicker than say an hour respawn timer.
@alpha: Hopefully the 'quadrants' aren't literally huge quadrants of the map, and are more localized.
-
1
-
-
Going by my interpertation of the quadrant system, a looted item is anything that's been moved from its initial spawn position.
So yes, if you picked up something and then dropped it, it would count as moved.
Players could trigger a premature respawn ... if they knew all the items in a group. So if one house was one quadrant, thats maybe 10 item spawns, and if you did that, then sure, you can get some more things in an hour. However, there is a relatively simple counter to this: Don't make a house one quadrant. Make one item in House A, 3 items in House B down the street, and 4 items in House C 200 meters away in a quadrant. You'd be nuts to map out every quadrant if they were all randomized like that.
Also ... is this really a reasonable thing for a player to do? If they had the inventory space, wouldn't they just take items? And if they don't have the space ... why are they trying to get more things? They want different things? Why not just go to the next house and check it instead of waiting for an hour for a crapshoot?
-
1
-
-
Kawai'i AK74-SU
-
The gist of it is that the server keeps a tally of the number of items held in that server and held by the players of that server. Let's assume a server has 19,000 unique items (250 of which are carried by players) and it wants to keep a stock of 20,000. Every X-Y minutes, the server decides to restock loot on the server. In this case, it would want to spawn 1,000 new items to bring the total back up. The server would then pick 1,000 loot locations. If a picked location is
- Filled
- Has a player within X00 meters
Ok, even assuming you are doing this the most intelligent way by making ONE table of viable spawn locations, and assuming that there are only 1,000 item spawn locations on the map, you still have to do a three dimensional spherical trace from EVERY PLAYER to EVERY EMPTY LOOT SPAWN. Assuming a full server at 40 (and remember the devs are aiming for 100 person servers!) that's up to 40,000 spherical traces + the 1,000 "is there an item here already" checks. Exactly it would be #LootSpawns + (#Players * #EmptyLootSpawns)^, where ^ denotes computations that are much more intensive. And no, your sanity check doesn't count because you haven't described how you get your acceptable locations. What current list? Where? Determined by what algorithm?
Compare that to how the quadrant system is likely to work with your numbers, which would simply be 1,000 yes/no checks on a list.
Your method is basically ludicrous in comparison.
In reality, there are probably 1,000 spawn locations in each large city, I'd wager probably 10,000 spawn locations, at least, throughout the whole map, especially given that something like half the buildings in the game aren't properly spawning things. That's 10,000 * 100 for the goal of players in the server, which is literally a million spherical traces. Oh I forgot, that's in addition to the 10,000 "is there an item here checks".
Again, compared to how the quadrant system is likely to work, thats 1,010,000 operations compared to 10,0000. And you are using sphere traces, which means calculating a line between the player pos and item_spawn pos, which is more mathematically intensive then just checking for a 1 or a 0.
This system would
- Spawn loot away from players
- Not spawn loot near players (loot cycling)
- Lower the loot in high-traffic areas (airfields, etc, makes server hopping less profitable, drives people away from the kill zones)
- Implants the idea that "there's always loot over that hill, or in that little farmhouse, or in that town we haven't checked in a few hours" (promotes exploration)
1) and 2) are literally exactly the same, stated in reverse. And it doesn't matter, as your method of achieving it is ludicrously computation intensive and almost certainly not workable. You say you're a developer but it seems like you have literally no experience with the Arma2/3 engine.
As for 3) and 4), have you ever considered that there being high and low traffic areas is a good thing? It's nice to have a general sense of areas that are dangerous and areas that are safe (even though nowhere is really ever totally safe). It sounds like you're trying to force the game toward exploration and spreading out across the map. IMO it would be kind of dumb if this plan succeeded and made the entire map have roughly the same player density. Differences are interesting!
EDIT: Also upon further consideration your system is inherently self-defeating. The goal of your system is to spread players out everywhere, so we have a more even distribution that's less weighted toward what are currently hot-spots due to loot and/or proximity to spawns. Well ... if players are spread out everywhere, your item spawning system will be even less able to actually spawn items. If there are people evenly spread through out the map, far less areas are going to be possible candidates for a new item spawn (as at least one player will be nearby).
-
System is hamfisted and inelegant. It's also not very transparent to the player.
I don't really see how you can say that, given that you know literally none of the details, as you point out in another of your own posts.
What constitutes an "empty" quadrant?
No one knows. It could literally mean empty, or it could mean 75% of the items have been taken leaving 25% of the items still there, or any other number. Quadrant could restock known empty positions and leave the things that are still there ... still there.
Better question: How big is a quadrant? If a quadrant is large, it would make sense to have a threshold level as I've described above. If a quadrant is small, that threshold could be smaller, or absolute.
- Do useless items like wrenches count towards a quadrant being "empty"?
- Do players need to pick up these useless items to make the quadrant empty?
- Do players dropping items cause a quadrant to not be empty?
For the first two, the answer is probably yes, and the answer to the third is probably no.
Why?
Fairly simple: The quadrant system probably only cares about item spawn locations. So, things in the place they are spawned count, and other things don't. This is optimal because then to do a respawn check, the system only has to check it's known locations, as opposed to doing an intensive search to find all items in the map and then define whether or not they are in some geographical area. It's much more likely that a 'quadrant' is just a defined group of item spawns, as this would be less intensive on the script.
How quickly do quadrants restock?
No one knows, but a reasonable solution seems to be something like ... oh I dunno, say an hour delay. Every 15 minutes have each quadrant check to see if it is empty, or meets the emptiness threshold as I described above, then that starts an 45 minute timer for it to restock. If Timer is in effect, quit checking, until the spawn happens where one last check is done to see if any additional items have been taken, then you've got you're proper 'put new stuff at these locations' instruction.
If I pick up the last item in a quadrant, do all of the buildings around me suddenly spawn loot?
Probably not, that would be really stupid.
- Are there any cities bisected by a quadrant line?
- Does loot still respawn on server restart anyways?
1) As I said above, quadrants are not likely to be actually defined by some kind of geometrical container. It's waaaaaay easier to just say item_spawn_1 item_spawn_2 and item_spawn_3 are part of quadrant 1, and item_spawn_4 and item_spawn_5 are part of quadrant 2. So, it's entirely possible that a city could be one large quadrant, or a city could be made up of many smaller quadrants.
2) That depends on if the respawning system is part of or tied into an item persistence system. We don't really know about that right now, but that is certainly within the scope of this sort of thing. This question is misleading though. Why do servers restart? Primarily, to restock items. If the restocking system works ... we don't need frequent restarts any more. So this question is moot.
All I can see this system doing (if the last bullet isn't true) is that the servers will start with a bunch of loot, people will quickly snatch up all of the food, weapons, and ammo, and since the system doesn't sound like it'll restock very often people will just end up with an empty server. New players won't find food and will starve, and if they don't they're not going to find any weapons or ammo.
You describe a situation literally identical to how the current system works (OMG it's hard to get items in a highly populated area! People might fight and stuff!) ...
Even more KoS since everyone will be starving and/or that guy over there might have some gear!
... and conclude that this will result in more KoS and less items. Pretty much nonsense. Let's say the quadrants restock in an hour as I hypothesized above. Currently, most servers seem to reset every 2 hours. That'd mean we'd have twice as many items compared to a server that restarts every 2 hours.
Or hey, even if it's a 2 hour respawn, if it's tied into the item-persistence system, we still don't have to restart our servers any more unless we REALLY want more items. Come to Joe's Stop and Shop 30 minute respawn server!
If the last bullet is true, nothing will change at all.
Again, nonsensical, servers don't have to restart all the time if the quadrant system is implemented.
I've proposed a better solution in my signature.
TL:DR; your solution is hamfisted and inelegant.
Continued Below!
-
Can't wait for the next one :P
-
Certainly the most mild-mannered hacker I've ever heard of, hahahah!
-
Ummmmmmm, then how in gods name can we hope for vehicles and helicopters?
Now I am fucking worried if this is why zombies are such an after thought at this point.
It's an early alpha and everything that strains network performance is subject to massive amounts of optimization and complete recoding.
-
2
-
-
Is the Uzi Classed as an SMG?
Fires 9x19, so it's a submachinegun.
-
I don't really know how much faster a pistol should be than an M4... an M4 is a pretty handy carbine...
Yeah that seemed a bit strange to me ... An M4 should be a bit slower, but not much. Maybe it's to compensate for all the pistols being hilariously inaccurate at the moment?
-
Someday my .357 won't be woefully under-powered and laughably inaccurate.... someday.
-
It's probably going to be a hunting crossbow, which realistically, would be effective out to about 65-70m (and that's pushing it a bit) assuming you are an expert and have a really nice xbow.
In other words, similar to the effective range that a pistol currently (though unrealistically, especially for the 357) has right now.
Medieval Crossbow != Modern Hunting Crossbow.
Gameplay-wise it will likely make an excellent close range assassination weapon, and useful hunting weapon once animals are added.
-
Haven't died yet...
Like bionic man or something.
Have been shot at, ambushed, chased off, out flanked, out gunned and out scavved but still survived probably by sheer luck.
Gunfights when you've been alive weeks on end really get the blood pumping!
My buddy had also survived as long but was taken out West of Zelengorsk. Couldn't reach his body and couldn't get a good enough shot at the 3 guys who got him. I hid in a house and peppered 5.56s at them but had to back off after emptying two clips, fearing I'd be flanked and killed sooner or later.
So I'm waiting for that glorious moment when I fall off a ladder and *splat*....
It's possible I was one of the three guys. From our perspective, we were looting there and then an unknown showed up and started shooting at us, so we all returned fire.
My hardcore experience is otherwise incredibly similar :D
-
1
-
-
I don't really care if a console port is made at some point ... some point far after the game is finished for the PC.
-
4
-
-
Can't you people come up with something more original than TTsKO?
As far as this game goes I'm an advocate of enforcing better fashion through violence :D
-
1
-
-
An excellent example of why I only play Hardcore.
At around 0:52-0:54, the player is clearly able to see almost the entire contents of the room and learns how many people are in the room, what weapons they have, where they are and which way they are facing.
Had the player been restricted to first person, he wouldn't have been able to see any of that at all. He would have had to either rush around the corner blind, or lean around a corner, or use another friendly player to scout from afar after he opened the door.
Tho I will give credit where credit is due, the player had good aim and wow did those other guys suck.
-
8
-
-
You cant plan beforehand the number of zeds in one place,
You don't need to know exact numbers, you just need to know that more may show up the more you shoot.
the safe you will be on that hill or any kind of shit,they just respawn 5 meters from you only to aggro you instantly and start hitting you.
Its fairly simple to tell where they will and won't spawn: Cities and Towns and Military Installations. They'll spawn there. You know, places with buildings.
And they certainly don't spawn 5 meters from you. They spawn something like 50 - 150 meters from you, and move quickly. They do spawn aggro'd instantly, that's the point.
Even that wouldnt be a problem to me if fighting zeds were on a polished state but right now they are laggy as fuck,you have to get your melee which is atm also a crappy mechanic,guess where the zombie will be next sec and kill, only to find that he respawns right at you. You dont even risk getting hit since you can always strafe around 2-3 zombies and they are just unable to scratch you.
So if I understand this correctly, you just said "fighting zombies is difficult because they are laggy, it's stupid that you have to use melee weapons, fighting zombies with melee weapons is too easy."
My response to that is: Play on a server you ping to better. At under 100 ping, all I have to worry about is the time it actually takes my guy to physically swing his axe.
IMO the problem shouldnt be made worse by making more zombies,but by making the fight with zeds as a whole more polished, better animations for switching weapons, more accurate aim for zombies that can maybe grab you, smooth pathing etc. etc. That would increase threat of zombies and make them less an annoyance and more a fight with a fucking walking corpse whos trying to eat your guts.
All of these things are being worked on.
-
You could have been shot, you could have desync'd/lagged and heard somebody whistling in voip while simultaneously falling off of something, could have been a hacker, who knows.
-
Dude, you realize there is a glitch right now where the player can have no visible name. Meaning he can make his name slot and no character slots BUT it actually allows the player to still join.
Its generally a good practice to just tap P every few minutes and make sure some weird bullshit like that isn't going on. Pretty good rule in any game, if you see someone who either has no name, or who's name constantly keeps changing to clones of names of other people on the server, you should probably bail out and/or alert the admin if you can.
Please do tell me how a player not showing up on the player list is game breaking to you. Who cares if he was on the player list? He was there and he shot you, period. No need to call hax. And what kind of hack would that be anyway? A hack that gives the hacker no advantage whatsoever, except not showing on the player list? The hell?
Well way back before there were such things as reliable anti-cheat engines running all the time (hell even when those things were starting to get off the ground), the most effective way to keep hackers out of the server was to log everything, try to keep an admin on during peak hours, and blacklist anybody caught hacking. So fairly quickly developed the offensive tactic of not having a name, or duplicating the name of another player. Either of those things can fuck with logging and can fuck with admins trying to on the spot ban someone without restarting the server. You can't ban someone if you type "!ban " ... nothing, no name, because they guy doesn't have a name. The command won't work. Similarily if the guy has duped another player's name, you'll likely end up banning the wrong person.
So fast forward to now when we do have fairly reliable anti cheat engines ... well guess what? Those things work in the medium term, as in they won't ever ban any brand new hack that uses a new exploit. They have to figure out how the hack works and then ban it. That process can lag behind the proliferation of hacks by anywhere from weeks to months to years. SOOOOO ... an intelligent hacker probably knows this, and he will probably still be masking or removing his name, so that he can't be banned immediately by some server admins. And he checks his h@x0r forums every day before he logs into a game with his h@x on to see if anyone else with the same h@x has been caught and banned.
Source: Have been a server admin for various games for a long time.
-
There are on average fairly major patches every 1-3 weeks, which are usually followed by a hotfix, sometimes two, a few days afterward.
Now that we have an actual development map, we can all breathe a sigh of relief as it is apparent that there actually is a working process in motion, and not just a seemingly random addition of whatever content happens to be newly finished.
-
Why is has KoS been prevalent and why does it continue to be so?
My guess for the primary cause: The average DayZ player is 14 and their primary gaming experience is in triple A FPS titles.
-
3
-
-
Any chance we'll ever get some scopes that have the built in PSO style rangefinders? Or at least mildots? They were in Arma 2, and they worked ... can't be that hard to implement... :|
At the moment range estimation is either entirely guesswork (god help you if you change your FOV), or using a ruler tool on dayzdb or izurvive.
-
This is 50% rant, 50% wondering what other people think of the current zombie implementation.
Looks more like 100% rant, unless you're counting your poorly phrased poll question. How could anyone be satisfied with all aspects of zombies right now? They still phase through walls 1/2 the time!
Ever since they changed the zombies last patch, this game has become way less entertaining than it was for me and my friends.
Actually this update is finally the one that got my friends to start playing it again, now that fighting zombies can actually be a challenge.
I've read a lot about people praising the recent changes made to the zombies, but I haven't really seen any sensible reasons why. What good reason do people have for enjoying the current clusterfuck that are zombies in DayZ? A potentially unlimited stream of zombies that can run through walls is so dumb I can't even begin to express my frustration.
I'll give you that a bunch of zombies running through walls is pretty dumb, but in my experience this patch has actually helped the pathfinding considerably. I'd say about 40% of the time I actually see zombies pathfind around a wall, then through a door (as opposed to through a wall), then up some stairs to get at me. This is a fantastic improvement over the previous pathfinding, where I'd literally never seen that happen. In that regard, this patch is clearly a step in the right direction.
As for sensible reasons, well you yourself actually outline one of the reasons further on in your post.
This is a survival game set in a world overrun by zombies. Now we actually have zombies responding to their environment, and posing an actual threat for players of all gear levels. As you said, it creates a much better atmosphere for a zombie survival game, having, you know, actual zombies coming after you.
Oh and now that zombies are an actual threat, it creates an entirely new level gameplay in that you actually have to worry about the zombies in the zombie apocalypse. More on that below.
They ruin PVP. Like, completely. PVP has become arduously obnoxious as everyone is forced to play the waiting game.
That's a pretty extreme statement. Since the latest patch, between my friends and I we've seen a bit of PVP, and it hasn't been ruined at all. PVP still happens, PVP still requires skill, coordination and some basic tactics.
Whoever shoots first generally loses as they're stuck fending off a ridiculous amount of zombies that apparently appear out of thin air, while you can sit back and laugh as you pop off shots at them. Don't bother shooting them, because an unlimited horde of their brothers and sisters will join the parade, further damning you and your companions.
So ... adapt your tactics? Quit camping and maybe move after you fire? Or maybe fire from a position that zombies can't get to, or don't spawn near? This isn't a detriment to PVP, this is a much needed and sensible addition. Now there is an entirely new level of thinking that has to go on in players minds, as firing a weapon not only possibly reveals your general location to other players, but to the hordes of undead as well!
Like, I fully understand a few zombies awakening here and there due to proximity noise. That'd actually be cool and add to the atmosphere. You'd have to watch for corpses, step around them, move away from them, and plan your shots. It'd actually add another element to tactical decisions made during PVP encounters. Instead, we get this blanket fix because a few people were whining about how bad zombies were so far.
Sure it would be neat if we had a bunch of corpses lying around that were actually awoken by gunshots, but this is an early alpha, and we can't get everything we want just yet. Zombies spawning out of nowhere, a reasonable distance away from you, at reasonable time intervals seems pretty good for a first implementation of this aggro mechanic. The only way you attract hordes of them is if you act stupid and stand in the same spot and keep shooting everything that moves. The current implementation DOES add this tactical element to PVP encounters right now!
I've also read that the zombie AI was going to be one of the last things worked on before the beta hits. I always believed that to be true, as before this patch zombies were just kind of an annoyance. As they are now, they're enough to make me want to Tombstone my keyboard. They're not hard. They're not scary. They're just ANNOYING.
Well shit man, guess you were wrong. If you gotta take a break, you gotta take a break.
TL;DR: Bro, do you even hardcore? Sounds like you're just mad you and you're friends can't just camp inside some 2-story building in elektro and shoot every bambi you see anymore.
-
3
-
M4A1 Firepower?
in General Discussion
Posted
Also desync.