bazbake

OP attempts to convince people to use heatpacks as money. Response? "Hey, how about you go try to convince people to do that." Sometimes I wonder...

So what are you doing here?

Hacker teleported all of us into the wilderness. Mowed us down with a SAW when we appeared.

Your character hyperventilates when under too much stress when his blood level is low. This causes you to wheeze and your hunger to drain faster.

You have to get there right after respawn to find up to 8 boxes of medical supplies worth of blood bags. And then you have to do it twice. And then you need to find room to fit 240 blood packs in your inventory. With a coyote pack, you can carry 24 slots. That's 36 slots in your inventory for blood packs, or 7 separate inventories worth of blood packs. Technically, it takes about 3 seconds to blood bag someone. 2 seconds to swap out a rifle. 2 seconds to swap to a blood bag. So each blood bag would take 7 seconds to use. So 7 x 15 for about 85 seconds for a medical box full of blood bags. 680 seconds to use 8 boxes. For 16 that's 1680, or 28 minutes. So 30 minutes. And then travel time. Pretty cheap investment if you have the resources. But instead of 60,000 humanity, you're talking more like 8000-9000 humanity per person with less than 10 minutes of healing time. Anyway, I made this suggestion in another thread: Shooting but not killing a player should cost as much as healing and bandaging them (currently 300). Shooting bandits costs no humanity. Healing bandits earns no humanity. Easy fix. And it makes it impossible to humanity farm. If you shoot a non-bandit, you lose as much humanity as you would get bandaging and bloodbagging them (for now, 300). If you shoot a bandit, you lose as much humanity as you would get bandaging and bloodbagging them -- nada.

http://www.dayzwiki.com/wiki/Humanity

@schrapple Next time you'll need to put your subject in the title clearly so everyone knows what they're supposed to be discussing. Your thread has now officially been derailed and at least half of the responses are to ideas you never even put forward. Steps to thread attrition. Pose an idea. Someone agrees with the idea/disagrees with the idea. If they agree with the idea or disagree with it somewhat, they may try to modify it. If they mostly disagree with it, they either pose a new/unrelated idea or never read the idea in the first place and argue against something different. See step 2. Add new thread to current thread. Eventually you end up with 10 threads going on at the same time. The issue is, a lot of people have their own ideas but they don't want to test their ideas by posting them in new threads where people may ignore them or, sometimes, they have already been ignored. Occasionally your idea inspires their idea and they feel that since they came up with the idea while reading your idea that the two ideas must naturally be related, which is actually an honest mistake. The key, of course, is to state early and often what you're discussing, so that, for example, a discussion about Afghanistan doesn't turn into a debate about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.

Especially if you quicksave/restart and give yourself 10 luck.

I have a can of beans. If you throw in a M16, I'll part with it.

I once played seven hours of DayZ straight without dying. How many days added to my total? One. I once logged off for three days. How many days added to my total? Four. DayZ. Where the rules are made up and the points don't matter.

@schrapple What you don't realize is that many people are personally invested in the current system staying as it is. While your arguments are actually quite valid and the basic ideas easily supportable (just check the polls on whether or not tents and vehicle storage should be thrown out completely, for example), there is a group of people that finds the game unplayable without a significant advantage over new players and a sense of constant progressive accomplishment. The irony is that the original concept behind the game punished failure with starting over from scratch. It doesn't matter if your ideas are closer to what was originally envisioned or if it would ultimately provide a surprising amount of game balance and constant tension and excitement, this group of people doesn't want to play with permadeath at all. It doesn't matter how much more faithful to the original idea and how easily implementable it is, they don't want the discussion to even take place. So it's not necessarily a knock on your planning skills, it is more an attempt to stop you from even planning. There will be no counter-idea that accommodates their concerns because the point of the concern is to stop the ideas from even appearing. So don't take it too personally.

Some people like to say they play how they would if they were actually in that situation. I believe a more accurate description is, they play how they would play if they were immune to handgun bullets and could immediately come back to life 2km away and restock with their tent after a ten minute jog. If you want to see how people would really act in that situation, give them permadeath by taking away storage and bump handgun damage up. Now THAT would be a real experiment. If a missed rifle round meant you could be floored with two or three .45 rounds to the chest and you couldn't reup back at a bandit camp, you would see how people would really react in a post-apocalyptic situation. Hint: most of them would hide in the woods pissing themselves. Seriously, just wait for the posts in response to this one...they freak the hell out if anyone even suggests permadeath.

You're dead. You shouldn't even be able to pick up your crap again. Go play the game.

Beans for appropriate user name. I argued pre-hero skin that PVP in the game was easier for bandits since the prisoner dilemma makes KOS the mathematically logical response to random player encounters (more importantly, bandits were more likely to get free loot than survivors were to survive random encounters). Interestingly enough, the bandit skins should make survival higher for non-bandits than bandits. I'm still waiting for the game to adjust to the new dynamic, though.

This could easily be done by increasing how much of the screen the crossbow model takes up and changing its angle. I don't know if it was a compromise between obstructing view and accuracy or what, but I hope it would be a simple adjustment. EDIT: Although you can quickly figure out the sighting by shooting at a wall repeatedly. But still, why the extra crazy?

@Tankerd18 You have one person with your point of view trying to engage using information that isn't gut instinct or something they think they heard from somebody once. The reason we're done here is because you aren't that person. And if you're not more concerned about the dude threatening to shoot me in the face with a .308 than you are that I don't take what you have to say seriously, then your priorities might be off. But seriously, you don't have a "common consensus" by any measurement. You just have the angriest, most hostile, most violent posters on your side (welcome to the internet) and only one of them even read my post. EDIT: @zor. Huh?

They're more than twice the size of the rocket launcher. M136 weighs 14 lbs. M107 weighs 30 lbs. It doesn't have to be just another off-the-shelf FPS. I'm pretty sure you're on the opposite side of the argument you think you're making, if you think you're talking about originality. BF3 has a .50 cal in its singleplayer. BFBC2 had .50 cals. BF2 gave you the Barrett M95 on its first tier. COD Modern Warfare 1, 2, and 3 have .50 cals. Actually, they're all the same .50 cal, I believe, except for the AS50. .50 caliber Barretts are like the jumbo size vanilla of gaming and they show up about 100 times as often in deathmatch than they show up in the actual military. Everyone expects a .50 caliber sniper rifle in their FPS. It's like the mint on your pillow. And DayZ gave us TWO. The same two used in COD Modern Warfare 3. There's nothing original about these sniper rifles. They're the most common sniper rifles in gaming over the last 10 years unless you count the Dragunov SVD. Technically, by going with a .338 instead of a .50 in multiplayer, BF3 took a longshot chance on a round with a better ballistic profile...go figure.

I like this. Have some beans.

Only if it's a can of sardines, of course.

The M24 and CZ550 are pretty much the same gun with different scopes. The CZ550 is uncommon and the M24 is rare. The damage of the .50 calibers are ridiculous unless they're using Raufoss Mk211s and they're exploding on impact or something. If they would bring up the damage of the .45s to kill in one or two hits, the shotguns to kill in one hit, and the 9mms to kill in two or three hits, this wouldn't be as much of an issue.

@dev0 You don't know your own sources or anything written in them. I'm not defending your argument for you. By the way, I get that you have ideas for an even more realistic system for bullet damage. A poster by the name of necro already beat you to it a month ago. I'm in that thread. Even mocked up some bar napkin injury tables for location-based damage involving infection, bleeding, and unconsciousness. All of your concerns are duly addressed there. Search function. @MykeMichail So your argument is that since buses kill by bouncing people off of them, then bullets kill by bouncing off of people really hard and the harder you bounce the bullet off someone, the deader that person is? Sounds legit. While we're at it, the sun revolves around the Earth because I woke up this morning and it was in the east and I came home and it was in the west so it's just so obvious, I don't care what those "scientists" have to say with their witchcraft. Now excuse me while I watch watermelons explode on youtube. @Tankerd18 We're done here. I'm not saying you are any less likely to serve in the military as any other random person on the internet that I have never met. But when I quote military surgeons referring to military studies on wound ballistic and performance in military journals and military reports and then a random dude on the internet tells me "I don't really feel like reading into it" and then proceeds to tell me stories he says he's heard, I have to take what you say with a grain of salt. @Mr Two You don't know anatomy...and now you are going to expand upon this by explaining how you think the body works? This should be fun. Wait, how would shooting someone in their artery with a high velocity rifle cause bone fragments again? I think you need to walk us back through that one. Wait, how did we get to... Oh, now I get it. Like I told dev0, there's already a thread on that. Dig it up. It's lonely and cold. This is about better bullet damage numbers to replace the current ridiculous ones. When you first popped into this thread you said I tend to abandon posts once "experts" get involved. I replied: Not the majority, but it didn't take more than a few hours for you to prove my point. Don't worry, you can share. There's plenty of "obvious direction this thread is heading in" to go around.

There are people who play the game. And then people who are fucking with the people playing the game. At some point, the people fucking with the people playing the game will be forced to play the game or GTFO. This I truly believe.

Ah, reality. In reality you have to hump a 30 pound rifle and the cartridges weigh a shit-ton. In real life you could carry a shotgun, a sniper rifle, three or four handguns, and an assault rifle all strapped to your back with a sack full of ammo for the same weight. Ah, reality. So we're talking about reality. In reality, a .50 caliber rifle round makes a 1/2 inch hole through someone's arm. In this game, it disintegrates them completely. Ah, reality. In reality, firing a .50 caliber rifle would rock you back on your heels and take about 10 seconds to sight while standing. In reality, there are less than 1,000 trained snipers in the military. But in TF2, they average about 10% of your typical squad. Even more than that in Battlefield. False equivalence.

@Delta Smoke 01 The kill reticule for the AS50 and M107 isn't a dot like it is for the DMR or any of the other sniper rifles. It's more like a square the size of the person you're aiming at. Killing with the AS50 or M107 isn't sharpshooting, it's skeet shooting or plinking cans in the vague shape of people. @OhShitSarge Here's an open secret about the AS50 and M107. A one-shot kill for a DMR at 800 meters requires a headshot but for a .50 caliber it requires at most an extremity shot. At 1200 meters, the profile of someone at 800 meters will be 45% the size, or roughly half as big. So if a sniper rifle requires a headshot for a one-shot kill at that range, it's half as effective at 1200. But an AS50 or M107 only requires an extremity hit to kill, and a person's head is 1/6th the height of their body. This makes a one-shot kill by an AS50 or M107 at least 6 times (a pretty conservative measurement) as easy as any other scoped weapon within its effective range. So even at 1200 meters, where the human silhouette would be 1/2 as large as the human silhouette at 800 meters, a kill on a stationary target with an AS50 or M107 is still more than 3 times as easy than one with, for example, a DMR at 2/3rds the distance. Furthermore, a moving target at 1200 meters only appears 2/3rds as fast as a moving target at 800 (you can do this experiment at home...close one eye, focus on a point directly in front of you, and hold two objects in your hands, one directly in front of the other with the tucked knuckles of one hand touching the back of the other hand...then move both hands together back and forth on a plane...notice how the object in front seems to move farther than the object behind it even if your hands never break contact). Add that in and one-shotting someone running from 1200 meters with the M107 or AS50 is 5 times as easy as one-shotting someone running with, say, the DMR from 800 meters. So it's 5 times as easy to one-shot a moving target with an AS50 and M107 at 1200 meters as it is to one-shot a moving target with a DMR at 800 meters. The M107 is five times as powerful as a shotgun. The AS50 is 30 times as powerful. So, yeah, this...times 5. Sorry, but these guns are a joke.

So in the current system people don't guard vehicles?