Henk Grunn

Members
  • Content count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I would be happy if the description on the steam page would be actually about the game. It's says something about fight for your life. Well, I, and many others, don't have to fight for our life. I, and probably the majority can live from patch wipe to patch wipe without problems. As long as you are not looking for trouble. I'm stuffed within no time, without the apples. And i often don't see anyone for hours. I haven't died in ages, and only have killed 2 people. in the last 2 patches. Oh I forgot, there is something you have to fight against. And that's "BOREDOM". In it's current state, and i think 0.63 will be no different, the game is giving the players zero incentive to do anything. Open world? yeah fine, but even most open world games give players certain incentives. You can get anything from everywhere. Even if you can't find a specific commodity everywhere, you can find the alternative for it everywhere. And there you have the reason why you can walk all over the map without seeing a single soul on a full server. An incentive could be a commodity that everyone, pvp and non pvp minded players, needs and that can only be found at 2 or 3 locations. There you have the player interaction. And a quest. I would like to see that in the game. That would make me happy. A chance to get an infection by one of the zeds. That would make them scary. Right now the zeds don't bother me at all. That would make me happy. There is plenty of stuff that could make the player base happy. And till now, the devs did not reserve any of their resources to make the early access buyers a bit happy during the development process. There is no gameplay, only a maze. That doesn't make me happy. hopefully the 1.0 release will include some gameplay instead of just graphics, inventory and mechanics.
  2. I tried 0.62, and I would like to make a remark on the sounds. The new graphical overhaul is awesome. And the new sounds are very nice to. However, there is something with the sound that makes it very hard to differentiate player sounds or environmental sounds. This basically results in always feeling someone is around you. Now some may say that this adds to the paranoid feeling. However, if you have a 2 or 3 hour play session, this will be bad from a tactical point of view and also it makes you ignore sounds after a while. I.o.w. for me as a lone player, this is very bad. I am not the only one that experience this sounds behavior. I've heard other mentioning that they also have the idea that they hear footsteps, or other noises, while walking (or even standing still) that makes it seem they hear other players. Now i think there are 2 major parts of being aware of your surroundings. The first one is visually, so looking around if you see other players. The second one is sound. So listening to footsteps, etc. And you can't rely on sounds anymore, because it's impossible to differentiate, and like said, you become numb for sounds because of the environmental sounds. Perhaps there are more people with the same experience?
  3. Right, this may sound like a broken record. But let me give you my view on the chernarus plus map from a different angle. ( I already mentioned once that I would prefer original chernarus with all buildings opened up) The current situation is that there is, even on full servers, hardly any player interaction. imo, this is due to the high number of key lootspots in the new Chernarus plus maps. In the mod it worked like this: Player got an infection by a zombie. Needed antibiotics, or otherwise he would die. Player had limited choices. Chernogorsk, electro, berezino hospitals, or on the limited medical tents. Highly needed loot forced players to certain spots, thus player interaction. The above situation will give the players a quest, where he is force to think about his approach. On the Chernarus plus map: You can almost get all stuff everywhere. Thus, little chance to meet players. My simplistic conclusion is, if the devs don't force players to visit a certain limited amount of loot spots, there will hardly be any player interaction. This game is now 3.5 years into development. Still we have no chance on infection by zombies. Also, with the current direction it is hard to predict if Dayz Standalone will ever be viable for any playstyle. Map is not balanced for current playercount. But 100 player servers?? how many small clans will be able to afford that? it's expensive. Pvp is a desync lotery. Survival is not viable either. Food everywhere. There is no risk nor need for anything. No infections, no challenges. nothing. Yeah ALPHA. I know. But please show some direction. Show something viable. Show some direction. Even if the engine is optimized, and desync is less, there is hardly any playstyle that will enjoy this game. Makes me sad.
  4. If you look purely at PVE, then it might be too easy. You spawn, and have to spend a decent amount of time finding food, not dying by keeping warm when it rains, etc. And then of course you find some gear that will enable you to give you a chance with some pvp interaction. I think that with 0.61 the difficulty stepped up for all players. Mostly by the number of zeds, and the risk of hypothermia during rain. You can still have fun at pve when you set your own goals ( for example, only eat wildlife, or players). But the devs have to balance it in such a way that not only the hardcore pve player can have some fun as well. Imagine some friends logging in on a saturday night. They want to have a play session together. And the only thing to worry about is to hunt, craft, keep warm, and they will never be able to meet up during +3> hours, just because it takes that many planning and time to be able to stay alive. That would really take out the fun of this game. Those ppl would really just meet up, and have some pvp interaction with other players. So, imo it is balanced reasonably.
  5. You will almost certainly find them at devils castle in the field. Where the house is with the parking. Every time i come there i see the wolves.
  6. I like the coffee idea!
  7. video

    The only reason I never pick up the crossbow is because i just cannot find any arrows for it.
  8. Yeah it is hard to kill them. Especially since it's difficult to concentrate on just one while you are aiming. Though yesterday I met some pack of wolves again. I did not need 7 or 8 shots. I think about 4 or 5. But i aimed at their heads. I had luck, because the second wolf I killed appeared to be the leader of the gang, they " cried" the moment i killed that bastard, and then they all ran off. I hardly had any damage, but that was because i could hide in a bus, and I shot from inside the bus.
  9. Thanks for the info. As said, as a pack, the wolves behave very natural when it comes to movement. So I'm looking forward to improvement of the damage they inflict.
  10. Yeah I agree with that. Gunshots should scare the wolves away in most cases. Bears on the other hand are less scared of gunshots, because they tend to run way a bit, and then come back. And at the next shot they run a bit less away, and then come back again. untill they are not scared anymore. But, I still think that when no gunshot is fired, wolves should attack. And also do far more damage. Because the currently you can just run and don't care about them. Even a successful jump attack does hardly any damage.
  11. On 0.61 experimental, I encountered a pack of wolves near devils castle. They behave great. And they scared the shit out of me. Really really nice work. However the damage they do is very little. In all honesty, I should have been killed by them. I killed 2 of the wolves with the little ammo I had, and then I ran into the cabin, east from devils castle. I closed the doors, and one of them managed to clip through the walls, and got inside of the cabin. imo the damage should be like this: Damage should be upped a lot. If a wolf makes a jump attack, and succeeds, the player should fall on the floor (lying position). Make their persistence in attack variable. I think this would add to realism. Really hungry wolves would push it more then average. Iow, sometimes when you shoot with a gun in the air, they should run, and when hungry (random number variable part) sometimes they continue their attack. I would really like to see them as a real threat. With a few modifications to some parameters they could be a real threat.
  12. @gannon46 I think you misinterpreted my post. The problem I have with the current map is that I find that gameplay for both pve and pvp styles are out of balance. PVE players don't have really places that are isolated, since most areas are a route to some town or key place. And pvp players hardly have any contact. ( I've had sessions of 4 hours on full servers where I haven't see a single soul, not even at key places) I don't think there should be safe heavens on the map. Nor do I think that you should have pvp anytime you want it. I just compared current chernarus to original chernarus. And my experience is that original Chernarus had a much better balance. Not due to the size, but due to the locations and lootspots. It was just a suggestion, and if more ppl agree to that, it's not too late, especially during alpha, to create a chernarus which is better balanced.
  13. Personally I don't think it is needed to expand the map. With original chernarus the northern and western part of the map where already pretty clean, with a lot of Forrest. Also those areas where no route to some important location. This means that hermits would be pretty safe there. The northern and western parts where also great for having a camp/base or to recover. The area that hasesdestodes drew is a nice suggestion. However it is in an area that would be used to travel through on the way to stary, NWAF, or the rest of the map. The outer sides of the map would be better for deep Forrest, since you specifically should have the need to go there. This was the advantage of original chernarus. Those who wanted player contact could find it, with higher frequency, at the key locations. Those who wanted a more pve experience had the opportunity to do so. With new chernarus both player styles are now less fun. edit: i agree with @Radibor78 that it doesn't have to be exactly original chernarus. They made some stuff like prison island which imo is not too much. And some modifications to some towns/cities. But it's the surplus of militairy bases and towns and northern cities that spoil gameplay for both pve and pvp players
  14. I know that that is the goal. But we don't know if it will be achieved. It will also take quite a while before that happens. And then we have the price. 100 players servers will be quite rare, since most people can't afford that at current server pricing.
  15. Hello, Original Chernarus from arma, that was featured in the dayz mod, was imo very well balanced for 40/50 players. New chernarus isn't. All the content that was added was all very good quality on it's own. Some stuff is just beautiful. But IMO it's too much. The intention to spread out players over the map has succeeded. I hardly see anyone in new Chernarus. There are too many "key" locations and too many cities. Original chernarus with all buildings enterable would improve gameplay on 40/50 player servers. Like in the dayzmod, players could chose to go into action or live the hermit style. Basicly in original chernarus you had 3/4 key locations. NWAF, NEAF, Stary Sobor, and perhaps Devils Castle. Less key locations, thus more player contact. I suspect that performance would increase as well with less loot spots. Plus we tree lovers would have our pristine Northern Forrest back. Probably Original Chernarus with enterable buildings should be made first. But all the content is already ready. The suggestion: What if server owners would have the option to start a dayz server with either NEW or OLD (with all enterable buildings) Chernarus? We would soon find out which servers are more populair.