Snablas

Wouldn't hurt with something in the middle too, so that we aren't just running up and down Chernarus (spelling?)...

A quick post: I see that we'll be spending a whole lot of more time in buildings when the standalone arrives. This has me slightly concerned, seeing as the buildings in DayZ haven't got any zombies spawning inside them. This means that the exposure to zeds will be much less, and that the tension in the game stemming from zeds therefore will be much less. In buildings you're always "safe" from the zeds. Why? Wouldn't it be great to stand behind the door, listening for the moans of the undead? To enter a house, only to hear zeds walking around on the upper floor? Could we please see zombies spawning inside buildings for the standalone? The spawn rate wouldn't have to be as high as in the open, seeing as zeds are more dangerous in the cramped spaces of building interiors.

So is it in or not? Because I've never really encountered it before. At the very least, the spawn rate must be dramatically lowered inside. Or am I just imagining things? =(

I am also not convinced. The jumping over the fence looks a bit awkward, I mean, the vault animation in DayZ the mod definitely looks authentic, a bit tiredly and like something someone who has been stuck in the woods for several dayz would do. I am also a huge fan of having to stop to shoot. It adds just a fraction of a second before you pull the trigger, like your character has to take aim. It simply looks more controlled, and like the real way to handle a gun. If those things are fixed are fixed, I don't really mind the cross hair or inventory... Although I hope Rocket will still force us to sit down to open our inventory, or at least the backpack.

Will there be Heinz?

I don't know if this counts as a big disadvantage, but I think it's worth mentioning: I was in cherno, on a server with surprisingly little loot as newspawn. IRL it was late in the evening but in the game it was a cloudy day. I ran through almost every house, exchanging hits with zeds along the way, but as my food was running low and my character was getting increasingly thirsty I decided it was time to take the big risk- The... Supermarket That damned graphic glitch was having its primetime. The zombies were scarce. And even though there wasn't any food anywhere else, the supermarket was filled to the brim. I went and started filling my backpack, checking the back first and saving the deathtrap of the storefront for the end of my looting. And very well, as I was grabbing the last supplies, someone entered through the main enterance, carrying a handgun. I looked at him, slowly walking backwards towards the back door with my axe in my hands, repeating "Friendly, don't shoot". The man was silent, but before I could exit, a shot hit the wall behind me. I turned around, sprinting out the exit with the man coming after me. Which were my options? Attacking him with my axe? Run around the exterior of the building, hoping he would take the wrong turn? Run straight for the buildings around the supermarket, and hide? The storefront faced the big, open road leading away from the city, and the back of the store faced a big wall with an opening right at the back door of the supermarket. However, between the supermarket and church was also a big, open street. He would have a clear shot at me. Went out the exit, through the wall, and turned around to hug it. The wall was high and impossible to see through, but thanks to third person I could see the supermarket. I didn't have to wait long for the man to come after me. As he walked through the opening in the wall, he checked both sides. Sadly, he checked the wrong side first. My first blow landed on his back, breaking his legs. I had quite a bad aim in third person, so of my subsequent blows only one or two landed. He tried to get up but couldn't, and instead tried to shoot me but turning around. However, since the turn speed while prone is much slower than while standing, I was able to circle him without him being able to hit me. At last, he just gave up. As he was about to die, he used his mic for the last time. Cursing, he told me he would come after me again when he respawned. I remained quiet, as his final insults stopped and the server anounced him dead.

I think the point of the crashsites and towns is that the soldiers you loot from would have placed out markers for those, just like a player would have. However, it doesn't make much sense with it updating. The ideal would ofc be maps that would be treated like an item- So that you would have to go find another map in order to get updated locations. But, I guess the zombies wouldn't update the map either...

So lately (and with lately I mean for quite some time) there have been a lot of threads complaining about the KoS attitude in DayZ and the amount of hackers. I see a lot of good suggestions about making zombies harder, but I think that the real problem is something a little different. Please bear with my english. It's not top notch. We can all agree on that DayZ is about, or at least should be about, survival, right? Fightig to survive in a zombie-infested world. I think that the issue lies in that surviving is too easy, and the zombies are not the issue. Right now, anyone can survive for a very long time as long as they have a little water and a couple of cans of those sweet tasting beans (don't forget to give me beans BTW!). If you're out in the woods, you're unlikely to break your leg or get an open wound, so you barely need any morphine or painkillers. Heck, you might barely need food or water if you have a canteen, hatchet and a hunting knife. You get a crossbow, and you won't need ammo either. And here the fun ends, because living in the woods is a perfectly good life for a family in real life, where the only goal is survival and where you actually feel good for just staying healthy. But for a game to be fun you need drama: So, when you're in the woods you have almost beat the game! No zombies to worry about, and players are a very rare sight. If you increase the zombie difficulty, you just endorse this playstyle. The only thing to do now is to get a jeep, or a chopper, or a better weapon. And then you're "the master"- You could help newspawns, but they'll probably just kill you. You don't need their help, and they'll by all probability just disappear soon anough, not granting you anything. And at any time, they can rob you of hours of hard work. Some people say the answer is that when you reach that stage, you commit suicide and start over, again having your adrenalin pumping. Will you survive? Death is at every corner. Untill you find the mentioned items, then you need to kill yourself again. I say, the solution is to do just this. The players shall not survive like this! It's a disgrace to the DayZ-name! Let's make the game harder, let's make the woods a dangerous place. Roaming zombies? I actually think this is a good idea. Zombies are eazy to avoid as it is, a couple more to torment the bush-wookies and Bear Grylls couldn't hurt, and it's not as if they would make roaming the woods impossible. And it's actually quite realistic, who wouldn't run to the woods when your neighbour tries to eat you? Furthermore, diseases. It sounds like there's diseases planned for the big cities, to scare you away. Why not in the forest (and to comment on poo spreading diseases in the city, even in the apocalypse it's not like you're going to be wading in poo). Dangerous animals- I know a bear won't kill you, but a bite from a raccon might well if you're just living in the woods without any antibiotics. And make food more scarce! Make us refine the water, just drinking out of a random lake is sure to get you infested with a parasite. Reduce the amount of food, even in the cities, so that you can't just grab food from a couple of houses and live of that for the rest of your bandit-life. On the topic of zombies, I think zombie- types is a great idea. As I think Rocket himself said, no acid-spewing-bat-zombies, but I was thinking of a really old, degenerated zombie that would appear dead, but once you're within a cople of meters, hell, once you've started to loot it, it would attack. And of course, since it is a zombie lying down with no legs, make it attack the legs first. The "booby trap-zombie". Remember it from the movies, the little fellow who kills one of the characters right after they survived that huge attack? A zombie which would make you consider wasting some ammo, just making sure it's dead. On the opposite, a very new, fresh zombie might still have a shred of humanity left. It screams as it runs towards you, attracting some friends. The pack of zombies. And make the "normal" zombies hit harder. Of course, this would be worthless if there wasn't a big need to go into the cities. I think that this would make "snipers" (sorry if that term is misused, I think you know what I mean), and bandits just killing without looting more rare since the time to "beat" the game will be increased. They are not just killing for the heck of it, they are killing because they need it, and every time they don't need it they are taking an unnecessary risk, a risk that would take a lot of time to recover from. Also, make the terrain harder to navigate and cross. So that we don't simply contact that member who died on steam, but start recruiting new members since we need people. I think that this would make the game more fun, for everyone.

Sounds good. Perhapse we don't need all those fancy pancy "survival views" but rather just keep it text-based. Then, it shouldn't be so heavy on the system, right? Fully support this. How about the game doesn't tell you what you need to use, but you have to figure it out on your own? Using an in-game catalouge or something like that. It would really put some worth into an experienced medic. It would also make the game's medical-system much more intriguing.

Of course. I think what is really unique in DayZ is the "needs", the needs to eat and drink and apply antibiotics. I think that killing other players make surviving too easy. Attacking another player should really make you think: Is this player valuable to me? Is his loot? Is attacking him a danger to me? Have I got enough bullets for a prolonged firefight? Right now, a lee enfield is a bit of a "click to win" button. Especially out of town.

Swedish guy, DE.... Something. Think it was three numbers. Called me crazy axeman and ran, but when you found out we were from the same country we teamed up. Went to cherno, you took the lee enfield since I was content with my axe. We found each a backpack. Then, server connection seperated us. I'm sorry =(

TL;DR is bad for the brain. Anyway, I do think stealth should be more important. But I still think zombies should be quite slow. The numbers is the way to go.

I, atleast, am not satisfied with the difficulty in killing other players. I do, occasionly, play the bad guy and when I do a single kill can sustain me for almost a whole life. PVP in this game is too easy. Surviving is too easy. I think increasing the players need of supplies will make both harder. People who find good gear will be more afraid of losing it, and that can only be a good thing.

Well, I can gear up without killing a single player within perhapse thirty minutes. Perhapse your way isn't the only way? I think a lot of players kill others because of that this almost always make you advance in the game. If others weren't so geared up, then I don't think people were to be so inclined to kill them. Besides, how would you decrease unnecessary banditry?

This, exactly. People are bored, the start of the game is too easy, especially if you start living in the woods.

Of course! I might have been a bit sloppy in my text (English is not my mane language), I meant that if surviving/gearing up was harder, then perhapse bandits would be more inclined to only attack players that they need to kill. I think that a lot of killing nowadays is because people are bore, or at least think PVP is the best passtime. If they were to be more entertained, then perhapse there would be less mindless slaughter and rather attacks against th players who would provide more "worthy" loot. They would still be killing, and it would still be a viable playstyle, but less geared players wouldn't be such a target if the bullets were worth more. I think increasing the need for the players in the game would mean killing would be limited to that which is needed for the bandits. Mostly, anyway.

Beans

Of course not, but hving a longer road to the "endgame" would mean that they would get more attached to their gear. With duping and hacking out of the way, I think bandits would be really catious.

This. But illnes, need for dry clothes and so on are the things that would make the woods dangerous.

I think that perhapse more end-game conten isn't the way to go, maybye we need to make the road to end-game longer?

DayZ- Chernaurus is busy.

Dancing is a punishable offence. I got banned from school for two months because of it!

Things happens OP. Nice of you to addmit it.

Hi=) I'm new. I've been looking through a whole lot of threads regarding 1.7.1. My game isn't working very well, but that's another story. What I wanted to talk about was that difficulty in a game can be quite deceiving. Because increasing the difficulty isn't as easy as to lower the health, the damage you deal, or as with 1.7.1, zombie aggro-distance and access to weapons. I've read a lot of threads regarding the game being hard, and dying a lot being a step in the right direction. I agree, altough I'm not a hardcore player myself. Firstly, the game has recently removed global chat. Adds to the immersion, yes, but if the game's so much harder then it might also mean players have a hard time teaming up. Because one of the main attractions of this game is cooperation. You might say that i have missunderstood the game, and that might be right. But coop is the reason why I play this game, and you'll hear the same from many others. If you die a lot and you can't chat through the game when you have spawned, you'll lose eachother very quickly. Be careful, you don't want to lose the random coop aspect of the game, or a large portion of the community will follow. The other, and perhapse most important thing is the difficulty. Sneaking is damn hard now, if I have understood the patch correctly. While stealth is another, very imortant part of the game, I think you have made it a bad option through the increased sight range. Because now stealth has a very large chance of failing. This means that other options, like just running through town and losing the zeds in a building, is so much easier that stealth is unused. If stealth is to be harder, then all other options must be too. I still want to be able to sneak through town, and I think that LOS was a great feature. But I also think that it needs some work, like, for an example the zombies looking for you near your latest known location, and being able to hide behind furniture, or in the woods. LOS shouldn't be like clicking a button, going into a building then enjoy a zed-free evening. It should be a bit challenging. Otherwise, it will become such a good option, all other means of surviving will be abandoned. And, just as coop, stealth is one of the cornerstones iof the game. Thanks for reading. I hope we can keep a mature disscusion going =) Remember that this is feedback, something i think, not neccessairly a fact. I know a lot of simmilar threads exist, but what I wanted to do with mine was to mention some of the relations between the changes.