Bits (DayZ)

There's a very obvious difference between the bull barrel MK-II and the integral suppressed version, if you know what to look for -- the suppressed version has a straight tube from the cocking knob to the muzzle, and the bull version has a noticeable pinch at the front of the lower frame where the receiver meets the barrel. The MK-II Govt Target (7" bull) is plenty accurate, I have no doubt that it could shoot 5" groups at 75m if the shooter does his part. Whether or not it would be *effective* at that range depends on what you were shooting, and what the desired effect was. As long as ammo was plentiful, I could see a suppressed .22 becoming the preffered implement for clearing zombies. Certainly would be my favorite. Against other players, not so much. Could be interesting if they modified the damage model to immobilize arms and legs from gunshots but, otherwise... no.

(may have been covered in the vids, haven't watched, so I don't know) Open this map: http://dayzdb.com/map/chernarusplus Looks for the faucets on the map. The wells look like a concrete circle with an old-style hand pump on top. Also, look for ponds and streams -- just as good as a well.

It's much more complicated than that. Larger (heavier) bullets retain energy much better than lighter bullets, and deliver much greater energy downrange. Just as an example: IIRC, at 1,000 yds a .50 cal from an M2 has double the energy of a .30 cal from an M1919. Bullets that go through a target do not transfer as much energy as bullets that stay in a target. Different bullet designs (ex: JHP vs FMJ) can generate very different types of wounds (ex: temporary wound cavity, hydrostatic shock). I've shot deer at 100-200 yds with a 7mag (small and fast, exited) and a .50cal muzzle loader (big and slow, no exit); I'll give you three guesses as to which dropped the dear faster, and the first two don't count. If interetested, read up on ballistic coefficient and cross sectional density. Civilians in the US are NOT barred from owning fully automatic weapons (or SBRs, or suppressors, or sawed-off shotguns). You just have to file a form with the BATFE and pay a tax (few hundred dollars). The problem is finding a fully-automatic firearm that is legally transferable. They can be found, but they are outrageously expensive (buy-in starts at about $10,000 for something worthwhile). The license you refer to is required to MANUFACTURE. Manufacture and importation of fully-automatic firearms is very tightly controlled. Manufacture of SBRs, suppressors, and AOWs does not require a license, just the form and the tax. Single-shot is not the same as semiautomatic. You can buy an AR that is one or the other (strange but true). Please do some research yourself (you can start by googling "ATF form-1 form-4 07/02 SOT" and "gca 1986") and watch your language.

^ this. I played many hours over this past weekend, went from the east coast to NWAF twice, and never saw a gun. ANY gun. And this on a low-population server, and after a fresh restart. I did, however, find a significant amount of ammo (12ga, 5.56, 7.62, .357, and .45). Found magazines, bayonets, weapon lights, bipods, and comps. But no guns. From the perspective of this game being about the zombie apocalypse, I think it makes a tremendous amount of sense that hardware is fairly common, but consumables are rare -- so having lots of empty guns laying around makes sense to me. I think it also makes sense that the most common guns and ammo would be the ones that were produced in the highest numbers, and for the longest period of time -- namely, the Mosin and 7.62x54R. Finding a bunch of M4s (or .45s, or .357s) on an island with Russian names is just... lame.

GTX 650, ver 305.57 (9.18.13.557) DX 11.1 Win7 (fresh install, missing a whole bunch of updates) Not having any problems playing the game, but have noticed an oddity -- I tried running with the -winxp flag, and I started getting CTDs when I exit the game. May have gotten a CTD when I tried to switch servers, too. If you're running with -winxp, remove it; if not, try adding it and see if it helps. Also, run dxdiag and see if it complains about anything.

I have the same problem... only seems to happen when there's no moon (yes, that does happen). Tried clouds on/off, shadows on/off, hdr up/down.

I shoot whatever I have on hand... currently LC XM193. Never had a problem with it. Never had a problem with my Ciener, either -- it's the .22 ammo (which is the cheapest crap ever made) that causes trouble. I'm fairly paranoid about the gas tube, so I probably clean it more than I need to (concession to shooting the crappy .22). More than my friend with the suppressor, anyway. :) I've seen some pretty nasty AKs, too. Seen a few ARs that were crap as well. Definitely more crappy AKs than ARs, I'll give you that. I think that the AK design is more inviting and tolerant of crap builds than the AR. Not just a persona thing, I think there's just something about a stamped receiver that says, "bubba," and a cheap-and-easy build is going to be more prevalent than something that requires more effort. FWIW, my impromptu poll today of army CI-types resulted in a clean sweep in favor of the AK. To wit: "As soon as we found a cache of clean AKs, we ditched the A2s" (this from a rag-wearing bearded type). Within the context of the game... expecting that resources are scarce and the vast majority of people won't know how to take care of a weapon properly... I believe that the AK is a better choice. Just my opinion.

Agree... mostly. And I think we should probably be a little more clear on when we're speaking about the DayZ game vs Real Life . I wouldn't say that the AR is unreliable... just finicky. I'd say the AR is more accurate than the AK, and has greater accuracy potential at long range, but at "normal" engagement ranges, the AK does just fine, so it shouldn't matter. With a modern optic, both will reach out to ~500m; at that range the AR will have a better chance of hitting, but the AK will hit with more authority. In game, I'd like to see the M4 be more accurate and degrade faster than the AK, with a significant chance to jam if not cleaned. The AK should be essentially immune to dirty affects. Accuracy should not substantially degrade in either case. Since DayZ is set in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, and resources are scarce, the M4 should be a really good gun when pristine, and a jamming POS when dirty and degraded. The AK should be an okay gun from start to finish. Aside #1: I've seen two 5.56 SCARS, both had horrendous feeding and reliability problems. It's a pretty gun, but I'd never own one myself. Aside #2: I don't enjoy shooting AKs as much as ARs; doesn't seem to matter where I grab an AK, I always burn my fingers. Rule #1 of gunfights: Bring a gun. Rule #2 of gunfights: If your gun goes "click" instead of "bang," you brought a club to a gunfight.

Meh. It's night on the server, no moon, can't see squat. Guess I'll just camp here. How about "...in my experience...?" I can't say that my experience is universal, but I have seen more ARs fail on the line than AKs. The problem with the original M16s was blamed on three things: the powder used in the cartridges (ball instead of stick), the lack of proper cleaning, and the lack of a chromed chamber. That last issue exacerbated the first two. Even with chromed chambers and shooting LC ball, I've seen ARs gum up, get cranky, and stop feeding. You know it's time to hose it out with CLP when the bolt won't go back into battery. Gets worse when you use a Ceiner (.22LR converter). A friend of mine tried shooting his AR with a suppresor; after 100 rounds or so the gas tube was so clogged it wouldn't cycle. He had to do a complete tear-down to clean it out. Granted, he probably hadn't cleaned the gas tube properly for quite a while, but the suppressor only accelerated the failure. Best policy for AR: clean it, clean it, clean it, and run it wet. Then clean it some more. Of all the AKs I've worked with, I've never had one fail to go "bang" when I pulled the trigger. Dirty or not, wet, dry, ComBloc ammo, didn't matter. They're so over-gassed that a little crud seems to make 'em happy. I've built ARs from 80% lowers and AKs from blanks. No argument about the ease of changing a barrel on an AR (especially vs an AK). FCGs are same-same. An AK is much easier to clean. Pull the cover, pull the bolt, and hose it out. An AR has too many nooks, crannies, and crevices; it's a PITA to clean. If anything, an AR needs to be cleaned in detail, not an AK. All firearms need regular maintenance to function properly, but not all firearms function equally well when they haven't been properly maintained. AKs will take a tremendous amount of abuse before they quit, but an AR will not.

Biggest problem with sights on the AKs is sight radius; just too short for precise work. I'd say they're good for MoM out to 200m, past that you're using The Force. The biggest problem with M4s is they don't like getting dirty. Save your cleaning kit for the M4, because the AK only needs a good rinse every thousand rounds or so. :) Every nugget was issued with a canvas sling. It's not as good as an American '07 leather sling for support, but it's better than nothing. Aside: Shooting supported with a sling seems to be an American thing, I've never seen or heard of other militaries doing it. AK and nugget slings are intended just for carry. If you want a fast transition to your pistol, either go Italian (throw it on the ground) or get an M4 with a single-point sling. +1 loading (or lack thereof) doesn't bother me. As I understand it, the game doesn't keep track of rounds in a mag, and a tactical reload will make the game lose the rounds in the mag being replaced. I'd say fixing that would be more important. Nugget quality (and ammo quality) can vary widely, but I'd hesitate to call a Nugget "fairly poor quality." For what it is, and what it was intended for, I'd say it's a damned good rifle. They are tough as nails, and nearly indestructible (search YouTube for "mosin torture test"). ComBloc ammo is dirtier in general than NATO, and the corrosive primers are kinda irritating... but all you have to do is spray it with Windex... or piss down the barrel. When you scope your nugget, you have to load singles; the scope blocks the clip guide. I've shot an FNX, but it was a .40. I prefer my Para P-14-45. I can ring steel at 100yds, and my personal best on Bianchi plates at 10yds is 3.81. I have also missed plates at 10yds with a 12ga coach gun (funny things happen when you're on the clock and breathing hard). The early MiG (and Yak) jets were designed prior to the Russians developing their centralized GCI, which didn't come into play until after Korea.

http://www.bostromgunsmithing.com/index.htm#Page_ImprovedRifleAccuracy ... just sayin'.

I haven't seen the shotgun speedloader in-game yet... but I have a 12ga carrier for my CASS rig that has three doubles. Takes a practiced jerk when you break the action to kick out the spent hulls (polished chambers, no ejectors) but you grab two fresh shells in one hand from the carrier and load them both in one motion.

At the risk of being labeled pedantic... barrel attachments can affect accuracy (and point of impact) because they change the barrel harmonics. Depending on the caliber and load, brakes and suppressors can also have an affect by reducing the turbulence of the explosive gasses exiting the muzzle. On the nugget specifically, you can change POI quite a bit just by removing the bayonet. Compensators for bolt rifles are intended to reduce felt recoil and muzzle rise, making it easier to keep your target within the FOV of your scope. Doesn't do much for the first shot, but can accelerate a follow-up. Bipods are used to steady the rifle when shooting prone. They serve the same purpose, and are more portable than, a bench rest. They make the shooter more accurate, not the rifle (although in some circumstances, like when the barrel isn't free-floated (as in the nugget), they can also change POI). For gaming purposes, it makes sense to give an accuracy buff when using a bipod in the prone position (or knealing behind a wall). I don't mind an item that gives an accuracy buff when standing or knealing, but I'd prefer it be a sling (which is already there, but does not serve that purpose). IRL a comp on your nugget won't make your first shot more accurate, but it will make you feel more comfortable, and by extension your 20th shot might be more accurate. But that's up to you, not the rifle. Source: I'm an avid shooter, hunter, instructor, and I own a nugget. P.S. I can shoot my 7mag (single shot, no comp, buttpad) all day long... but the nugget wears me out. P.P.S. Aim your 1911 about 18" high to ring steal at 100yds.

...interesting... I've been reading up on Rocket and the genesis of DayZ. Very libertarian. From the perspective of DayZ as a training tool, I can understand (and wholeheartedly agree with) an almost absolute hands-off approach. Like you said, any construct or mechanism that would either promote or discourage a behavior or approach would be counter to the purpose of the training. As a game, however, I don't know if that approach is really necessary or desirable. The basic purpose of the game (to have fun) seems more constrained to me, in that we all want to have fun -- but not everyone has fun in the same way. And that's okay, as long as we can all have fun. But when only a few of us are having fun, at the expense of other people having fun, then that's not okay. Every other game I can think of has various mechanisms for directing certain styles of play, and this seems to be the accepted norm; not that I would want DayZ to be like every other game, but I think there's value in that general approach. Consider MOH/COD/BF and the like; they all have team associations that are defined and enforced. There are mechanisms that preclude and/or punish players that attack their teammates. Most of those games have an FFA mode, but it's rarely used. And, most of those games have built-in and/or external mechanisms for kicking and banning players that violate the operator's notion of fun. Speaking of FFA... if that style of gaming was in such high demand, I would have expected to see a lot more servers running in that mode. I can't say that I ever counted, but my gut tells me that FFA servers represented less than 10% for any game I've ever played (and that's probably being generous). Considering that this is a game -- and a commercial venture -- I expect there will be certain incentives (directives?) to make DayZ a financially rewarding endeavor, and that means playing to your base... which leans heavily away from the FFA genre. I'd like to think there's a happy medium, somewhere between the traditional black-and-white, good-guys-vs-bad-guys formula that's been played to death. I don't want static/enforced teams (although it would be a hoot to play a zed). I want players to be "bad" if they want. I want players to choose, but I think those choices should cost something. If DayZ can make that happen, I'll be a happy camper. So to speak. (I don't camp) Aside #1 -- I used to mod for MOH and COD, and I prototyped a system that nerfed damage for TK'ers; worked pretty well. The trick is in getting the nerf rate correct, ie slow enough that the incidentals don't hurt a lot, but fast enough to take care of the griefers. Aside #2 -- I tried running DayZ under wine last night (long story), mixed results. BattlEye is borked under wine, and my internet connection is absolute crap at the moment, so there was only one server I could get into... and it was night. Graphics were disappointing (my fault, not the game's) and I had massive control lag (again, my fault, not the games) but I was able to play for an hour or so without dying. Got thirsty, found some soda, punched a zed in the face and ran away, got jumped by two more zeds and took a beating, got away, nearly bled out, got bandaged, skulked around in the dark (using that flashlight is scary+dangerous), found some more loot, and never saw another living soul. Creeped the heebeejeebeez outa me. *sigh* Looks like I'll need to rebuild that Windows partition...

New here, been perusing the forums; read this entire thread but haven't searched for other KoS threads (I gather there's a number of them). Apologies in advance for trodding on well-traveled ground. I think the definition provided: ... misses the basic perspective of the complainant, that being the guy on the receiving end. Usually a noob, often just spawned. Essentially they're not a threat to anyone. At worst, they're a nuisance. In a different venue (long ago and far away) we referred to this practice as "clubbing baby seals." I think that sitting on a hill with a scoped nugget waiting for people to run across a runway is altogether different than turning a corner and unexpectedly coming face-to-face with someone. Both may result in somebody's death, but for different reasons, and with different motivations. Inasmuch as some people would want to punish the former and forgive the latter, how about this: For every player you kill, the damage you dole out (with any and all weapons) gets nerfed by some amount. The more players you kill, the more you get nerfed. Maybe it's a constant amount per player, maybe an increasing amount; whatever, the point is, killing another player costs you something material, ie the ability to kill something else (like another player... or a zed). Your nerf is decreased by a constant amount every 24hrs. Being nice does not help you, so there is no way to game the system... other than to make things more difficult for yourself. Players that inadvertently, or only occasionally, kill other players won't be noticeably impacted; within a day or two they'll be completely de-nerfed and, in the meantime, maybe it takes an extra bullet or whack in the head to take down a zed. Players that make a habit out of clubbing baby seals *will be* noticeably impacted; after ten or so kills (depending on the nerf scale) they may not be able to take down a zed with an entire 30rnd mag, and it might take a week for their nerf to go away. For the vast majority of players, I don't think they'd even notice. I seriously doubt a majority of players kill enough players often enough that they would ever get nerfed enough that they would recognize that it took three rounds instead of two to bring down a zed... it was either "one shot to the head" or it was "half a mag." On the other hand, that small minority of players that set out to kill as many other players as they can find will very quickly find themselves in a deep hole that only a lengthy time-out will cure. Sure, they can still go on a killing spree, but only for a short time, and then they'll go away. Eventually, I expect they'd get bored of not being able to kill anything, and they'd become much more discriminating in their killing... which is what everyone seemed to want in the first place. I don't think this would have any direct affect on banditry, other than to possibly make things slightly easier, in that victims would be more inclined to cough up the goods, knowing that the bandits were less likely to kill them. Maybe it moves KoS'ers into banditry, because it's easier and more lucrative? Or, maybe KoS'ers (being the sick bastards they already are) find new levels of depravity to subject their victims to? I don't know, but the sociology and psychology of the zombie apocalypse has always fascinated me...