Katana67

See my above post. And not giving it attachments certainly limits the weapon. Not being able to fix a 4-6x scope onto a G3 would be a huge limitation. Honestly, I've been willing to take you seriously up to this point, but your logic on what constitutes something "realistic" and "dumb accessories" isn't sound at all.

Which hasn't been confirmed for consoles. At all. Smedley's saying it'll be an homage to SWG-style MMO's. On-topic. Great, albeit old, news. If they can optimize the engine up to snuff, I'll be happy in a few years time when/if they release it on console.

I'd rather they "balance" the weapons through things like weapon rarity, ammo rarity, and magazine rarity. Rather than limiting the capabilities of the weapon itself.

Who says these are issued from the 50s? The Mk 12 is just a "unique firearm that is actively fielded by the US military and is quite common". Same with the Mk 17, Mk 48, M240, Mk 11/M110, and M14 EBR! Funny that. While DSA FALs haven't been adopted by anyone in particular (even though the Peruvians have adopted a railed FAL). But seeing as how the G3 (and railed variants) are COMMONLY used by countries like Germany and Norway, gonna' go ahead and disagree with you. These aren't fancy-shmancy SF folks either, these are just regular soldiers. Google for yourself.

How are rails "tacticool"? They add functionality. The AR-15 is a weapon from the 1950s and 60s. Yet it has rails on it. Is it tacticool? Again, your criterion for dismissing things is arbitrary and pointless. And coming from the guy who wants a freakin' Mk 12 SPR.

I suspect the FAL or the G3. Would love to see either one. Not sure how they'd work out the attachments for them without having to render the weapons with rails (which I'd support). Or they could make weapon-specific attachments. Strictly speaking, the SVD is kind of a battle rifle, although it seems pretty focused on the DMR side of things. So that might be the first one, given that it has irons. Other than that, there aren't any Warsaw Pact battle rifles of note. The SVT-40 is more of a collector's piece nowadays and isn't very versatile, although I'm sure it could stand in for something like the Garand. And the rest are pretty much just SVD variants or clones (i.e. PSL).

Chernarus =/= Russia On topic. Well if some of the folks on this forum are to be believed, they'd have us all playing WWII zombies with our PPSh's and Mosin's only! However, these things (like starting fires) are fundamental aspects of modern survival. They're tried and true methods that have crossed the ages. Man can always make use of a fire. The "modern" stuff like stoves and stuff will still be there.

Trolling/joking aside. Battle rifles could possibly be used as potent anti-vehicle weapons. Yet another use. Seen a DMR bring down a helicopter in the mod and I've been smacked out of trucks many a time.

There's plenty of attachments out there for the AKM. The same if not more than the 74. Although I do sort of like the approach of having a plain-jane AR being somehow more common than the tactical AR.

I'm saying accurized, tuned, and purpose-built rifles perform better than stock un-modified weapons. That's all. Take it or leave it.

Which is what we're talking about, seeing that most are tailored to fire specific rounds. It's a combination of both. Either way, just realized that none of this is on-topic. Sorry folks.

Well for game purposes, I would submit that that's completely hypothetical, as neither of them are in the game. Nor were we actually comparing the two as if they'd both be included in-game. The fact remains that civilian rifles (stock ones, like the base Remington 700) are not equal to highly tuned and modified military variants. So to say that they're one in the same isn't accurate. Look at the Mosin. A gun which is actually in DayZ. The sniper variants were purposefully selected by armorers at Tula (and other places) and accurized, machined, added a new bolt handle, and mounted with optics. It's not like one could just slap a PU scope (which requires modification to the weapon itself) onto any old Mosin and have it perform as well as a purpose-built sniper variant.

Seeing as every scrap of an M40A5 is different, highly tuned by Marine armorers, accurized, and mostly originating from the civilian market (i.e. McMillan stock, Schneider barrels, magazine-fed, etc.) gonna' go ahead and disagree with you.

Played it for two years. So, yeah, I played it. A lot. Civilian rifles are most certainly different from military sniper rifles. Even Mosin sniper rifles in WWII were specifically accurized and selected. To say nothing of modern sniper rifles (like the M40A5) which feature almost nothing in common with their "civilian" cousins (i.e. the Remington 700 action, heavily tweaked by Marine armorers). Rarity is a massive issue. It dictates how often one would even have a functioning sniper rifle in the first place.

A pristine LRS is pretty rare in DayZ. It is entirely a problem of rarity. It can certainly be both either way. Rarity dictates how frequently one is going to have a sniper rifle in any given moment. Your last statement is a supposition. Likewise, many people do not find pure realism fun.

Or just have decent scopes be rare (which they are). Or just have weapons which can mount scopes be rare. Or just have ammo for sniper rifles be rare. Not sure where these so-called "sniper fests" even occur, besides the cities, which should be suicidal anyhow. It's not like there's a DMR mag in every hamlet and a DMR in every deer stand (as was possible in the mod). The "sniping" has been neutered heavily since the mod. What more do you want?

There were/are a lot of things which set DayZ apart from the other shooters on the market. Mainly in the fact that it's much more than just a shooter. The PU scope requires machining to mount to a Mosin-Nagant. No more than mounting an aftermarket 1913 mount. You're advocating realism. Yes. But you're advocating it blindly, without taking into account other considerations. And you're doing so in the most inflammatory way possible (i.e. the irrelevant comparison to CoD).

Planks are fine by me. I suspect they'll have metal sheeting and other materials, lockable doors, etc.

The only weapon that this is the case on, is the Mosin and the LRS. The rest have appropriate optics. Which CAN mount Picatinny accessories, provided it's fitted with a relatively cheap scope mount. Saying it's like CoD is hyperbole at best. Loads of games take liberties with attachments for pragmatic gameplay reasons. You're effectively advocating for a tiny piece of metal to mount the LRS on. If that breaks your experience, dunno how to help you.

[insert comment about how I've been playing DayZ for two years with a controller and had fun all the way through]

I have no idea if this is just me, but in the mod, it clearly used to set hard west. Now it's clearly southwest. Might just be me, I dunno. Either way, I haven't used the sun to navigate in a long time. Which is sort of sad, memorizing the entire map sort of does that.

Pretty long-standing issue with how doors are handled. Figure it might be another aspect made worse by the removal of the crosshair-dot (which I fully support). Some doors require the player to look at the door itself to close/open it. Others require the player to look at the empty space in the doorway for the door to close. Most require the player to stand still searching for the arbitrary box in which we can open/close doors. Perhaps this could be looked into further down the line. I'd love for it to be a bit more intuitive, would probably be the easiest solution. Maybe a fixed animation could be added for opening/closing doors (i.e. large bay doors, single doors, gates, etc.) Maybe something like this (*gasp* It's KAWED). Either way, I'd just be fine with more responsive doors. Doesn't have to be fancy.

She looked like a freak to me...

The US. Although I've lived in the UK for a time, and the exterior doors there that I can recall opened inward as well (sort of hard for me to recall doors from 10 years ago haha).

Dunno if you ever played DayZ+ (it fell out of favor pretty quick in the grand scheme of things) but something as simple as just upping the damage that zombies inflict per hit goes a long way in making them scary/threatening again. Granted, it sucked in the mod (as it does in the Standalone) when you'd just sort of randomly get hit by zombies and they'd attack through walls. But, approaching an area was something you'd have to think about doing first. Rather than just running in and mowing down all the imbecile zombies. Once they get the stealth and aggro issues worked out, I think zombies will be able to be much more powerful. Like I said in a post I made a few weeks ago, zombies have to get worse before they get better. They cannot remain guided missiles with 100% access to your exact location when aggro'd.