Evil Minion

So of all the weapons he could choose he chose the pitchfork? Well done - such stupidity shall not go unpunished!

The problem with Hero/Bandit scores is that those will only reward some arbitrary playstyles that may or may not have any relation to true Hero/Bandit behavior. So all it does is giving you random points for following a fixed moral codex by the letter. Why would we want to have this? To make people follow a fixed moral codex by the letter. Do we really want this? No! The problem with public global rankings would put a great focus on metagaming and provide people with extremely biased information about others they did never meet and they never heard from. Why would we want to have this? To use metagaming to know if a certain player followed a fixed moral codex by the letter. Do we really want this? No! What we do need is an ability to simply recognise another player or survivor we met or heard from without some stupid algorithm telling us biased things about them so we can decide on our own if its a good or bad or honorable or pious or whatever morality you are following fellow. And if we do not know someone we should not get information about them for free. Think about a really nice and sweet girl that went really unlucky over the last year getting dumped by a couple of "seemed nice but was actually a jerk" boyfriends. Now think about someone following her around and telling everyone she meets that she is a slut.

People should stop confusing "balanced" with "built around my playstyle". Most people seem to have no idea at all what "balance" actually is. And people should stop complaining about things being exactly as you would expect them when bothering to use half your brain. On a warmer autumn day you will get hot when wearing winter clothes and sprinting all the time (not to mention that sprinting all the time is far from realistic) but when standing in the rain with only a T-Shirt you will get cold very quickly. Also the game aims for authenticity not necessary realism. Thats not the same here because nobody plays DayZ 24/7 - so some aspects (cooling off, warming up, healing, hunger, thirst etc.) are more authentic if you speed them up as otherwise their effect on gameplay would much lower than the effect of their real life counterparts on your life.

I would love to see such a penetration system in DayZ and I am positive it would greatly improve the gamplay and the gameplay options in PvP (as well as PvE in terms of shooting zombies and animals). The only issue I can see is people in third person mode shooting others through walls without them having the slighest chance to see it coming. But hey - you can always peek yourself or join a first person server, right?

I don't have any problem with the price increase - it was announced and makes sense from a development point of view: early stages got less features and more issues and by increasing the price there is also more motivation for the developers to improve the game as later purchases will bring more money. What I do not like is putting an Early Access Alpha on sale in Steam. Its not a finished game and the price is more of a donation to development. Putting it on sale is like tricking people into buying it which only results in people ending up complaining about having bought an unfinished game because it was on sale. Sales should be limited to finished games in my opinion.

Its rather the other way around here - for you the Blaze is better than the Sporter 22 because of your playstyle. You only compare the properties important to you ignoring the rest. For the Magpul its mostly placebo - the increased accuracy is not that significant and nothing justifies ranking a marginally lower disperson over massively increased Dexterity. At 200-400m range the difference between those stocks is not very high - its far more important to have the right optics here. And thats why I did not only include the final score but also the values its based upon. Take a look at the details and if you think I did something wrong there tell me. Because the results are purely a consequence of the scoring and if the final score is warped its mostly because of the weight put on the single aspects. Right now: Score = Damage + Dexterity + SQRT(InventorySpace * (AudibleRange + PerceivedNoise)/2) + SQRT(AmmoRarity * MagazineRarity) + SQRT(MaximumCapacity * RateOfFire) + SQRT(Dispersion * Optics) If anything the red part might need some improvement. Because thats where most of the criticism comes from.

True the Blaze is very good in the hands of a player who actually hits their shots. But thats making assumptions - if you are not a Marksman you only have two shots and the Sporter will still be effective on headshot. The Sporter 22 has some qualities that make it slightly more desirable in my (relatively broad) ranking: low noise, abundant ammo, quite some magazine capacity and somewhat better handlung (which increases your chances of hitting your target). The Magpul stock is overrated - with the latest dispersion chances the differences aren't all that noticable as they only really matter past 400m. On the other side for only slightly worse accuracy the CQB stock gives you a huge boost in Dexterity making the weapon much better in non-"sniping" situations.

Most of the scores are not based on my personal opinion - only the ones I explicitly listed as such and the way I put them together to get the tiers. The rest is based on the actual weapon values in relation to the other weapons values (see above for details). So you basically think I rated Dexterity too high and sniping capability too low? You might go by the Offense value then - here the Mosin is the best by far. It still sucks in close quarters. What 45 are you talking about? The FNX? Of course its not high tier - compared to the weapons up there is inaccurate, takes up a lot of your inventory space, has weaker optics and has a much smaller magazine size.

I think one of the major reason many players go for KoS lone wolf is that you can basically do everything on your own without too much hazzle making cooperation not worth it because of trust issues. In short: You don't really need other players and it doesn't really benefit you to try and make friends. One of the reason for this is "civilian tasks" being trivalized to simple, realtively short and easy actions leaving only combat as a viable option. If equipment maintenance boils down to carrying around the repair tools and using them on your items there is not much reason to offer repair services to others. If farming consists of planting seeds and coming back after a few a few minutes later everyone can get food without too much effort. Two things are to be considered to make civilian tasks more viable: Tools should be rarer but much more durable This way there is more emphasis on sharing tools with others instead of everyone carrying all the things needed. Rarer tools make it more conventient to team up with others and share work if something has to be done. However, in order for this to work tools need to be more durable, degrading much slower to ensure suitable performance for shared use. Sharing a sewing kit does not make much sense if it can only repair three pieces of clothing. Also maintenance tools would be affected by rarity as well so tools would need to work longer before getting repairs as repairs would not be commonplace anymore. Tasks should be more complex and time-consuming If you could do everything instantly you could just raid a village in between fights and use the tools you found there then return to the fight as if you never left. This marginalizes civilian tasks making them a mere annoyance within the gameplay. Things that have to be done but distract from the military playstyles. Now by making civilian tasks more complex their value and impact on gameplay is increased making for viable alternative playstyles. farming should take quite some time and plants should require frequent care for best payoffrepairing items should not be a simple drag&drop actions but require some materials and a little bit of time for the actual repairsbase building should take a lot of time and require a lot of resources but bases should be quite durable and not destroyed too easilytechnical maintenance should also require materials and also the disassembly of the weapon/device/vehiclecooking, medical tasks etc. should provide a higher interactivity instead of being one-action and/or waiting tasksmost tasks should play an animation to make them unsuitable to do while traveling or fightingberries etc. should be stackableanimals should be pretty shy and elusive as well as more durable (requiring aimed shots to take down) to make hunting more of a taskresources and food in particular should be much rarerthere should be a greater variety of illnesses, weather effects and suitable countermeasuresNow this is not meant to stop people from being fighters - if you want you should do it - but rather to make non-fighter playstyles more useful and viable. This gives more options to players who want to roleplay, build or help others and also makes it worthwhile for bandits to rob, raid and pillage. this also gives players something to do if there are no other players to interact with (as doing everything by yourself should keep you busy).

You are right! Why even bother with travel times - we need a teleport feature now. We should also be able to teleport directly to the next weapon, food item or ammo box.

You can have more than one by using different gamemodes and private shards. Having more than one character per shard/hive is not a good thing because you can only be active with one basically removing the other characters gear from the game. it would also destroy the impact of death as you can just switch to your other character and possibly even use this to get revenge and/or your gear back.

No, because a killer playstyle is not banditry - and as already mentioned has almost nothing to do with competition at the moment. The trust issues are another aspect - here the solution might be closer to player idfentification though an actual reward for cooperation would help as well. Thats why all those things should be considered in combination: increasing tool rarity without making them more durable makes them not suitable for sharing => kill and take tool for yourselfincreasing tool rarity without nontrivilizing tasks would still make the other person "useless" => kill and take tool for yourselfmaking tools more durable without making them rarer would eliminate the need to scavenge and putting yourself in riskmaking tools more durable without nontrivializing taks would have the same effectnontrivializing tasks without increasing tool rarity would still work but apply less pressure on people to interactnontrivializing taks without making tools more durable would emphasize hoarding of toolsNow a weight/stamina system would mitigate some of those issues but in the end tools should be: rare enough to make "maintain"/"repair" a viable option compared to "replace" rare enough to make finding a specific tool a not-too-easy task rare enough to avoid every survivor having one for him/herself durable enough to allow tool sharing with other survivors durable enough to function with lower travel speed and higher travel risk durable enough to survive a firefight Making one item rarer does not imply making other items more common. You can reduce the overall spawn rate to selectively affect the rarity of some item. Now realistic rarity does still mean "rarer then in 0.50" - sure you would find tools rather easy - but not specific tools (especially if the places don't match like farming tools in industrial areas). And you might not find multiple tools of the same type in one place. Thats just static rarity - basically what should happen if the loot spawns are left alone: You have a good chance of finding a tool in the right place but not a great chance to find multiple tools of the same type. Enter loot dynamics: Players take away stuff and and loot respawns. Here the chances of an item "respawning" (after being taken by a survivor) shouldn't be too high - otherwise it would be just like an infinite supply of tools. Which is hardly realistic. So spawn rates should be adjusted to allow for "unlooted" places with a more realistic amount of tools and "looted" places where the tools are taken away. In terms of game mechanics this means a loot spawn should stay in "looted" state for quite some time and on the other side "wild growth" (loot overspawning) should be avoided. The end result is most likely tools being rarer.

Overheating is not much of a problem - even on sunny warm DayZ you can simply put your top in your backpack and sprint all day long without ever getting hot. Maybe when they include really hot days but thats not the case right now. Still I think its a misconception that runspeed is fast because of the lack of vehicles. Its more a consequence of missing stamina/weight systems and survival elements. Right now most travels have only two things to care about - getting to your destination and getting attacked by other players. And the latter is rather unlikely because many players use server hopping instead of ingame travel routes or stay at the coast anyways. Also in fights having a fast sprint at your disposal is not a bad thing - but as some mechanics like stamina are missing you can use it permanently as a side effect. However, reduced runspeed would increase the value of vehicles which I think is a good thing. But the features we are really looking for are those that give us something to do on our travels (loot economy, server hopping/suicide fix, PvE elements, etc.)

The points is not to decrease banditry but to increase interaction be it friendly. neutral or hostile. Also its essential to include both parts in any consideration. Its true that by simply making tools more rare banditry would increase - but so would cooperation if only to defend against banditry. In any way "rare" does not mean "exceedingly rare" - but you do not want to provide every tool for every survivor to carry around. Then by also making the tasks nontrivial getting the tool is only a small part - you still have to put in some effort. And thats something the average bandit will probably not do - why kill someone over a Shovel if you do not plan on using a Shovel anyways? If you could claim the reward with a Shovel and little effort you would probably do it and claim the reward but with more complex and difficult tasks the average bandit will just not do it - and in consequence not claim the reward Unless he goes for a hunt which is risky (because the civilians we are talking about are still other players and probably very capable of defending themselves - this is not sniping helpless freshspawns). Its about providing options and opening possibilities for those who are willing to take them. If "civilian tasks" are too easy too access all their benefits will also benefit loner "bandits", "scavengers" etc. while by making them harder but more rewarding (compared to not getting the reward) people get the benefits either by working on them or by interaction (sharing, trade, banditry). One last note: Tools and items being common does not reduce banditry or KoS because then people would simply not have anying else to do. Currently the "hunting people for their gear" bandit is almost nonexistent. Most of the fights are unrelated to the loot situation and can be attributed to other players simply not having any "use" for the average survivor while being a potential threat/diversion.

"I know something is work in progress and has some issues but because those issues exist its bad and should not be ingame." I really don't get this kind of logic because all the issues you are talking about are not intrinsic to the concept of persistence but are rather specific issues with the current implementation that can be fixed - but not by fatalism.

Unfair advantage? No! In fact we should have more features to identify players or at least characters because thats one of the fundamentals for most friendly interactions and cooperation.

Thats why the task themselves should be non-trivialized. To do something it should not be enough to find the tool but you also have to invest time and effort - things you could leave to others if not interested in the work. Banditry is player interaction as well and this is not a suggestion about reducing banditry or KoS. Its about reducing the "screw others - I can do everything on my own" loners (or making this playstyle much harder) and not making the rewards of civilian labor easily available for everyone. If you eventually get this reward by working on it or by banditry or trading or whatever is your own choice. Sure most people would rather like to go for the combat route - but thats no reason to give them any non-combat reward for free. If you don't want to care about those "lowly weakling stuff" get a weakling friend who does it for you or find a random weakling you can rob or trade with. This also opens more stages for a fight. I don't think farming should be an immediate way to get some food but rather some kind of "pseudo endgame feature" for longterm survivors that increases the number of food items available.

How does weapon damage work?

We are fine, thank you! Unless we get murdered by crazy maniacs for no good reason. Good thing they mindlessly kill each other as well, unlike us.

Even if you don't (I looted the NWAF about two times in total and it didn't have that much of interest) you will still find yourself moving from one place to another for a couple of minutes. During this time W is pushed down and many people will use the Alt key to look around. Now a autorun feature would make this more convenient from the player perspective - it does not make the game easier or promote running straight to the AIrfield. Its just a matter of better game controls. If you want to stop people from running straight to the Airfield add a stamina system, make survival and PvE more of a challenge and generally give them more to do while on their way. Also helps replacing "running simulator" with "survival game".

I prefer inland PvP - coastal PvP gives you less of a rush (as you grow to expect it), is generally urban combat and has nothing-to-lose-freshspawns running around going for berserk punches. Though in the end I hope the game will gradually evolve from running/looting simulator with PvP at key points to a game that features alterating phases of longer (but still challenging) PvE survival periods and shorter intense PvP fights (that could break out any second). The last experimental patch had elements of this. Both - but technically I got the phrase from the show as I read the books in my native language.

Wrong subforum then - this is for standalone. Go here. Also you might put some actual content in your post as otherwise people could see it as advertising/trying to get views on your website.

Because most of your "PvPers" are in fact server hoppers who come back to coastal areas to use the gear they got with almost no effort on freshspawns and just happen to bump into each other. The rest are people who know this and follow up for the PvP or freshspawns who paid the iron price. An added benefit is that you could also abuse the fast respawn to get back to your corpse after you died. As long as server hopping/fresh spawn suiciding (aka teleporting around) doesn't get penalized the game dynamics will suck in this way.

I use a male voice when playing as a male character and a female voice when playing as a female character. My ingame name is a stealth pun towards the games name. I like to knockout people and unload their gun. If those people still aim at me after waking up they will die (enjoy your last click). I try to stick to the rules of gun safety and expect others to this this as well. Because of this accidentally aiming at me could result in a hostile response. I do not care about others gear - so if I fight I try to put as many bullets into their body as possible. The reward is taking down a hostile not getting his stuff.

Something useful: