Katana67

People really have gone to enormous lengths, irrelevant lengths, to discredit the desire for more accurate weapons. No, I/we don't want "laser-beam accurate, Davy Crockett-esque, single-hole at 1000m" weapons. Nobody's said that. So, that's pretty easy to understand. We don't want laser-beam accurate weapons. Period. End of concept. I mean, you're seriously asserting that the developers are willfully attempting to simulate EMOTION now? Do you have any evidence to cite? And that somehow translates into MOA values? Absolutely ridiculous. It went from "Aw, they're simulating our characters being inept" to "Dude you'd be shitting your pants! You expect to actually hit what you're AIMING AT?!?! lolololol" Both with equal levels of imbecillery. Yes, I just made up a word specifically for this. Again, our characters are nothing. They don't "feel." We, the players, you... me... neckbeard X behind computer Y... is scared. That's the entire premise of DayZ. They don't need to simulate something as inane as "emotion" or "ineptitude." Weapons need to be more WYSIWYG, vice aiming at one thing... doing all the right things to ensure you're going to hit your target... and then having the game give you the middle finger and do something else. EDIT - On-topic. Call me crazy... but these... EDIT 2 - Again, I don't think any of these (even the Kel-Tec) should really be a "civilian" spawn. I don't like 5.56x45 being used as a "civilian" cartridge AND a "military" cartridge, no matter how common it is in reality. I'm much more in favor of adding a few more "civilian" rounds and moving the overall hierarchy around so that there's a harder divide.

But you, as a player, have to expend EFFORT/RISK/TIME to get the ABILITY to communicate. Vice just getting it innately. Which is what I'm saying. I think the case of sidechat NOT providing an advantage is HORRENDOUSLY understated. For example, I made a point of demonstrating the error in sidechat in the mod. Whenever I found a camp, I'd broadcast that location to everyone. Consequence-free. A choice, by definition, is exclusionary. You're given X, Y, and Z. You pick X. Y and Z are not picked, and therefore excluded. You're confusing "choice" with the "freedom to choose." And if the popularity of Epoch is any indicator, "crazy" servers are far more numerous/popular than not. Sure, there are "regular" servers, but they're hardly ever full... and thus, someone who wants to play that way gets shortchanged with dead 5/75 servers.

I agree, but it should be part of the equation. Ammunition wasn't really a concern in the mod, because it was all over. However, in the mod, it combined magazine and ammunition (whereas the standalone has them separately). I'm saying that all three, now, need to have a relative amount of rarity - ammunition, magazine, and weapon, for the weapon to be truly "rare" in appearance, use, and continued use. It becomes inconsequential to use a "rare" weapon, when the ammunition can be come across readily. In other words, said weapon isn't really "rare" if it can be used and maintained every bit as easily as "common" weapons.

DayZ definitely needs leeks... I propose this as a candidate for the horticulture system and/or forage system.

Again, variety/choice isn't always good. People gravitated to ludicrous 1000 vehicle, self-bloodbag, donate-for-loadout servers... because they're easy. Not decent. Having choices, inevitably means someone doesn't get something. You're not just picking server X, you're also NOT picking server Y. Thereby EXCLUDING a given type of play by virtue of popularity, not merit. Thus making it unfeasible on the server-side. Having it be toggle-able client-side still means its innate, though. It'd be like willfully turning off your minimap, crosshair, and compass whilst playing a Regular game of BF to "simulate" Hardcore. You're willfully making the game harder whilst playing in a field of folks who are using these tools to their benefit. You're not just turning off setting X, you're turning off setting X while OTHERS still have setting X turned on. Thus making it unfeasible as an innate client-side option. In-game item please.

No, I'm satisfied with the damage models in DayZ. The faster folks drop, the better. Three-shot kills should be the norm. I don't want to be pumping mags into folks a la BF or Halo. I got the jump on you, I shot you, you shouldn't be alive. EDIT - As others have said, having "injuries" would be preferable. But that, to me, is distinct from a traditional "damage model."

I mean, people don't have to agree on everything. That's all that really needs to be said. Nobody's said that you can't have an opinion. DayZ has never been "as flexible and inclusive as possible," in-fact, I'd assert that that's THE CATEGORICAL OPPOSITE of what DayZ is (or at the very least, should be). Solutions have been proposed, fairly early on. Sidechat becomes the RESULT of looting and powering an item in-game. It becomes a facility of choice (i.e. you can turn it on/off if you like, or, you can not loot it altogether). And, it removes the wholly detrimental facet of forcing players to see an annoying and largely irrelevant feed of shit. That, and it adds weight to the ability of communication... rather than just taking it for granted.

No, it is only to do with realism. Both of the reasons you cite are concerned solely with realism. By advocating for a "civilian" rifle (and multiple ones at that) chambered in 5.56x45, in the current situation, you're essentially repeating the error in their use of 7.62x51 as a ubiquitous "catch all" round. You can't advocate for commonality framed in "real-world" terms whilst at the same time advocating for more specificity in terms of "gameplay." They are conflicting concepts. If they abide by "realism" then they're essentially correct in having 7.62x51 bridge the gaps between everything from a break-action pistol... to a GPMG... But that type of ubiquity isn't beneficial to gameplay, in my opinion, for a variety of reasons. I don't think 5.56x45 would be a good choice for anything below an assault rifle for the purposes of DayZ. Because, if they're going to have a bolt-action... or a varmint rifle... I don't want it chambered in a caliber that "military" weapons are using as well, because, again... they'd have to make the WHOLE caliber relatively common just to accommodate the "civilian" weapons chambered in 5.56x45. I think the Mini-14 might be a good SKS analog, but not a bolt-action in 5.56. And, again, this is dependent on two big things. One, that (like 7.62x39 as it exists now in-game) the weapons using this caliber are relatively few and far between (which you can't really have with 5.56x45 at all). Second, that the Mini-14 takes STANAG-esque mags just as easily as an M4. So, you'd have to make the magazines fairly common as well, which would be bad. EDIT - I forgot that Mini-14's are not STANAG pattern. However, I don't expect the developers to honor such a technical distinction... nor would I be particularly upset if they didn't.

Not necessarily. I don't like sidechat, therefore, I advocate against it. I don't want it in the game, therefore, I state as such. I'm not saying you can't make an argument for it, but I'm making an argument AGAINST it for reasons as stated. The solution is having it be the result of an in-game looted item (i.e. a walkie talkie/radio/whatever). Simply because something is popular doesn't mean it's beneficial, hence why my critiques of sidechat in the past have been leveled at how it affects gameplay. Not whether you or I like it or not.

I don't really want any "civilian" weapons for 5.56x45/.223 or 7.62x51/.308. You're seemingly (or at least inadvertently) suggesting more ammunition ubiquity, which is something I know you're against. Obviously, I'm not a crazy elitist... I welcome all weapons. But, I want weapon calibers to be more selective. I don't think adding a "civilian" weapon that uses 5.56x45 will be the way to go.

90% of what will make or break DayZ (and has made/broken mods, including the vanilla mod, in the past) is loot balance. People just keep kicking the can down the road, and rightfully so. This is alpha, and they're not into balancing the loot yet. But I think that causes folks to underestimate its significance. We don't know what DayZ will, should, or can be... simply because we haven't ever really had a lot of things (i.e. decent zombies, truly balanced loot, a good hunting system, a good health/wellness system, etc.) Furthermore, people get acclimated to certain loot distributions and then those become the norm (i.e. canned food in every residential building). To answer the question in the OP, yes, I do believe that there should be a small... miniscule... chance that everything should spawn everywhere. However, that doesn't preclude certain buildings from FAVORING different types of loot, obviously. This is something that a lot of people don't really understand. Simply because there's a .0005% chance that an M4A1 will spawn in a log cabin, doesn't mean that having a 20% chance of one spawning in a barracks somehow gets rendered irrelevant and people abandon these locations entirely. Take Deer Stands in the mod, for example. They were great sources of high-end loot for a while, fairly low-yield... low-chance... but distributed across the map so that they represented a low-risk, high-time, low-reward method of gearing. Whereas with hyper-centralized loot locations, all you really have is a high-risk, low-time, high-reward method of gearing. That and the loot tables/distribution is also, unsurprisingly, dependent on the overall gamut of loot offered to the player. Like it or not, I don't want a humdrum M4A1 remaining "high-end." There really isn't enough so-called "high-end" loot to even justify going away from residential areas. People always cite "Aw, well you won't have high-value buildings anymore" or "WTF do you want M4's spawning in houses for?" That's not what this is about, I'm afraid. High-value buildings will still remain high-value. High-value loot spawns at a higher RATE than anywhere else, so they're still valuable. However, it also gives reason for the player to search every nook and cranny of a town. And every house therefore becomes a Forrest Gump-esque box of chocolates. Generally, I'm in support of all loot having a chance to spawn everywhere. But it largely depends on what those chances are, and how frequently that loot spawns. Which, I think, will be the prerogative of the loot management system further on.

Why? Of course it is... people don't like X for Y reasons. Sidechat, in all innately-given forms (i.e. you don't have to loot an item in-game) is evil... evil I say. EDIT - And I love how people have this misty-eyed bond with sidechat somehow, as if it actually behaved in a beneficial manner with any semblance of frequency. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Sidechat was 50% whining about being killed, 20% asking "ANY1 IN CHURNO?", 10% being entitled and asking for rides, 10% trolling, 5% sexism, and 5% actually conversing in a way that aided gameplay. Or this... from earlier... my percentages/categories always change... I vote NO on 4chan feeds grafted to my eyeballs...

Can we clear out the proverbial clown car and just make a dedicated "Conduct of the Developers" forum to weed out all the vitriolic, loaded, Reddit-esque threads that crowd the General Discussion forum these days?

Well, yeah, I agree about... not knowing... what you mean. But, I've always felt that windows have never been done right in a video game. Partially due to having fixed stances (i.e stand, crouch, prone) which minimizes how flexible you can be when shooting out of a window. But also, I don't know what it is, but the perspective is all wrong in DayZ. Might have to do with the clunky collision, but still, it's almost suicidal being inside a house shooting out.

This thread makes me giggle.

I'd rather it be a mil-dot, mainly to distinguish it from planned "other" optics... like the hunting scope. Doesn't necessarily bother me that it can't reach 15x, bothers me that 7.5x isn't really enough to make it all-the-way decent. At least, if it's supposed to be the best magnified optic in the game, they need to make it better (to say nothing of "realism").

Don't act like Myshkino isn't the best place to be in the game...

Pics of the rail for the AKM or GTFO. All I know is that there's a railed handguard for the AKM on file, never heard of it spawning.

The overall profile of Chernarus (not Cherno) is based off of the area surrounding Usti nad Labem [sic?] in the Czech Republic. However, its OVERALL GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION is more akin to the Ukraine or Georgia. And it's historical (distant and recent) political situation is more akin to the former Yugoslav republics or Chechnya/Dagestan. In short, it's an amalgamation. It's not really based on any one particular thing. And, moreover, what we see in DayZ is merely a small portion of the country of Chernarus. We play in South Zagoria.

Only thing I could take or leave, that's functional, is the MICH helmet. I tend to run with a boonie, or, just carry both. Oh, and I run with a raincoat rather than a tactical shirt. Looks cooler (although, when rain is actually a factor... look out), so, you got me there as well. Normally, I do follow a "pick what looks cool, and get good with it" mentality. But there isn't really enough variety yet for me to follow that philosophy.

PvP =/= military warfare. DayZ isn't a "war" game, and having "military" gear doesn't make it one. It doesn't deal with warfare, period. People will still kill folk in DayZ whether they're wearing a tuxedo or a tactical vest. Camouflage certainly helps in PvP, but so do firearms... so does everything in DayZ. Simply because it's single-purpose doesn't change anything. You appear to be muddling three very distinct issues - the aesthetics of "military/civilian" gear, the balance of the characteristics offered by "military" gear (i.e. storage space, camouflage, etc.), and the desire for more challenging zombies.

Why not all gear? I agree that it's too easy to get "military" gear, but that's only an issue if it provides an advantage. It's a balance issue (something that has yet to be addressed), not an aesthetic/feeling/setting issue. Has nothing to do with whether or not the gear is used by a "military." And no, it doesn't make it a "war" game... because there's no war in it. Military gear has peacetime uses, and a multi-billion dollar worldwide marketplace is a testament to that. Just look at the Ukraine. It's about as close as we're going to get in the real-world to a "zombie apocalypse" in terms of instability and conflict (Yes, there are other more extreme examples... see Chechnya, Syria, and most conflicts in Africa). Yet military gear is commonplace outside of official military channels. Because, in the absence of a military, folks will loot/raid military installations (hence why most separatists/rebels/whatevers are equipped with gear taken from Ukrainian national guard depots). Not to mention the "military surplus store" is a thing. I'm not sure what you mean by "used" when you say "military gear would get used." There's only so many weapons a soldier can carry, there's only so many LBVs a soldier can wear. They have surpluses built into most logistical supply trains in modern militaries. Plus, if there are zombies knocking down your door... I doubt you'd be all "Nooo! Grab as many Tactical Vests as you can boys! They's a-comin'!" Stuff would be left behind.

I mean, it's not like when the apocalypse happens... somebody goes around ripping up clothes for giggles. Or somebody goes around opening gun safes, only to beat their weapons senseless. If an apocalyptic cataclysm like an outbreak of "zombie infection" happened, I'd put my money on a lot of shit being left behind. If anything, there'd be tons of pristine clothing left behind in drawers and closets, as it's not really an essential item. Taking your entire wardrobe with you isn't necessarily the first thing on most folk's mind. And the fact that the outbreak left no folks other than "survivors" meaning, players, I think we can assume that military bases are unguarded for the purposes of DayZ... Military gear is a facet of DayZ, and always has been. It's always been a feature, even an emphasis. I want it to stay that way. Doesn't mean civilian clothes shouldn't be in-game, or shouldn't be commonplace. But jesus, I'll never understand all the hatred surrounding military gear and so-called "tacticool" items. I mean, for god's sake, they're neutral inanimate items they didn't beat up your mother.

This is a demonstration of why "majority opinions" are often awful.

Nah, I'm good. Bring on the "military" gear por favor. "Civilian" gear as well! Never thought it was necessary (or even possible in most cases) to discriminate. And I never paid any mind to the "Oh, he/she looks like a bandit because he/she is wearing "military" gear" bit. Some yahoo with a smiley face t-shirt is every bit as likely to grease you as a guy with a plate carrier.