Katana67

The only way I'd support a traditional "class" structure is if it wasn't traditional, so I guess that means I don't support it. If anything, skills should be gained over time. That, and I want DayZ (as it has to an extent) to represent the player behind the character, not just you playing as a character. A skill system needs to be implemented in such a way that it actually requires extended input from the user, and in a manner that allows players to distinguish themselves (i.e. actually having to perform surgery, actually having to manually start a fire, actually having to repair a vehicle accurately, actually having to pick a lock, etc.) That or it could be purely, purely, aesthetic.

See, this is the extreme that everyone jumps to. I don't want people spawning in the north, ever. For a variety of very real and pragmatic gameplay reasons (i.e. getting relatively easy access to high-end loot, getting a posturing advantage on potential player storage, etc.) Forced mobility via spawn points doesn't work, it still devolves into deathmatching (see Overwatch). Mobility needs to be encouraged via demand (loot and survival needs) and ambition (fortresses, vehicles, storage). Spreading folks out along the coast, rather than just spawning people near Berezino... in addition to removing or limiting the loot spawns at Balota... in addition to tweaking the overall loot bias inland... in addition to increasing the zombie densities around major cities... will encourage folks to be more mobile in a much more natural manner than just spreading them across the map like butter on bread.

They need to make the melee system better before I'd like to see any more "primitive" weapons. I haven't tried the bow out yet, so I don't know how it feels. That and I like firearms, I like that DayZ embraces them readily (as opposed to a lot of zombie games, which treat them as an afterthought).

The idea is great, the blind adherence to "realism" isn't. Don't see any reason to consider anything else other than the pros and cons of the idea itself. And this certainly isn't a "realistic" representation of nutrition, the concepts of "energy" and "digestion" aren't represented at all. It's still just filling up a meter, rather than seeing tangible gains from expending a resource. On-topic. I'd like to see a more robust hunger/thirst system. However decent this is, I'd much rather it just be made significant through external means (i.e. limiting the food loot). I think the sentiment is good, not sure we necessarily need the complication of feeling vs. actuality, though.

It would make more sense if the melee system wasn't akin to "vaguely waving a butterknife in front of you". I'm all for making zombies a threat, but this is a piss-poor way of doing so. Especially now, with very few alternatives made worse by glaring issues (i.e. few working suppressed weapons, lack of stealth, and instantly respawning zombies).

All of the weapons you all have mentioned (including the MP5K, part of one of the most popular SMG platforms of all time) are available and/or employed widely in Eastern Europe. Debating which weapons "fit" the setting is sort of a futile exercise anyhow. Here's a picture of a Thompson (or two) in the window of a Prague gun shop

To my knowledge there were no nuclear facilities in Chernarus. But I wouldn't be opposed to them adding something like this, even though Chernarus is pretty much just... that.

In some of the mods (Overwatch, maybe?) the castles spawn military loot or have tents/barracks buried inside. Not really the approach I'd take, but it's a good demonstration. These places become bastions, which is fun. I think player construction and barricading existing structures will add a lot of utility to otherwise un-used locales. I mean, just having all buildings spawn loot is a huge plus.

As a solo player, I don't think anyone should be outright forced to interact with others. However, it should be much harder to go it alone than in a group. In terms of managing the zombie threat at the very least. Which I think may answer your first and second points. To the third, unless they actually address the detriments of third-party comms programs, no. There will never be risk in communicating with others, outside of the current risks of face-to-face communication (which are undercut as well by third-party programs). To the fourth, yes it's coming. EDIT - Plus, I just don't even encounter players frequently enough to warrant interaction in the first place. I suspect this may change with 100 player servers, but so long as there's a million servers with 3/40 players on them, rather than a few with 99/100 players, this will always be the case. That and this is an issue intensely wrapped up in server hopping, whereby empty servers are attractive to those who wish to exploit the persistent player location saving to gain undue access to loot.

Well everyone spawns on the east coast now. So not sure when the last time you spawned in Kamenka was (at least in the standalone). I love Kamenka spawns, and miss them dearly. But yeah, I actually wouldn't be surprised if spawns were bugged/have been bugged. I used to get certain spawns over and over and over again.

I hope not, I hope felled trees are persistent. But take a while to cut down, and make a lot of noise. Perhaps they could respawn eventually, but I'd want them gone for a while. Players shaping the landscape needs to be a thing at some point and in some fashion, this'd be a great way of trying the concept out. That, and hopefully we'll get to a point where servers do not need to be restarted frequently.

Regardless of whether or not someone's wearing a mask, my player encounters pretty much consist of. 1. He or she sees me/might've seen me/is going to the same place as me... light em' up. 2. He or she doesn't see me/is going away from where I'm headed... leave em' be.

This. This. This. This. While removing the significance of the Balota spawns wouldn't fix all of the issues, it would certainly be a good start. I mean, there's barracks now near Pavlovo, in Zeleno, and near Kabanino. What more do people want?

Yes, and there's a difference between dictating gameplay and crafting an experience. We have no idea, somewhat misleadingly, what DayZ is intended to be. Because we've never had a finished product. Even with the mod, certain things just couldn't be done the way the developers intended (see zombies, vehicles, construction, etc.) That and the efficacy of CCP's approach is debatable at best. Emergent gameplay is certainly something worth pursuing, but a wholly unregulated experience isn't. Even something like EVE is very much a regulated experience, CCP is constantly tweaking the parameters in which players participate. Sometimes... people just don't know what's good, to be honest. And simply because something's popular and player-derived, doesn't make it beneficial or worthwhile. Case in point, the mod. People absolutely adored (and still do) detrimental things like sidechat. People migrated in droves to mods which resembled DayZ in name only, hemorrhaging players away from the vanilla mod. I'm all for player freedom, but the second you give the playerbase the capability to make something so different from the vanilla experience as to pervert the entire nature of DayZ, it becomes a concern of function rather than idealistic commitment to emergent gameplay.

I know, but Myshkino is. I've spent most of my two years playing DayZ around Myshkino. Gorka's too far inland in my opinion, and if it were the mod, it'd be on the way to Stary. Polana, however, as I understand it is a fairly high-value town now. I haven't been to the eastern portion of the map in a long while.

It's actually a dolled up M110, but same difference. Agreed on the helmets!

I've listed the countries countless times before, pretty much all of the Warsaw Pact/Eastern European/Balkan/former-Soviet countries manufacture and/or employ "NATO/Western" weaponry. I think the one real exception is Bulgaria, but I've not come across much information regarding that particular country. H&K and FNH products can be purchased in Russia. Russia has one, if not several, AR-15/AR-10 manufacturers. Czech has Luvo Prague, an AR-10/AR-15 manufacturer and Barrett distributor. Czech also use AR-15s with their SF, M60s and M249s, and other weaponry. Serbia uses SCARs in their police force. Ukraine manufactures their own Tavors. I mean the list goes on and on. Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania use NATO weaponry perhaps the most of the former USSR nations. Georgia as well. And, for one, Chernarus was the host to a NATO/US intervention (confirmed lore item) pre-outbreak. Second, in said lore (unconfirmed tie-in) the US armed forces adopted the SCAR platform as their standard service rifle.

Whoa... whoa... whoa... Gorka? Myshkino? These are several klicks (Myshkino is at effing NWAF's doorstep!) inland. And I definitely wouldn't want people spawning near the one untouched swath of forest near Myshkino either. The furthest inland I'd permit spawns, in my ideal world, would be Tulga, Pusta, Orlovets, Bor, Pavlovo.

The disparity isn't as significant, though, as it was in the mod, between the non-military loot and military loot (or whatever you choose to deem as high-end). In the mod, aside from a few sparse spawns in Cherno and Elektro, the main juice of the military spawns were inland. Hence why you had a decent (although still not as adequate as I'd like) mobility inland. Whereas now, everything spawns loot. And there isn't much utility in actually finding decent loot. A police station is in every town, if not an outright military base, there are now more barracks. Point being, one doesn't have to travel far (if at all) to get geared to a satisfactory level from where one spawns. Most cities spawn everything up to and including the SKS. One can get 90-100% of what one needs in the cities on the coast. In my opinion, they either need to make the cities/coast so dangerous (through upping the zombie density) that it's imprudent for a newspawn to linger for very long and loot. Or, tweak the loot bias inland.

I think that folks who want random spawns need to consider several things... 1. There are other, more subtle ways, of encouraging people to be mobile (i.e. tweaking the loot to favor inland) 2. Spawning people closer to the juicy interior military spawns is detrimental for a multitude of reasons 3. Spawning people closer to potential persistent storage and player-constructed structures places one at an arbitrary advantage -- I don't want people getting any more of an advantage than anyone else to finding my stash just by virtue of spawning I mean, did anyone play Overwatch? Spawning all over the map, near military spawns made the game extremely repetitive. The journey of survival is lessened when spawns are inland, as you're arbitrarily rewarded just for spawning in. Now, to be fair, this is the case with coastal spawns (i.e. Balota). But, nobody is shortening your journey outright. In my opinion, people should be moving inland after they spawn, gearing up, then have an incentive to return to the coast (or do whatever they want). There are ways in which people can be encouraged to be mobile without the hand of god planting them across the map.

Here's hoping felled trees are persistent... and chopping makes a broadcast-able noise... and falling trees make broadcast-able sounds...

Right, but what criterion are you using to define "better"? They both look fine to me.

Which uniforms are better? I don't know, pretty subjective. They both look fine to me. One's red and one's green. We persevere.

So gore = apocalyptic? I think the buildings themselves are fine, in and out. The overall environment however, needs more apocalyptic blemishes (i.e. abandoned refugee camps, roadblocks, crashes, etc.)

I'd love to see some kind of camo netting/foliage be able to be applied to the MICH helmets. That and I still think the headlamps should be compatible with the helmet (including other headwear as well).