ColdHeat

No, that wasn't what I said. It's not so much the amount of guns that's worth to be overhauled but the distribution and the currently extremely easy accessability as it quite takes away the challenge and fun part of having to build/earn a gun; to have to survive without one for quite some time and to rely on your survival and social/negotiation skills instead of just grabbing a gun within 10-30 minutes and live trigger happy from that moment on. Just as DannyRed said: sometimes the best games are those which force the hard way as the only possible way down your throat. Yet once people get basically a green card from the devs to take a shortcut, it corrupts the whole concept. Opportunity makes a thief. Regarding the "Realism = Tons of Guns" subtopic: After 5 years and with 5% of the population still intact - which is a lot - guns would disappear from bases pretty quickly, especially since the Chernarus bases aren't exactly big. Personally I would grab and stash every gun I could find just in case. Yet the biggest problem would possibly be the shortage of ammo sooner or later. In any case from a gaming perspective if you have too much guns and ammo available all the less capable weapons become useless too quickly. Bows, Crossbows, the 0.22 peashooter, the B95, the IZH43 and so on.

Regarding the realism discussion: The good thing about Chernarus is that it's fictional, so the devs can forge the reality the way they/we like it and make it equally balanced yet believeable. The comparison to the Czech republic, russia and the US might sound reasonable yet the result (a huge amount of guns and 90+ % of the population being turned to zombies which don't use guns) would be a world filled with guns which would be game breakin for every postapocalyptical survival scenario immersion and challenge wise. Otherwise we could just spawn with a B95 right in our hands. So let's remind ourselves that this is a fictional game and not a simulation.

It's clear that this is an alpha and that the devs have most likely an idea of how the finished game should look like which will be different from what it is now for testing purposes yet this is also a crucial phase to name the players hopes and wishes and to test them as well. In the end it's never wrong to discuss about something instead of "just hoping for the best". It's also clear that there are multiple ways to balance the game and to increase the immersion. I also welcome the idea of less ammo, of different gun conditions and jams yet in order to make a "lot's of guns but also with malfunctions" scenario actually reasonable and not utterly frustrating there have to be only few good guns around. So we're basically back at my initial point because otherwise you would just drop your semi optimal gun once you found one of those better guns which are currently too easy to find (not only due to their amount) and the implementation of damaged guns would become only a waste of code. All that "OP is possibly bad at PVP" or "join full servers" is offtopic babble as it misses the point. No hard feelings guys. Currently you have the choice between the extremely easy way (joining low populated servers to quickly get the awesome gear everyone is craving for) and the extremely hard way of joining high populated servers which is a quite masochistic experience since in order to have a reasonable chance to actually find anything and not to be shot without warning common sense tells you to avoid all the good areas and travel for hours from village to village, knowing only by the look of the buildings or an open door that they will be entirely useless to you. How productive. Not to forget that these full servers are mainly populated by guys who already got their stuff (possibly also not few due to the "easy way") and now are only looking for an easy target to test them on. Neither of these two extremes actually makes much sense currently gaming wise.