WhiteTigerShiro

I've probably aggroed zeds a dozen times without a weapon (and since I often take-off running full tilt when I aggro while unarmed' date=' I sometimes build-up quite the train of them) and every time I've shaken them without problem within a half-mile's running distance; possibly less than that, since I don't have exact measurements (point is, it isn't that far; certainly less than 5 miles by leaps and bounds). Run for a two-entrance building, or run for the hills (literally); neither are often very far in any given area that you're likely to risk zed aggro. [hr']

No one said it's a bad idea, just that it's an idea that's been thrown out there so often that it's getting redundant. As I said, at this point it's either in the planning stages, or written-off by the devs as something they don't want to do. Further topics won't likely change whichever stance they've taken.

Players being able to clean-out a city, at which point nothing spawns in there while it's "occupied" (including no more loot spawns), I could agree to. It'd be awesome to have a group of players band together to take over Cherno or Electro, set-up player-made walls, and then it'd just a haven for that group of players. However: It shouldn't be automated in any way. Player actions only. Nothing is to stop players from opening fire within the city walls. Anarchy/Betrayal should be a very real threat, forcing the occupying players to establish a guard that takes down any threats. As mentioned, loot will not spawn in any area that's considered "taken over" by players, so you can't just set-up a barrier around Cherno and just start farming the market and church non-stop. You'll have to send players to unestablished cities (or rival-held cities, because that'd be an awesome PvP mechanic) to get supplies. So yes on being able to hold cities, rather than just setting-up tent cities; No to any form of automation (including auto-holstered weapons). Edit: Of course, this implementation would have to come after they fix the issue of server-hopping. In the current state of the game, no one would go through the hassle of setting-up a base like this because of how easily a rival group could just server-hop to spawn inside city walls for a raid. It's one thing when a group is able to sneak into the perimeter undetected, but it's another entirely when they can just "teleport" inside.

*Ahem* I repeat: "I turn around' date=' back-pedal while I get the zed center-screen, [b']stop for a quick second, shoot, dead zed." Mind the boldface. Also, I wasn't talking about in-game mechanics so-much as your own ability to line-up a shot. So again, I don't know what it is you're doing wrong, but I've killed plenty of zeds after deciding that there's no building or hill to lose them, and then trailing them out of gun-shot range of other zeds, without taking damage plenty of times. And feel free to report my posts, watch how quickly the mods read my posts, shrug, and ignore the flag. You aren't gonna scare me with empty threats when I know that moderators aren't here to defend your posts from nay-sayers. Having a different opinion and experience on a matter isn't trolling.

I don't know what to tell ya. I turn around, back-pedal while I get the zed center-screen, stop for a quick second, shoot, dead zed. Sometimes I take a moment to get-up the iron sight if there's enough distance, sometimes I don't. Done it many times, will probably have to do it many more. Just because you have poor aim doesn't mean I'm trolling.

This would never fool players (since zombies don't currently have backpacks' date=' and you'd be a moron to drop your backpack just for the off-chance of someone thinking you're a zombie), so I'll assume this is for the purpose of sneaking around zeds.For one, we don't know how zombies detect normal people; the only reason it worked in Sean of the Dead (the only time I've seen this idea in play) is because it was a [i']comedy. And yes, I know that they did this in The Walking Dead, but that idea wasn't to just shambled like them, but to smell like them. Which kinda segues us into the next point; players killed by zombies will never get up as zombies because zombies aren't risen dead in this game. They're normal people who have become infected, much like the Rage Virus from 28 Days Later (though it clearly isn't transmitted like the Rage Virus, or else getting the bleed debuff would be an instant death).

That's impossible to say, really. The world has never really been in a situation like in Day Z, so no one could really say how many people would act in what way. Besides, how can we really tell who kills in pure cold blood? It's not like you can stick around to see if anyone loots your corpse. Yeah sure, a few people have posted videos of them just running around and killing people, even those who clearly have no gear, but that doesn't mean that the majority of PvP killings are just cold blood. Frankly, I think it'd be interesting if they started to track murdered corpses and posted on the front page the ratio of corpses that get searched (even if nothing gets looted, you wouldn't search a corpse unless you were hoping to find something) compared to people who are murdered and just left. It wouldn't be 100% accurate, granted - there's no accounting for if someone else comes along and loots before the corpse despawned, or someone who's killed in cold blood, but his buddies grab the important stuff before leaving the corpse, and so-on - but it'd still be interesting to see how often a corpse gets looted before it vanishes.

I vote no. The only reason we can revive people with a defib is because they die from heart failure. All it takes is a quick jolt to get the heart going again and they're otherwise completely fine. Dying in Day Z is generally from blood loss, so great, you got his heart beating again, but what's it going to pump?

Your character can back-pedal at running speed (or close to it). On more than one occasion when running from zombies have I turned around to shoot at the one or two on me without them hitting me.

Same thing that stops a group of bandits from using the vehicles that are already in-game as a way to kill people who investigate the noise, or stopping a sniper from camping a stopped car and killing anyone who gets close to it.Abso-fucking-lutely nothing. So what's your point?

It does one-hit zombies' date=' even if you hit the arm or leg. Problem a lot of people have is that they go for headshots because they think anything else won't do the job, but you want to aim for center mass with the crossbow because A) There's no targeting iron-sight, and B) it's a one-hit kill no matter where you hit, so aim for the easiest target. I can understand what you're up to. But to be honest, the crossbow is the weapon that no one ever uses. Most players avoid to use crossbows because of its slow rate of fire and not stackable ammo. If that's the part of the idea, why is this weapon still in the game when no one uses it? That's why I wrote this thread. The crossbow definitely needs some improvements in some way. Thanks for your opinion :) So who exactly is "most people" and "no one"? Because I've talked to plenty of people who specifically prefer the crossbow for just the reasons I mentioned.

*Face-palm with a sigh* So it's either black or white? Just because I say that there are people who would murder if there was no consequence' date=' suddenly I'm saying that EVERYONE will start doing it? No, that's fucking stupid. But when there aren't people to enforce rules and morals, or not enough people, chaos ensues and people will only obey the rules that they feel like obeying. Heck, you need not look any further than schools for proof of this fact. Tell me you've never been in a classroom that devolves into total chaos the instant the teacher leaves, only for everyone to quickly start behaving again as soon as teacher is back (or is spotted as being close). Or what about substitute teachers? If you've honestly never seen a sub have a hard time keeping students in control because they know that he/she is just a temporary stand-in with no real power, then it's only because you were cutting class [i']because you knew that it was going to be a sub with no real power or authority running the class that day. Consequence is the only thing keeping most (and again, that's MOST) people in check. The instant those rules can't be enforced (like in the world of Day Z), people will obey whatever the hell rules they feel like; and that includes people who would rather gun another person down in cold blood than risk that the other person might do the same thing.

Seems there's a lot of people who want to link up with other survivors to team up and survive. I think a great idea would be to add a new forum to the message boards where people can post about wanting to team-up with each other. They can establish on what server they want to meet, and where in-game. Heck, maybe people can even use that forum to establish an entire squad of like-minded players (and I swear this is a different link this time). Maybe the forum could be called Survivor HQ or something. I think this would be a great way to help people who want to meet-up and work together to do just that. It would give them all a place to gather and coordinate, rather than relying on luck-of-the-draw meetings in-game with people who might not be interested in team-play and would rather work alone. I dunno, kind of a strange idea, but it's something to consider. It would be nice to have a place to meet people for some team play. Oh, and just to be fair, maybe give bandits their own forum, too. ;P

Not the worst idea, for sure. It would definitely be something to encourage team play, since repair and maintenance of the train would be near impossible solo, especially when you consider that there's a lot of points where you'd have to get out and re-align the rails depending on where you want to get to. And all the noise that a train would make would be a deterrent from being too reliant on it as a means of transit. So I say go for it.