FlashHawk4

Trolls gonna troll. It's not like they get to do it on side chat, so the only people who would be hearing it are the people in sending-a-rifle-bullet-to-their-annoying-freaking-heads radius.

Hunting will be a larger factor in the Standalone, so this might be a good addition. Animal AI will hypothetically be more evolved, and hunting will be more necessary due to fewer easy canned meals. Also, it would be useful as a signal device while enemies are around, so you have an alternative to shouting out orders and whatnot within earshot of them. A sentry could give a bird call in place of shouting "We've got company" over direct chat, and everyone who needed to know what it meant would have been briefed on it beforehand. Obviously we'll never be able to get rid of this, but this could help to neutralize the allure of a third-person system like Teamspeak or Skype. It would be more immersive than being able to say "Watch out dude" over Skype with no fear of being overheard, and that might be another way to get people off of Skype and TS and into the game. Obviously not as much of a factor as functioning radios and whatnot, but still. +1 for all of it.

I agree with the OP on crafting entirely. It might take a good deal of creative thought, but I think the best way to facilitate player cooperation is to make a way in which not everyone can craft everything. But, at the same time, I don't want it to be a (more or less) artificial system, like "Oh, you didn't pick Doctor at the start of the game, so you'll never be able to splint a broken leg", or "You haven't found that one particular book that teaches your character to build IEDs in one read-through? Too bad." I want it to be something complicated, even more so than Minecraft's. Not talking about the finished product, obviously. I don't want people being able to make their own swords and whatnot. And obviously some things would be simple, like wrapping a cloth around a stick to make a torch. But somehow I want it to be player-knowledge-based, as I've seen mentioned before, without being painfully silly and simple like Minecraft.

Sounds like somebody wants to play City Life with zombies in it. Limited crafting will be nice, but there's absolutely no way Rocket is going to include mining and smelting or something ridiculous like that. I'm sorry, but it's true.

Which is what the ancient Sumerians had to deal with when they invented farming. No one said it would be easy.

I was considering pointing something out to y'all, but then I realized that it didn't particularly matter. Attack helicopters don't carry very much ammunition; they've got about 40 unguided rockets, and perhaps 4 to 6 guided missiles. After those are fired, you've only got a 12.7mm to 35mm machine gun. And zombified Chernarus doesn't exactly have the proper facilities to re-rack those, and the player doesn't particularly have the knowledge to do so (then again, he is FLYING A HELICOPTER)... But yeah, it doesn't really matter as much as I thought it did. Yes, attack helos are OP.

I hope you realize I can now read the Cyrillic alphabet, in part because of Day Z. And I love that about Day Z, about ArmA, about BI Studios...they don't compromise on stuff like this, and it makes the game better in the long run. http://learn-cyrillic.ehpes.com/ There you go.

I realized something that we've been neglecting in this argument so far...civilization. Now, we all know that the larger and more developed servers have dedicated individuals who have formed coalitions for a specific purpose, instead of turning to what amounts to griefing new-spawns with high-caliber sniper rifles. Mostly what we see are medical units, who go out of their way to rescue people. Now, think about this. A new type of clan, that focuses on farming. Not every person has to have his or her own farm. In fact, not every group has to have some overall-clad flunky who has to sit around and tend to the pumpkins while Bob-Roy and Jed are out shootin' them some zeds. You just need one group of guys who grow food and sell them to the rest of the server. Let's say you've got about seven or eight loyal people, service-oriented with long attention spans. You get them all to the critical point in Day Z, the point where players don't worry about zombies any more, and never find themselves actively searching for antibiotics, beans, coke, etc. You set them down in one of those loose clumps of buildings that no one even really knows about, like map grid square 013018. You build a farm up, and you assign a few people to guard it and tend to it while the rest do what we scavenger-shooters do. Hopefully you'll also be able to herd animals, and bring them back to your little settlement. Mammals' reproduction would take way too long to be simulated in game, but chickens could lay eggs that could be useful as food. The crop yield term comes up, and the harvest is bountiful and wonderful and all that. You take a big-cargo vehicle and load up some stuff in there, and you have a travelling caravan that people can trade for food superior to the canned stuff. If you need bullets, ask for bullets. If you need medicine, ask for medicine. Boom. You're now a sedentary, non-nomadic clan of individuals who have basically done what the Sumerians did on the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates 6000 years ago. That's right, you invented civilization. You'll have to fend off the raiders, and whatnot. But you're well on the way to being a nation. Now, this relies more or less on in-game radio contact, or at the very least side chat, in order to put your wares on the market. It also relies on base-building. But I think this could work.

I was referring to the average good player, who tries to stay alive and tends to have an automatic. And I think that farming, right now, would be useless. But, if/when the loot spawns are adjusted in SA, it might have some relevance. I'd prefer foraging over farming, nuts and berries, but ranching an farming may be plausible. Except SOME amount of acceleration would probably be necessary to even make it a viable concept, which skirts realism..eh.

I honestly agree with the guys who are complaining about time frame. In the time it takes for a wee little carrot to grow to nom-mable maturity, the average player dies and restarts about fifteen times. And I do NOT want this to be Minecraft, with the 15-minute wheat plants. Perhaps, PERHAPS putting ropes around animals' necks and leading them to your base, in order to kill and eat them at your leisure. But NOT farming.

After my experience last night with Alt-Tab and firing eight rounds out of my 74, I'm with you.

I'd recommend making this thread into a poll, first of all, not to be presumptuous or anything. And yes, I support removing the crosshairs. I personally play on a server without them anyway, I forget how big of an issue they are, but it takes some of the challenge out of the game. And if you haven't noticed, I think Day Z should be all about challenging gameplay. Perhaps crosshairs would be permitted if one had a weapon with a laser sight, which would perhaps be relatively common, and (if the modular weapons suggestion is being considered) would make a nice object for veterans to trade to newbies. Obviously the crosshairs would be worse than they are now, I'm better at shooting ranges in ArmA 2 with them and not sights up to 100 yards. Not good. But just my 2 cents

Or we could revise the command system already present in ArmA 2 to reflect Day Z.

You took my sarcasm and turned it into perhaps the best idea I've heard all week. I salute you, sir.

I WANT TO SPECIFY WHICH CHAMBER MY REVOLVER HAMMER RESTS ON

Bro, 3rd-person shooting in Veteran with no cross-hairs pretty much IS blind fire. I got into a gunfight yesterday with an M16A2, and I realized I was basically shooting 3-round bursts in the general direction of where I THOUGHT the shots were coming from. Which is the most realistic version of warfare I've ever seen in a game. As of now, most Day S shoot outs take place between 50 and 300 yards. Without aiming down your sights, you're missing. Try doing it without looking at your GUN, and you're just being stupid.

Finally, an idea concerning armored vehicles I enjoy. +1, if we disable the logout feature. Plus, it would still be vulnerable to explosives like rockets and satchel charges.

Favorite Day Z forum quote, and I'm so sorry that I forgot who said it. "If this was Chernarus and you asked your commanding officer about the safety he would reply: "WHY YOU NEED SAFETY FOR! IS GUN! IS FOR SHOOT! IS FOR KILL!! SAFETY MAKE YOU WEAK!!!"while punching the table." Why do you need one, exactly?

Hmm...not quite enough. Try making the starting flashlight roll a 5% chance of breaking every 20 seconds.

Metro 2033 is one of my favorite BOOKS of all time. The game was okay too. Anyway, I'm with you for this. But I'd like to refer you to the "Huge Structures" thread that's floating around here, it's what you want.

I'd love to see anything underground. I'm personally infatuated with Metro 2033. The book, not so much the game. The sociological impact of being in the Metro is something Glukhovsky looked at so wonderfully, that no one else has done nearly as well. But, of course, I'd still go for bunkers, sewers, anything really. I'd personally love to see a military chemical-weapons repository with neglected and leaky storage tanks, that would be incredibly lethal to unprotected players. Not that it would form a huge cloud of nerve gas that floats around the map like other suggestions, but I'd love to see this bunker as a good high-level, high-risk, high-reward destination for the grizzled veterans who are bored of shooting up airfields. Think about it. The facility would be almost completely dark except for flickering red emergency lights, the gas mask and gear would (ideally) restrict your vision and movement, and one zombie could end your life if it just so happens to tear your suit or remove your mask.

I was under the impression that everyone's favorite part of the ArmA 3 engine was support for underground structures, and I'm sure that excitement is not lost on Rocket and crew. Sooo many possibilities. Also, colekern, really digging that banner in your sig.

At this point, I chose to abandon even considering this argument. But it's completely true, after all. Magazine not clip, APC not tank. It's like we're watching television newsreaders. And also it would be more likely to find Warsaw Pact vehicles than NATO ones, even though the M113 has been sold to pretty much everyone. And this is totally irrelevant, but I always kinda thought Chernarus was more like Georgia than the Czech Republic. Even though...y'know...Bohemia Interactive...Czech company...yadda yadda...

How many of them would be GOOD swords, though, and how many would be $80 quasi-toys that nerds bought from the Renaissance Fair? because trust me, there is a difference. A big difference. I'm a fan of new melee weapons. I just doubt they should be exotic stuff like longswords and medieval halberds. I don't know anyone who owns a (real) longsword. And I DO know someone who owns an M107. So there's your answer.

I don't think it should be a lifetime achievement system, because that unfairly favors the veteran over the noob. I personally enjoy this game's philosophy of "in death, everyone is equal". I think survivors should get slightly better at certain things as they practice them, like physical excercise and skill mastery, but I personally think that reducing the penalty for death in any way, shape, or form is a terrible idea. It's what makes Day Z Day Z. And, as Fraggle here mentioned, this is probably in the top 20 suggestions. There have been sizeable debates over this, and in most cases the proponents lose.