Whyherro123

Have.....have you made and thrown one of these before? I have, and while they are easy to make and fun to throw, there are other weapons that are both easier and more effective in the terrain (deciduous forest, with lots of scrub bushes (there should be a lot more undergrowth in the forests)) Chernarus is made up of. Those throwing sticks (especially the 100 meter throw mentioned) probably require a lot of open space, flat ground, and long sight-lines to use effectively. I would probably use a spear and a bola, or a sling, or hell, even a bow, instead. More concentrated killing power. I've taken rabbits,squirrels, and various birds with a "rabbit stick" before, at "close" (<20 meters), but I wouldn't try to take anything larger. I don't want to injure the animal and be unable to kill it. I don't doubt the ability of the throwing stick to kill larger animals, I doubt my own ability in using it to do so. I would be more comfortable using a bolas to snare the prey, then run up and stab it with a spear. Both weapons are basically as old as a throwing stick, are easy to make, easy to use, and reliable in effect. (note: I've taken out pigeons on the wing with bolas. Anything that walks or flies can be caught with them) On that note: I would IMHO say that the spear is instead the "best survival and hunting tool". Lets you kill things quickly and easily, easy to make, easy to repair, can be used at close range or thrown, used as a walking stick, etc. Can be combined with a club for close range, or bolas for medium range. There is no reason to not make a spear in my book.

...Huh? What does that have to do with my comment?

Oh, I agree. Yew is definately awesome for bow-staves, and for good reason. Unfortunately, I don't have many yew trees in Southern New England, so I have to make due with birch, beech, and ash.

Yep, although throwing is iffy. If I had a hand weapon, probably the last thing I would do with it is throw it. I just want bayonets...... Literally the perfect weapon for the "post-apcalyptic survivor": you get shooty, stabby, choppy and bashy all in one nice package. Magazine empty? Stick 'em with the pointy end. Enemy/zed too close? A rifle but to the face will get them away. BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD

Except....their bones are not decaying and squishy, at least, not any more than a "normal" human being. Because that is what the "infected" in this game are: regular human beings infected with a disease. Not "zombies"

I referred to the Mount and Blade system in my post on parrying. I like it as well.

Take a look at the grey sheds outside of houses, the ones with a "little porch". Under the "porch", you are practically guaranteed to either find a splitting axe or a hacksaw.

Then you run. Run like the Devil himself was after you. Not the game's fault you derped through the largest (well, 2nd largest, but the point still stands) city on the map without a weapon. Really, IMHO, a city raid should take either careful planning, skill, or high levels of cooperation between players (preferably, all three). If there are 200+ zombies running at you from all directions, a 30rnd magazine will not save you, even if you make every shot. ( 6 other guys with 30 rnd magazines of their own to help you, on the other hand.....) I don't know. I just hold the opinion that if a game gives you enough ammunition so that you don't feel afraid of anything the game has to throw at you, it is no longer a "survival game". Fear is a part of survival.

I have no problem with there being a lot of guns. It would be realistic, especially for a region that just underwent what was essentially civil war in ARMA 2. However, think of it in terms of the "zombie apocalypse", and especially with regards to the sense that we (the players) have no idea how long it has been since society has collapsed and infrastructure ceased to be. I, personally, think between 2 weeks and a month have passed, while there is evidence suggesting years. Regardless, as soon as infrastructure stopped, things like bullets, medication, canned food, fuel, pretty much anything that we would need to survive stopped being shipped into South Zagoria. The "supply" of items becomes limited to what we had in-country. The MASSIVE Cold-War stockpiles of ammunition, etc that exist in Siberian bunkers might as well be on the moon for all the good they will do us in Chernarus. Of course, the CDF (Chernarus Defense Force AKA Army) and the Chedaki (Communist, Russian-supported Rebels) in South Zagoria would have made stockpiles of weapons, ammunition, medical supplies, etc for their own use, even before the "zombie apocalypse", but we have (feasibly) been dipping heavily into that stock for a while now, both "actively" (players looting airfields and military bases) and "passively" (finding things like firearms and ammunition in civilian homes. Granted, some portion of it would have been civilian, but I prefer to also think of it as a stockpile left behind by previous unseen survivors). That stock will not get replenished as long as there is no infrastructure: there is no magical "ammo fairy" dropping bullets for us to find because we are good little children. If this game wanted realism, or even authenticity, then the available ammunition supply would get lower and lower (and harder and harder to find) as the weeks and months went on. (Which, to my limited knowledge, would be relatively simple to do. Move various ammunition types "lower" on loot spawn lists. Probably not that simple, though) This scarcity-of-ammunition-over-time would lead to decreased "PvP for the hell of it", as well as more hold-ups, bluffing with empty weapons, careful consideration of shots taken, etc.

There were 10 MILLION AKM assault rifles produced officially, 15 MILLION SKS carbines produced officially, and close to 40 MILLION different Mosin-Nagant variants produced officially. These numbers not including the "basement knock-offs" of the above that are produced worldwide. The only reason there would be a shortage of firearms is if they were artificially "balanced", which is a concept I find, to be blunt, quite stupid. So, I have no problem with there being a plethora of firearms available (realistic, after all). To lessen the probability of them being used in combat, lessen the spawn rate of ammunition. That is realistic, considering how everyone right now effectively "prays n sprays" due to the overabundance of ammunition, so whatever stock of ammunition there is is getting used up, with no way to make new rounds. If you have 3 rounds for that Mosin, chances are you aren't going to waste them on that freshspawn/infected, and are going to bayonet/buttstroke them instead. As for your comments on firearms and ambushes: Yeah, and? I've ambushed fully-kitted-out players drinking from wells before with just an axe. Tactics and skill, my friend. Firearms make ambushes easier, they don't make them trivial. As for "survival games being a "PvP-fest", I attribute that in Day Z to being less than 1/3 of the way finished, with little to no actual survival mechanics implemented as of yet. Same thing with H1Z1. There is nothing else to do as of yet, with an overabundance of ammunition (not firearms. The rate of firearm spawns are fine, but my character has 200+ SKS rounds after visiting 2 military locations. Not OK). This is one of the major reasons PvP dominates Day Z as of late.

You do realize that human beings invented melee weapons with reach (spears) and eventually ranged weapons (javelins, slings, and eventually the bow) specifically so they didn't have to get up close and personal, right? Melee combat is 1) scary 2) hard and 3) a good way to get injured, even if you win. Very rarely does an animal (and this includes people) get "one-hit-killed"; they often fight back, even after getting dealt a mortal wound. Don't get me wrong, I've wanted more focus on melee combat for a while now, as it would add some verisimilitude to the game. But there shouldn't be a focus on it. It should just be yet another option for the survivor. Look at firearms. With the proper ammunition, you can (obviously) shoot a player or infected. However, most "military" firearms allow for the mounting of a bayonet, which would allow for the user to stab and slash the enemy in close quarters. This would be useful when out of ammunition (or want to conserve ammunition), want to be "stealthy" (stabbing/slashing someone should make them scream, though), or get surprised. Weapons without a bayonet mount could make an "Improvised Bayonet" with some duct tape and a knife, but it would get damaged over time and be less "effective". Of course, the option to strike an enemy with the "buttstock" of a rifle or shotgun should always be there, bayonet or not. That way, you don't get absolutely fucked, like you currently do, when someone gets inside your longarm reach. Parrying is when you redirect the force of a blow (blocking is when you absorb it, and never really done in real life. Shields were for parrying blows, not blocking), and could be implemented thusly: when an enemy attacks with a melee weapon, they attack in a specific "direction", directed by the movement of the mouse when implementing the attack (Up could be a buttstroke, left/right could be slashes with a bayonet, down could be a thrust., etc etc etc). Each "attack action" would have differing ranges and be telegraphed differently (thrusts would have the greatest range, but be telegraphed the most, etc). In order to parry a blow, you need to hold a "parry key" at the right moment, when the blow would impact, as well as indicating the attack direction, or the blow would just slide past the attempt and hit you. As for your "getting the drop on someone" comment, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. They are called "ambushes", and actually require skill and tactics. Not my fault if you don't pay enough attention. Read my first post in this thread (http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/218567-baseball-bat-needs-a-buff/) for my ideas about differences in melee weapons

Nope, if you are overheating and get exposed to water (either water or sweat), you will develop hypothermia faster due to the heat being absorbed more readily into the water (and thereafter, to the environment) from your blood vessels transferring interior body heat at a faster rate vs when you are not overheating. So long as you are insulated (which I am assuming you are, considering how that is the main rationale behind wearing clothing) , air temperature has relatively little effect on interior body temperature (which is different from "percieved" body temp. On a winter day, your nose, cheeks and other extremeties might be cold, but your "core intestines" are doing just fine). Probably the most important aspect of Cold Weather survival is heat management. It essentially boils down to "I want to work hard enough to get done what I need in order to stay warm (build a shelter, gather firewood, etc), but I can't work too hard or too fast, because I don't want to overheat and sweat." Sweating is probably the most dangerous thing to have happen to you in a cold weather survival situation, because it means all of your "core-intestine-warmth" is going to get sucked out out you (due to heat transferrence), your body will then respond by limiting blood flow to the extremities in effort to keep the core warm, which in turn will hamper your efforts to stay warm. Which is why the layering system is so important. If I am setting up a tent or gathering firewood in the winter, I usually take off two layers, and avoid working hard to avoid sweating. Metabolic processes keep me warm, and the removal of two+ layers of insulation helps me to keep from sweating. Once the work is done, I put on the layers again. Being wet or not will have more of an effect on the development of hypothermia than the air temperature. Will the air temp and weather conditions have an effect? Of course. Are they the be-all-and-end all of interior body temp management? No, ensuring proper heat dissapation from the "core intestines" is, and getting wet will make it very hard to maintain an adequate interior temperature required for metabolic homeostasis. I apologize, oh Great and Wonderful Forum Master, for presuming to bring my real-life skills and knowledge to bear in debating the effects of a real-world aspect of wilderness survival! What penance must I be put under in order to walk beneath your Beneficence again? --Grovels-- /snark

True, however, they have to find that bear first. And if the bear was smart, at the first sign of humans tromping through the woods, they would high-tail it out of there. Plus, I don't think a human being incapable of complex planning and armed only with their fists could seriously damage a bear.

No, Day Z is in fact the exact opposite of what would likely happen. People would band together in community militias, and the "bandits" would rapidly be pushed out to the hinterlands. Would there be killing? Of course, but it would be organized killing (different militias fighting over resources, alliances of towns banding together to wipe out/take over other towns, bandits knocking over a trade caravan, etc), not the currently mindless-assault-rifle-circlejerk that Day Z is.

Quoted from myself in another thread: "Realistically, there wouldn't be all that many predators in Chernarus, at least the region we play in. --Which is why you sleep in a tree, and prepare all food away from your campsite. People seemingly have this idea that predators have this hate-boner for humanity, that they are just waiting for us to relax our guard, and they want nothing more than to kill and eat us. This idea could not be any more incorrect, and was (and sadly, is) the reason why so many predator species in Europe and North America were next-to wiped out. What are the predator species we are most likely to come across in Chernarus? Wolves and bears? Wolves want nothing less to avoid humans, and will only become aggressive if you intrude upon their territory. And aggressive, in this case, means following you and trying to scare you away. If you provoke an actual attack, they are probably more terrified than you are. Similarly with bears. Most bear attacks occur either because they smelled food/etc at your campsite, came to investigate, and you startled them, or you got between them and their young. The thing is, most animals (not only predators) actively seek to avoid potentially dangerous confrontation as much as possible. Predators don't go on murder-sprees just because they can, because they know that their prey can, and WILL, fight back, and they don't want to get hurt. If you get attacked by an animal, it is literally the final and worst option available to the animal, and it means you literally ignored EVERY other option to defuse the situation. These options include making themselves known, setting dominance (staring in particular. NEVER try to stare down an animal confronting you.), and actively following you in effort to scare you off and get you to leave. Plus, there is the territorial concerns. South Zagoria has about 225 square kilometers of area, and let us assume that only about 70 square kilometers of that is ocean. That leaves about 150 sq kilometers of area for animals to live, INCLUDING cities and human development. Let us lowball the area claimed by a wolfpack and a SINGULAR bear as 100 square miles (wolves, and the area is given for a wolfpack in the 48 lower US states http://www.wolf.org/...fo/wolf-faqs/#h), and for a bear is between 70 (female) and 300-500 (male) square miles per mindividual. http://westernwildlife.org/grizzly-bear-outreach-project/faqs/#a6 This works out to be 260 square kilometers for a wolfpacks territory, and between 181-1295 square kilometers for a female - male bear. So, we could have 1 wolfpack for the whole of South Zagoria, maybe a female bear, and not likely to come across a male one. So, even if predators were likely to attack humans, we wouldn't be likely to come across one. Really, the most likely aggressive animal we would come across would be packs of angry, hungry, rapidly-undomesticating dogs. Good eating on one of them!-- TL;DR-- If there were predators in Chernarus, they would (realistically) be there in such low numbers that we would likely not see them. And, they are unlikely to attack humans unless you deliberately piss them off."

Hard alcohol is an excellent thing to include in a TSC-Chernarus, as there are so many different uses for it, and because of this, it has great potential as a trade good. -medical disinfectant -water treatment -industrial processes -fuel for vehicles and generator -trade good, limited to a specific quality (150 proof moonshine is the accepted basis of exchange in Clan -X- lands. You can try to use homemade moonshine, but unless you know what you are doing, don't expect the quality to be as high and expect them to come and bust down your still for "damaging their currency) etc etc etc many other uses

Hey...well....whatever floats your boat. But now I will never be able to watch (not that I watched it all that much to begin with) The Walking Dead without imagining Mr Sheriff Officer Sir Rick Grimes ah..."thrashing the milk-snake" whenever he is off-screen.

I do. Thing is, Day Z could also have those mechanics, or, at least, some of them/mechanics like them, and I can see no real reason to at least try to. For a game supposedly based on realism/authenticity, other games are kicking its ass on the whole standpoint. Compared to PZ (which has a development staff of 4 people, and came out in 2013), Day Z is little more than a particularly-shitty PvP shooter, and that is sad.

For some, it is a "comforting" thing, to do something familiar when stressed out. There was a story about an American diplomat captured by some brand of militants in the Middle East during the late 80s. While he was captured, he "pressed" his pants (I'm assuming "pressed" means free of wrinkles, and sharp seams) by folding them underneath his bunk and laying on top of them. Gave him something to do, and he said it reminded him that he was a human being in face of the mind-games his captors kept playing with him. I know that when I am stressed out, I make myself a nice cup of tea and take a shower in order to relax. If I need to (I usually do), I also give myself a nice thorough shave as well, with some nice soap and sharp safety razor. There is just something about being clean that is relaxing to me. I do this when I am camping as well, at the end of a long day of hiking. I have a metal cup that holds about a large soup cans-worth of water. I will warm that using varied means, then wash my face, neck, arms, hands, underarms, groin and feet using some hand-made soap (fresh-piney scent!) and a facecloth I carry for this purpose. I then change the water, heat it up again, and shave (carefully, mind you) with my Mora Kniv, which can "pop hairs" right out of the box (seriously, I cannot recommend Mora Knives more. They hold an awesome edge, and are extremely inexpensive. For their price, they make awesome survival knives). After the shave, I make myself I nice cup of tea and relax. For me, this is an excellent way to keep up my morale, and I pretty much do it almost every night I camp. Takes me 30 minutes, and the comfort and morale boost is worth the time in my book. "Morale" is an important thing to consider in actual wilderness survival (not sure how it could be implemented in-game), as you can have all the best equipment, be warm and laying in a nice shelter, but if you are unhappy, all of that means jack shit. The "will to survive" is real, is at least partially based on mood and outlook, and has/can have a serious effect on your chances of survival.

A lot of the things you mention above are in fact implemented in Project Zomboid, another Early-Access ZOmbie Survival game, available on Steam. In almost every way, Project Zomboid is arguably a better game because of it. Sprint for too long, you will get tired and have to stop running. Smash open a window (with your hands) and climb through? Gonna get cut up. Bandage yourself with rags? Probably gonna get infected. Get infected? Probably gonna die. Eat the same food over and over again? Get "bored" with it, get depressed, and probably suffer from malnutrition (haven't lived long enough to see if that is a thing yet). Go for too long without sleep? Suffer a serious malus to movement speed, combat and skills. Drink some booze, in order to relieve your sadness from being surrounded by zombies? Get drunk, lose control of your character, and stumble out into the horde. Forget to close the curtains when looting a house? Attract zombie attention from outside and find yourself face-to-face with a group of 20 zombies. Make a lot of noise, set off security alarms when looting, and sprint everywhere? Have fun dealing with hordes of 100+ zeds. Try to fight off a zombie with a melee weapon? 1 or 2 is no big deal, but any more than that and you are gonna get fucked up. Locational damage means you can break arms, legs, different parts of the torso, all with different effects. Fire a firearm? Enjoy drawing half the map (which is pretty big) to your location. etc etc etc TL, DR: Project Zomboid is FAR more realistic than Day Z, and the game is arguably "better" for it. I actually fear the zombies in PZ, for one, even though they can't sprint at you nor glitch through walls and doors (although they can break through doors and climb through windows)

The thing is, you don't lose a substantial amount of heat from your face, and the amount of heat retained due to long hair is tiny compared to the heat lost from the head. You would be better off putting on a hat. Long hair and a beard will not retain body heat in a significant way, at least not for survival purposes. Will you be more comfortable, due to your face and head being "warmer"? Maybe. But hair/beards in and of themselves won't keep you alive. Yes, Jesus and Santa are pretty awesome dudes, but their awesomeness is only tangentially related to amount of beard-and-hair-itude they have going on. "Correlation does not equal Causation", here. "Jesus and Santa are awesome, and they rock some sweet beards as well", not "Jesus and Santa are awesome because they have beards". I also don't "hate" facial hair, I just find it strange and funny how worked up people are getting over the possibility of beards and such, rather than getting excited over things with much more tangible and immediate benefits: the new renderer, the new engine, new Battleye thing, etc.

I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or get aroused, Grimy Rick. Probably all at the same time.

I....don't? I dislike how they feel. I dislike how itchy they are. I dislike how they look. Plus, my facial hair grows in two colors (Irish), so it looks like my face is dirty until it gets long enough, which, coupled with the above, leads me to shave pretty much every other day. Problem? I am no less a man than you are because I dislike something you like.

Tell me, how does a head of hair and a beard protect you from cold and the rain? Yeah yeah, your face is warm. That won't stop hypothermia. I just don't understand the mania about beards and facial hair. They aren't "SUPPER AWESOME FUKKEN YAEH GUY". They are....just facial hair. Nothing special. Some people like it, some people don't. Yet the above players portray the coming of beards like it is the second coming of Jesus Christ.

Nope. Of all the things that could be implemented in future builds, people are going apeshit over beards. Fucking. Beards. And, with regards to actual combat, pretty much every warrior society throughout history that expected to engage in hand to hand also pretty much never had long, grabbable hair or beards. The Roman Legionaries were required to be clean shaven. Even the quintessential "barbarian braids and long beards " culture, the Scandanavian Vikings, tended to have short hair and goatees, instead of foot-long braids and beards.