Valadain

1) We don't know much about the infection, except that players are immune. Which has been confirmed. 2) In a survival game, things should at least reflect realistic or authentic survival. Which means finding clean water sources. 3) There was no indication of how it might happen, just that it might happen. Generally it occurs when you have too many people using a well and not properly caring for it. A sealed well (like in game) with little usage (like in game) isn't likely to get infected.

I'm aware of cholera, but the pumps are pulling groundwater, not surface water. The chance of them getting contaminated is very slim. Ponds, rivers, lakes, absolutely. Pumps, not very likely unless people are shoving dead bodies down them.

Guns are built to last if you maintain them. It will degrade, but a rifle barrel is going to last anywhere from 6k to 10k rounds. Given the average life expectancy of a DayZ player, I would be incredibly surprised if anyone ever managed to wear out a gun just by rounds fired. Maintenance is the trick, that is really where they should focus.

This would be a hard turn from realism. Unless you have a catastrophic failure with your ammunition, it isn't going to damage your weapon. There are types of ammunition that are harder on your weapon, but it isn't about the condition of that ammunition, but rather the chemical make-up of the powder (corrosive ammunition).

Either a damaged gun or damaged ammo can jam up your weapon. If you have a weak casing on a round, it can split when fired and fail to eject, causing the next round in the magazine (for a semi-auto) to jam up behind it. The worst though, would be the bullet failing to exit the barrel. This is more likely with an actually poorly manufactured round and may cause an explosive situation on the next round fired. Same thing can happen with a damaged or poorly maintained gun. The chamber could be gummed up with carbon residue, causing the round to sit too tightly and not eject. Or gunk up the action causing it to not cycle correctly and either push the casing back in or stove-pipe it.

I don't think people understand how wells work. I've seen this suggestion quite a bit and, barring an actually infected well (bacteria on the walls, which isn't terribly common, but can happen) ground water is the safest source of water around. People do realize that there was a time before iodine, chlorine, and UV lights? Where people drank water right out of wells and didn't die every few drinks? Also, the big miss on this thread is simply chlorine. It is all over the dang place. It cleans water.

I must have missed the part of the Early Alpha language that said participation is to be "shut up and hope for the best". I'm fairly certain that isn't the position of BI. I'm fairly certain they like to get feedback about what they are actually developing. I personally don't think the values are "placeholders". I think they are part of experimentation. Since they already have good access to realistic numbers to put in here, it means that they are likely rejecting realism towards some goal that involves somewhat unrealistic numbers. I personally don't care for that and am making that opinion known as a participant in the Early Access Alpha.

They altered some of the specs for the better, but the two questionable things they did was make it full auto and change it from a direct impingement system to a piston. Both questionable moves. The full auto is favored by special forces I think, but to my understanding, the general forces like the burst fire. It limits ammo waste.

I wouldn't necessarily call that an upgrade, but you are right that the gun in game is full auto. It is the M4A1 variant, not the stock M4 which was burst fire.

Balance is for MMOs and if a placeholder were desired, the default Arma values would have been just fine. There's nothing wrong with pointing out a problem that could cause many of us to lose interest in the game.

I get the idea of simulating inaccuracy (I hate it, but I get what people are trying to say). My question is, why are there only suggestions to simulate a rather fringe inability to shoot straight? Why are people not suggesting realism in areas that impact other areas of game play? The one-sided nature of this makes me wary that this is just a game play style preference. Social skill and strategies should come directly from the player, but coordination and gun knowledge should be filtered through some random generator. I don't care for that sort of bias.

I wonder how many people that want more random fumbling martial interaction would be accepting of the same random fumbling introduced to social interactions? To simulate the stress of social interactions in a world with no rules, characters may randomly flip the bird during interaction. To simulate the common misunderstandings of high-stress communication, characters will randomly draw and aim their weapon at other players. And maybe add in, the Mic muting randomly, but appearing to work fine. And perhaps a random accidental discharge of your weapon if you are pointing it at someone for a long time while your mic is active. Maybe even a chance of a panic attack that forces your character into run-mode upon meeting another player.

You are right when talking about other modern 7.62 rifles in use. The Mosin, however, doesn't fall into that category.

Because it is fully automatic or they have all of the attachments, which brings it closer to in-line. But having fired a both a Mosin and m4 platform (AR), there really is no comparison. The M4 is just flat more accurate. I was skeptical as I do like the Mosin, but after a few debates on here, I decided to take it to the real world to see. No contest, even with a pristine Mosin (as pristine as they get).

It is very far off, in absolute terms or relative terms. Partially because the other guns are far off in relative terms.