Katana67

But I still don't think it matters. Sniping isn't any easier than CQC. It's just a different kind of risk. You're trading risk, for range. It's still plenty hard to hit folks at range by comparison to CQC. Especially when people are on the move.

Centralized is a misnomer. We're still spawning along a coast, not in a diffuse group based around a fixed point (i.e. a center). It may seem semantic, but it's misleading as represented in the poll. Weighted toward the east, sure. But it isn't centralized. And there are unrepresented middle grounds as well. Like having us just spawn all along the coast, rather than just the east.

Well the poll is a bit misleading, the spawns aren't centralized. They never have been. They've favored certain areas, sure, but they're still dispersed (over a linear landcape, meaning the coast). To answer the question, no. The coast should be where folks spawn. Spawning people over the map undercuts the significance/isolation of potential construction and persistent storage mechanics. People should spawn along the entire length of the coast (as opposed to now) but they should only spawn on the coast.

What reasoning are you citing by holding this opinion? Most, if not all, of the attachments are readily available on the civilian market. We know this isn't a mil-sim, but weapon attachments aren't exclusively used by militaries. And even if they were (which they aren't) what detriments can you cite in their inclusion?

People act as if we can't have a populous inland AND a robust wilderness.

Like what? What could SenChii (the map designer) offer? Other than map design...

Shameless bump.

I was thinking about the loot locations in DayZ, most of which are highly centralized in terms of what they actually spawn (hospital, barracks, police station, piano house, etc.) Rather than have a higher chance of weapon spawns at an arbitrary residential building (i.e. the piano house) why not transfer that likelihood of weapon spawns to a gun shop building model? Also, to be clear, I still want weapons to occasionally spawn in residential buildings. That would be left untouched. This is not intended to replace that, just to put the weapons that are currently spawning into a more appropriate building. Of course, being the apocalypse, I certainly wouldn't want the gun shop to be as pictured below... meaning fully stocked, it should be pretty barren like the market buildings in Chernarus. To be clear, not suggesting any more weapon spawns overall at this point. Merely suggesting displacing the weapon spawns that we already have in certain buildings (like the piano house) to a more fitting building model. Gun shop, Prague, Czech Republic This may not be feasible for several reasons. One, development prioritization/workload. Two, the fact that we've already got centralized weapon spawns in certain buildings. Three, the possibility that it may result in a marginalization of rarer weapon spawns in residential buildings. Four, folks might not like the idea of a gun shop (for various reasons). I think it'd be good to move the ammo/weapon spawns to a new building model which is fitting, rather than finding a box of ammo on a supermarket shelf or finding four weapons in an unassuming residential building. Plus, it may give the developers a chance to configure their towns a bit more appropriately rather than shoving massive police stations in every one. Not entirely sold on the idea, but what are your thoughts?

This. This is where I think people are misled. I'm not advocating for more spawns, just "appropriate" spawns.

Meh, essentially what you're asking for is more variety in buildings, rather than a re-allocation of resources to make fewer towns. Sure, I'd love that. But the main issue for me, is the wilderness. It's become insanely marginalized. And I think once they implement persistent storage (even if it's just packs, not tents) and player construction, they're going to really feel the detriment of having such a limited wilderness. I'd rather they devote more resources to adding a proper mountain range, streams, rivers, cliffs, all that jazz. http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/185396-save-the-trees-man-marginalized-wilderness/

Agreed, artificially dictating downrange accuracy is a bad thing. But changing how the weapon itself handles, seems like a decent way of making certain attachments significant. Hell, I'd even support a sling attachment for quicker transitions from primaries to secondaries. Whether or not the devs will take this approach has yet to be seen. As an aside, can anyone direct me to any quotes from the devs regarding the M4-attachment relationship? Have they said anything? Do they intend on continuing?

Agreed! Would love to see both eventually. There was a Thompson in one of the pics I had of the gun shop in Prague. More weapons! Less discrimination!

Mo' money... Mo problems... Congrats devs, and buckle up for the uninformed tsunami of "You've made X amount of money, why is the game still Y?"

Oh, it's much more than five... 1. A more robust wilderness 2. Better zombies 3. Decreased significance of graphics settings (i.e. ATOC, gamma, etc.) 4. Probably barricading, I suppose 5. Survival mechanics (i.e. hunting, cooking [and therefore, rarer looted foot items], fishing, growing crops, etc.) As to weapons, many subcategories... AR-10/M110/SR-25/HK417/L129A1, Mk 17, and some kinda' FAL - Supported shooting - Robust attachment system via rare looted rail systems

I am glad they have the angled compensator on the AKM this time around, I never liked the look of the AKM in ARMA II for that very reason. Nice screen of the OMON uniform.

To those saying they disapprove/dislike attachments affecting accuracy, a few things (I agree with you for the most part). I believe, as I understand it, the current attachments that affect accuracy do so via modifying spread values. This is, of course, a caveman solution. But I'm not talking about having foregrips modify innate accuracy or down-range dispersion. The sight picture should still be accurate, it'd just move around more/less before or after you shoot. So there's a difference there, it's not artificially dictating your accuracy after your round is in the air. It's merely either decreasing sway before you fire, or decreasing recoil after you fire. It's not dictating the accuracy of the weapon, but it's reducing input for the user as to make X slightly easier. It's modifying the level of sway in a few of my thoughts, which I think is the best way to do it. Rather than have it mess with recoil. That said, while I agree that in real life, their use is overstated (albeit very, very, very common). And their utility is negligible (although based on comfort for the most part), I believe they should do something in-game. If only to give real use to the RIS handguards.

I think this'd need to be combined with internal organ simulation.

Agreed, I'm interested in seeing what they come up with whenever they get around to putting in offensive/hostile animals. Something like Red Dead Redemption would be fine. Save for the fact that it was insanely easy to bag bears.

For real? Might have to peep the Crossbow once it's out. And the LRS is really the only exception at this point, so I'm not sure I'm willing to use it as an example for what might happen in the future. All of the other optics are accommodated for with "proper" mounts, other than the LRS. I certainly don't mind the LRS being able to be used on the Mosin, either way. So yeah, maybe that'd work. Not entirely sure I'd want an ACOG just sort of, slapped on, to a bare AK receiver (I'd prefer a mount), but whatever is easiest.

As an aside, does anyone want to see a hard divide between Russian/Warsaw Pact optics and Western/NATO optics? Meaning, would you prefer it if they drew upon separate optics pools? I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to this, given that it'd make it easier to tweak one pool of optics to be more common whilst the other more rare. But I don't like the idea of a two-way street in this regard (i.e. Battlefield). I'd want Russian/Warsaw Pact optics to be weapon specific, whilst Western optics to be more modular and universal (in terms of application, not rarity). Or even weapon-specific (rather than origin-specific) optics? (i.e. like the PSO for the AK, SUIT for the FAL, DMS-1/Hensoldt/Zeiss w/ claw mount for the G3, etc.) However, from the standpoint of variety, I'd love to be able to mount an ACOG to my AKM. So personally, I wouldn't mind it if railed mounts were available for pretty much every weapon upon which it is necessary. Might simplify the attachment system from a development standpoint if most of the rarer optics were using the same rail interface, which would have to be looted as well. Whilst we leave the weapon-specific optics as the more common optics. Try and not consider the lolrealism (even though it is "realistic" as exemplified in the images shown below of reality) in this regard and instead think of pragmatic gameplay concerns. So in other words, you could have this... Versus this... Or this...

Right, but that uniform wasn't the OMON one. It was just some random police uniform. They're two different uniforms. Torchia states that, "We’re starting to play with OMON-inspired riot police uniforms but its a bit too early to show anything." The uniform in the screen certainly has the OMON camo pattern, and is blue (albeit roughed up owing to item degredation texturing). It's a new model for sure, one that we haven't seen before. Looks to be the OMON uniform. I'm sure there will be some kind of hunting jacket eventually, as we've got hunting pants already. As an aside, I wonder what they're going to do attachment-wise with the AK. I hope there's some kind of rail system available akin to the M4 for the foreguard (optics don't necessarily have to have a rail mount, as the PSO is coming in regardless). And I'd love to be able to paint the AK as well (not just the effing wood a la BO). Plus, would love a suppressor for that bad boy as well (not to mention working suppressors in-game for rifles).

The hunting jacket, appears to actually be the OMON uniform Torchia had discussed previously Last I checked, OMON wasn't present in Chernarus. Nor is it a unit used for foreign intervention. Fiction strikes again! But it's okay this time, because it's Russian and has Cyrillic script on it. If it had an American flag on it, whoo boy, my immersionz would have been so broke. /sarcasm

Didn't have much of an effect in the mod, whatever the ballistic discrepancy is now, I'd put it back to the levels it had at the mod if I were in-charge. I think they really need to start including more distinct cartridges to help aid in making certain weapons rare and certain weapons common, via ammo rarity.

All things gnarly. Can't wait to try out the AKM, my M4 is just getting boring to look at these days.