Katana67

Curious to know about trees as well, I assume the felled trees reset upon server restart at this time. Can anyone vouch for this? The developers (dunno if it was Rocket or someone else) said the trees will "stay there" when felled, which was pretty vague.

I'd gather that the loot for the helicopter crashes is a placeholder. That and has anyone found any foreguard mods for the AKM? Seems the stock and foreguard are separate pieces. I know they spoke about having the folding AKMS stock, but haven't heard anything about the foreguard. That, and has anyone been able to paint any pieces of the AKM?

Wow, pretty rad.

To my knowledge, Remington doesn't make an 870 (at this time) with all of those features (i.e. an 870 Police Magnum with a ribbed barrel). So it's either modified as rendered in-game, an older model, or it's meant to be a stand-in for an MP-133 model. Either way, we'll see what they actually release. I mean we've seen the AK-74 and Mauser in Standalone, and haven't heard a peep with regard to those weapons. Honestly, I'm a little confused as to why they're sitting on these weapons for so long if they're already rendered.

Would I rather complete changelogs? Sure. Do I understand why they're not given? Absolutely. You don't write a book if you're just going to rip all the pages out to start a fire.

I hope not as well. There are a lot of solutions out there for this, not sure any of them are 100% but it's an issue that needs to be resolved. The most blatant solution, would be to just remove a player's storage object from the map upon the player's death. But I'm not sure I'm in favor of that, because I want that stuff to persist for at least a while so that other players can loot. Another solution, is to just have the storage item disappear for the original owner (not everyone else) upon the player's death. Which isn't necessarily a fool-proof solution, as a teammate could easily transfer the items in that container to a new container for when the killed player returns.

Errr, what? Sway doesn't affect down-range dispersion after the round leaves the muzzle. If you fire when your crosshair is on the same point, sway isn't a factor.

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/158038-mosin-and-m4-accuracy-test/

The only mistake was a mistake inherent in any early-access or alpha release... that you see how the proverbial sausage is made, rather than seeing nothing but a finished product.

I'll never see the logic in dismissing something on the off chance it could be hacked. Ballistics could still be calculated by the server regardless of whether there's dispersion or not, so no matter what your screen tells you, your rounds will still go where the server desires. The dispersion can be there, it just doesn't have to be on the order of tens of feet at reasonable ranges. We aren't playing as anyone, we're not playing as a bumbling civilian or a trained individual. Our avatars have no background as enforced by the game. The only background our avatars have, is the one YOU as a player create in your mind. Other than that, there is no reference through which we can say our avatars are X... at all. So, rather than simulate ineptness... just add systems which are intuitive and straightforward as to demonstrate the prowess of the PLAYER. If the PLAYER is inept in shooting, he or she will be inaccurate. You don't have to screw the folks over who're doing the right things by "simulating" anything.

I think that's essentially what they plan on doing with the controlled loot tables. Yeah, it'd be different to add "for a limited time only" items, and would be cool. But it's sort of the same concept as just limiting the amount of X available to the player at any given time.

Yeah, I don't know what the hold up would be. I swear they've already tested it (could be way off) and were just waiting on some of the now-finished serverside stuff to implement it. Either way, just getting some basic stuff in would be great. Although, there's not much I consider worthy of storage in-game yet. I can carry pretty much everything I want/need, so the only use I'd have for persistent storage is the old (and detrimental) post-death gear action.

I think the weight/stamina system needs to be implemented first, before we talk about adding capability. That said, I'd like any other primary weapon to actually be visible on the character. I'd like it mounted horizontally on the character (i.e. ACROSS the shoulders/lower back) vice vertically. No magically hiding an AS50 in your pack like was the case in the mod, if you've got another primary weapon, it should be visible to those who encounter you.

Chris confirms, it's the MP-133 Baikal. Essentially a Remington 870. Very cool!

Two separate issues here. 1. Players looking like they're moving "realistically" (i.e. transition animations) 2. Adding value/consequence to movement itself Unfortunately, making the player movement less-responsive is not something that's really been done in a game. And shouldn't be. It'd be a similar situation to mouse acceleration if we artificially made characters not do what we're telling them to with our mouse and keyboards, or delayed the input for the sake of realism. The trouble with video games is that they demand 1:1 input/output matching. Anything other than that, makes the experience unintelligible. We're not using a brain and body to move, we're using a mouse and keyboard. Obviously some fidelity is going to be lost. Unless folks are playing with a controller (which smoothens things out a bit at the cost of responsiveness) or some other peripheral, mouse and keyboard will continue to dictate our characters "looking unrealistic" in movement. I'm all for more gradient transition animations, but movement should be WYSIWYG in terms of input. Also, I'd be in favor of a mild idle animation. Although not so abrupt as to be uncontrollable when a player needs to be stealthy (i.e. it shouldn't reveal your position ever).

Again, there's two schools. One which views the act of flight in and of itself as irrevocably undue. The other doesn't, and views the ability to fly as being in need of justification or mitigation (via the things mentioned throughout the thread). Unfortunately, these are polar opposite points which both rely on one's subjective understanding of the facts (i.e. that the fact of helicopters flying and being speedy is either okay or not okay). Neither with any more merit than the other. But I've been very upfront with my stance, I don't view the ability to fly about or traverse the map rapidly as undue (given a myriad of potential factors, such as likelihood of repair/discovery). However, I do see the error in some of the systems in the mod which allowed for the helicopter to gain a relatively easy advantage in certain situations. I'm in favor of mitigating those, vice removing the helicopter based solely on the premise that it can fly and go places rapidly. Luckily, the development pipeline seems to be in favor of implementing helicopters again. Which is why I made this thread, to discuss ways in which it can be made better. Not discuss the merits of its mere inclusion.

Why? The only reason it was an issue in the mod is that ammo was all over the place and its recoil in rapid fire was negligible. Two very fixable issues. Torchia just had a tweet saying that they're waiting for centralized loot to start implementing DMR-type weapons, as to regulate them.

That's true, because I'm defending my assertion (that spawns should remain on the coasts). I'm not defending yours. I think there might be a misunderstanding here. And, I'd rather have some secluded areas vice none at all (which would be the case if spawns were random). Your original bit was a critique of my desire to keep coastal spawns (vice random spawns inland), and I provided buttressing factors for that. You can't seclude yourself if people are capable of spawning in around you. However, if player spawns are made random, the loot spawns aren't. Hence why I don't like random spawns, as it randomly places people closer to certain high-value areas. Likewise, the case still stands... if people are spawning randomly all over the map, then they're liable to RANDOMLY spawn next to my tent. It doesn't matter where the tents are, it matters that there's the POSSIBILITY that someone could spawn near my tent. If someone ran five miles and came across my tent, more power to them. But if someone randomly spawns in atop my tent, they didn't expend any effort or risk anything and are instantly rewarded. The same goes for high-value loot. You can't have fixed loot spawns, and persistent storage/construction, and have people randomly spawning in around it. It completely undermines the entire purpose of making stashes and structures (i.e. hiding things). It also completely undermines the significance of mobility in DayZ, whereby one travels to a high-value location from afar. Randomizing that experience doesn't make any sense to me, it removes (or at the very least, undermines) the significance of travel. At least with spawns on the coast, they can actually regulate the loot spawn's relationship to player proximity. Likewise, having attractive inland loot spawns (and unattractive coastal loot) causes people to move inland. Vice just spawning there. And plus, if you think newspawn suicides are bad now, wait until the spawns are randomized. People will cycle through spawns to no end just to get closer to NWAF. Of course, this is a separate problem with a separate solution. Point being, there are much more elegant solutions (like just tweaking the loot bias) to encouraging mobility than just slapping people arbitrarily all over the map.

You're referring to aesthetics, what your avatar in-game LOOKS like. Which is entirely different from reading a potential background into these avatars. Backgrounds and traits aren't assigned to the avatars by the game, to any degree other than aesthetics (i.e. male or female). If "he" added dispersion for a reason, it doesn't make it a GOOD reason. Hence why I disagree with it. I disagree with it in BF too, as a concept.

Yep, and I've also proposed moving at least Balota, moving the loot bias inland, and making NWAF and other inland military spawns more significant. And you're kidding yourself if you think people are going to put their high-value structures and stashes on the coast with any semblance of frequency. It's counter intuitive and wasn't the case in any of the mods. If someone spawns next to your camp in the woods north of NWAF, you're going to be pretty pissed when they make off with all of your stuff because they lucked into a spawn.

Folks are saying it's the end-piece of a Bizon mag, not entirely convinced, but as good a theory as any.

This. A weapon will hit a target if John F. Civilian aims it properly at a target or Blake J. MARSOC aims it properly at a target. As we're not playing as a character, the only thing left to do is just render the weapons and shooting to be more WYSIWYG. The player demonstrates his/her prowess or ineptitude in being able or unable to hit a target in-game. There's no reason to add another layer of randomness as manifested in "random deviation" when you've got a shooting mechanic which rewards/punishes player accuracy.

I thought so too, so I went and disassembled mine and I couldn't find anything that resembles it. I thought it might've been the slide-stop/retainer, but it's not (could be a different model though).

Well, if you're asking why people should spawn all along the coast, to make for a variety of experiences/journeys, rather than a singular one (i.e. go to Cherno, or go to Berezino, etc.) If you're asking why I disapprove of inland spawns, because they put folks at an arbitrary advantage to finding potential player structures and stashes, not to mention put people in closer proximity to high-value areas (which should only be inland, and are for the most part).

AFAIK the tube is all one part.