Whyherro123

I actually prefer any weapon that doesn't have a magazine, so I am not at the mercy of the Random Loot God, over a weapon that has a magazine. It just feels like I am so more efficient, plus I can actually use the ammunition I find in a town rather than have to search for a magazine. So, my firearms of choice are: Primary: Mosin, sometimes SKS Secondary: Sawed-off Shotgun Sidearm: Magnum

I'd actually rather not have tents at all, OR have tents behave solely as shelter (vs rain, wind, weather), and have gear stashes be somewhat smaller, think an ammo can in size. That way, there could be a minimization of "running back after death to gear up" that get some forumgoers so riled up. In such a small container, you would only really be able to store the essentials: maps, compasses, firestarters, first aid supplies, some ammunition, MAYBE some food (you would really want to avoid this, as animals would smell it, and as anybody who has spent time in the wild can tell you, if an animal can smell food, it WILL get it.), or a sidearm. Not a full-sized rifle, bulky clothing, large CQC weapons,etc. These would benefit the survivor, but not make survival stashes "overpowered" (lend too much of an edge), while the small size would both make it easier to hide from other players AND yourself, prompting intelligent play, note-taking, navigation skills, etc.

Yeah, those are pretty bad as well.

HAHAHAHAHAHA what? I strongly suggest you do some research, because you are simply wrong.

Being on the business end of that stupid graphical glitch where zombies don't physically appear, but still exist and can attack you, prompting you to hunt down the physical "body" of the zombie to kill the thing. I died today related to this. I was moving along the waterside in Cherno, trying to get to Balota in order to loot the undisturbed (to my hopes, being so far away from the spawns) tent city. I hear zombie "pissed off" noises, think to myself "OH GREAT", and pulled out a bayonet to bring about some head-stabbin'. I whirl about to enact aforementioned head-stabbin'... Nothing was there. I turn around the look for the zombie, which has whacked me a couple of times by now (I am bleeding) I back up, to get a wider view, and accidentally fall off the dock. No big deal, right? Just fall in the water, you say? Not in this case, sir! Apparently, the water didn't come right up to the dock. I fell 15 or so feet onto dry land, to my death. Abusing the "esc glitch" I look around after my death, to see the zombie glitching out of the SIDE OF THE DOCK. motherfuckers.

1) If I were to shoot you in the leg with really any moderately-sized-and-powerful round, you would die. In your thigh, you have a major blood vessel called the "femoral artery". It is about an inch thick in adults, and if you so much as nick it, you will die from blood loss. Probably within less than 30 seconds, due to the extremely high pressure blood travels under. Even if I were to miss the femoral artery, you would still suffer from pretty serious blood loss. In behind your knee is another major blood vessel.

Berezino. On every server with a population over 15 people, there will be deathmatches going on in Berezino. It is just one of life's constants, like death and taxes.

If you really want to think about it, a "splitting" axe is not the most effective axe for cutting down a tree. There are different types of axes with different blade shapes, grinds, and profiles, all suited to a specific task. A "splitting" axe is....well, for spitting logs into firewood. They tend to have pretty heavy heads, with a wide blade bevel. They don't so much "cut" wood as "wedge" the fibers apart. A "hewing" or "limbing" axe is thinner, with a longer face, which is more effective at biting into the wood. These "cut" the wood fibers. This is a pretty good representation. If you were going to cut down a tree, a saw would probably be the most efficient tool to use, not a hacksaw, though. And, you can totally break an axe handle if/when you use it wrong, like using a splitting axe to cut down a standing tree. A lot of force gets exerted on the handle when the head impacts the wood, and different types of axes have handles with different profiles/shapes to minimize the effects of these forces.

In reality, me and 3 of my buddies built an 8 foot by 12 foot log cabin a couple of years back on his land in Maine, with a main floor for cooking and gear storage and a loft for sleeping, in about 4 days of solid (think 12 hours a day) work. Granted, we made that thing NICE, with a split-log floor, table, shelves, benches, stone-and-wood fireplace and chimney, and waterproofed the walls and ceiling with clay and pitch. So, it is possible, just don't expect to do it alone, and have it done with a click of a button.

Let me lay this out here right now: in the short term, Chernarus would not be that difficult to survive in, at least for the short "Wilderness Survival" term. Essentially, there are three major stages to survival, and they all involve different skillsets and mindsets. ( I am projecting this from the view that the world hasn't gone to shit, because this was how I was trained, and how I train others) Wilderness Survival: Up to one week. You shelter in place, move as little as possible in order to conserve energy. You are assuming people are looking for you. You strip the area around your camp for food, bedding, and shelter materials. Need good shelterbuilding, water treatment, foraging, and firebuilding skills. Bushcraft. 1 week to 4 weeks. You start to move from area to area, trying to find some human activity (a road, powerlines, etc) you essentially become a hunter-gatherer, taking resources from the area you move through. Need good land navigation, overland travel, on-the-move water and food procurement skills (especially since you can't really preserve food). Homesteading. 1 month on. You assume searches have ended. You build a more permanent shelter, and start gathering plant sources to grow later on (essentially, primitve agriculture). Need EXTENSIVE shelterbuilding skills, agriculture, and hunting (big-game) skills. This is the "classical Survivalist" people think about. The area has a temperate oceanic climate, which means the temperatures and weather would shift with the seasons, but remain relatively stable year round, being moderated by the ocean nearby (look up climate types for a more in-depth explanation) Extremely abundant water sources. I can't travel more than half a mile before stumbling across some podunk pond in the middle of the woods. Yes, untreated water should definitely make you sick. However, treating your water is almost comically simple if you know what you are doing. Boil it all before drinking, then sieve it through a soda bottle filled with crushed charcoal. Perfectly safe, and you can set up a lot of these bottles to collect rainwater Abundant plant and animal sources. Plenty of agricultural plots (almost every house I see in-game has some sort of garden, even in the cities) suggests that the soil of Chernarus is good for growing. Plus, the temperate climate suggests there are a lot of edible plants about. The only issue with this is the fact that relying on wild sources for food essentially forces the player to become a hunter-gatherer, which would strip the land of resources EXTREMELY quickly. This isn't only food and animals, but firewood, available shelter materials, etc. I would like to see more of a focus on Bushcraft and Homesteading than pure Wilderness Survival. people growing their own food, reloading their ammunition, etc. There is just so much more depth possible exploring those areas than just Wilderness Survival.

Yep. I disagree with the linearity of your model, but player-built shelters and eventually housing should be awesome.

Yeah, I agree. Plus, I can't really come up with a reason why someone would move around at night at all. Humans are diurnal creatures. Sleep, eat, or maintain gear during the darkness. Running around at night without knowing the terrain is asking for a broken leg/ankle.

Why? Bicycles are some of the most common vehicles in the world.

I also don't think you should be able to store "large" items, like rifles and axes and such. Ammunition, some food and water, gear (like matches and a compass) MAYBE a sidearm? Sure. But, stumbling across a tent stuffed with M4's and Mosins? No thanks. A tent would make a HORRIBLE storage device, BTW. Set up a modern plastic-sided tent in the woods and see how long it lasts

No, actually the lead dev specifically said they weren't zombies, just infected people. Thank God. I actually find "infected people" far, FAR more frightening than "classical" zombies. Zombies can't sprint, and have to follow a whole bunch of unrealistic rules that are pretty stupid. They shamble at you, all you have to do is keep up a brisk walk and you should be fine. On the other hand, "infected people" are much more plausible than zombies. Do you know we as a species are overdue for a population-destroying pandemic? The last one was in 1917.

Annndddd......what would stop them from stripping the corpse to the bone? Why stop at "halfway"? For looks? Also, how do we know they are cannibals? They don't bite, just smack you about some. For all we know, the infected could just be "21 Days later-esque" RAGE infectees.

Like someone else said, Horror =/= Gore. Horror is understated, classy almost. A faded bloodstain on a wall behind a corpse, suggesting suicide. A line of cars stretching off around the corner, with broken windows. A desolate, empty city. The ruins of the world that was. Not that. That is vulgar. That is obscene, and IMHO, entirely unnecessary. Plus the bit where it would essentially ban the game entirely from certain countries.

HAHAHAHAHAHA what a dumbass!

No, it isn't. IRL, the stash would still be there.

The main point is, the deletion of someone's stashed supplies isn't all that realistic. At all.

Please tell me this is coming to stable soon....

I understood the reference. I just don't particularly agree with it's usage.

"peasant"? Really? You just lost whatever respect I had for you.

How? let me throw this out there right now: Chernarus would not be that difficult to survive in. A relatively stable climate, many sources of fresh water, plant and animal-based food extremely available. Real survival is NOT "move from town to town, looting as you go". Real survival is staying in one location. It is moving literally as little as possible. What makes you think someone is just going to be able to run back to their campsite and re-gear? They would have to get there first! That leads to two very distinct and extremely likely possibilities: 1) Camp close to town. Makes it easier to move gear from town to camp, but also exponentially increases the likelihood of someone finding the camp. 2) Camp in the middle of fucking nowhere. Nobody is going to find your camp, but on the other hand, unless you knew the coordinates (and have access to a map) of your camp, you probably aren't going to find it either. Enjoy starving to death/dying of dehydration in the wilderness, looking for a couple of pixels on the ground(buried stash) or some pixels in a tree (treed stash). Protip: I can carry all of the gear (shelter, food, water, clothing, equipment) I need to survive for a week (or more, depending on how I can stretch it) in/on a backpack not much bigger then the small packs in-game. It is actually smaller, capable of compressing down via straps. We are already handicapped. No need to handicap ourselves further. In my hypothetical Day Z survival situation, gear would be the least of my worries, I can get by with little more than a knife. It is shelter that I need,which is entirely different from stashing gear (get rid of the tents that hold gear, you don't leave up a shitty tent like that with stuff in it. It would get torn to shreds). You stay out in the rain, you get hypothermia and die. You stay out in the heat, you get heatstroke and die. You put gear in your shelter with you as you sleep, you get attacked by animals and have to fight them off. All of the above has happened to me before, with the obvious exception of the "dying" bit. I want the environment to be the killer it actually is in the real world, not having my life be dependent on the gear that I have. Blocking access to gear just because you died is entirely unrealistic and unnecessary, as authentically, the gear wouldn't help you all that much anyways. Survival = 90% Determination 7% Pure dumb luck 3% gear and equipment

I literally cannot understand why people want stashed gear to disappear after you die, much along the same lines as being unable to loot your own body. Stashing supplies is an end-game thing. I don't think you understand the amount of effort it takes to dig a hole large enough to bury anything worthwhile in, while keeping it stable enough so it won't collapse. example: take an ammo-can, the go-to-stash for a prepper group I occasionally scope out online. It would take about an hour to dig the hole, waterproof it, waterproof the can, stash everything evenly inside the can, bury it again (disposing of the spoils properly, so it isn't blatantly obvious that a hole was dug), and clean up. Why go through all the trouble if that is just going to disappear when I kick the bucket? Or, think of it from a "realistic, new-survivor" viewpoint. You die, spawn in as a new guy. You stumble across a stashed supply (find your stash from the old character). Please, explain to me why or how you shouldn't be able to make use of the gear? It is entirely unrealistic, and frankly, unfair. You should be COMMENDED and REWARDED for your foresight, not punished for it! Caveat: I don't think you should be able to bury large weapons, like rifles, axes, etc. Handguns, hand-weapons, ammo? Yes.