sloasdaylight

This whole thread is a pretty good example of why I hate the word "Hero" being used in this game to indicate a play style.

Because flares are ambiguous in their meaning. Unless you know the guy who dropped it, you don't know if it's a warning, bait, or something else. Helping someone with a splint when their leg is broken is unambiguous, and further more puts yourself in jeopardy in order to help them.

What this guy said.

Very much this. The stories of mountain men living solitary lives their whole life are equivalent to lottery winners. Yes, there were some, but they were few and very far between. You just hear about them because they were so rare.

Lol, you're one of those people.

You should captain your school's debate team, with logic like that, you'd never lose.

Yes, but it decreases the damage one guy slacking off does to the group exponentially. If you have 2 people who have to do 4 tasks, let's say Gathering foodBuilding a fireSetting up shelterGathering waterEach person in that 2 man group must do 2 of those tasks. If one of the people in our pretend duo decides he's not going to go gather water, he's just going to set up the tent, then the other guy must now perform 3 tasks, 1.5 times his original workload. Now, say there are 4 people in the group, if 1 guy decides he's not going to do anything, you have 3 people left to cover 4 jobs, or an increase in workload by .3 jobs per person. Bump that number up to 8, and you now have 8 people for 4 jobs, or 7 if one person decides to not do anything. You have 4 jobs for 7 people to do, which means there are 2 people for all but 1 job, and so one and so forth down the line as you increase the number of people in a group. It also means that more dangerous jobs can be performed safer, because as we all know, there's safety in numbers. A bandit is less likely to attack a group of 3 people in town gathering food than if there were only 1. Addendum: For example, back in the original mod days, I played with a multi-clan conglomerate, with players from both the EU and NA. There were a few of us who took up roles as suppliers due to our play time restrictions/hours/etc. I was one of them. My "role" per say, was to make water runs, go hunting, and scour the map for enemy camps. I did a pretty decent job of it, our tent city always had food and water when the other guys logged on, and on more than a few occasions I was able to point out camp locations and run some cursory raids on them myself, when few people were online. Because I was able to supply my group with food, water, and gasoline on a regular basis, the other players in my group were able to spend their time PvPing, or running large scale loot runs at NWAF/Cherno/Elektro/etc. The more people you have in your group, chances are, the better your group will do.

You mad? You seem mad. The "lowest common denominator folks" bit is the most ridiculous thing in your post, if for no other reason than that it's completely off base by assuming that these players A) Can't play the game in a survival type manner 2) Won't want to play the game when it gets to full release, and III) Lack the intellect to play a more demanding version of the game, which is not only hilariously neckbeardy, but also flat out insulting. Newsflash buddy, those clans who are streaming themselves sniping bambis at 800+m with their Mosins and using TS to raid a town or kill another group of players are the same clans who will have elaborate bases built once base building is incorporated into the game. They're the same ones who will set up farms once horticulture is included. They're the same ones who will raid other players' bases and farms, and they're the same ones who will control an economy in game when that comes to happen. And why, or probably how, you're asking yourself? Because they're organized, and have a common goal. That's all this game boils down to from a multiplayer standpoint: Do you and your team have the organization necessary to pull off your required goal? If you do, you'll do well on average. If you don't, you won't.

I've got one in my closet, speak for yourself.

http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/how-chris-mccandless-died http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxalyldiaminopropionic_acid Krakauer was wrong to suggest it was swainsonine, but he was ultimately proven correct when he mentioned the seeds as being the root cause of McCandless' death. The seeds of the Wild Potato do contain ODAP, which is a neurotoxin known to cause Lathyrism, which would easily cause one to die of starvation due to an inability to move.

Sure, right now. But right now isn't the finished game, and it doesn't have a lot of what the finished game will have. Sure it is, it's also incredibly possible to poison yourself even if you have a book of edible flora and fauna on your person (See: Christopher McCandless) Social Isolation, poor nutrition, high stress, lack of sleep, and exposure to the elements is a cocktail for the body's internal chemistry to go completely out of whack. It's not unreasonable to assume that someone who has been out in the woods, fending for themselves, for an extended period of time would be a little touched in the head. Ah yes, hermits. That .001% of the human population (or less), who live on their own. Oddly enough, most hermits have contact with other people in some form or fashion, and those mountain men you (or perhaps someone else) brought up a few posts back did as well. Being truly, 100% isolated from other people is not the natural human condition. The main reason humans banded together was because it made life easier, not to protect ourselves from other groups of humans. Protection was a welcome benefit of living in a larger group, but it was not the primary impetus. No, of course it won't. Even still, there should be things that lone wolves simply either can't do, or have a MUCH harder time doing. Vehicle repair is a big one. It's much easier to move an engine block, or a set of tires, if you have 2-3 people, than if you do it on your own. Base building as well is something that should be much harder and more time consuming to do on your own as opposed to with people. Yes, Dick Proenneke built his cabin on his own, by hand, but most people are not knowledgeable enough to be able to do that on their own.

Lol, you said flaccid...

Did the outbreak occur while they were in there?

The "realism" argument comes from the likelihood of seeing them. Like Gibonez said earlier, even if a country has purchased weapons, and therefore technically uses them, the numbers of such weapons used would determine whether or not those weapons are likely to see much service in the engagement. Rare weapons, like the Cheytac, Scar, etc., are exceptionally unlikely to be seen by forces in this game, regardless whether or not countries Chernarus is modeled after use them or not, because of my second point. Regarding your statement about Special Forces being the first into a situation is true in some circumstances; but not this one. This was a viral outbreak in a civilian population of unknown cause and with an unknown cure. You don't send special forces into that sort of situation to establish a quarantine, you send in the national guard, or a civilian defense force or some other equivalent until they requested UN aid. The weapons found there ought to be based on what that sort of force was likely to use, which is to say AKMs, AK-74s, maybe a few AKS-74Us, and then M4s, M16s, G36s, L85s, FALs, etc. Rare weapons that are used only by select special forces units simply don't belong and aren't found in those types of military/paramilitary units. For them to fit the "they do exist and are there in real life, so they should be in the game" argument, they'd have to be so rare as to be practically unfindable, and if that's the case, then why even bother going through the effort of coding, modelling, and developing them?

No, I'm