Xianyu

So, what is one major problem with DayZ? No penalty for death. For people like me, death is a lark. I can just go get more shit, rather effortlessly. People have been talking about making zombies much harder, to make dying more of a problem... But still, once you get that gear, you're back where you were. Where do survivors come from? They wash up on shore. So... why not have the 'backstory' be something like they've been adrift at sea for weeks. Barely any water, negligible food. Once you're back on the mainland, you can get proper food, and proper hydration, so you start getting your strength back. There were hints from Rocket (apparently) that the better you look after your character in the long run, the better off he'll be in terms of health. Why not start everyone at a very low bar? Imagine if you had a 10 day old character, that has been properly fed for all ten days, and has his strength back. He can run fast, take a decent amount of damage, maybe his hands don't shake as much when aiming a gun. Basically, he's healthy. And then you die, you loot your body. In the current mod, you'd be exactly where you were when you died, because you got all your gear back. But if the standalone has 'sickly' starter characters, then when you die, you lose something that you can't get back instantly. You can't just find an item that makes you instantly healthy again. You have to fight malnutrition the old-fashioned way. And suddenly, character lives aren't measured in 'gear' but in 'health'. A character's worth to YOU, won't be defined by something completely recoverable like simple loot. Of course, if your character only ate junk food and soda for those ten days, then dying wouldn't be much of an issue... but a healthy character would be a much more potent thing to lose when compared to a sickly beach washup.

not... really? 'Level's brings to mind experience and tangible structure. Starting out malnourished is not the same as starting out 'at level 1' because if you fuck up and eat junk food for three days straight, you'll be right back to being malnourished, won't you?

You know where you should hop? Right the FUCK off of the DayZ servers, down to your local hunting store, and pay for a REAL ghillie suit. Don't ever play DayZ again. That is my advice, you abysmal excuse for a gamer.

Hurrrrrr you're removing the most overpowered guns in the game! DURR hurR DuRrRRRR! YOU'LL TAKE THEM ALL AWAY NEXT! That's exactly how you sound.

I think what happened was like, Rocket was all 'look at this cool new shit we're doing. We need people to test it'. That was the original 'closed alpha'. It supported a certain amount of people, and was built on the old client/server architecture same as Arma. Skiddies could wreak havoc pretty easily. This 'new' closed alpha is using the new client/server architecture so that it can all be tested for bugs and game-breaking shit once more than two people get on a server at once. Once the closed alpha testing bugs are ironed out (there's bound to be a few, at least), then we'll probably get the open alpha. But it all comes down to the new architecture. They rewrote the client/server protocols entirely. One spelling mistake in thousands of lines of codes could end up with weapons being unable to be used, server crashes, etc etc etc etc etc. Now that it's complete though, things should speed up massively (I sincerely hope so). I want to throw money at this project already!

You're talking to someone who ONLY uses the AS50, pretty much. I play with other people most the time, and I'm their overwatch/countersniper. So yeah, I always pick up the AS50, but I hate the fucking thing, too.

I am honestly surprised at the amount of votes for replacing/removing the as50/m107. I thought it would be much lower compared to keeping it in, when you look at how many people actually USE the as50.

The dragunov has a really shit scope, though. It's not very good at 'long' ranges.

Oh god, the butthurt rage once this patch drops is going to be delicious. I've wanted the one-hit-kill wonder-wands gone forever, and they're finally getting kicked right the f- out the door. Thank you Razor. I want to marry you. But what with the superweapons being gone and banned, what're you all gonna do for firepower now? Personally, I'm pretty fine the CZ550. The lack of zeroing on the DMR is kinda a turn-off to me. Probably because of the variable zoom levels making it impossible to know where your bullet will fall without extensive practise. Chest shots with the CZ550 is where it's at. Unless I can get my grubby mitts on an M24. But still. Removing a weapon that arguably more than half of all players use to get an unfair advantage at every range. There is no better definition of a 'game changer'. The assault rifles are viable again! \o/ Only problem I see is that vehicle don't have a one-shot-stop. I mean, you can aim for the tires on a normal vehicle, but what the fuck do we do about helicopters? Helicopters were already ridiculously overpowered, considering the fact that they traverse the map so quickly, and can fire on you accurately from over a kilometre away. Two guys in a helicopter will be pretty much invincible now.

I'm hoping that we can get a mod or something that would give the .338 'anti armor' rounds or something. Nothing too unrealistic, but something for taking out helicopters. Because yeah, helicopters are hovering platforms of death with very little ways to take them down.

On the very real chance that I'll anger the gods of flame wars, why exactly were the 50 cals removed?

Well you're going to have to learn to aim for the head. Have fun!

Not particularly. Chernarus is very, very open. While I can't possibly think of any time when firing on 800 deliberately is a good idea, being shot at from further than 500 metres away is a possibility in almost any part of the game world. Walking into Cherno or Elektro, for a start. Going near that helicopter crash Being anywhere on the coast. being anywhere near Stary Sobor. Traversing the open fields anywhere in the northern parts of the map. Basically, you can get fired at from 500 metres away just by walking/running/crawling into town. Perhaps in the standalone it will be true that being fired on from long range means you fucked up and revealed yourself, but no one takes the TIME to plan their approach to towns and spend the least time exposed to the world at large, because of the simple fact that the zombies that appear give away your position like a giant red beacon. Smash and grab is the only SAFE way to get in and out, or you increase your likelihood MASSIVELY of there being someone waiting on the outskirts of the town to pop you in the head because you just spent an hour creeping through instead of ten minutes sprinting.

So basically, what you're saying is that sniping in this game doesn't fulfill your idea of what 'true' sniping is? And you need 50 calibre sniper rifles to do any 'skillful' sniping? ................................................ I rest my case.

Bahahahaha. I want you to go on the public hive once .50's are removed. People like you will be easy, easy, easy, easy game. 'Oh man, the effective range of their sniper rifles is only eight hundred metres now! We can run around as much as we like!' And then bam, you're unconscious, bleeding, mostly dead and probably reaching for the alt + f4. DMR, M24, and CZ550 are still very, very deadly in the right hands.

God, the slippery slope argument gets more and more stupid the more times I hear it. Does the M14, FN FAL, M24 etc work perfectly at all ranges and do 39,000 blood damage a shot? No? Then kindly STFU. You people are the worst kind of whiners. 'Waaah, don't remove the obviously broken equipment! You'll take away ALL THE GUNS NEXT!'

Still, something anti-vehicular is pretty much needed. Especially against helicopters with mounted weapons. I'm all for 50 cals if they have enough disadvantaged to be used as anti-material and 'situational' weapons rather than the be-all, end-all of all firearms in the game. The massively increased 'blood damage' number is, if I remember correctly, because vehicles use the same 'blood damage' formula. It needs to be excessively high because vehicles have a retarded amount of 'blood' to get through before they're done.

I want that weapon in the game, as well as a 'super high end' sniper rifle like the Steyr HS .50. Bolt-action, single shot, 50 cal goodness. Give it 200,000 damage on a bad day so that it can take out vehicles and helicopters (the AS50 does 174,000). The single shot, bolt action nature of the weapon would completely preclude it from being used against 'normal' targets except by people who really know their shit. It would take AGES to put in a new round and line up your target again. But for the really decent sniper, it could allow them a guaranteed OHK against stationary targets out to the max view distance. And it satisfies the 'anti vehicle' role while not being a 'super weapon' in that it would be better against infantry than any other sniper rifle.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. You should play differently. This is not a matter of different taste or different playstyles, this is a matter of the weapon that facilitated long-range engagement beyond 600 metres being removed from the game completely. It's like saying 'oh look, all the melee weapons have been removed' and you sitting there going 'well I'm still going to run at people and melee them ANYWAY' and me saying '... are you fucking stupid?' With no .50 cals, you are either going to have to A) change your gamestyle, or B) waste your ammunition hitting targets 4 times in the chest and watching them retreat to cover because you're deliberately engaging targets outside of the optimal range of the weapon. Yes, you can play any goddamn way you please. You can run around with a makarov. You can be a badass with a crowbar. You can kill zombies. You can kill players. You can use your fucking sniper rifle as a snorkel for all I care. But without 50 cals in the game, you cannot then sit there and say 'well I don't have a one-hit wonder wand any more, these guns suck at anything above 800 metres away' and then, when someone tells you, repeatedly, that your only option is to move closer, refute that by saying 'oh but that's not sniping'. When they remove the 50 cals you will have to play the game differently. Put a teaspoon of cement in a glass of water and harden the fuck up. The days of easy sniping beyond 800 metres are numbered. At least for now. I have no problem with long-range sniper rifles. So long as they're not game-breaking. The AS50 was the definition of game breaking. Super accurate at super ranges, a super long range scope, instant OHK no matter where it hits you, negligible recoil allowing follow-up shots from a semi-automatic platform, ability to accept two different types of ammunition, destroys vehicles, doubles as a close-range semi-auto assault rifle... and even though it's 'rare' over half of all people have one and at least 90% of the user base wants one because it's so ridiculously better than every other weapon. Yeah, and people wonder why I have a problem with the AS50. The problem I have with long-range, 'wonder wands' in Arma is that there's no skill to their use. Find the range. Push some keys. Put the crosshairs on them. Click your mouse. ??? Profit! And this problem was massively, massively compounded by the AS50, because it's a semi-auto OHK. And the Chernarus map itself is pretty much an open field with some tree cover every now and again. I've seen more vegetations in the arid countryside of Australia, AFTER scrub pulling for cattle grazing. A bolt-action lupua with an effective range of 1000M or so would be pretty nice. But it would still be abused. Skill + ability + practise >>>>>>>>>> game mechanics. And right now, game mechanics count at least five times as much as personal skill, ability, or practise. I just think that if you want to kill someone at 1000 metres, then you should be fucking good at the game. Not fucking good at combing loot spots until you find a rifle that does it all for you.

Which is why I'm saying 'adapt and overcome' to the lack of 50 rifles. I'm going to have to do the same thing. But every disadvantage foisted on you by the loss of the 50's is the same disadvantage foisted on others. Sometimes, you might spot someone in the distance through your binoculars that are just unfeasible for you to fire at. At which point, take cover so you're not seen, and move closer, until you can fire at them. If you've been sniping as long as you say you have, you should be a decent enough shot by now that 400-600 metre shots aren't an impossibility. And that's still a damn long way away. I've never had my hands on the SVD, I'll be perfectly honest. I don't go anywhere near the barracks because I feel that it is a stupid, stupid ridiculously stupid map design to have the rarest weapons and equipment appear in two static locations only a few hundred metres from eachother, that are five rooms with a single entry point to the building. So I've stuck with the AS50 and the M107 because they're the best at super long range work. But the question still remains. At what point in DayZ are you going to be firing on someone from more than 900 metres away unless you're trying to set the engagement range at that distance? Even if you're camping, waiting for someone; defending; moving into a town across a superhuge open field (which is fucking stupid in the first place), the argument of move closer still pretty much sums up your options. And I think it creates an interesting game dynamic. You can spot people further out than you can comfortably kill them. I think that's pretty true to the real world, as well. Just because you can see someone at 900 metres away, doesn't mean you kill them. Adapt.

Which is why you have to practise. Or move closer. When the max range of all weapons is 800 metres bar one single rifle, either find that rifle, or move closer. Adapt to changing circumstances. Stop playing like you have this magical zone of death that stretches the entire view distance around you. Learn to use cover when approaching towns so that you can GET within the optimal range of your sniper rifle before you expose yourself to anyone inside the town. Furthermore, the CZ and the M24 both have zeroing up to 800 metres. So you know how hard it is to hit a target at 800 metres? Try this. Push 'page up' until the zeroing reads '800', put the crosshairs DIRECTLY on their head, and pull the trigger. Maybe adjust up and down a little bit if they're not exactly 800 metres away. That's where practise and skill come into play. You know, the two things that aren't required by the wonder-wand 50 cals.

Oh look, someone who mistakes heated arguments as personal attacks and back it up with passive-aggressive douchebaggery :D Move. Closer. Do we really need a weapon that hits beyond 800 metres with an ensured kill/knockout? The CZ550 and the M24 both have effective ranges of 800 metres. Please, tell me a situation where you would be fired from, at ranges of over 800 metres, where you would need to kill them to be able to move? With no 50's, the effective range of ANY weapon in the game is a maximum of 800 metres. Bar the SVD Camo, which has an effective range of 1200 metres, and is retardedly rare. Simple fact is, if you're sniping from beyond 800 metres, you aren't doing it for looting purposes or protection purposes, you're doing it for sport. When I'm overwatch for my friends, the furthest away I get is 400 metres or so. In my opinion, the only time you'll even engage an enemy at 800 metres or more is when you want to. Not when you need to. Within 400-500 metres, which is definitely an acceptable sniper range, the M24, DMR, and CZ550 will put someone on the ground with a round to the chest, and will kill them with a headshot. And if someone is firing on you from over 1000 metres with anything other than a 50? Point at him and laugh. Because he's doing it wrong. P.S. I'm pretty sure a shot from a sniper rifle to the head is a OHK regardless of the range. If I get into a one-in-a-million point of needing to shoot someone beyond 800 metres, I'm STILL going to aim for the face. Closer range just makes it that much easier. Practise on goats/cows. Or, you know, those pesky zombies.

Why is this a problem? I don't aim for the head. Not consciously. I try to hit my targets centre-mass. And when I'm using a sniper rifle that does 39,000 blood damage on a BAD DAY, that's perfectly acceptable. But with an M24 or a DMR, shooting someone in the head is an instant kill. No alt +F4 when you're instantly dead. At least, I should hope not. where's the problem? Because if any of this seems too difficult or unrealistic to you in any way, I suggest you spend more time in the shooting range.

960 metres. There's your problem right there. The 50's were the only rifles viable for such 'extreme' shooting. Try moving closer if you're using a 7.62. Anywhere within 500 metres should be a knock out with a single round.

Yeah, if they have a full blood, a direct hit from the M203 won't kill them. http://dayzdb.com/database/m203-he It goes 8000 damage on a direct hit, apparently. 'Kill' radius is 5M, and 10M for minor damage. The 'kill' radius is for arma, I'm thinking, where health levels aren't raised.