Lady Kyrah

Kinda wish DayZ had a more "survival" accent rather than "looter" accent as it is currently. Packaged goods do run out when there is nobody to produce them.

I like that idea but i do not think it's the right way to do it.

I have no problem with people trying to build their own world, it's all fine i you want a post nuclear zombie apocalypse as long as you do not blatantly plagiarise someone else's work. I know too many people who get all creative, but won't do anything because instead of trying to create their own world, they want to piggyback on an existing franchise.

Why do people think they cannot discover a game as they play and that they need to know everything about it beforehand?

Get your own ideas please?

The different game styles are self balancing really, as long as no play style is forbidden by the server admins, it reaches an equilibrium between easy and hard, between rewarding and pointless. Because it's a sandbox game doesn't mean it has to be everything to everyone, the point of dayZ is that other people will influence how you play, you can adapt to it and turn it to your advantage, or complain about it on the forum.

A tarmac at noon in summer? Oh yeah, you wanna run on this -_-

You guys have to choose, either we keep the hackers, or we lose the modding. The modding ability of dayZ is what made it so hacker prone, it's not the case of all games, but it's the case for this one.

I can't see the future but rocket could simply request the mod development to be stopped, it's still his project after all.

Regardless of the hacker problem, to me private hives ARE what made DayZ a failure. You cannot please everyone, you should stick to the game you want to create, and screw those who think every game should be customizeable to the max so they can remove the elements they are unwilling to deal with. I sincerely hope the SA ends up not implementing private hives at all.

There is no such thing as an "end" game, a well designed persitent world doesn't ever let you reach a point where it has no content to provide to you. Considering DayZ is perma death, there is very little chance that you might experience all the game has to offer over the course of a single life.

YOu guys who are worried about griefing need to chill a little bit, sometimes unexpected things are what keeps a game interesting. Enough of this "only on my own terms" crap.

Blank shotgun shells sound plausible and easy to make. Blank AK round? Manufactured ones tend to look really obvious, and homemade ones would be even more. http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/5.56mm/556mm_ammo.jpg If anything, dummy rounds :D

And one more nail in the coffin for this idea: Is there a plausible reason as to why a death squad would go hunt down a player? Wouldn't armed people have better things to do with their time?

If he does this then he's most likely dead, cars are not a suitable cover for firearms. That's probably the only reason to implement this suggestion. But it's implementation would be the end of car chases, nobody want to be on the receiving end of that.

Excepted a more powerful bullet doesn't necessarly cause more damage. Bullets can be roughly scaled on 3 criteria. -how much power is injected in the bullet by the load propelling it. (how big is your shell and what kind of punch it packs) -how much mass the bullet has. (.50 on one side, .22 on the other) -how "hard" is the bullet (full metal jacket on one side, soft expanding bullets on the other. "power" directly impact the transported energy, the penetration of the bullet, it's range and how much damage it does. "mass" impact the bullet in a similar way, the more mass, the harder the punch, but the more power you need to get the same velocity. "hardness" determinate how the energy is transfered to the target, a soft bullet will lack penetration but will transfer it's energy more fully to the target, a hard bullet will punch through it and a lot of the energy might very well be wasted. The military generally favor hard bullets because you can shoot through soft cover and body armors, they prefer to penetrate too much than too little. But since military weapons/bullets tend to go straight through the target, it can happen that they make very little damage if they do not touch any vital organ, but at least you know they will most likely go through armor. Home defence bullets usually go the other way, since armors are rare in civilian settings, you go for maximum stopping power, where a smaller caliber bullet, with a soft expanding bullet and much less powder than your military weapon will take down someone in a single hit, it's less power delivered but in a much more efficient way, it also prevents collateral damages through the target, but also through walls. Soft bullets will usually require extraction from the target because they will most likely transfer all their energy to the target before exiting it. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but i thought i would point out that "bigger boolet" isn't the only way to go.

Like you can hit anything while shooting out of a car window :)

That's activated charcoal tho.

Ballgag!

Bedtime story time now. *puffs on her old pipe* On Garry's mod there used to be a gamemod called "the experiment", it was sort of a very loose "roleplay" server: Guns. A way to trade with other players. Full loot on death. "money generators" which would create money for you over time but other players would earn money for destroying them. Non letal weapons that would knock you unconcious for a minute or so. Ability to ziptie people. Ability to move an unconcious player around Crude building ability. Needless to say the experience of the average player would be very rough there, new players would come and go all the time, but if you endured a little, built relationship with the dominant clans and made a few friends, you could have some epic times. Clans would obviously be the game changers, especially well equipped ones, some would actually maintain a climate of fear by systematically hunting down anyone who dared to use money generators under their watch. In my time on this server, many strange things happened to me, for example a "friend" beanbag shotgunned me unconcious and then dragged my body across the city, dumped me from a bridge, where i died from the impact with the ground. In an other instance, i was made to surrender, got ziptied and ended up in a jail cell being used as "slave labor" (every 30 minutes you would receive a bit of pocket money on your character and the guy kept me alive just so he could collect), a guy from another faction stormed the castle and ended up freeing me tho. This gamemode had some pretty deep protection and counter protection mechanics, a basic gun could blow a door lock open, but doors could be reenforced, you could also build all kinds of protective entrenchments (as long as you didn't block doors with it which was against the rules) Long story short, this gamemode had a lot in it for abuse, from taking players prisoner almost indefinitely, to raiding homes, to basically negating all you worked for that day. But it also showed me how important player to player relations are in this kind of game: If you try to be a hardass and do not make any relations, you are going to have a horrible time. Unpleasant situations can sometimes make you the actor, or witness to some epic moments of emergent gameplay. Some players become untouchable because they are apreciated by everyone, have a "disarming" behavior and deny their killer the satisfaction of seeing them get angry. (carrying only what you wish to lose sort of help too) Enforce cooperations by making some things only profitable to groups. (in this game "shipments" of equipment where always of at least 5 units, making most of the interesting gear too expensive to a single player, yet only one player could make the purchase. This create bonds and force players to trust eachothers if they wish to aquire equipment.) Now these are NOT features that the SA should have, i am merely presenting an example of something i experienced.

But how do we judge the trustworthyness of those maintaining the list?

The point of the walking dead IS inter survivor relations. It's not a zombie slashing flick, and none of the good zombie movies ever where.

I do agree that people are more sociable IRL in a catastrophe than in this game. BUT, they are usually acting friendly inside their community, not just with absolutely everyone. We as humans tend to gather in groups, an entire nation doesn't necessarly form a single group, but rather a myriad of them. It doesn't take much in the absense of laws to spring tensions between these groups. In a catastrophe scenario, i know who i'm going to trust easily and who i will most likely never trust, do you? I would even go as far that if you come trying to impose your rules on these communities, they will destroy you. Irak was a prime example of civies rejecting those who where supposed to save them from saddam, then from anarchy and chaos.

Lungs hemmoragy would be an interesting one. A chance from bunt weapons due to a cracked ribcage, from firearms obviously, but also from puncturing weapons. Doesn't kill you imediately, but you would basically drown/choke.

Would be nice to be able to simulate how events affect us differently. Some people do enjoy the adrenalin rush of a firefight. It would be nice if the more a player is exposed to specific dangers, the better he is at handling it and channeling himself to get over the obstacle.