Katana67

Well, I'm curious, have the Deer Stands been altered in any way, shape, or form since ARMA II? To my knowledge, the Deer Stands are in the same place as they were in ARMA II and therefore DayZmod. So, any conclusions drawn are purely happenstance. All of the Deer Stands highlighted in the OP were in ARMA II vanilla Chernarus.

Well I think the first two concerns (i.e. Teamspeak and maps) actually have a lot of merit, and these issues have marked detriments on the in-game experience. Not to mention it limits the efficacy of what they can add in-game (i.e. in-game communications like radios, and in-game maps). However, I actually do think there's something to be said for your first bit as well. But I think DayZ needs to, eventually (perhaps if a sequel to DayZ is made further on down the line), abandon the FPS-style server divisions and embrace a more wholesome MMO-style "world" division where everyone is simultaneously playing in the same "world" as everyone else.

Thanks, didn't feel like scouring through all of them so I just posted the link to the Imgur gallery. As an aside, two things were raised in the Reddit discussion that I think are worth mentioning - these could be "bullshots" and that, in order for them to put in fog, I was under the impression that they'd have to have ripped out the renderer.

Yeah, I'd rather it be gone... but not going to lose any proverbial sleep if it stays in. It has a minimal detriment. But yeah, being able to monitor how many players, but who specifically, is in a game whilst playing is bad in the sense that you inevitably lose some of that uncertainty, especially when looting.

Yeah, not sure what the utility of his comment was. That's like saying, "Psh, zombies? This isn't Resident Evil." The lengths people will go to, to dismiss something so innocuous is beyond me. I would assume so, so long as a zombie's (not only the player's) sight is impaired. The only thing I think needs work is the sun bleeding through everything.

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/191294-quarantining-chernarus-a-thought-exercise/ http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/186377-framework-for-lore-discussion/ Check my topics out! Food for thought.

Not everyone considers the act of flight as "bad" for gameplay, "unbalanced," or undue. Yes, helicopters flying is a fact. That act of flight being unbalanced is a subjective opinion.

Weapon accuracy =/= Zombie omniscience. This. Zombie aggro, in an ideal world, should be reminiscent of GTA police AI. They are initially turned on to your general location, if you're not able to move away from that location, then they track you. If you lose them, they go about searching for you in your last known position. If they don't find you, they return to loiter as normal. Problem is, now (and in the mod), even if you move... even if you're stepping a little too loud... vice a gunshot... regardless of LOS... zombies react the same. Insta-knowledge of your exact location regardless of whether or not you move. It's a singular experience, rather than a dynamic one.

I do have one small caveat for those claiming that sneaking around zombies was an "or else" scenario. Granted, when I first started playing the mod, that's what I did. I proned into every town and slid past zombies all day. However, it was far more expedient to just sprint into a town and dodge through a couple buildings (because zombies walked in buildings) than it ever was to sneak by them. Once I realized that zombies walked in buildings, that's all I did... and all I ever saw other people do. You minimized your exposure time via clientside zombie spawns (which was the main red flag for knowing if a player was in the area) and still got what you needed. The zombie aggro has always been inadequate, as compounded by other factors (i.e. clientside spawning, walking indoors, etc.)

It was still inadequate back in the day, albeit better certainly. But I think the whole thing needs to be revamped (as per the roadmap). Mostly with regard to them being laser-guided missiles with 100% accurate access to your exact location after aggro is gained.

I don't want a fixed limit though, I want to gradually reach a point at which it becomes prohibitive to carry what you're carrying. So that the player can manage different tradeoffs, vice just carrying 99/100 lbs and being relatively uninhibited.

No, one RANDOMLY dictates where a shot will hit regardless of the input from the player. The other, allows the player to influence downrange accuracy by demonstrating skill in managing things like wind, lead, sway, etc.

Star Citizen's 44 million would like a word with you as well... Unsure if serious...

One happens before you fire, one happens after. One dictates the input required for the player to hit something, one randomly dictates whether or not the player will hit regardless of whether or not that player aimed properly.

Not to derail the conversation, but yeah, I agree that private hives or server-fixed characters are the easiest solution. But I do recognize the convenience and perhaps even merit of cross-server characters. That said, I too am a bit confused as to why Rocket is encouraging server hopping for rare loot. It's sort of like he's thinking we're playing a traditional "MMO" whereby we're all in the same instance. But we're not, it's essentially trying to force a MMO-style approach onto a highly granular FPS server division. I just don't foresee it working so long as we're all playing on different servers, vice in the same "world."

Yeah, there are a lot of ways it could be done. However, with regard to the weight system, I don't want to see a Skyrim-esque weight system wherein you can only carry 100/100 lbs or you're rooted to the ground essentially. I want to see it so that, if you want, you can carry multiple primary weapons and ammunition on you... but it becomes prohibitive/detrimental to move around for any extended period of time, and you can't really carry anything else that you need to survive. EDIT - Not to backseat mod, but this post is better suited to the Suggestions forum.

Yep! That's part of the risk that we all have to live with in a game where vehicles are persistent. Camouflage netting and lockable structures would work wonders in adding a layer of protection. Not to mention the always fun game of hiding your vehicle anyhow.

No, shouldn't even be a server setting. It completely ruins the "survival" aspect of DayZ in my opinion, when you're instantly given... essentially... a laptop computer with IM capable of contacting anyone, anywhere, on the map without a shred of consequence. It wholly undercuts in-game non-meta communications mechanics, which are the result of the acquisition of an item (i.e. radios). Glad it's gone and hope it stays gone. Utterly ridiculous. Simply because something's "popular" doesn't mean it's good (see Justin Bieber and McDonald's). 70% whining about being killed, 10% trolling, 10% entitlement for rides, 5% asking repetitive questions that could be answered by just going to the website, and 5% actual interaction. Never mind that that lowly 5% of negotiated interaction is an insanely IDIOTIC prospect on global-chat (i.e. in broadcasting your location, status, and/or plans to the entire server). That's the way it was in the mod, always. I don't want a bright blue 4chan feed grafted to my eyeballs every time I want to play on a populated server. I piss on your grave side-chat, I piss on your grave.

Vehicles should be a luxury, a luxury that's the result of the expenditure of time/resources/risk. For the most part, we should be walking. The frequency of use, in vehicles, should be somewhere below that of the mod. Overall, they need to be much rarer in the first place. And once they're found, they should require SPECIFIC repair parts/actions (i.e. no generic "tires" fitting on everything from a Ural to a bicycle). As for modifications, I think there are two areas that need to be looked into. One, is weaponry. The other is retrofitted armor.

Rocket has said that they're going to have a method of discouraging server hopping to get inside buildings (which is still a problem with player-placed structures as well). IIRC, Rocket said they're going to implement a "zone" inside of fully barricaded buildings as to make them impossible to server hop into. There's absolutely something stopping the player from building the "final" building, which isn't really a term if one endorses "modular" construction (i.e. someone can build whatever they want). Rarity, for one. Look at it this way, if I want to build a wooden shack... I'd have to forage for wood, forage for construction materials, find a spot, and build it. If I want to build a HESCO bastion'd fortress, I'd have to find the HESCO bastions, transport them to a spot, find sand, fill up the HESCOs, and construct the fortress. Point-being, simply because something isn't artificially linear, doesn't mean that there's no arduous process through which the player is investing time/effort/risk. Making common materials common, and rare materials rare, helps provide a tiered system of effectiveness (i.e. wood being more common than concrete, concrete being more common than metal, metal being more common than reinforced steel, etc.) and forms a tiered system unto itself in terms of how rare certain items are, and thus, how much effort/risk a player has to expend in finding said items. Which is why realism has to be suspended in this particular instance. You can't have every Tom, Dick, and Harry be able to open any lock with any weapon and still have the locks/fortifications be useful. They require specific counters.

On an unrelated note, does the shading on the Megavest look off? Everything else looks so natural, but the black and green Megavest just sticks out like a sore thumb.

The DMR, as rendered in DayZ mod, had issues. It doesn't mean that all designated marksman rifles are inherently and perpetually "on easy mode."

The roadmap says they're starting out with barricading (Q3), and then might move to persistent player-placed structures (Q4/QX). I think barricading will be a great start, and is something that I've advocated for as a first step in construction for two years... often in the face of raving masses who thought it was impractical. I wrote a long proposal for barricading a while back (and never posted it), but I think barricading should be done in concert with some sort of persistently placed walls or fences. Otherwise, just having a random building on the corner of a city won't be very useful. You need to actually be able to carve out a bit of white space between your building and the rest of the world. That and every fortification should have a suitable, and specific, counter. Like a crowbar, for wooden window barricades. A breaching round for locked doors. Or thermal lance/explosive charge for reinforced metal doors. Stuff like that. It shouldn't be generic (i.e. toolbox) and the counters should be relatively difficult to find in relation to the items/fortifications they're countering. That, and I think there needs to be a difference between a barricade and a wall/fence. The latter is just there to provide cover and prevent easy access. The former is there to prevent outright entry. So, for example, you could have a walled-off area, and incorporate the ability to "climb" a wall (leaving the player vulnerable).

Again, I don't care which one. Either .338 LM or .300 WM would fit just fine as a dedicated sniper rifle round in DayZ. They're both widely used in military and police sniper platforms, and most of the weapons that can be chambered in one, can be chambered in the other.