BeefBacon

I love this forum. In the past I've frequented forums that have had a mandatory title for each new response in a thread and have had a multitude of horrible UI elements. The DayZ forum is great, but I'd like to suggest one very minor change. Could the "report" and "spambot" buttons be moved away from the other buttons that I'm likely to actually click? There's been a couple of times now where I've clicked "report" instead of "quote" and have ended up losing what I was writing. Again, it's minor, but it'd be a nice change.

I can't give enough beans for this. I'll have to make a bunch of fake accounts. This mod is pretty rusty, but it's a push in the right direction. I'd rather see a, say, .2 second fade rather than popping in and out. Being able to see over grass will still be a problem, but that pales in comparison to the issues that'll be solved. I truly hope the devs will consider a similar system.

The problem is that there isn't enough ground foliage or, rather, the ground foliage in forests is too small. If large ferns and such were to spawn in forests then they'd appear much denser.

Seems a little harsh. Remind me never to have a powercut or have my computer crash while playing DayZ. Besides that I like it. Seems fair. Provided that the screen is so obscured that combat loggers can't continue fighting until the 30-second timer runs out then I have no problem with it. Perhaps leaving the game suddenly (alt-f4, crash, etc) could result in the current system whereby your character remains in the game for 30 seconds.

There's a sound made that is very similar to the one made when you open a soda, and I hate that. Puts me on edge for no good reason. Spent 20 minutes in a room with my rifle pointed at the door because I thought there was somebody on the floor above me. Besides that I see no reason to remove other sounds besides a few tweaks. For example, sometimes I'll be in the middle of a forest and I'll hear the gate squeak ambient sound, which is odd.

I was going to make a similar suggestion, but I forgot. Provided that most of the items are near-useless (bits of paper, low-level clothing, maybe soda and tinned food) then I could definitely get on with this idea. Perhaps there could be an extremely low chance to spawn items like sewing kits, water bottles and medical supplies. Even low-end melee weapons like kitchen knives.

Was that a pun? I like it. Good work. Yeah some backstory discovered in-game would be neat, even if it doesn't serve any practical purpose.

If it was fairly rare, then yeah. I quite like the idea of chambering single bullets at a time. Means that people don't become rambo the second they find a gun. Must be said, though, that pistol magazines are one of the hardest things to find. At one point I had a .357 speedloader, a 9mm pistol magazine, a 1911 magazine, an FNX45 and an Amphibia S. So I had either the pistol but no magazine or the magazine but no pistol. It was incredibly frustrating. Eventually I found a 1911 so I was able to ditch all my other pistol-related items bar the 9mm magazine. If nothing else I'd like pistol mags to be a lot more common.

Saw some threads on lethal traps like spike pits and nail bombs, but nothing like this. The idea is simple. Players can craft traps out of empty tin cans, string, broken glass, whatever and then lay them down in front of a door or something. They go away and start looting the building they're in or snipe or whatever it is that they do. If somebody comes into the house and they walk over the trap, then the sound of crunching glass or clinking cans will alert the guy who is looting/sniping. Of course it'll also alert the guy who just came in, as they will suspect that whoever laid the trap is probably still in the building. It'd also be nice if doors made a sound when opening.

Today I was followed by zombies from Stary almost all the way to NWAF. They did the usual thing where they chase you, slow down and then give up, but then they'd almost immediately follow me again. They were never more than a couple of pixels on the horizon, but they followed me for miles. Is this a game feature or just a weird fluke? I've not experienced this before.

Players who are low on blood should have this reflected in the way they look. Somebody who is about to starve to death and somebody who's been munching on a bag of rice look exactly the same. I propose that players who are low on blood (because of sickness, starvation, blood loss, whatever) should actually look as though they're dying. Their running/ walking animation should be as though they're exhausted. Their skin should be pale with dark rings under their eyes. They should breathe raggedly, maybe cough from time to time. On a similar note; I still dislike the notion that your vision becomes obnoxiously desaturated when you're injured. Perhaps this could be an alternative. Thoughts?

I swear I keep spawning in the same 3 places. Also wouldn't mind seeing inland spawns.

Today I accidentally joined a hardcore server and found that I couldn't enter third-person. Initially I thought this to be a problem with my keyboard so I ignored it. To begin with I found playing the game in first person disorientating and even a little claustrophobic, but I've really warmed to it. So it occurred to me, why is there even a third-person mode? People obviously abuse it by looking round corners and over walls, and I doubt that anyone shoots in third-person, so why is it an option in a game that is described as a hardcore survival game? Playing hardcore is much more difficult but ultimately more rewarding. You need to be cautious. You can't check a corner without risking yourself and this is a good thing. The only downside is that for some people I imagine that the head bob will be disorientating as it was for me initially, and melee becomes even more clunky than it was before. But for a game toting realism as one of its primary components, a third-person camera seems a little counter to this premise.

If there was some garuantee that nobody would ever use the powers of 3pp for evil then I wouldn't have a problem with it. I prefer 3pp from a casual perspective because it feels more comfortable, and I like seeing my character, but I feel uncomfortable knowing that people are exploiting it, so it puts me in a bit of a quandary.

But the increase is negligible, especially when compared to the way people exploit it.

God damn I keep nearly clicking "report" and "spambot". They really need to move those to the other side of the window or something. It only compensates for FOV in your immediate surroundings, that is to say what is standing left and right of you within a couple of meters. That's it. Your FOV remains the same besides, like, a one degree increase from being a meter back. So the pros are that you can see things that are next to you, you can see your character running through fields and that, for some, it alleviates motion sickness (which is actually important). The cons are that it allows you to see over and around walls without risking yourself, and it is often literally impossible for other players to see you. You can see over grass when you'd otherwise have your vision obscured. 3pp promotes dirty tactics where the player never has to take any risks to gather intelligence, at the cost of other players who have no chance of ever seeing that player. That's my problem with it. I get situational awareness by using the alt key and by leaning around corners, not by staring at walls or at the roofs of tall buildings. This, in my opinion, is the way the game should be played. Claiming that 3pp increases FOV just isn't true. The negligible FOV increase pales in comparison to the negative side effects of 3pp. I respect that people like to play in 3pp, but please don't claim that 3pp simulates a 180 degree FOV.

I'd like to see a focus on first-person balance so that the game is angled towards it more. My initial post was really supposed to pose the question "why is there a third-person perspective in a game like this?" I don't want to see 3pp removed entirely, but if 1pp was the dominant way of playing I'd be happy. For now it seems that most people play 3pp, so it feels like the game is more likely to be balanced for that. Again I understand that 3pp is, reportedly, supposed to simulate peripheral vision, but I wonder why it isn't in every other game? Somebody put this video up on another thread and I think it accurately portrays the points I'm trying to make. But guys, don't get worked up over this thread. I want this to be a discussion, not something that's going to get locked.

Seems pointless to me. Why not go down the Metro 2033 line and use bullets and high-quality gear as a currency. You know. Like you might expect in a zombie apocalypse.

Eh, no. A two minute walk isn't going to deter server hoppers. I can see a 'no logout area' causing a lot of problems.

So everyone wants perfectly accurate weapons. Why not cut out the middle man and make all the weapons hitscan too? I've never fired a weapon before, and I probably never will, but I get the impression that if I was half-starving in the middle of a zombie apocalypse in clothes that haven't been washed in 3 months I probably wouldn't be able to shoot the balls off a fly. If you want all weapons to be as accurate as their real-world counterparts when they're fired by trained soldiers then fine, but please look up "balance in videogames" before you suggest it.

Christ that's horrible to read. Not your fault, of course. Some of these suggestions have been made before and others are on their way to being implemented. For example, I believe there's already a thread on having ruined clothes and backpacks lose slots and, as far as I'm aware, rain will eventually cause sickness; so staying dry will be important. Fresh fruit I can sort of agree with. Doesn't really make sense that some fruit would be totally rotten and yet other fruit is pristine. Would be nice if you could get apples from what appears to be an orchard outside of Berezino. Weapons, I'll grant, are easy to find but I don't think there needs to be a huge decrease in their number. Mid-high tier weapons should be reduced, sure, but I'd like to see more .22s and shotguns. The fact that I can usually find an M4 or an SKS before a farmer's shotgun doesn't feel right to me. In regards to backpacks, I sort of agree. I think it should be much, much easier to make a makeshift bag. I spent nearly 3 hours the other day going from village to village looking for some rope and a burlap sack. I found the rope in the first 30 minutes. If burlap sacks and other similar materials were more readily available then that'd be good. I'd like to see more makeshift bags in place of mountain and taloon packs.

I don't think this idea should be put aside so hastily. The idea itself has some merit, but the way it's proposed to be implement is terribly thought-out. But the idea of a bandit or a hero having a very minor advantage or disadvantage when they newly spawn is kind of interesting. I'm not saying that the hero should spawn with an M4 and the bandit should spawn with a wrench up his arse, but I do propose something a little more subtle. Let's assume that there's some under-the-hood system whereby the game can accurately identify heroes and bandits. I don't know what this system would be, but let's assume it exists. Perhaps a new spawn hero could spawn closer to good loot. Maybe they have a better chance at spawning in Kamenka near the military base. Also couldn't hurt to maybe spawn them with no hunger or with a tin of beans or something (but no way to open the tin). Bandits, on the other hand, spawn in areas far from good loot. Perhaps they also spawn with slightly more hunger than the average player. So nothing game-breaking, but there should be little buffs and debuffs. Heroes get a very slight head-start while bandits are set back a little bit. Players who weren't bandits or heroes but who were identified as them anyway won't be hugely undeservedly rewarded or punished. Personally I'm not too fussed. The game seems fine as it is. However, I can see the merit of having little rewards or penalties depending on the playstyle of your previous life.

I don't want this thread to turn into a flame war so pipe down. As I see it, SA only has third-person because the mod did, and the mod only had third-person because Arma 2 did. SA is an alpha and it's supposed to be a hardcore game, so I see no reason why 3pp wouldn't be subject to change or removal. I've gotten used to first-person and although there are features of 3pp that I miss, having the game locked to 1pp makes the game much more rewarding and it assures me that there isn't a sniper on a roof staring at the floor so he can see me without me having any possibility of seeing him. If people want to mod the game to reintroduce 3pp then that's fine, but I believe that the base game should be locked to 1pp, and it should be balanced around 1pp. Just because the FoV is 90, that doesn't mean it should be increased to 180 with a third person camera because, as far as I'm concerned, it creates more problems than it solves. This is, of course, my opinion. I've only been playing hardcore for a couple of days now but I can easily see the benefits of it. To me, 3pp is just a tool for wallhacking and little more. On the other hand, perhaps it's good that the game caters to casual gamers and, as has already been stated, the hardcore community is fairly strong. It's not too hard to find a 15-player server before midnight.

There's a couple of zombie-related ideas floating around, so I decided to add my own. Zombies are nasty, half-dead people who's only goal is to beat people to death and then calmly walk away. But being half-dead I bet they sure get tired, but darn it, they want to beat people up so badly. So I propose three things. Firstly, zombies should lie in wait. They should lie in the road as though dead. In other cases they should be sitting around and doing other idle things. It's not like they'll always want to be standing around, is it? When you approach them they attack if they detect you. Secondly, zombie corpses shouldn't despawn. Thirdly, zombies shouldn't respawn unless the loot in their town respawns. I use zombies as a measure of how much loot there's likely to be. If I don't see any zombies then I assume that the place has been cleared. If I see loads of zombies then there's a good chance that there might be a fresh apple in one of those buildings. You enter a town full of zombies. You see a couple of dead zombies and a couple of open doors, and so you assume somebody's been here. You go further into the town looking for somewhere that hasn't been looted when one of the zombies, previously thought to be dead, leaps up at you. Zombies will become more of a threat, as even zombies thought to be dead can thump you one. You'll be able to survey towns more accurately. No more seeing that there are no zombies and deciding whether it's because somebody killed them all or because they just aren't there. Now you'll see the corpses (or the sneaky ones who are pretending to be corpses) and can conclude that somebody has probably beaten you to the punch. Thoughts?

Seen similar suggestions before, but I like it. If nothing else the military zombies should be tougher and faster.