cinder

The word was maintenance. I like dayz pure gameplay and immersion being hard and violent as hell. And unlike many (from my last read of the forum a year+ ago, I could be wrong) I actually love zombie-killing and being killed by zombies (if it were up to me zombies/zombie gore/player gore would be more prevalent and way more gruesomely real). But "very very rare" firearms does not sound authentic. Rare yes, or it even gets to the point they feel cheap. But IMO their regulation would be better via other gameplay factors than extreme spawn rarity. IOW balance firearms' pros (lethality, reach, etc) with cons: more than just attrition.. I can't think of any others off-hand, but that is a better formula for good gameplay. Just plain rare firearms is not hairier, more difficult gameplay, it's less gameplay.

This was probably said already, but I'm at work and don't have time to read the whole thread: Items (e.g. magazine) shouldn't damage by mere association (because they're in the same carrying item, e.g. ballistic vest) but by actual impact proximity if not exact collision damage. I.E. magazine in lower right pocket of ballistic vest shouldn't take damage when said vest is struck by bullet in left shoulder.

One of the first things my tutor made fun of me for, when I first started basic weapons training and one of the handguns misfed or something. "You thought it was so easy, huh? ... Now try doing that [putting the intact round back with others in mag] in the dark and dirt in combat zone" If anything... The classic AK/M16 range of reliability depending on maintenance etc, should also show up. That definitely oughta be at least as high priority for modeling/inclusion, as simulating medical hazards down to over a dozen illnesses.

For a second there it looked like he needed your approval to do whatever the F he wants to do with his $$$.

It better be for sure. Right now it's still as hard as threading a needle to grab a ladder in Arma3.

Are you trolling? A video game is by principle not realistic. Reality is not fair. E.G. you only get 1 life.

Doesn't show up in search, so here it is, suggested.

I meant that M&B seems to model bows' pull & release well enough. The wooden bolts update doesn't sound good to me. It's as if every other weapon had unreliable homemade ammo, or wore out with use. Maybe the intended dynamic to accomodate quivers (more ammo in players' inventory) makes this change unavoidable... but it's still really corny.

Yep, I read this same report. Don't remember where to find it though. At least a few good professional comments on this +-4 year old article: http://www.futurefirepower.com/myths-about-the-nato-556-cartridge Some fairly informative dissent.

Satisfaction / Schadenfreude YMMV

Thanks!

It would (ought to) punch thru zombie heads. Give scrabble-ass-poor survivors a means for the bare minimum: killing zombies for the price of relatively basic level of combat proficiency (stealth, position, aim etc). Have you played Mount & Blade?

jacked up neurochem Visit a psych ward and see for yourself.

n/t

Probably mostly because zombie numbers are hardware/network limited first. Otherwise you'd only have to set herd sizes large enough that players would have too little ammo to wade thru em. And the extra shooting would be even riskier for PvP. So given big enough hardware budget, slower but more numerous zombies could be just as difficult as current ones. It's not that hard to shake em. Break their line of sight and you're free. This other point probably doesn't apply to SA, but keep in mind our dayzmod zombies must stop each time they strike. And as I understand it, they run as fast as you do. So it's a losing game for them.. Given that you have effectively infinite endurance and 100x their smarts.