Katana67

They are adding new locations as well, in one of the rounds of screens we got, there's a screen of a compound in the woods that is definitely not in vanilla Chernarus.

Well the use of zombies as a player locator seems to be a pretty poor way of complimenting the mod, seems like a pretty blaring issue to me. I think part of it has to do with the peripheral bubbles that I don't think need to be there at all as well as the zombie linger time being too short.

Question that needs to be asked, and I'm sure it has before... What is being done about how zombies spawn? Because as of now, you can use the spawns to see where other players are at... which is silly. I think this is a big issue. Somewhat less of an issue, and I think this is being handled in 1.7.5, loot takes forever to spawn and doesn't spawn when you just hop out of a vehicle.

Totally, was just making the "immersion" comparison a bit more apparent vice simply adding child zombies.

My concern with the inclusion of "child zombies", is just the timing really. It would seem in pretty poor taste to have an issue like this to publicize in such immediate proximity to the recent shooting in Connecticut. I don't really care either way, I don't really think they add -that- much to immersion and I wouldn't mind at all if they were included. I just don't think it's worth it given the current climate, not making a judgment call just dealing with reality. What I think would add a bit of immersion, is female zombies obviously... with different sounds, animations, skins, etc. Also, just more varied zombies in terms of skins... What do we have now? Two or three types of military zombies, a cop, a few farmers, a few hunters, and a few business suits? There needs to be more variety of zombies. Seeing a diverse field of zombies, rather than three types copied and pasted would add much more to immersion I think than just adding children. EDIT - I realize that it has been indicated that the above suggestion about female zombies and more variety is due in the SA, just making a comparison.

Well, unfortunately... it doesn't trend retroactively. The only "consolisation" results from a game developed for PC -AND- Console at the same time. Games that are developed for PC and then ported to console, in that order, tend to remain true to their original design (i.e. Minecraft). You might say, "Well Minecraft was dumbed down from PC". Yes, obviously it had to be sliced up a bit in terms of capability from PC, but the core mechanics, core gameplay, and overall experience is preserved. Meaning, the differences between PC Minecraft and Xbox Minecraft are largely cosmetic. It is my belief that Day Z could possibly run on current-gen consoles, albeit not at full settings and with a highly-optimized terrain rendering system. Next-gen wouldn't be a problem. To cite the common criticism of "Well a keyboard gives you much more variety than a controller"... True, but I play Day Z with an Xbox controller, and if I could map the "lean" keys and the inventory key... to one of the five or so buttons that is un-used... I'd be 100%. Day Z's controls aren't that complex, as most complex actions revolve around the ARMA menu system. Personally, I don't care as to whether it goes to consoles eventually... I have both a high-end gaming PC and an Xbox, and plan on upgrading both (with new-er parts and a new console respectively). However, if I could play with some of my friends who are in the military stationed abroad with Xboxes, or just friends who don't have the disposable income/technical prowess/inclination to support a gaming PC... then that would be a positive in my book. On Topic - *squeeeee*

I agree about the cars, though I think if the repair system was made more complex (i.e. non-generic parts) and fuel was rarer, then I think you could have as many vehicles as you want. As for weapons, I think the vanilla Day Z numbers are good... just the rarity of certain weapons needs to be adjusted and the variety increased (as is being doing with 1.7.5). In modded Day Z, getting three solid weapons per heli-crash is common, and sort of ruins the fun. I've been playing on a server where donators get to pick their loadouts, basically pay-to-win... which is silly. And, as a personal aside, I feel that most modded servers aren't really Day Z at all... they've betrayed what Day Z is by overwhelmingly focusing on PvP rather than survival over others.

I feel like this happens more often than not, and it may just be paranoia... but I think server admins abuse the system a -lot-. Especially when they're in clans and everyone in said clan has admin status.

I'm glad to hear from Rocket, and I think we understood before as to why he wasn't in the spotlight. So I think it's a bit redundant, but appreciated. I do have to side with the critics here, however, that I would have also appreciated a bit more of a status update on the standalone with specifics... rather than a general "we're working on it", which seems obvious. But, I'm sure we'll see that later on.

I was under the impression that draw distance/visibility was fixed and that adjusting it in the game menu did nothing for the mod.

Hide it, yes... it's easy to say and hard to do... much like EVERYTHING. You just listed places to effectively hide something... and the sides are -heavily- trafficed... I don't know what you're talking about, the entire map is heavily trafficed. If you're expecting something to be responsibility-free or hidden indefinitely, that's unrealistic in any realm. It's the same principle as the tents, someone can find my tent while I'm offline and loot it... but it's my own fault for not being there or hiding it. A settlement implies you've got others as well, I don't expect one person to be able to construct a fortress. You're thinking very narrowly and that the game should somehow be serving you by preserving your hard work... when this game is all about the exact opposite.

When I say base... I mean whatever you can rightfully construct and defend given the resources... so say, a clan of five can construct and defend a base the size of a few large houses... and one person could reliably defend a base of a tent with some fencing around it. It's not a base in the traditional sense of FLAG A, FLAG B, FLAG C. It's something that you construct with resources gathered and defend. You wouldn't be able to stop people from looting it when you're offline... so hide it well... The purpose isn't to have an indefinite outpost that's responsibility-free... you have to put in the time to construct, stock, and defend your settlement... no matter how big or small it is.

You're right, it's not the Sims... it's Day Z. However, the suggestions made... fit into the philosophy of Day Z... the Sims analogy is a logical fallacy at best and an idiotic assumption at worst and I'm tired of hearing of it. Simply because something is in a different game, doesn't mean it couldn't or shouldn't apply to this... much less benefit this game/mod. Nowhere did anyone suggest "life in a forest using only a machete and crossbow/blow gun with poison darts with a likkle tent to live off the land" as the -ONLY- type of gameplay, people who support low-key gameplay like that simply want it to be -less- boring than it is... by adding things to do whilst surviving like that. Have you seen the map? Even the most secluded areas are heavily trafficed, defending your settlement... whether it be a tent and a garden... or a HESCO'd fortress will -always- be a factor. If that ain't exciting, I don't know what more you want. Having to maintain yourself, expand on a settlement, defend it, survive... that sounds insanely fun to me. If you look at my post history, I am a STRONG supporter of military weapons... so I don't know what that's all about, I don't subscribe to that way of thinking. Military weapons exist in the world, are prevalent in countries and should totally be a main feature of the game. I think there is a fundamental schism in those who actually recognize that Day Z is trying to be something different... and those who just want balance and fun served to them just how they like it. That is not how Day Z is, is intended to be, or will be if Rocket is to be listened to.

Server doesn't exist anymore

Hackers teleported me to Skalisty island. Aborted before they killed me. No idea on names, was a nameless player in. Saiga 12K in one if their tents.

Nobody said it'd be a "grind". Furthermore, Day Z and ARMA in general has never been -not- tedious and boring. It's two hours of walking followed by 2 minutes of shooting at something. Day Z skirts this by having things to deal with whilst not getting shot at. The issue for most is that these are -too- boring because they don't affect the player to a significant degree.

Everyone who's crying about high-end military gear and wanting the draconian measure of removing it entirely... read the above. If I had to forage for rare-ass batteries to even power my EOTech/Aimpoint/etc, I would be far less likely to waste my time killing players. This is my philosophy for both making a better survival game and decreasing idiot deathmatching... the player should be consumed with survival requirements and advantage gaining... that he/she should have very little time to just willy-nilly go kill people. If I had to fetch batteries for my optics, if ammunition was slightly rarer but more spread out, if I had to clean/repair my weapon, if I had to purify my drinking water, if soda didn't refresh you as much as pure water, if disease was a concern, if repairing/refueling vehicles was more difficult, if creating a stronghold/outpost/settlement was beneficial, if one had to -find- attachments rather than just find weapons with them, if food supplies depleted every now and then, if there was a more significant and persistent zombie threat... I would have VERY little time or desire to just go to dangerous places to kill others. EDIT - A -BIG- problem with Day Z, is in the meta-server treatment of players. What I mean by that is, loot spawns reset -entirely- with server restarts... so if the server restarts every four hours... then that's a VERY quick turnover of high-end loot. This causes, a slow, but inevitable flooding of the land with extremely high-end loot (Which I could care less about). However, it makes such loot worth less to the player. I have no idea how to solve this problem, but as it stands, there are just too few impediments to the player that AREN'T other players. Here's the hierarchy of threat to the player in my point of view... 1. Bandits 2. The Game (Bugs, idiot vehicle damage mechanics, broken limbs off three foot ledges, etc) 3. Zombies 4. Disease/Hunger/Thirst/Weather Here's how I think it should be 1. Zombies 2. Disease/Hunger/Thirst/Weather 3. Bandits 4. The Game

Oh, another one... non-generic "Wheels". A car wheel won't fit on a bicycle, a motorcycle wheel won't fit on a truck, a truck wheel won't fit on a sedan.

Well before they implement a solid "blood" system, that doesn't involve generic bags of blood or freshly cooked T-bones adding more "blood" to you... they need to make damage consistent and able to be mitigated. What I mean by that is, right now... I -never- know when I'm going to take damage from a zombie. They still get me through walls, they still stop... claw at me... to no avail, and they still deal damage randomly from time to time. They are still far more difficult to hit than they should be, and even with all of this... they are still a tertiary threat. On top of that, you still have random bone breaks from just hopping down a three foot ledge or climbing atop of a rock. Before any changes are to be made to the blood system, the damage needs to be made consistent on a fundamental level. As of now, I take a frequent amount of damage (a hit or two here and there from a zombie). If there is literally -no- way, other than finding someone with the same "blood type" to transfer "blood" into me... then a lot of players will be screwed through no fault of their own. I say this knowing full well that this is a sim-hardcore-unforgiving-whatever mod... but the system needs to be addressed to be made both more realistic and a more streamlined mechanic in general when coupled with how damage is applied.

Obviously, some creative license has to be taken with our "characters". I mean, if they were just born... obviously they wouldn't have any idea about how to work any of the things in Day Z. This to me, is -too- much realism... in order for this to be "realistic", we'd have to live our character's previous "lives". Which is impossible, so, it's assumed that the survivor knows what he/she is doing in that regard... and then the player's own prowess takes over. Hence why everyone else (besides other players) in Chernarus is either dead or a zombie, so it's assumed that the player's character is somewhat adept at all of the aspects of survival to begin with. I mean, I've heard of people humping 100lb plus packs, but that's hardly a regular occurance for the average person. Most people, that aren't concerned with firearms, wouldn't know how to work an AR-15. They could figure it out eventually, but that goes with literally everything in life. Run of the mill person carry an AS50, Mk 48, and G17, along with gear? Probably not for a long period of time, and not very fast... hence why this type of hindrance needs to be implemented. However, carrying something like an M4A1 and an MP5 as a backup would be totally within the realm of possibility. Hell, even carrying a DMR with an M4 as a backup is within the realm of possibility. The problem isn't that it can or cannot be done, it's that there is no penalty (like there would be in real life regarding speed, encumbrance, silhouette, and maneuverability) in the game currently. Personally, I could care less if someone wants to have an AS50, Mk 48, and a G17... but there should be a penalty for that in terms of gameplay (not just vague inventory "slots") over someone who just runs one primary weapon.

That appears to be ARMA lore, I believe Rocket has said Day Z's lore will be distinct from ARMAs.

Modern snipers often carry two weapons, in fact, a lot of soldiers/marines/sailors/airman in the United States at least... carry two primary weapons. One in usage, and another one T-boned under a backpack flap. Many Marine Scout Snipers don't even carry a secondary weapon anymore (I'm not one, but I know many in that line of work). Granted, the likelihood of throwing an AS50 in the back whilst carrying an M107 isn't -that- realistic... but the assumption that carrying two primaries is stupid... or only accomplished in action movies is just wrong. It is totally plausible, for a normal warfighter (much less a survivor in the zombie apocalypse unbound by military regulations) to carry a primary assault rifle and perhaps (for example) a shotgun for breaching. What is -really- silly, and obviously just done for the sake of "balance" is having the AT4 take up the entire backpack slot for some reason. What I don't agree with, is how easy it is to switch between the two. You don't have to access a different type of ammunition, it just throws it in your primary inventory automatically when you switch... there isn't even an animation for your character stopping and pulling out a weapon from the backpack... it just appears in your hands. There needs to be a limit on what types of weapons can be carried in a backpack, for instance, (in my opinion) anything but a large anti-materiel rifle or GPMG/LMG should be able to be stored in/on a backpack. EDIT - On the subject of ammunition as well, it currently doesn't discriminate between ammunition in terms of weight. Fully filled 7.62x51 mags weigh considerably more than say, 5.56x45. Likewise with .50 BMG. Granted, larger rounds generally translate into smaller magazine capacity... but it's still a lot of weight to lug around. I think a kilogram/pound system is preferable to a "slot" system in terms of inventory like we've got now. EDIT - Or, large weapons (like LMG's and anti-materiel rifles) should be able to be stored in a backpack in a broken-down state... whereby if the player wanted to utilize the weapon... he/she would be rooted to the ground for around 30 seconds while they assemble and load the rifle. Same could be said about AR-15's, which would actually work in favor of carrying two weapons (ammunition commonality and decreased weight from not needing two lower receivers). If I had, say an M4A3 CCO and an M16A4 ACOG in Day Z, with one in the backpack, it should discount the fact (in weight) that I don't need two lowers. In addition, they should take up more/less than ten slots. For example, a DMR should take up 15 slots and an MP5 should take up 6 or 7.

In "Chernarus", the sky's the limit for weapons because it's a fictional location. We'd need to establish why NATO is involved (hence why we're seeing UH-1Y's crashing and dropping American/British weaponry). If you're equating Chernarus directly with Eastern Europe, we'd be liable to see a variety of AK's modern and old, SKS, Mosin-Nagants, various shotguns, etc. Also, on the military end, we'd be likely to see PKM's, RPD's, SVD Dragunov's, as well as a whole myriad of variants. British and American weapons should be fairly rare in Chernarus regardless, however, the extent of that rarity would have to be based on NATO's involvement in containing the zombie outbreak... or whatever, we don't really have lore to base it on. But, like I've said previously... all of this talk about getting rid of military weapons and replacing it with civilian weapons is just ludicrous. Assault rifles are commonplace in the civilian realm in many countries, even those who have strict firearm laws. Assault rifle, in this case, can mean a semi-automatic AR... it doesn't mean a full-blown automatic M4A1 with an ACOG and PEQ. Long story short, an AK or an AR in every other town shouldn't be a surprise... nor should it be god's gift to man. EDIT - OH! Suggestion, put loot in containers (Wardrobes, Gun Cabinets, Fridges, etc)... not just in conveniently arranged piles on the floor...

General Suggestions - Make certain types of ammunition rarer -- Mainly just DMR mags, they spawn everywhere for no apparent reason - Don't prefer stupid cliche'd Romero-esque weapons -- Like chainsaws, hatchets, sawn-off shotguns, and bolt actions. -- Military weapons are commonplace in the world and shouldn't be stricken as so many people have been crying for. -- Make military weapons rarer and civilian weapons more viable, but don't prefer either one... just make them have a realistic distribution -- In many countries, there is an increasingly blurred line between civilian/military weapons. -- Nobody's saying sniper rifles and thermal/NV weapons should be commonplace, but an AR or AK shouldn't be god's gift to man... - Mk 12 SPR -- Low-damage sniper rifle -- Already in ARMA - Make Flares/Cans/Bottles/Chemlights useful, by having them be craftable with "trip wire" -- You'd need the above as an ingredient as well as some sort of wire as an ingredient, simple... when a zombie/player crosses a trip wire... the item goes off. -- Purely used for perimeter notification, shouldn't be combinable with grenades (opinion) Most of the other suggestions are already spoken for and/or already being implemented and some of the above probably are too.

Just remove the Thermal sight or whatever it is, have it replaced with an L85 with an ACOG or something. There needs to be more ACOGs in the mix. As to the people wanting all military loot gone, get the fuck out. It should be rare, yeah... but I don't want to be reduced to every tired Romero cliche zombie weapon (Double-barrelled shotguns, bolt-actions, hatchets, etc). Military-style, assault weapons, exist in sizable quantities in most countries around the world. Deal with it. Not everyone should be running around with an M107, but an AR or AK shouldn't be god's gift to man. Also, stop bitching about sniping... it's designed to be irritating...