Evil Minion

Allright I will consider the "Other" votes as votes for medieval armor pieces. Poll will go down in the next few days and the shirt poll will probably start next week.

I think its actually a good thing but has to be done right. Heavy firearms should be heavy to begin with - which means you have to go prone with bipod if you want reliably shoot something. Then the weapon and its attachments (including said bipod and the ammo belt) should be very rare making it hard to actually get it going - so most of the time even if you manage to find one you will have a less accurate, very heavy single-shot rifle - and then as ammo should be pretty rare anyways a weapon made for full-auto and suppression fire should eat through your precious rounds very quickly So you got a weapon that is potentially very powerful but also impractical and cumbersome. Which is great because if you manage to actually use it effectively you probably earned it. Either by surviving long enough to get it complete with attachments and ammo or by taking it from someone trying to get it and by overcoming its drawbacks. Anyways both machine guns and sniper rifles would probably work better if they changed prone in a way that requires you to either stand up or crawl to turn around (instead of just spinning around on your belly) - this way these weapons get a limited fire arc and become vulnerable to attacks from elsewhere or flanking.

"Civilian" does not have to mean "has no idea how to fire a gun". In fact gun some enthusiasts might be better a shooting things than many soldiers. Hunters in particular are practically snipers that shoot other animals instead of their own kind. Now I don't want to explain away improbable gun skills by saying "each survivor was an expert hunter that spent his spare time practising at the shotting range" but for the sake of gameplay its probably better not to apply things like "faulty stance", "bad grip" etc. to your character. Rather shift the skill to the player by adding things like sway, wind, bullet drop, bullet speed, fatigue for holding and so on. Now back to dispersion: This table has some values that may or may not be the correct ingame dispersion numbers. Now I don't know exactly which unit is used but radian seems reasonable. If its indeed radian - most rifles got too much: 0.006 rad correspond with ~75m effective range (seems reasonable for handguns)0.003 rad correspond with ~150m effective range (also reasonable for the weapons in question)0.002 rad correspond with ~220m effective range (Longhorn)0.0015 rad correspond with ~300m effective range (the right amount for the AKM - but not enough for the other weapons)0.001 rad correspond with ~440m effective range (which means the Mosin is about half as accurate as it should be)So while everyone is crying about sway the true issue is actually the current dispersion (given the values are correct and actually radians).

3 MOA at 300 yards is about the same as 3 MOA at 100 yards. Thats because MOA (minute of arc) just represents the angle. Now in reality projectile ballistics might make 3 MOA at 300 yards a little more accurate (because it manages to stay just as stable) but if a simplified linear dispersion model is used (and the game will most likely use one) the distance doesn't matter. But at first I also read it as 3 inch at 300 yards which would be 1 MOA - thats what a precision rifle got. Also keep in mind that 1 MOA dispersion leads to a 2 MOA group (because your shots spread in the opposite direction as well). The group is used as measure for accuracy.

Wear a T-shirt for a day and it won't be "Pristine" anymore. Shoot some rounds with a gun and it won't be "Pristine" anymore. Thats what I meant there.

Yeah it would be a good thing - but it doesn't. The actual point is "Server restart does reset time of day" which causes an eternal "groundhog afternoon" from 1400 to 1800 on many servers. Then "this should not happen" is feedback as well. What you are looking for are ideas for solutions and designs. I actually posted some of those in different topics but the point here is to point out that there are some issues at some points. Just negate the meaning of each line and you suddenly have a list of positive suggestions. ;)

Gathered some data* about weapon accuracy: the AKM should shoot reliably at up to 300m (~5 MOA)the SKS should shoot reliably at up to 400m (3-4 MOA)the M4A1 should shoot reliably at up to 500m (~3 MOA)the Mosin should shoot reliably at up to 800m (~2 MOA)the SVD should shoot reliably at up to 1200m (~1.2 MOA)All values are only based on dispersion without any sway, stance, fatigue, weapon/ammo damage, wind etc. taken into account. Thats what you should get if you are in prime condition and do everything right (so the values above are the distances where you should not miss because of dispersion alone). *Internet data that is.

"Civilian" people can actually hit things with assault rifles given minor training - especially with the newer NATO versions. Recruits can reliably hit targets up to 200 meters away with little training. I think the DayZ survivor should fit the category "has a little experience with guns" - meaning he/she knows how to use them but is not a professional shooter of any kind. Is there any source? Because my experience says different - but the last time I got shot by a Mosin was one or two patches ago and I don't like using the weapon. I still think if you do everything right your should be able to reliably hit your target at up to 800m (~1.9 MOA). There is a table about weapon values but I have no idea if it is correct or how to translate those values into something we can work with (what does 0.0015 dispersion mean?). PS: An Arctic Warfare seems to go down to <0.5 MOA accuracy (which is <0.25 MOA dispersion as accuracy is measured by the size of the group shot) so given the shooter handles it absolutely perfect you can "reliably shoot" human sized targets at distances up to 3000 meters meaning the shot seen in the video above (2475m) was indeed purely based on skill.

No hate - just Alpha feedback. I swear there was something about this on that disclaimer. :P

If they are developing a big project like DayZ they should not be afraid of adding a few more animations and item variants. For faces, and some minor body features etc. the "bald below your hat" method should work just fine and they might even be able to use the same animations for them - which might even be easier with a Skyrim-like character generator as you only need to animate the single features instead of every face separately. For bodies it might be a lot more work - so it seems reasonable to only provide a small array for choices. But that doesn't mean there should only be two choices available. Even adding one or two additional choices per gender would greatly increase variety and I think thats worth the effort (though variety is not the focus right now so its okay to add these features later).

Both are terrible ideas in my opinion as they enforce certain playstyles on players. Dedicated "play this way" areas/servers/... reduce the excitement and varieaty of gameplay as you know what to expect. Then an ingame store is terrible as well artificailly giving advantages to players that follow a certain way of playing. The only kind of ingame store should be the one where players decide to set up a trade post and the only kind of currency should be able to be earned ingame and agreed upon by (a group) players who want to participate in trade. I would like to have the ability to recognise players/characters I met before though so you could set up an ingame justice system. Then you might be able assign a bounty by knowing your targets face and name and being able to draw/write notes announcing the bounty. Sadly three things are missing right now: a fixed name for each character- doesn't need to be unique but should not be changeablea great variety of faces (maybe also body shapes) to make them a suitable way of recognitionthe ability to draw on surfaces (paper, walls etc.)*This might as well be player-based instead of character-based but I think a character-based system is enough as it offers more options to players while also being more forgiving (as your sins are purged upon death). Key is that everything should be set up ingame by players and inside the game dynamics instead of being imposed upon them by artificial mechanics. *Stop being afraid of people drawing penises already. First - it does not hurt anyone. Second - it takes some effort most of the kids are not willing to take (not asking for importing pictures - everything should be drawn by hand ingame). Third - most people prone to drawing penises should be pretty bad a drawing, making most of their pictures unrecognisable. Four - the possible creation of good drawings outweights the possible creation of bad drawings .Five - allowing this part of culture would actually help the social aspect of the game.

Thats a matter of amount then - the point is to have different effective ranges for different weapons and them being unreliable outside of that range. As I wrote above knowing your effective range and applying this knowledge should allow you to hit your target without worrying too much about dispersion. So if you have a Mosin aiming at the center of someones chest 800 meters away, already having factored in all deterministic effects you should indeed hit his chest but the exact point of impact could be in the upper chest or in the lower chest due to dispersion - or in the arms if your target turned sideways. However, dispersion should not cause a miss or headshot here. And a complex ballistic noise system would simply eat up resources without having any effect on gameplay - you would still get what seems to be random dispersion, just that it would originate in some complex calculation instead of a simple random numbers and the counter to this would still be getting close enough for your weapon to be reliable. Those resources could be used elsewhere - for example to create a complex ballisticsbias system that factors in wind, weather, temperature, your weapons intrinsic bias etc. Things you would actually notice.

I guess there are uses - if cooking food or waiting for a friend for example. I don't see players reading the whole book in one ride though. Some like the Russian Spreadsheet can also turn out to be quite useful - and the New Testament can be used to spread faith*. *To spread faith stand on top of the Police Station in Berezino and read it aloud without getting shot.

Oh look - the generic "fly around and drop grenades" cheater finally has made it to DayZ. I imagine some Russian hacker sitting at home enjoying the money of soon to be banned kids from all over the globe.

I don't think players should start with too many useful items. You should have to find nearly everything. Even the flashlight is almost a little much - it's a little help for freshspawns at night. Spawning players with items would cause them to value life even less than before. Also being able to find all information written on books you can find on the map cripples the exploration part of the game and making these books too common also borders handholding. So informational books should not cover all possible subjects (only the more complicated basics), be quite rare and of course they should be written in character ("If you feel like your body is about to burst you should stop eating because otherwise you will most likely throw up." instead of "If the stuffed state turns orange stop eating.").

Actually not - it would just require another approach to nutrition and thirst. I would like to scrap the HP part though - this one really looks like punishment for me and health is a bitch to get back (a good thing that I would like to see expanded). On the other side your character should also slowly get dry over time and regain stamina while you are offline. Also your stomach should reduce - it would be stupid if you loged out in fully stuffed state and after two months of absense you come back - hungry, thirsty but even the smallest piece of food would make you vomit. As for nutrition and thirst: What about adding a fixed cost to logging out - this way "off server paths" get some other cost than waiting time and it would give players who don't have time to play often less of a disadvantage. The limits should also assure you don't drop into dangerous levels - not below the amount you spawn with (hungry, not thirsty). This way by having a a bag of rice and some water even a player who logged out months ago would still get back to healthy pretty quickly.

He is obviously just helping mom. Met a single squeaker until now - he was a decent guy.

No it won't. Every weapon has "random" dispersion - the only difference is that in a simulation you use a few pseudo-random numbers while in reality there is a complex dynamic system with myriads of parameters. I don't want a complex dynamic system with myriads of parameters in game as it will eat away my hardware resourcesusing up performance that could be used for more important ingame elements fot the sole reason of being able to say "its not random dispersion" - the effect will be exactly the same. But I also don't want an overly simplified system that changes ordinary survivors that found a sniper rifle lying around into magic supersoldiers that fire with pinpoint accuracy regardless of weapon. Not only does it hurt the gameplay (which has sniping as an element but not as its main purpose) its also by no means authentic. All this would do is giving an unrealistic advantage (pinpoint accuracy) to a group that doesn't need it (snipers) for no reason at all. The guy in the video is a trained sniper with a dedicated sniper rifle and spotter that set a record with the shot. Thats not what he (let alone an ordinary person) could do on a regular basis. The fact that he hit twice over ~200% maximum effective range (an average person hitting 50% of his/her shots*) did not mean he had a 100% chance of hitting. And the exact point of impact was indeed "random". Two shots are hardly enough data here (MOA of an average AWM?). *Which means my suggestion above is most likely a buff relative to reality.

Or just throw in a reasonable amount of randomness - same effect, less performance loss, less work. In fact if the developers released a "hyper realistic dynamic bullet flight noise system" you would not see any difference from a random dispersion system. By reducing it to a few elements you can actually calculate in you would actually create a less believable system where highly skilled players could take shots not even the best sniper in the real world would be able to take. Which also hurts the overall gameplay and experience. Now you should be able to hit a human sized target within your weapons effective range if you completely overcome bias (sway, wind, weather etc.). Noise should only affect smaller targets within your effective range or targets outside of your effective range. I think ingame dispersion would be perfect when the group you shoot at your weapons effective range is about as wide as the torso of your character model. Outside a weapons maximum range* even the best shooters should not have a 100% chance to hit their (human-sized) target. There should be multiple skills necessary: keeping your weapon and yourself in good conditionusing ammo that is in good conditionadjusting to exterior factors (wind, weather, distance, target movement etc.)adjusting to interior factors (sway, stance, getting your aim on target etc.)knowing and adjusting to your weapons effective rangeIf you manage to fullfill all of those prerequisites you should be rewarded by hitting your target. Not just by "point faster, click faster" - thats how casual games do it. *Which is - if I am not mistaken - ~800m for the Mosin.

Right - wind is bias whereas dispersion is noise. Random dispersion simulates things like: your rounds not having pefect shapeyour barrel not having perfect shapeyour rifling not being perfectyour round being loaded insie your weapon in a certain waydust, microorganisms and other small particles in both the weapon and airair turbulences (e.g. caused by a butterfly two kilometers away)earth magnetismthe earth not being perfectly roundedthe gravitation force caused by distant planetsthe gravitation force caused by objects on earthair pressuremagnetism and oter forces applied by objects near youthe minor tilt differences you have when aiming...Now simulating all those is silly thus random dispersion. The user won''t see any difference so why add a complex resource eating simulation that probably won't even cover all the influences let alone the right propotions. Even the best shooter in the world with the best weapon in the world will ever hit the same spot twice because of this. Of course this part should be reasonably small - just strong enough to reflect the effective ranges of weapons. No weapon should be pinpoint accurate - thats just as stupid as having zero sway. The current dispersion doesn't seem to much either - its just that its affected by attachments that shouldn't affect it (scopes, buttstocks, handguards, bipod) Now bias - thats something the game is missing (yet). I would really like to see wind and weather effects that chance the ballistics of bullets. Even weapon bias would be interesting - each non-pristine weapon has a slight deviation in a certain direction that is bigger the more damaged the weapon is (condition should also increase dispersion). Thats something you should be able to get used to (given you keep your weapon in good condition).

Also they added an AK-101 instead of an AK-74 variant. Oh wait... Sway does indeed simulate people not being able to hold their weapon perfectly still. And random dispersion is just good enough to simulate the many small effects that cause... dispersion.

Its basically handgun sway - and the scope makes it worse because of the zoom factor. Also most attachments should not affect dispersion but sway, recoil and dexterity (can't repeat this enough). Still not as bad as everyone wants it to be and also far less luck based - you can see the sway, you can adjust to it. I still agree that there should be other factors like wind, weather etc.

Like, say... the whole topic? Your "arguments" are: "I like sniping.""I want it to be a viable tactic.""I feel personally attacked when sniping gets nerfed.""Your arguments don't count because only my arguments count."

Maybe make this clear at a point where most people are confronted with the early access model. Especially that the game is <33% finished as opposed to >50% (thats what most people here seem to think). If there is some kind of "progress bar" somewhere - its not visible enough because I have missed it for months.

"Hey - I got no more arguments so I am going to insult people who disagree with me!" Sorry, but you just confirmed that you are a 1337sn!p0rkid who is crying because shooting people over long distances is not easymode anymore. Sway for me isn't "ridiculous" - if its for you you are most likely out of breath, in pain or expect the bipod to reduce sway (now the bipod should not fit on a Mosin in the first place). It seems to be much because of the LRS zoom factor but it is not. You are also completely missing the point: Why would a game like DayZ have unrealistically easy sniping? Sorry, its not about hurting you or your favorite playstyle its about not giving you an advantage you shouldn't have. Then you are talking about weapon damage - again in a self-centered way because weapon damage does not only affect snipers. It should depend on both the cartridge fired and the weapon used (a longer barrel increases bullet speed/energy as does a - high quality - manual action). And please stop thinking that everyone who disagrees with you just wants your favorite playstyle nerfed to hurt you. I couldn't care less about your personal feelings here.