Turin (DayZ)

Which completely screws it for anyone? Someone goes away for a few hours' date=' logs in in Elektro and everyone in the town doesn't have a loot spawn for 15 mins? Lol [/quote'] ... I'm not talking about loot inside a whole town disappearing because a player spawns there. I'm talking more about loot much closer to a player - i.e. inside the same building. For instance, if a player spawns inside the NW airfield barracks (one of the main server hopper spots) then all loot inside the NW airfield barracks should vanish and not regenerate for 10-15mins.

100+ players is an AWFUL idea. There's too much PvP deathmatching going on as it is. PvP encounters should be an infrequent occurrence. Really, if people just want action and to run around killing each other, they should go find a regular online FPS game to play.

Yes, it's just a game... but it should also strive to be a realistic and immersive zombie survival simulation. I hate the idea of it becoming more gamey or arcadey to appease a broader audience. I also hate the idea of it turning into one big open-world PvP deathmatch experience with loot. That shouldn't be what DayZ is about. It should be about surviving in a world overrun by zombies. Yes, PvP encounters come into that... and the possibility of survivors killing each other really adds tension to the game; but not to the extent that everyone is just running around looking to kill other players.

I think there are easier ways of stopping server hoppers that will have less of an impact on everyone else who plays the game fairly. Like making it so that loot disappears and doesn't regenerate for 10-15 minutes when a player spawns near it.

Isn't the plan to keep it going on Arma 2 until a standalone game can be made? If they do shift DayZ over to Arma 3 though, I hope it'll include Chernarus. I just can't imagine Arma 3's mediterranean setting being anywhere near as good or well suited to DayZ.

I would imagine you'd need to keep the respawn button in an alpha mod like this so players have the option to kill their character if they encounter a bug or glitch. For instance, the issue of players being thrown into the middle of the ocean after putting on a different suit. Imagine how tedious it would be if players had to swim all the way back to land instead of just killing their character and respawning. Some kind of timer on the respawn option would be better.

Like I said' date=' I really don't know much about NVGs or how they work. If the OP's ideas genuinely would make them realistic, fine. But the changes should be made with that in mind - not simply to nerf them or to give survivors without NVGs a better chance. Perhaps the OP should have called the topic "Make NVGs more realistic" and based his argument around how they're not realistic enough at the moment... instead of calling it "Nerf NVGs" and whining about how survivors without NVGs can't compete. Rocket should do everything in his power to stop the game turning into a PvP deathmatch experience with loot. It should be a realistic open-world zombie survival simulator where PvP killing is always a danger, but an infrequent occurrence. In fact, a lot of the recent changes to the game (such as the removal of the starter gun and the attempt at making zombies more dangerous) do seem like changes aimed at shifting the focus away from PvP deathmatching.

I still don't think there's anything wrong with NVGs. Players with NVGs SHOULD have a tremendous advantage at night over survivors who have nothing but a flashlight, flares, or chemlights. Your argument that players with common guns at least stand a chance against players with rare guns is completely invalid. ALL guns are lethal to an extent so it's realistic and plausible that someone with a Makarov would stand at least some chance against someone with a powerful assault rifle. A person running around in the dark with nothing but a road flare and a pistol standing a chance against someone with NVGs is not realistic or plausible. Unless they're somehow able to sneak up on the person with NVGs, the person with NVGs should have an overwhelming advantage. As for your suggested changes to NVGs, i'll be honest, I don't really know much about NVGs or how they function. If the changes you suggested would truly make them more realistic in-game, fine. But any changes should be made solely for that reason - not to "nerf" them. If a by-product of making the NVGs more realistic is that they're slightly less effective, so be it.

Or, just make it so that if a player joins a server and spawns within a certain radius of loot (close enough to be inside the same building as the loot or just outside) then that loot should automatically vanish and not regenerate for 10-15 minutes. Either way, having to wait 10 minutes will make server hopping a much less effective means of aquiring good loot fast.

You're always going to get idiots like that. Just deal with it. It really doesn't happen that often.

I think NVG's are fine the way they are. As Zeromentor said, they're extremely rare (maybe not to people who exploit the game but to most of us they are) so it's absolutely fine that they give players who find them a big advantage at night. And besides, all players start with a flashlight now so night time isn't so unplayable. If they get any kind of nerf, it should be something very subtle and plausible, like direct hits from zombies having a certain % chance of damaging NVGs beyond repair. Or simply up the rarity by a slight amount (not really necessary in my opinion as they already seem incredibly hard to find).

I think they should make it a tradeoff so that the player can't wear the suit and have a backpack at the same time. So survivors who come across ghillie suits will have to make a decision whether to keep their backpack and the extra space it provides, or enjoy the benefits of being camouflaged.

Awful idea. Why the hell would bandits be marked on the map?

Trying to simulate human reactions / emotions like that in a video game can sometimes come across as more gimmicky than realistic... especially if it's deliberately added with the intention of punishing the player. I guess it's something they could look at testing out though.

I disagree completely. The more realistic, immersive and simulation-like DayZ gets, the better. I'd hate to see it get more gamey / arcadey.

Stop whining. Firstly, DayZ is an alpha mod. What you bought was Arma 2. Stop acting like an entitled paying customer who's received a bad product. Secondly, if you find the landcape boring and the start of the game too brutal, perhaps you should have done more research before purchasing a full price game just for an alpha mod.

Yup, it's an awful exploit. Far worse than disconnecting to survive a zombie horde in my opinion, as it affects other players more. I've been killed 2-3 times now by server hoppers catching me off-guard by spawning inside loot hotspots like the NW airfield barracks after i've checked it's clear. Some will try and argue that the risks outweigh the rewards for server hoppers, but that's bullshit. I've tested it out myself and it's a ridiculously easy way of amassing good loot with minimal risk. Though I don't understand why anyone would want to play the game like that.. it completely ruins the element of survival and the excitement of stumbling upon good loot. Maybe they should fix it so that if a player spawns into the game within a certain radius of loot (close enough to be inside the same building as the loot for instance) that loot should automatically disappear and not respawn for 10-15 minutes.

I almost always play in first-person, except when i'm prone. It does feel as though i'm cheating a bit when doing that though. Crawling in prone is so much easier in third-person - you can see everything around you.

Not a bad idea, but to be honest, I'd prefer it if every player just started out with absolutely nothing. Also, wouldn't an idea like this potentially increase PvP killing dramatically? I mean, someone could choose to be a soldier, then just run along the coast killing defenceless medics, navigators, and pack mules until they're well equipped.

I actually like that the biggest cities are on the coast. It's a nice balance: great location for loot, but likely to be crawling with other survivors...

Agreed, it would be nice to have all those issues addressed in the near future.