Bororm

Original talks were of having underground bases, as a separate instance (still enterable by anyone). I think they've now opted to lean more towards barricading and creating bases that way, but I don't think the underground stuff is off the table according to one of the talks Rocket gave. Both would be cool obviously, in terms of base building I'm personally a bit happier they are leaning towards overland base stuff as the idea of instances puts me off in a game like this. Definitely wouldn't mind seeing caves and overland tunnel stuff added though. As the above post mentions, there's some pretty cool rock formations out there already. A full on train tunnel or something would be really sweet though. I'm a bit disappointed that some of the drainage/sewer looking pipes aren't enterable. Hopefully we see some more cool stuff.

I get what you're saying but I don't think it's really a comparable compromise. To be fair I can't think of a good alternative either though, just additions to help. Height/weight would be an interesting addition, but I don't see that happening as all the items are modeled specifically for the existing player models. They even removed one of the vests because it didn't fit just right. My friends all easily recognize me in game because of the outfits I wear, generally I can tell them apart too but for the most part everyone ends up looking super similar in the SA currently so it can be difficult. I personally like to wear stuff for style rather than function. =P Maybe more incentive to wear different clothes would be good, the "problem" currently is that the clothes are given "realistic" slots as to how many pockets they have, so military/hunting gear is almost always superior, both in slots and camo. In any case, while I still often confuse people by their similar clothing it's at least a step up from the mod. There have been talks from the start of things like armbands or some other in game representation to help distinguish friends. Perhaps being able to dye your clothes would be a good addition too, then you could customize the "better" gear as well, to be more distinguishable. In terms of recognizing people by their behavior, I meant in a bit of a broader sense of gaining a reputation. For instance, when people gain incentive to stay on specific servers, if some dude really loves to just snipe/camp some specific part of the map, you may eventually come to recognize that hey, it's probably that dude. This happened to an extent in the mod on private hives. I spent a period of time primarily using the double barrel, and when I'd kill guys they'd often times ask in side chat if it had been me. Side chat's gone of course, so that limits things a bit, but if players can make an effort to actually talk to each other more in engagements (something I actually see more of in the SA, as fights are generally a lot closer range) then that will also be helpful. Back to nameplates though, I just think the less hud the better. There's the matter of what distances and when they are displayed as well. If they display from a fair distance, they can give away positions. You can say that ok, objects blocking line of sight will block the tags too, but that seems hard to perfectly implement, what about catching glimpses between bushes/trees etc. If it's that you have to be very close, then you're likely close enough to speak to them any ways and I'd rather that be done. There's pretty much nothing in the game right now in terms of an external HUD besides the crosshair, and there's talks of removing that, so it would just feel very out of place imo. In that sense I feel they are bad for immersion, because we don't see floating text above people in real life. The other thing is, the confusion from not knowing who a person is, adds to the gameplay a bit in some situations. The other day I killed a guy and put on his clothes and sorta fooled another guy. If I'd had a nameplate that wouldn't be possible. Perhaps that's unrealistic in the sense that he would be able to recognize me in real life, but what if I'm wearing a mask or facing away from him or whatever. There's so many little nitpicky scenarios where it wouldn't be realistic to instantly recognize a player either. You could try to account for them all, but again that seems extremely difficult to do. Just my thoughts on it. I don't disagree that there should be more ways to identify players I just don't feel nameplates are the right fit, even if it's a fairly easy solution. I'd rather see more ways/incentive to customize your character instead. I suppose I wouldn't be completely opposed to it as a server option, I believe it existed in the mod.

One thing that will help is when persistence becomes a thing. A sense of community doesn't really develop when there's no incentive to stay on a particular server. There's no sense of reputation if you never see the same people twice. When bases and even tents and loot spawn get added, players will have a motivation to stick to the same servers. There will always be those who hop but it will go a long way of building a sense of community in the loosest sense. Then you will begin to recognize players not only by their names but their behavior etc. This was true especially of private hives in the mod, and I believe it will happen in the SA. We're a ways off from that though, but I agree it is important. I'd personally rather not see anything as artificial as name tags etc.

This is something I actually agree with. We see each new addition as it's added. When I started the mod (it was early so it wasn't really "complete" either at that point) it was the first time in a long time that a game had a bit of mystery to it. A lot of the systems and mechanics were new to me even though I've been playing games for years, because arma itself is quite different than most titles. I purposefully avoided looking up maps and such before I actually found them in game. After playing the mod so long I know the game nearly inside and out, and a lot of that carries over to the SA. I think if I'd waited for actual release it would have felt a lot fresher and new with all the new systems in place. So I totally get what you're saying. That said, I love it too much so I wouldn't say I regret it =P

Rocket himself warns people not to play. It's an alpha, that's a legitimate thing to tell people because it is. The majority of people who complain and quit can't seem to grasp that concept, I don't see anything wrong with telling them to wait till it's actually finished. This game doesn't need to be hugely popular to be a success, even though it already is. As long as there's a core community (there already is, plenty of people love the game) there will be people to play with and it'll live on. They don't need to appeal to everyone, this game is a niche.

They just need more reason to feel attached to your character, I think when they get in their eventual subtle skill system it will be helpful. As well as when they create more high end/rare loot etc. You can't ever stop players who simply don't care about dying, from being reckless though and all you do is penalize everyone else if you put in timers etc to try to. For instance, let's say there is a 2 hour timer when you die. Some guy brand new to the game spawns in, get's immediately killed. Maybe not even by another player, maybe he dies to a zombie or a glitch or simply falls off something. Tons of ways to die in DayZ. Now he's locked out for 2 hours? That's terrible. Even 10 minutes would be awful. Not being able to loot your own body would also be ridiculous, and players who have groups would have another advantage over solo players. Can't loot your own body? Just get your buddy to do it. The main reason for the state of the overall deathmatch at the moment is just no real alternatives. Wait till the game becomes more well rounded, we'll see people spread out and do other things. There will always be those who choose to death match the coast, but there's nothing wrong with that.

It isn't an all seeing eyeball mode man. The issue is that between people being able to turn their trees way down and the way LOD works that it's fairly easy to spot certain objects and at times players. If trees and bushes actually rendered in a way that provided good concealment it would be a non issue. It's already being exaggerated any ways, as you're actually still very capable of hiding from helicopters in foliage. Do people even play this game? The amount of hyperbole I see around this forum is ludicrous. Another thing to bear in mind is a lot has changed in the SA and we don't even know how much of an issue these things will be. The way players render in, in the SA is already different than the mod, not to mention that players don't render in at all past something like 1000-1200m now (whatever the size of the network bubble is, you can already see this in practice from the ground). If things need to be tweaked they can, simply removing something because it doesn't work perfectly in a few aspects is down right idiotic.

This is an issue regardless of helicopters due to players turning their settings low. Helicopters aren't the real issue there.

I did, which is why I don't see what the issue is with helicopters. I said in my previous post that I really don't care if people want to make their sole purpose to smash camps. But his argument against helicopters is that they make it too easy to do so. His complaints are not about helicopters themselves, but stuff like LOD issues making it so easy to spot camps which is something that could be addressed rather than simply removing the helicopters. I am saying he is a bit hypocritical because his issue with helicopters is smashing camps, but it's as much of a player behavior issue as anything, it is not directly inherent to helicopters. This game isn't meant to be fair in every situation. Helicopters add for fun gameplay, just because some people can't handle having their shit destroyed doesn't mean the helicopters should be removed. Systems can be balanced. I don't get the hardon people on this forum have for removing shit completely instead of balancing or providing options. The sort of zero tolerance stance people like to take around here is potentially really a lot more detrimental to the game than anything else. The point of a sandbox is freedom to do whatever you want.

I play video games for my own fun, not other people's fun. As pointed out, helicopters themselves aren't bad for the game either, it's a lot of other factors. They actually create a ton of fun gameplay. You're also a bit hypocritical saying you care about the health of the game then admitting to just running around stomping camps.

This exactly. Also, they can learn from and improve upon concepts from the mod. Get used to the idea of helicopters, Rocket has mentioned them numerous times, they're all but officially confirmed. I can't wait for the resulting awesome fights again.

I still don't understand how people don't realize melee weapons hit where they connect. Like, how do you not figure that out or follow development enough to realize this is the case? It's not a fucked up point blank gun like in the mod any more guys, it's actual melee. Of course every melee weapon is different, they are all different lengths/sizes with different animations. Also, hit detection isn't actually that bad. It's lag/network issues/desync and that sort of thing that you're complaining about. When things actually run smoothly, hit detection works fine.

Random spawns around the map won't do anything, everyone will still gravitate towards the hot spots or suicide till they're close. It's an extremely forced way of trying to make use of the map, and an incredibly annoying one to those who like to play in a group. If all the best loot is on the west side of the map, and you have completely random spawns, I am going to suicide till I get a spawn on the west side of the map. Why should I run 20 minutes when I can spawn about 10 times in that duration, with a high probability of getting one closer to my destination? It worked fine in the mod to have the best loot inland. It provided incentive to go inwards, then you return to the coast to use the gear or stay up north depending on what you were into. Vehicles spawns and camps got people around the map as well. So did heli crashes. It is easy to get people to use the map, you just provide incentive, the problem currently is there's no reason to because everything you need is right by where you spawn. So put the shit you "need" further away. Random spawns potentially reduce the journey, which is more important than the destination. PvP in dayz isn't purely about who has the better gear. We saw this same thing in the mod, where people grab high end weaponry and go back to the coast to shoot fresh spawns. The result was that yeah, you kill a lot of fresh spawns but eventually you end up dead yourself because a makarov can kill you just the same as a dmr. Fresh spawns are even less defenseless now, punching and melee are very viable. We already see countless examples of groups kitted out camping the coast and eventually being killed themselves because some fresh spawn runs up and knocks them out and suddenly has an m4. I will say current spawns are a lot more crammed together than they were in the mod however, so I agree that they should be further spread out along more of the coast.

I think it would be a good time to start implementing weapons into specific sections of the map to increase traffic. Would love if the AKM only spawned in say NWAF and/or Balota (barracks spawns?), giving a real reason to head west again. When higher end gear gets eventually added they could spread out akm spawns, but I really think they should start creating incentive to get away from the east coast, and new loot is the perfect way to do that. Could do the same with the new large vests as well.

Honestly, probably coincidence.

Without watching it, I can tell you, whatever it is, it could have happened with helicopters on the server. Unless of course, it's a video involving a helicopter. But heeeey hyperbole, who needs anything else!

It's the current reload animation, there's nothing you can do. The video you saw was likely old. There were talks by Hicks of implementing a button to hold to stall the reload animation so you can see your shot.

Don't be obtuse. I'm saying that it takes effort to do so, it's not a trivial task to go around a map and destroy every single vehicle and tent. So if you're investing that much time into it, what's the problem? That's something to do. You've also given those players something to do as well, as now they need to remake their camps and get new vehicles. Vehicle hoarding/tent bases are actually sorta detrimental to gameplay if there's low risk of losing them. My group usually didn't bother going around fucking up every single tent and vehicle we came across because what's the point? But if you're going to be a "dick" and make that your sole purpose every single night, to go wreck everyone else's stuff, then wonder why your server is dying then I don't know what to say. I personally have no gripe at all if that's what you choose to do, I believe all playstyles are valid, but realize the consequence is obvious. It's a sandbox, I don't see a problem with the freedom to completely fuck it up. Some other players could always actually get together to stop you any ways.

I've actually played a lot in a group with helis and while they are very good for spotting vehicles/tents as mentioned, you also need to invest the time to actually go down and either check or break said things. I'd argue they're actually beneficial to a server for clearing up hidden vehicles and getting them back into circulation. Also, it is not hard to check the map without a heli. It takes a lot longer for sure, but if you've got a vehicle it's not that bad. The map is not as big as people like to pretend it is, and as mentioned the popular hiding spots become known and are obvious. So again, unless we're talking about hiding shit way out off the map I don't see the big problem. Also, who the hell logs off because they died to a group using a helicopter? I would rather not design the game around those players, just as the game should not be designed around all the people who cry about KOS. These are the types of players who are going to quit regardless. The only situation where not having a helicopter and trying to get a helicopter is an extreme disadvantage is when people used to land them on top of the castles or buildings that you couldn't reach without one. However, you could still blow it up at least.

How is it cheating? Or do you also not want to contribute anything besides tired illogical rhetoric? It is built into 3 arma games and the standalone with no alterations, so it would appear to be very intentional.

Unless you guys were sticking your camp out in the debug plains (something that was fixed any ways, or at least any private hive dealt with it nicely) then you were just playing with not so clever folk, because as you said there are only so many places to hide a helicopter so I fail to believe that every day you had control over all helicopters on a populated server, or that your camp was never found, unless again, you were just very lucky with playing against "noobs" for lack of a better term =P In either case, if you were spending several hours each day flying around to destroy/capture other vehicles/helicopters, then what's the issue? That's something for you to do, it's something for other people to do. We can assume base building is going to be much more elaborate than tents in the SA and we can hope that they'll be created with helicopters and vehicles in mind. What's the issue. These sort of "end game" conflicts are exactly the sort of stuff the game needs. People quitting because their camp got destroyed are going to quit regardless. That's the type of people they are, quitters. Should this game be designed around quitters?

In the context of let's pretend that the current 3PP doesn't exist. That we're just going with your example of having third person but not being able to see anything but terrain. What's the benefit over first person.

My argument has never been that one player doesn't have an advantage, my argument is that he has an advantage due to his positioning. The same thing you are saying. The resulting gameplay is different from 1PP, but it isn't inherently unfair in the sense that either player is given access to the same positions and tools. To put it another way, the fight is unfair, not the game. Not every encounter is meant to be fair, just as I have an unfair advantage in my example on a first person scenario. I have better visibility due to my positioning than those I am sniping down on. So no, you have not proven my argument wrong as my argument was never about every situation being fair, my argument has always been that the game itself is fair because once again, everyone has access to the same things, whether those be 3rd person cameras, or the best positions in which to use it. Enjoy.

How does it make sense that you can see the terrain but not the players/objects in said terrain? I don't actually care, if that was the choice for a 3rd server option great, but one of the common complaints against 3PP I see is that it's not "realistic" and a "floating magic eyeball." This still represents a "floating magic eyeball" just one that "magically" can't see players.

There ya go friend, wasn't so hard.