[email protected]

Like I told you earlier as well: this video is awesome :D

Then why put social contact in it? This is a survival mod, made for a first person shooter / army simulator. You can tell me whatever you want about that, but necessitating social contact in an army simulator sounds to me like you're trying to implement 1-UP's in a real time strategy game. Social contact is a main element for traditional RPG's and (to a lesser extent) traditional adventure games, not for first person shooters. Please note that the non-restricted part is really important here: you shouldn't limit a player to what gear he can wear based on his playing style. Someone playing as a bandit should be able to equip a medic's outfit just the same.

What's next? The need for sexuality? Getting babies with a female survivor because of the physical need for sex and the biological thrive for survival of the species? Having to go to a toilet every once in a while (that one might be achievable btw)? The need for sleep for a character (meaning you'll have to be online for about 6 to 8 hours a day just so your character can get enough sleep)? Saying we should move up one level in the hierarchy of needs when the current level isn't completed doesn't make sense, as it's like a building: without a proper foundation, there's no hierarchy. This said, the need to have social contact isn't very strong. People can go around for weeks without social contact before it actually starts to bother them a bit. Getting delusional from a lack of social contact is even far off the mark and shouldn't be a problem for people for the first few -months-, unless they were already delusional to begin with. Now, let's start looking at the time survivors live (the average is 49 minutes now), someone is considered to be living quite a long time if they have survived for over 14 days. 2 weeks... Heck, I've been sick for 4 weeks once without permission of physical social contact, since I was highly contagious during that time and it didn't drive me crazy, though it started bothering me for a bit after the 3rd week. 4 weeks = 28 days = 672 hours = 40,320 minutes without social contact; approximately 823 times the average lifetime expectancy in DayZ. I do, however, like your idea of clothing customization, though, coming back to the point I made earlier, that would break one of the most basic rules for sandboxes: what is available to one player, should be available to all other players as well. About character development, since there -is no plot- (in a sandbox game, you create your own plot), the idea of character development would push players into a certain direction, which is something you shouldn't do in a world that holds everybody's own stories. If you look at Askar, for example, he chose to be a medic himself, there has never been anything pushing him in that direction, nor is it a form of character development that has been laid out by the developers; it's a character he developed himself, without the need for intervention of developers and/or game mechanics. Another player might have chosen to become a lone wolf killing everything he sees moving. Fair call, it's his own choice and we should respect that, rather than go whine about it when you get killed by someone who follows that kind of character development.

Not killing a player upon encounter doesn't automatically imply you're going to be friendly with someone. What I usually do is completely avoiding the possibility of contact: I play on low-pop servers and generally try to spot other survivors before they spot me and try to find a way to avoid the possibility of them seeing me. When I'm playing alone, I'm just as vulnerable as they are, like Derpy_Hooves said as well. Just remember that there's a lot of play styles that are completely allowed (any play style that doesn't involve hacking/exploiting is allowed) that don't involve shooting on sight or becoming friendly with every other survivor you encounter. This would probably be true for me as well, moreover so when I'm playing solo. When I'm in a team, I know I'm covered when going to a supermarket. If the infected would get a lot harder, a group still offers that security. I play solo a lot as well though and in that case, I'd have to resort to killing other players in order to get my needed supplies if it gets harder to go into towns. The only (relatively) save targets are unarmed people. I will never harm someone who's unarmed, unless they're forming a serious threat (someone running at me with a bunch of zombies on his tail, be it armed or unarmed, is considered a serious threat, if zombies get harder than they are now).

Wonderful to see there's still people around who actually are friendly. :) Last time I was friendly to someone, he shot me in the back of my head ar the first chance he got. :(

I'm not saying that being egoistic is negative per se, but our drive to survive, leads us to follow the path that seems most profitable (or least unprofitable). The fact that we all have that drive, doesn't make us all dicks, as helping someone else out and sacrificing just a little bit of what you have at that time may lead to being profitable to you in the future (investing) is also an effect of the same drive to survive. When people hear the word "egoistic" they immediately associate it with negative behaviour, when one of the main definitions of egoism is: "Concern for one's own interests and welfare". Like I said, even when you are in a group of friends, you'll still think about how everything you do will affect your own interests and welfare, whether you do it consciously or not. Concern for your own interests and welfare isn't malicious; it's the main reason species manage to survive. I agree with this. People who don't like playing together aren't going to magically like playing together just because someone else thinks you should play it like that and should like that. The whole idea of "forcing" someone to play more in groups is, in fact, completely in breach of the principle of a "Sandbox" game. In a sandbox, you can make whatever choices you want to make, within the parameters set out by the creator of the sandbox. The creator of the sandbox should in no way force behaviour upon the users of it, because it will break immersion and work completely counterproductive. The main reason why people are shooting others on sight is because another human being can't be predicted if you don't know his way of thinking and his current psychological and emotional state. If you encounter an infected, you already know exactly what you can expect if you aggro him, he spotted you, etc. It's the unpredictability of the human mind that makes us scared of the other survivors, because frankly, they could shoot you on sight if they wanted to as well. This drives people more and more to a point where you indeed trust no one else, as you are isolating yourself from anyone that might have been friendly, simply because you couldn't tell if he would be friendly or not. That said, I'm also against a way to mark down that someone is friendly through the hud or something like that: the hud should provide minimal information (I -hate- servers with nametags for this reason). If there would be an option for people to change their appearance somewhat, marking that they're friendly, that would change. Let's give an example: give people who are looking for fellow friendlies the option to wear a blue band around their left upper arm (just an example). This would mean that once you've spotted someone, you can check to see if he's got a blue band equipped, denoting to you that he's friendly. This mechanism, however, is easily exploitable (look at the reason why espionage is such a favourable tactic): someone could start wearing a blue band around their arm, when in reality they aren't looking for friendlies at all, but just looking for easy kills / easy loot. Now you've got a problem: how do you decide who can wear blue bands and what would be the conditions for it? Now, as you might notice, we're talking about "rules" and "conditions" again, meaning putting individual restrictions and, as I said earlier, something like that works against the principles of a sandbox game. Long story short: 1) Egoism isn't strictly negative: "concern for one's own interests and welfare" 2) Forcing survivors to group up will never work in a sandbox game, as it goes against the basic principles of a sandbox game 3) There is no possible way to mark friendlies in a way that's not exploitable and following the basic principles of a sandbox game. EDIT: One of my mates once wrote a guest post about this on Kodabar's blog, go read it and see why he (and most other people) kill other survivors without asking questions first: http://kodabar.blogs...ay-z-story.html

What SeptusCap said: I won't trust strangers in my group, in case they might betray the whole group. Some people in my group have actually done just that with another group: found a clan on a server, one dude joined the clan, gained their trust and then, after some days, passed the locations to the original group, making sure he was in the back of the line and fired away when he reached the point where the ambush was set up. Won us a loaded truck, and more stuff. When you watch videos from back when DayZ started, you'd see groups of complete strangers going about and raiding towns to kill zombies, because it was all new and people didn't know their ways around yet. But people found out that it's not needed, people won't group up with strangers; why would you put your life in the hands of a complete stranger, if said stranger could put a bullet in your head without even blinking? The only groups I trust, are people I can talk to over TeamSpeak and preferably already know for some time, or are associated with some good friends of mine. Mankind exists of egoistic beings: everyone's doing what's best for them, even in a group of friends. It's a part of modern day society and it's reflected in how the DayZ community currently behaves.

I have never had that problem, but if you have a reset to before you equipped them, it indicates that the server you were on has problems with updating to the Hive.

Would be better if you just updated, since the DEVS ALREADY FIXED THIS PROBLEM in update 1.7.2.3. Ghillies and Camo are working fine again and you won't sink through the ground or lose all your items when you equip it. Apart from that, the fact that they didn't react on this topic (out of 102498435978 topics about people losing their ghillies) does't mean that they don't know about the problem. As you can imagine, a team of such a small size can't go around and answer all the questions of the thousands of users on this forums; they react in some topics, but it's impossible to answer them all.

Ah, so there's the villain. A bit strange that it isn't backwards compatible anymore, but thanks for the heads up! I'll just watch for my favourite servers' choices, when they update, so will I.

Fixed it for me :D

I've got details: I found myself 2 ghillie suits (don't ask, I'm luck like that lol) Putting all my stuff on the ground in front of me, except for the toolbelt (DON'T forget the binoculars, I did and lost them lol). Put on the ghille, swam for a second and came back to my original spot without the ghillie suit equipped and it's not in my inventory anymore. I picked up all I had dropped on the ground, so I lost nothing, except for my binoculars, but am really hoping to be able to equip my spare ghillie soon.

What I do is Google the old name. In your case, I found a GameTracker link, which is a website that, well, tracks game servers. Even if a server gets a new name, the IP address still stays the same. GameTracker and arma2.swec.se both store servers under their IP address, so a new name will be automatically provided by these services. The reason you find the old name in Google, is because Google is generally just a bit outdated: it still has to sync the new name to the search results.

It's US 537.

Great solution jskibo. :) I'll just switch servers then. I've been killed already by a bug, so my tent won't be there much longer, I reckon. About 48 hours, right?

Hello all, I have a question and am hoping somebody here is able to help me out / give me definite answers I played on US 265 and everything there was fine, found a place to put up my tent, put a lot of my gear in there and went hunting. After a while I had to leave the server to have dinner. When I tried coming back the next day, I couldn't find the server anymore; it's just not listed in the Servers list. I've looked all around and all I found when googling was this: http://arma2.swec.se...ver/data/258899 Furthermore, the forums have a rule where they don't allow me to search the forums for the term (without quotes) "server US 265". Instead, it looks for "server" (US is not allowed and 265 is not allowed)... "Oh hey, I've got 9001 pages of results for your query!" >_> Is this one of the servers that had a name change? And if so, what is the new name? And if it wasn't does anybody know whether it's down permanently, or just temporarily? If anyone can tell me if they know how I can contact the admins of the server, please do tell. :) I really want at least my tent back with a spare GPS, Toolbox, Lee Enfield, morphine, food, drinks, etc... Many thanks in advance! Cheers, ~Feng

Actually, I did, Hobo, but "hosted by Ersan" just gave me a load of Turkish websites mentioning the name Ersan.

Learn to read the forums before you start whining. On another note, have fun finding yourself new gear, it's the best part of this game. Oh, and a general hint? If you find a camo or ghillie, first drop ALL YOUR STUFF before putting it on, then, when it's done glitching, pick it up again. Winning.

Are you serious? This is a place to report bugs, if you think they shouldn't be reported here, you should look at what part of the forums you are. On-topic: Confirmed working on multiple servers while running 1.7.2 and beta 94444 as well as the latest update, beta 94700. Haven't checked logging out and in, but the combining ammo exploit is still working for the Colt .45 as well as for the M1911

First off, this mod is in an Alpha production state, which means things are -bound- to go wrong. Bugs happen, you -will- lose gear over random bugs, you -will- get killed by some bugs; just get over it. I understand how some people don't get this, but an Alpha is by no means a fully released game and doesn't aim to be something like that. You can compare this to going to a car factory and driving off in a frame without doors, paint or polish, using a wrench to steer and an engine that has to be manually started and restarted after every 5km. If you don't like this, you'll have to wait for the car to be completed before using it. Long story short, there is no warranty, nor -should- they warrant this. Shit happens.

Really want to know that as well.. I was on US 265 and all I found when googling was this: http://arma2.swec.se/server/data/258899 Or did they shut down their server? In that case, I want my tent back D:

I ran into this problem too. Was pretty happy, because I finally found myself some good stuff and a tent, placed it on a server (US 265) and now I can't find the server anymore... Who's managing the renaming by the way? Because I think that in this case, it'd be the responsibility of the ones renaming the servers to make a post with the old and new server names lined up.

Now let's just hope his last saved location was right after he died...