Katana67

Much appreciated.

Honestly, if they just re-named the AK-74M to AK-101, would that do anything for folks? AK-101 (5.56x45 NATO) AK-74M (5.45x39) Aside from the mag being curved a bit more on the AK-74M, they're identical aesthetically.

No, but many weapons which can fire one, can fire the other. Has to do with the headspace in the chamber, differences in thickness of the brass, and max PSI. Similarly to the .223/5.56x45 NATO divide. Here's an image of a stack of both .308 Winchester and .30-06 in a Czech gun shop. Not that any of this is relevant, as the objective of this proposal isn't to simulate pure realism.

No, no calibers would be removed. The proposal calls for the addition of FOUR NEW calibers.

That's a logical fallacy though. Simply because X is Y in Z, doesn't mean X has to be Y in A. The mechanics should be the same because it's representative of player skill. Simply because the avatars in ARMA are soldiers, doesn't therefore mean that the avatars in DayZ are intended to be incompetent. They're nothing, it's a different approach to the concept of a "character" or avatar. The avatars in ARMA have fundamental backgrounds, they're US soldiers... Russian soldiers... NAPA insurgents... The avatars in DayZ have NO background. They aren't soldiers... and they aren't incompetent morons. They're nothing.

Well, in the DevBlog I posted a few posts above this one, they say that adding 3000 zombies wasn't too performance-heavy. And that was way the hell back in March of last year, before any optimization had been done... and before they decided to re-approach the zombies. I doubt it'd be that taxing on the GPU, because the actual processing of the zombie AI is offloaded to the server. That and when they fiddle with the renderer, they've spoken about having occlusion-masking (or whatever, I'm not that familiar with this type of stuff) so that the client doesn't render what's not visible anyhow. But, with the network bubble as it stands now, stuff doesn't even render outside of a few kilometers away from the player. Either way, we'll be able to have a lot of zombies. Plus, with the new Navmesh approach, I'd assume that zombies would be even less taxing on performance.

But player-represented accuracy is already balanced. Either you're good at shooting, or you (as a player) aren't... or somewhere in-between. It doesn't even need to be balanced by simulating our "characters" being inept. A player is already going to be accurate or inaccurate, there's nothing to be gained by having something like "random dispersion" play proverbial ping-pong with your rounds as they travel downrange... especially when you can have other pre-shot factors (sway, lead, bullet drop, wind, etc.) which are able to be mitigated/countered, or not, by skilled/unskilled players. Point being, even if you do ALL the right things... make sure you're shooting from a stable position.... aim properly... manage sway... lead your target... compensate for bullet drop... and fire... the game is still arbitrarily dictating where your rounds will land.

Again, this is for the purposes of balancing the loot. Not simulating pure realism. And .30-06 and .300 WM are some of THE MOST common hunting calibers in the world. Never mind that Russia does use .338 LM sniper rifles, and .338 LM is used by a MULTITUDE of European nations. And, it's also worth mentioning that it's proposed to be included as Rare anyhow.

We aren't playing as anyone. Any connotation of a "character" is purely conjured up in the player's mind. The game, however, is indifferent. We're not playing as Ricky M. MARSOC any more than we're playing Sally J. Bumbling-Idiot. We're playing as nothing. Our avatars are just vessels, representatives of the player. They're not characters. The only thing left to do, once this is acknowledged, is to render the shooting mechanic in a straightforward manner that is actually representative of a player's own prowess in accuracy.

I'd rather have 28 Days Later style zombies, and hordes of them as well. Rocket has said that this is what he'd like as well, way the hell back in 2012 I believe. I don't see why it has to be hordes or sprinters, we can have both. Ideally, though, I wouldn't mind if we had a lot of sprinters, a few shamblers, and some crawlers like was the case in the mod. That's sort of what Rocket has said that they intend to do. You clear an area.... for however long, zombies aren't going to respawn.... then they respawn on the outskirts of the area (or town) and gradually migrate back into the area. I do want to be clear, I'm not against respawning zombies, even rapidly spawning zombies. I am, however, against pre-aggro'd respawning zombies.

See my signature. Even if there was no international response to the outbreak itself, Chernarus was host to a massive international intervention prior to the outbreak. If they can have G3s, AR-15s, EOTechs, and Sterling SMGs in Czech gun shops... I'm sure that getting Flecktarn (a commonly emulated camo pattern, not just used by Germany) wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.

I've never NOT been able to wholly outpace a zombie, both in the Standalone and in the mod. They keep pace with the player, they never overtake. That's the way it should be. I want them to be fast.

Then this post is not for you. It's amalgamated. The description says 7.62x51, but the box and round appear to be 7.62x54R. But it's not in-game, it's an amalgam between the two. The Blaser B95 cannot be chambered for 7.62x54R in real life, conversely, the Mosin-Nagant is not commonly chambered in 7.62x51 NATO. Well, if that's all you saw then I'm sorry? You can still have Makarovs, CZs (whatever you mean by that), Skorpions, and the like... they'll just be firing 9x19 Parabellum. Some compromises have to be made (even though the majority of those weapons can be chambered in 9x19). There's nothing more "survivor" like about 9x18 than .338 Lapua, they're hunks of brass, lead, and powder. Well, that's the other side of the coin. But the same thing could be accomplished with this, and I think you'd end up with fewer rounds overall if you just put in the ones that are common in real-life. So for example, you don't have to have three different types of rounds for the DMRs, Battle Rifles, and GPMGs respectively... you can just have them all use Rare 7.62x51 NATO. The problem is, to me, that 7.62x51 NATO is used in too many common weapon platforms now, that it can't ever be made properly rare as to suit the so-called "high-end" weapons that it's ALSO used in.

I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying that it needs to be rarer, and not be applied to every type of weapon, and not be an amalgamation of 7.62x54R and 7.62x51 NATO. Because as of now, it's in break-action pistols... double rifles... and bolt-actions. That's leaving out the battle rifles, DMRs, GPMGs, and dedicated sniper rifles that it also could be included for. I'm merely making the case that it need not be AS ubiquitous as it is now. It's flexible as listed above, hence why it's a rare round, as to justify that flexibility. However, it can't be used in both rare and common weapons... as it therefore must remain common to supply the common weapons (and thereby makes the use of rare weapons using 7.62x51 not all that rare).

The way I think the last bit could be managed, at least with hunting rifles (although the distinction may not even be that significant as to warrant this caveat) is by managing the optics available to hunting rifles as to be distinct from dedicated sniper rifles. Obviously, in the real-world, there's significant overlap between the two.

Yeah, it wasn't an indictment of you personally. You were defending Gibonez's remarks, that is the context in which I was making my post. And, if you feel something is wrong, try and get it fixed. Advocate for it, or against it. Don't just repeat platitudes about how the game is going in a "bad direction." Be specific, make solid recommendations, hell... even do it over and over again. But the second it bleeds into vagueness, vitriol, or a sweeping indictment of the "direction" of the game then you've already lost. Even though you might get a bunch of beans from like-minded folks who already believe what you do. If you want the X fixed, outline how you think that should be done, how it'd be beneficial to the development of DayZ, and weigh the pros and cons. Make your case.

Right, because you disagree with its execution. Not because it's objectively "bad", "casual", or "consoley." Which is totally fine. But the broader an indictment you make on the "direction" or "the experience," the less likely your grievances are to be taken seriously and the less relevant your opinion becomes to actually getting things the way you want. The same applies to Gibonez. The more you inject unnecessary vitriol and loaded statements, the less likely you are to effectively voice your disagreement. Let's stick with the subject at hand, and solutions. Rather than making sweeping generalizations and patting each other on the back because you hate the same things.

One inclusion does not equal a trend, or a "direction." Think of all the nuanced things they've added, and things that they have yet to add, which are/will be far more complex than the mod. Just look at the fireplaces, as an example. Not everything is getting "streamlined", to the contrary, there are things which are being made more complex. Either way, spewing out bile about how the game is now "consoley" or "arcadey" is not the way to express disagreement. Especially when those terms are meaningless.

And, I think people need to differentiate between three distinct concepts (perhaps four, in recognizing that there's a difference between the overall number of calibers and their respective in-game rarity). 1. The rarity of ammunition in-game 2. The rarity of weapons in-game 3. The rarity of use with regard to weapons If you make .50 BMG rare, and an AS50 not so much, you'll have an easier time finding a weapon but harder time finding a gun. But if you find that ammo, you'll have no trouble finding a weapon to fire it from. If you make the AS50 rare, but not .50 BMG, you'll have an easier time finding a ton of ammo but a harder time finding a gun to use it. But when you use it, you'll have a massive stockpile. Point being, ammunition in and of itself is useless. A weapon without ammunition, is useless. So the relationship between the rarity of ammunition and the rarity of weapons is representative of the likelihood that you'll even see a weapon being used in the first place. This is directly visible in the mod, with the DMR. It wasn't an overly rare weapon, but it was moderately rare. But DMR mags could be found all over the place. So, the use of the DMR became common and unregulated.

And also, I should say, that the approach of Assault Rifle Ammo, Sniper Rifle Ammo, SMG Ammo, LMG Ammo, Hunting Rifle Ammo, Pistol Ammo, etc. doesn't really bother me. But another issue here, is that they're seemingly trying to have it both ways. They've got two specific assault rifle cartridges (7.62x39 and 5.56x45), one specific rifle cartridge (7.62x51), and two specific pistol cartridges (.45 ACP and 9x19). Yet they're trying to make certain singular calibers bridge multiple types of weapons, like with 7.62x51 specifically (which is used on the Longhorn, Blaze 95, Mosin, and presumably the SVD and any other GPMGs, DMRs, or BRs they include). You can't go half way in my opinion, you either have to have one caliber per weapon type... or a granular diverse ammunition portfolio. Trying to find a middle ground ultimately forgoes the advantages of either (i.e. balancing ammunition rarity on the type of weapon OR balancing ammunition rarity on the weapon itself). You're ultimately left with an unintelligible milieu of rounds which cannot really be balanced, because you can't make them rare without screwing over common weapons. And you can't make them common without making the use of rare weapons easy.

No, the overall number of ammo types has nothing to do with how rare each one, or any of them, will be in-game. A more diverse ammunition pool will allow them to actually balance the weapon-ammunition relationship. Whereas now, they're essentially forced to make 7.62x51 common... because it is used by common weapons (in addition to supposed high-end weaponry). You can't have rare ammunition if you're relying on one ammunition type to bridge all the gaps between a break-action pistol, hunting rifles, bolt-action military rifles, DMRs/BRs, high-end military sniper rifles, and GPMGs.

That is certainly not true, at all. There is far more vitriol than reasonable posts on everything even remotely involving firearms.

I agree, and I'm not entirely sure why they think it's a good thing to have the "lowest number of calibers spawning." Although I do sort of think 5.45x39 isn't necessarily needed now, as we've got 7.62x39 and pretty much every 5.45x39 weapon has a 7.62x39 analog... the point is that by including both 5.56x45 and 5.45x39, they can appease the "realism" folks AND provide for a more diverse weapon/ammunition rarity/commonality approach by making 5.56x45 rarer and 5.45x39 more common (although, the same thing could be done with 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 that we already have). With 7.62x54R, the same thing applies. They can make the SVD and Mosin more common (by comparison to other weapons, such as a hypothetical high-end battle rifle/DMR or sniper rifle) by adding a distinct caliber. That way, they don't have to make 7.62x51 super common, and can make it rarer in order to justify the benefits in using a rarer, perhaps modular high-end weapon. But, with that said, I certainly understand why it's simpler to do what they're doing, and don't fault them for it as if it's ruining DayZ as a whole.

Well the VSS is essentially a Val (hence why they aren't pressing to add 9x39, as it's only really used in two weapon families [i.e. the Val and the 9A-91, which are functionally/aesthetically similar anyhow, so it's really only one weapon]), and the Groza can be chambered in 7.62x39 (a caliber already in-game) so I wouldn't be too worried about it. Plus, there are other bullpup AKs out there. I agree that it's the time to discuss this type of stuff, but too often do people just say "this is unrealistic, WTF devs?" without actually articulating an argument relevant to DayZ's gameplay, to buttress what they're saying. I'm more than willing to discuss the pros and cons of this approach, but most "realism" folks are pretty uncompromising/unreasonable when it comes to this type of thing. Somewhat counter-intuitively, most "realistic" suggestions can be argued to have beneficial effects on gameplay. But, people seldom actually MAKE that argument successfully... much less even attempt to in the first place.

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/195705-no-specialized-cartridges-torchia-tweet/ I made a lengthy thread about this subject already. The quote that I used (in the OP) states that it's "inefficient to add it [9x39 and the VSS] in with the current loot sys." The issue for me, isn't necessarily with the right weapons using the right calibers (i.e. realism). It's with weapons using more SPECIFIC calibers, as to differentiate them, and to allow the developers to actually balance the ammunition rarity. Vice being forced to make 7.62x51 common, because it's used in their low-tier weapons, even though it's also used in so-called "high-end" weaponry.