wolfmat

Yeah, I want that also. Edit: The 5-star rating I gave to the thread just now is because I love what comes out of this. Also, rating systems suck. You can ask anyone.

I have the policy that I only shoot back. Turns out that works. Edit: Only works if you generally follow common sense, of course. Don't run over open fields. Use cover. Stay low. Combine forces. Fight or flight. Bla

Well' date=' I don't think you can actually starve to death while trying to find a town, but you have a point: Some towns won't give the loot needed to survive because of the lack of loot spots and / or the loot probabilities. You can get a bad roll in Kamenka, and only end up with tin. If you then turn north, you're pretty much boned if you have zero supplies. So maybe give the survivor water and food like it is now. That doubles the range, which should suffice. The point of the suggestion is that the starter gun, as horrible as it is, skews the game towards shooting. Shooting is fun, but searching under risk and pressure, preferably in groups, is more fun in my opinion. (If you can call it fun.) However, zombies would have to lose the scent, so to say, otherwise, it wouldn't be feasible to turn the situation around for the survivor, which is essential to the dynamic. You can turn the situation around now if you have no ammo because it suffices to pick up ammo and reload to be ready to shoot (unless you accidentally ditched your Makarov). Actually, I just realized that I could just play like this -- ditch all the stuff at the beginning and see where it leads me. But if it's enforced, people would probably prefer cooperation much more up to a certain point. [hr']

Again, it's a completely different topic, and I really can't understand how you equated the two. Thanks for ruining it, mate. Good form.

I love it! Even more to the point: Animals become inverse zombies, and get speed factors by type. Type | Speed ----------+------ Zombie | 1 Chicken | 0.2 Cow | 0.3 Boar | 0.4 Sheep | 0.4 Goat | 0.4 Rabbit | 1.2

I don't want to argue with you about the validity of the thread. You're not a forum moderator. If you have a problem with the thread, then report it to a moderator.

So.. You're saying you don't have the balls?

It's not about the flashlight, it is about the lack of the other items. It's a completely different topic. Fucking hell.. All you read is "flashlight", and you went off. Madness!

That's not right. He suggested the flashlight as one of the starter items. I suggest the flashlight as the only starter item.

I shall quote Rocket from one of his interviews. "One of the key things that I wanted to get is that I wanted the player to have that sense of desperation when they started out. I didn’t want any sense of balance at all. I wanted it to be an anti-game. I wanted the player to enter the world and say “Wow, everything is out to get me!” and to feel that tension the whole way through. But I also wanted them to feel a tension from the environment, from the weather, from the land." Go on, keep posting nonconstructive stuff, youre the idiot at the end, not me. :* Respectfully, you're not understanding what has been said in there. Rocket clearly said anti-game to refer to what is currently being made in the AAA industry. He didn't mean "this is not a game". And if he did, then he'd be wrong. It's a game, clearly. You have a failstate (death). You have risk-reward. You have an input-output-cycle. You have persona vs environment. You have competition. All characteristics of games.

Replacing weapons with weapons by deleting the original weapon and then placing the modified weapon in the user's inventory is definitely possible.

I would like to add that handgun ammo should be placeable in the slots in the upper right in the standard inventory; same for bandages. Furthermore, items like matches, binoculars, maps and knives should be allowed to be picked up multiple times.

I like it. Additional ideas: Making a stash should need a shovel. The stash should make the items deteriorate over time. Every item gets a "rotten" flag that reflects the fact that the loot went bad. Players can counteract this by cleaning stashed items periodically. Stashes are per-server. The amount of items in a stash is rather limited (like, 6 slots maybe).

Charge money for stuff that makes sense for players that intend to play longer than 4 weeks. Only one-time fees. Additional character slots: $1 per slot, up to 4 slots per ArmA ID Groups: $2 for group registration; group is tied to one ArmA ID; invitational; joining a group is free; groups get group radios (Direct Communication still works the same though) Group spawn: $1 for every participating character slot; up to 10 group spawn slots; groups can spawn into servers together at one location; respawns are as close as possible to the group; group location is determined by the player who's been alive the longest; group spawn-ins result in players being able to opt-in into waiting for the others; banning a group participant gives his ArmA ID a free group spawn slot Safehouses: One safehouse only at a fee of $3 per character slot; the safehouse is located in a small village (whitelist for building IDs); it is a SMALL non-enterable house; it has an inventory; safehouse overlaps are possible, each occupant has his own house inventory; the inventory content is per-server, the house itself is rented across servers; entering the house equals "Abort"; spawning after entering a house makes the character spawn at that house; death means the player spawns as usual, but the safehouse is still his Group safehouses: $3 per registered group; optional group spawn-in (see group spawns) and shared inventory; group mechanics apply; safehouse mechanics apply; being in a group still allows individual safehouses (so a character can at the most have one character group house and one character house); group safehouses are BIG non-enterable buildings Spawn picker: A one-time fee of $3 gives one ArmA ID the option to pick the character spawn location when dying or entering a server; death near a spawn point eliminates it as a spawn choice for 5 minutes Stuff like that. Prices might be crazy in this draft. Just wanted to get the idea out there.

How dare you put CoD and My Little Pony in the same sentence? And the idea is kinda... Meh. You should see it yourself. I like the idea of paying for non-intrusive mechanics instead of for items (cosmetic or not). But I have to admit that the mechanics I listed maybe aren't desirable enough to finance the whole project.

So say you break your bones in a zombie attack, and you nearly bleed out, at some hunting stand in the middle of nowhere, on a server with 2 dudes on it. You have no morphine. You really want to force the player to crawl for 5 hours to a hospital (if he is even aware of the fact that there are hospitals in the game), instead of just letting him respawn? I get what you're saying, the respawning to get better start positions is exploitative, and not in the spirit of the mod. Maybe you're right in that regard. So I propose that respawning will spawn you at a random location, and all further respawns in a time window of 5-10 minutes will spawn you at said location. Furthermore, there is a timer displayed saying "Next random respawn location pick in x minutes" (with snazzier wording, of course).

No' date=' no. DayZ is not a game. How many times will i have to repeat that. [/quote'] Of course it's a game. What the hell? It's a video game, you fool! You press a button and the guy shoots, hits another dude in the head and a counter goes up! You can repeat a statement all you want, if you don't give an argument that actually makes sense, it's really just a blurb. Of course I can do something else. But if I don't want to do something else, what then? See, you didn't think of that. I want to direct my own entertainment at the least in the sense of when I play what. If something refuses to let me play although it is there to play for everyone else, I feel rejected and act accordingly, meaning I tag the experience as shitty and eventually will stop playing it to avoid having a bad time. Rocket science it is not. Noone is scared. It is a counterproductive idea, and that's obvious to anyone who has ever wanted to play something, but couldn't because the server was down or whatever. Don't you understand that it's the same as "game is broken, game is shit" to the player when you refuse entry every time you die, regardless of the fact that it's actually a really intricate mechanic that makes sense to people who take this thing a little too seriously? You're the worst for thinking this is awesome. You're completely misguided and patting yourself on the back for it. Someone should make a play about your suggestion becoming the next big thing in video games. It's for people who are a little too much into Schadenfreude.

Well, the reason for the real money is that running costs have to be covered somehow if things get serious. And most engineers don't work for free (regardless of what you've heard). Proper support also doesn't come freely. With such a community that shuts down every attempt of getting it sustainable on a grand scale, the mod can only fizzle out (because it's driven by community will, as rocket has said repeatedly). If you think you can Kickstart or Paypal-donate a healthy infrastructure with oodles of traffic and miracles in engineering into existence, then take a look around and try to find an actual example for that. Not gonna happen. I don't think that's problematic because I am a fan of perishable art, but it would be cool to be able to start up DayZ in 10 years, and still have servers running, don't you think?

As I read the thread title, I thought you were proposing ridiculous camera shake levels.

Well, I guess you caught me at a weak moment. I just want actual contra, you know? I don't take it personally at all, after all, you don't know me (I think), I just really prefer a proper discussion. I mean, I know there are good arguments against each proposition in the original post; it would be preferable if objectors would actually voice them so that something can come out of this.

I get it, you guys like freebies, and hate paying for cool stuff, and people who pay for cool stuff play CoD and watch My Little Pony. This is not the worst idea ever. The worst idea I've read so far is "wait for 60 minutes before respawning". How hard is it to actually SAY SOMETHING MEANINGFUL in a reply?

30 to 60 minutes to respawn? Why would I ever agree to this? Waiting is not a game! Something like that would make me quit the game immediately.