aversionfx

A) As it turns out, yes you can. If Rocket can ban servers that people pay for because they are doing shady things, he can make it so you can't instantly leave the game (along with all of the problems that creates in the game). You're not the master of anything. If you're going to play his game, you're going to do it by his rules. See how that works? Also, ROFL "master over his connection." That was funny. There's that sense of self-entitlement again.

1. You're clearly a kid, and haven't played any of the original MMOs : all of them had death penalties. Actual consequences that made you actually think about the danger you were getting yourself into. 2. Good. I don't think DayZ is intended for the people who want quick thrills. The more children like you that leave the game, the better the community will be. I would be more than willing to accept a 15-30 minute period that I couldn't play the game, so long as all of the wonky detection and other issues got sorted first.

I think that dying needs to be more significant. Losing your stuff is not enough of a deterrent to play safe (the entire point of a survival). Because the process of dying and respawn is so short, people will behave recklessly; something they wouldn't do if death actually had consequences. In the event of a real crisis, people will behave in a way as to actually stay alive. They will still kill each other for food, and other supplies they might be lacking. However, a lot of the behavior you currently see in game would die out. Namely people suiciding to get a better spawn, and sprinting into incredibly dangerous situations (such as Cherno or Elektro). Currently, I don't think the scope of DayZ can fit a penalty for dying. In a lot of MMOs, the penalty for death was losing experience, or some other valuable commodity. In DayZ, because weapons and equipment are fairly easy to come by, losing all of your gear upon death is a very minor setback. The items themselves are not valuable enough to avoid conflict (which is what survival is about), but there is no actual character progression. I'm pretty sure Rocket has said that he wants to add "RPG elements," and if that were true, then that would create an enviroment in which players actually want to play safe and survive Also, all the people hating on this: grow up, you sound like a bunch of children. When did video gamers grow such a sense of self-entitlement? You people make me sick..

Search function is your friend.

People have been drinking rain water using various methods for thousands upon thousands of years.

People already do this with Maps.

Oh, thanks for your wisdom, Armchair Expert! Who would have thought that to kill a person you'd need to be an expert! And here I was, thinking that all you had to do with a knife was insert the pointy end, pull it out, and re-insert it! What a fool I've been! I wish the self-proclaimed experts would just not post their (incorrect) expertise.

Threads like these (and the people who post them, as well as the people who "engage" with them) are why this community is awful. You people are why we can't have nice things. Don't have anything intelligent or useful to say? Don't post. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD. Grow the hell up.

Really? You don't see how dealing more damage to players but taking more damage from infected isn't normal? This is not an RPG. This is a survival sim. If you want an RPG, go play something else.

No. A million times no. What could claymores possibly add to this game?

This is where I stopped reading. This is absolutely awful. It would mean that Player A couldn't kill Player B' date=' yet Player B can (ie: will) kill Player A with no threat of reprisal. That is an awful idea. The most frustrating thing about the suggestion forum is that 99% of the people who post here have the absolute worst ideas. Using the words "realistic" and "zombie apocalypse" in the same sentence completely invalidates whatever point you were trying to make. Zombies are not real. The zombie apocalypse is not real. Stop trying to apply logic to this concept.

I would be in favor of removing NV (including scopes, and thermal) completely from the game. I think it completely removes the tension that night is supposed to represent.

This is a bad idea, period. Creating a "hard" punishment for PVP is not the way to handle a problem that doesn't exist. PVP is not the problem: the problem is players being able to instantly log out to avoid being killed, as well as change servers to move position to gain an advantage in the original fight. Not to mention, every single "realistic idea to stop PVP!" is completely stupid. Every single one of them revolves around crippling murderers for next to no reason. Psychological distress? Seriously? Every one of these threads is created by some kid who is mad because this isn't a regular shooter. You can't win every battle, and wanting to punish murderers is just belly aching. Learn to play, learn to accept death.

Just because you're not having success does not mean that the current state of the game is "impossible." Especially with the 1.7.1.5 patch, where zombies are no longer equipped with sonar. I started playing when you still spawned with a Makarov. To be honest, it wasn't the saving grace you or other people try to make it out to be. At best, it was a deterrent for bandits, and not much else. If you got spotted in a zombie infested area and tried to shoot your way out, you were going to die just the same. DayZ is a hardcore survival simulator. The most important thing to realize is that accumulating a good amount of supplies takes time. Stop thinking that you should be well-armed and well-supplied in under than 4 hours. If you manage to be well-equipped in under 4 hours, then you got incredibly lucky.

First thing: Before you pile in this thread to froth about the game only being in alpha, and that this topic has been done to death, know that I have been doing a lot of reading through the forums, the news posts and the game's changelog. My suggestion is two-fold. Suggestion #1: Create a pool of low-end weaponry. This could comprise such weapons as the Makarov PM, melee weapons (which would include current melee choices, as well as a few others, mostly for variety). Other weapons in this pool could include a single-barrel, break action shotgun, and over/under and side-by-side shotguns. None of these weapons are particularly "good" : the shotguns suffer from low ammunition counts and the constant need to reload, and the Makarov is a low-capacity, low-damage handgun. And all of the weapons have short ranges, especially the melee weapons. Suggestion #2: Assign values to each tier 1 weapon that would serve as the chance to spawn with a given weapon. For example, in order from "best" weapon to "worst": - Over/under & Side-by-Side shotguns: 5 - 10% chance - Makarov PM: 10 - 15% chance -Melee weapon: 100% chance, but only if you do not start with a firearm My reasoning is this: A) From a game design standpoint: Currently, players spawn with absolutely no means of defending themselves in any form, especially from other players. Weapons should not necessarily be considered weapons with which to attack others, but tools with which to defend themselves. B) Another game design point: While scavenging recently, I found a hunting knife. But I had no "weapon," despite the fact that a hunting knife would make an obvious real-world weapon. So, although I encountered animals that I could theoretically harvest for food, I could not kill them. Starting with, at minimum, a melee weapon, I would be able to put my hunting knife to use. C) A "logical" perspective: In the event of the zombie apocalypse, it's true that not everyone will have a firearm, and that should stay true in Day Z. However, some will. It's very unlikely that people would be without even improvised weapons - a chair leg, a screwdriver, a kitchen knife, a frying pan, anything. There's no way I, or anybody else would leave their home empty handed. Sure, a frying pan isn't much compared to a handgun, but it's still a weapon, and it's still better than nothing. A melee weapon isn't going to let you fight off a lot of zombies, but it will give you a better chance of avoiding a swarm by fighting off the one zombie that spots you. Othewise, the only defense is to run away, which almost surely guarantees drawing the attention of more zombies.