Katana67

Nope. Rare weapon is rare. Conserve or use a common weapon. yea but DMR/M14 use 7.62x51mm' date=' so does the FAL, rocket, please just do what you did with revolver/m1911 and make it combine-able. i understand the weapon is rare and that's alright. but the ammo shouldn't be. [/quote'] The point is that a FAL has nothing going for it to make it worth being as rare as it is. The bone-stock version is too similar to the M14, if not worse, and yet it's a super rare spawn. The stock FAL should spawn at military installations, and FAL mags should be added to the regular loot list. The NVS FAL should be left as is. FALs are perhaps the most widely circulated battle rifle. Oh and also, the M107 is rarer than the FAL... yet its mags can be found all over the place.

I'd try a search next time, this has been discussed before. But no biggie. I think a character wipe is inevitable as we move from Alpha to Beta, and then from Beta to a finalized product. Those who are vehemently against character wipes don't realize this is an Alpha, and you're not supposed to be hoarding uber-loot or even caring about what you have on your person. I think people are -lucky- to have no frequent character wipes. In many an Alpha program there are frequent character wipes. People should consider themselves blessed to have a relatively stable and persistent server/database system. Who cares if you camped NWAF for two weeks to get that juicy M107... If you're not willing to lose something you've gained without whining, in an Alpha, you're just a dumbass.

It's a combination of disconnecting and people becoming more attuned to the requirements of survival. I know my first few lives were fairly long, given that zombies spawned awkwardly in 1.5.7, but I didn't really know what I was doing. Now, my lives on average are much longer and more fruitful as I know the parameters of the game. Disconnecting is much more rampant now, though I don't see what's preventing people from killing players outright. If I land one, or two quick shots with my M14, they're dead on the spot before they can disconnect. I don't think many people understand that you'll have to put a round in a dude to bring him down, and then fire a round into his face when he's on the ground. Most people just assume that because the dude's on the ground, he's dead. Which, in Day Z, is not the case a lot of times. Sure, people have dodged death by disconnecting. But far more have simply been killed before they could reach Alt-F4 in my experience.

If it's a total wipe, absolutely. People who're attached to their gear neglect to realize that this is an Alpha... and you're not supposed to be attached to it, for you are testing. When people play a Beta, they normally don't get to keep the shit they've unlocked in the final release. Why would it be different?

Now that I see the "20 words or less" thing, kind of turns me off to commenting. If your thoughts are summarized in twenty words, you haven't thought about the issue enough. Pandering to the new generation of Twitter idiots, unintentionally of course. Deleted my originally constructive post.

Oh no another person who has been fed lies and believes them. Why does crime go up with stricter gun control? Look at Switzerland. They have one of the lowest crime rates, yet the highest firearm ownership. Infact they have way more machines guns and suppressors then the US. Criminals are afraid to break into a house when they know there is someone with a rifle in there, trained to use it. Yemen has a higher weapon per 100 people than Switzerland, yet they're embroiled in a burgeoning civil war and Al-Qaeda practically owns the north. Switzerland's low crime rate is more likely owed to a fairly homogenous population, little wealth disparity, immigrant empowerment, and universal military conscription. Conversely, Japan has one of the lowest crime rates of any first-world country. It has stringent gun control and regulation. So, if one looks at the variance in statistics between crime and gun control/rights... one can surmise that the two rarely coincide at all. So there is really no pro or con argument for gun control/rights from a crime perspective. I personally, am a proponent of prudent firearm rights. Yeah, there are people who will retort sarcastically at gun rights, but there's a proper way to go about gun rights and an improper way. Firearm ownership is rarely the sole, or even a major correlate to crime, when other social issues are taken into account. But that's neither here nor there.

I guess they don't teach proper grammar in the military. That entire block of text was two sentences believe it or not. He was referencing suppressors as not being available to the average infantrymen, which is correct. However, it's overridden by the fact that ARMA features SOF like FORECON and SF... which regularly use suppressors. Either way, suppressors are becoming less and less of a luxury item, as I've seen regular Army troops employ them occasionally. The point is that all of the items present in Day Z are reasonable. Actully we were issued M4Cqb's in iraq for a mission So again i was simply stating its all dependent on the mission and yes my typing does suck thats why people like you do support jobs and guys like me are on a Line unit :) Mk 18's? Never heard of anything outside SEALs and SF using the Mk 18, though I've seen it with some random Guard troops for some reason. Even so, the SOPMOD Block II kit is becoming so muddled with the wonderful freedom that the Army's given the troops in terms of weapon usage. Largely due to the ignorance on the unit level of TRADOC's ridiculous policies, like the one "banning" PMAGs. It's all up to the individual operator, yes. That doesn't really have anything to do with the OP unfortunately. See, I can throw around acronyms too... doesn't make what I just said relevant. I'm not in the military, merely raised around it, so don't pull the grunt vs. pogue dish. I don't identify as either and don't care. Trying to snag a job in intelligence. I have plenty of friends in the military, varying from a Scout Sniper in the Marine Corps, several officers in the Army, to an airman in PGM in the Air Force... none of whom have a problem typing. It's not like the early 90's where nobody knows how to type. Either way, on point, we're not measuring our military knowledge dicks here. We're talking about how the weapon distribution effects Day Z and whether or not it's reasonable. My criticism of you, stems from the fact that you called some person "dumb", then made an irrelevant point in the form of one massive run-on sentence.

I guess they don't teach proper grammar in the military. That entire block of text was two sentences believe it or not. He was referencing suppressors as not being available to the average infantrymen, which is correct. However, it's overridden by the fact that ARMA features SOF like FORECON and SF... which regularly use suppressors. Either way, suppressors are becoming less and less of a luxury item, as I've seen regular Army troops employ them occasionally. The point is that all of the items present in Day Z are reasonable.

There are armories at military installations that always have weapons in stock, even armorers that are deployed have weapons in the shop. Yeah, they're locked down... at military installations. Hence why you have to hike up to the NWAF and dodge zombies and bandits to get them. There's a clear risk/reward dynamic. Lockable doors don't exist to my knowledge in ARMA. Furthermore, there has to be some level of "Game" mechanics. Obviously, in a supermarket, the food would be on the shelves... but alas... due to the way loot works... it's in piles on the floor. Even if civilian weapons "are in use by their users", well... I don't see any NPC's that aren't zombies. They're either dead, or infected. Thus, they'd have dropped their weapons... hence why we can find them occasionally in barns. As for suppressors, in a country like America, they're legal... and many firearm owners and firearm shops have/sell them. This is Chernarus, a fictional land "based" off of Eastern Europe. Vanilla ARMA 2 features several SOF units, like FORECON and SF... so it's reasonable to surmise that these units -could- have been present in Chernarus during the zombie infestation. Furthermore, Rocket has stated the logic behind the UH-1Y crashes... something along the line of, NATO forces were inbound to help and crashed. So, seeing suppressors isn't unreasonable. We see them on the VAST minority of weapons, I have yet to come across anything other than an MP5SD and an M9SD. There are also limitations with how attachments work too, like the M4 SD is it's own weapon. Rather than finding an M4, and attaching a suppressor later. Succinctly put, the presence of the weapons we see currently can easily be explained. The spawns might need some slight tweaking, but I like my AR's just fine the way they are and the game certainly doesn't suffer for it.

I lived in the United Kingdom for three years, father was stationed there. I'm not sure it would be that different from what we've got now, and I don't think America is too "sparsely" populated. Also, consider that 28 Days Later, which has a heavy influence on the moods and zombies in this game... is set in the UK. A hefty amount of zombie/infected lore is derived from the UK in that franchise. The United Kingdom would be an interesting choice, no doubt. But, now that I think about it, we should probably be looking at post-apocalyptic "open world" games... rather than zombie games. Because the only thing L4D has in common with Day Z is that they both feature weapons and zombies, that's about it. Dead Island is pseudo-Papua New Guinea I think??, STALKER's in Ukraine and all that jazz, Fallout of recent memory is DC area. I don't know, I enjoy American settings and always dreamed of an open-world zombie game in America. Would serve to placate the masses of zombie-fans and paranoid firearm owners. Plus, the United States is one of the few countries with open firearm laws... so weapon variety would be a plus. If it were in the UK, weapon variety would be fairly low and/or reserved to police/military spawns. I live in New England, and we've got a very nice mix of rural/urban around Boston. It is by no means, sparsely populated. Chernarus, is fucking -sparsely- populated. Five houses in a town? Give me a break, that's 15th century right there and it works well enough. But, perhaps debating over a SPECIFIC location is sort of superfluous. Perhaps it will be a fictional location, like Chernarus, but based off a real-world location. I do think there should be far more difference in terrain. Wilderness should make up a big portion, as should suburban/rural farmland, cities should be far larger with actual high-rises.

The military has a presence in Chernarus, thus, one can find military-grade weapons. Even in a country with little military presence, but relatively reasonable gun laws... you'll find assault rifles in many households. Realism.

ARMA 3 engine has attachments, all-enterable structures. And, though it may be based off of the ARMA 2 engine, is much more efficient in handling the stuff that ARMA 2 is having trouble with. CryEngine 3 has the capability for all of the above, as well as easily-placed player items.

Put FAL mags into the loot tables... problem solved. FAL can be flicked to automatic as well, correct me if I'm wrong... that might be an advantage to some. If FAL mags were added to the loot table it'd be much more viable. I actually think that the FAL should be added to the regular loot table, not just the helicopter crashes. The NV FAL should stay as a helicopter crash-only drop, but the bone-stock FAL should be a regular occurance. It's all about player preference and circumstance. If both were at the same availability level, it would be more about which one you actually -do- find, rather than which one is better.

Err... I get the sentiment behind this, but... unfortunately... not possible/feasible. For one thing, server couldn't handle it methinks. When it goes down, -nobody- can play the game. Furthermore, your limit of 1000 players sort of shuts out the other 100,000 players or so who have a chance to want to log on at some point. There would be tent cities ALL OVER. Covering every corner of the map. You couldn't enter a hedgerow without ten players also in it. The map is far too small for MMO numbers, it would have to be made much larger to accommodate player counts above 100.

No, it's a wonderful thing. But I'm saying, those who are anti-bandit will only make things worse for themselves by advocating against it. It won't be as frequent, but it will be every bit as devastating. Which becomes a gameplay change to hone banditry and group play alike. Now, trying to improve the way the game plays, is a great thing. But using emotion to determine that doesn't make sense to me. In other words, don't use how many times you've been picked off as a justification for change.

Weapons are a key part to this game. I think a .92% chance of looting something that only spawns in one location on the entire map makes stuff pretty rare. If someone wants to go balls to the wall and light up a city full of zombies, they should totally be able to. With obvious risks, but they should be able to... lest the zombies become completely irrelevant to the aspect of survival. Weapon variety is part of what makes this game fun for me, as the "scavenging" dynamic is largely fueled by climbing to the top tier of weaponry. I don't want to be forced to carry a cliche'd double-barrel shotgun 24/7, and don't want to be forced to carry an equally cliche'd worn AK-74 just because somebody thinks the only weapons available in Chernarus ought to be Russian. Variety is good, there are already convincing reasons why NATO weaponry is as available as it is in Chernarus. You're already -not- finding assault weapons in houses and barns, which is ludicrous... as many households keep assault weapons. You only find them at military installations and occasionally in deer stands (which are a good thing, as they make for a contrast with the speed/risk dynamic of Stary and NWAF). I think military-grade weaponry spawn rates should be toned down for deer stands, but not removed, and not in areas where it's fitting. Get assault weapons out of Cherno/Elektro/Berezino, and it will make sense to me. I don't know why there's so much of a distaste for military weaponry, and moreover, NATO weaponry. Warsaw-pact exclusive games already exist in Metro 2033 and STALKER. I like using an M4, is that a crime? Nobody's seeking to throw out AK's altogether I don't think soloing should be made any harder than is prudent. It's already incredibly risky roaming Chernarus with no backup. If there are massive groups of people working together, this would only be exacerbated. Which is fine, but no additional hardships should be placed on soloing outside of the parameters of social interaction (i.e. gamey-mechanics).

There will still be banditry. Sure, facilitate group play to minimize the deathmatching. But, if anything, banditry will become MORE irritating the less commonplace it gets. As an example, you've been sniped 3 times in one night. Imagine being sniped just -once- in a week... when you've got all that uber loot you've been salivating over. That is far more devastating than getting thwapped a few times in a row inside Cherno. Group mechanic and player controlled settlements will be lovely. Bandits need some love as well.

Torture... in a video game? Priceless. Tell me what I want to know! Press A Ouch... Torture doesn't work without you know... pain.

Modern American setting. This is where most of the zombie lore is propagated, only fair to deliver to the masses of firearm owners who pine for a zombie apocalypse. Post-Soviet and European apocalpyse settings are becoming FAR too cliche, with games like the Metro series, the STALKER series, and now Day Z by proxy in Chernarus. Asian ones don't really interest me outside of maybe a South East Asian setting, but seem fairly gimmicky a la Dead Island and WaW Zombie mode. Middle Eastern setting might be interesting, probably in the Levant or North Africa rather than the typical Afghanistan/Iraq/Generic Saudi Arabia setting. Other time periods don't interest me in the slightest, WWII is boring... we did that dance in the late nineties and early 21st. Modern settings provide for much more diversity in storytelling and weapons. Day Z's setting in Chernarus will likely be seen as a root to be expanded upon, not reduced. Realism and gritty survival should not be compromised by gimmicky WWII settings and flashy tongue-in-cheek zombie lore. There's nothing gimmicky about a modern setting to me, as it's just emulating current circumstances. Day Z is all about the experience, as in, it's putting YOU in a simulated zombie apocalypse and leaving you to your own devices. It's not putting you in your grandfather's zombie apocalypse as it were. I could care less about "innovation" in terms of settings, Day Z's current setting is profoundly -not- about giving the player a new experience for the sake of giving them a new experience. The experience is garnered *gasp*, FROM THE PLAYER'S ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN GAME! Not the setting. Unsure as to what the map should look like. In keeping with a pure "open world" theme, I think the map should be massive... and player count increased to 200. Seems to be what's ideal in ARMA III. The map should have some variance in climate, warmer on the coast/south. Temperate forests, and some snow environments thrown in. Increased scavenging and all buildings accessed, plus a player settlement mechanic. All of these are suggestions that people have proposed for Day Z that would be easier to implement if they just used a different engine. On the subject of weapons, attachments need to be implemented in the full game should it arise. This is why a realistic WWII setting wouldn't work for me, because most weapons are not able to mount any type of attachment without becoming LUDICROUSLY anachronistic. The only suppressed weapon I can think of in the WWII era off hand is the Welrod and I think they made a Sten integrally suppressed. You'd be incredibly limited in terms of weapon variety, which is something huge in Day Z and should not be minimized to any degree. In order to make this, and the Cold War setting work, you'd have to take MASSIVE creative license with the weapons and sacrifice a portion of the "realistic/simulation" aspect of Day Z, which shouldn't be done under any circumstances.

Remove text notifications/chat period.

They sure as tits aren't up north of Guglovo. Went into Petrovka the other night in hopes that I'd find a bike in there, to no avail. It is my opinion that each town should have a chance at -something- worthwhile inside of it, no matter how small. Plus, I think bicycles should be pretty damn common. Most households have bicycles, and they'd be far more valuable in those villages that are isolated.

I like the concept, but perhaps we could remove the human outline. I don't know, it just looks cartoony. I like my HUD to be minimal.

To the people citing survival, yeah... obviously the game is about survival. It's already got several mechanics demonstrating as such. However, what is to stop me from going buck wild on a hoard of zombies for fun? Let's see... bandits who hear/see me, zombies who over-run me. That seems pretty self-explanatory, there need not be less incentive to kill zombies. Citing the movies that Rocket cited, they're all... with the exception of -maybe- 28 Days Later, about killing zombies. I want to kill zombies just as much as I want to survive, is that such a bad thing? There shouldn't be repercussions that aren't already built into the game, which are already pretty substantial. If zombies themselves were enhanced, rather than made over-powered by having them be unreasonably sensitive, they'd be more of a threat. I get the whole societal breakdown thing, and I think it's pretty well fucking demonstrated in DayZ as it stands. What isn't well represented, is the zombies themselves. Here's a proposal to make zombies more threatening and just more well done... - Make them run realistically. Sure, they can deviate from a straight line, but practically teleporting off to a side ruins the experience for me. I love running zombies. And yeah, I get that this might be limited by the ARMA 2 engine, that's fine, but it's a criticism nonetheless. - Keep/enhance zombie numbers. 1.5.7 numbers were great, what we've got now is fine... but I still think we could use more. Especially in the wilderness, finding three zombies around deer stands isn't cutting it for me anymore. I would like to see 1-10 zombies per kilometer randomly spawned, to keep those in the wilderness on their toes. - Vary the experience with zombies. As I said before, I love running zombies. But some shamblers might be a good thing now and again to shake things up, seems counter-intuitive. Sprinters, Hoppers, Crawlers, and Shamblers would be a nice spread... barring the use of super-zombies... which I am vehemently against. - Make light/visibility just as significant as sound. Often times I can hold up in a building surrounded by zombies with a flare on top of me, or sitting by a fire or somesuch. Zombies should be -hardcore- attracted to light from a distance. If it's in a building, obviously it should be less significant, but people should be extremely weary of the sensitivity of zombies. I think the sound stuff is fine as it stands, but people should have to think twice about crossing roads. - For the love of god, make only slight tweaks to ammunition/weapon spawns. I don't want to have to grind loot just to get a CZ, I already had to crawl through the killing fields of the NWAF to find my Mk 48. I think the risk/reward thing is good as it stands, maybe some slightly high-er level loot in deer stands... but not too much.