S3V3N

Lol, beans to me now, if you checked Skype for messages at the start ;) ! What is the quality and format of the Video? I upload 1280x720 in H264 and it takes hours (or Chrome bugs the whole upload up). I spent whole days trying to upload shit and failed. Also - what do you use to record? I don't see frapps frames in the corner. I'm surprised that happens to you in, hmm let me think Gorka(?) This is what happens along the coast all the time. Those two had every right to shoot though. You should have backed up, hope they don't see you and lured as many zombies into the house as you can find ^^

You post that video as proof of a one inch cock. What was I supposed to do? Draw a picture of it?

Idk, I always feel clumsy in cities, which is parly due to the nature of the engine. I imagine it would be even worse in a Japanese environment. Also, I'm not sure I want to play as Japanese or hunt Japanese Zombies. No offense, but it's a stretch for me. I like all islands, really and think they would be best suited, but it'll be interesting to see the results of the poll (and the additions); I can add more countries to the poll, if you make valid (new) suggestions.

so where are my beans ;) ?

Well - it's the zombies agenda to keep you from running straight for every loot you find. Also, it is a quite ingenious system to distribute the zeds and make you aware of lootable areas, when you are off the main tracks. I think zombies should have hunger stages. They could make some hunger crazed zombies that somehow lost their track of where the town is and wandered off into the wilderness. They are extremely violent, but at the same time, they are almost too weak to chase you for long (to cut the running-through-the-forest-for-10-minutes out). Depending on their hunger zombies are differently aware of you and differently interested. A well fed city zombie may just let you slip by where a hillybilly zombie will use his last breath to catch up with you.

The only way to be "friendly" is with the crossbow. It incapacitates everyone I shoot, and I just leave them there, while I use the time to sprint out of sight. They can bandage themselves afterwards. I could of course kill them with my sidearm, but I'm actually trying to play the game, not pretend it's Counter Strike. It could be nice to "lock" someone's ammo after incapacitatiing them. You could heal them, find out their intentions and return their ammo or chose not to. (You can take their stuff, while they are incapacitated, but I don't have space or time for that.) I only incapacitate people, because I have no other means of contact and finding out their intentions.

Should have recorded your own death as well. How did it end for you? 5 minutes later?

Lol yeah that's totally weird,innit? I also found my bike when I was crawling around because of a broken leg. Total coincidence. Then I drove on to find a hatchback + soon after a 4x4. When I was looking for parts to repair either of them, I came across the Ural, which was in far better shape. So I decided to fix that and shortly after refueling the server restarted with a password. So weird to find that many in one day and not nearly that much ever after.

The thing is, in real life, nobody would be thrown on a beach with the option to find a gun and start shooting people. In real life, there would still be people, who care and are trying to survive and protect their family. They would probably soon find out that it cannot be done without a gun and making compromise. You said it yourself - the game encourages to shoot people on sight. I do it too, even though I tried over and over to talk to people, at the start. Why did I try to talk to them? Because humans are social beings. We live from trading both goods and information, we explore and compete in challenges/wars against each other, but even then we fight in groups. Even in wars there are often stalemate situation, because no side can gain an advantage. In Dayz killing the other is always an advantage.

They could also call it "Get the m107 and snipe the shit out of Elektro" Also - why is it that everytime I accept an invitation on Skype and chat with the people, I find out they are a group of 12-14 year olds? Shouldn't a game like Dayz be for more mature players? There are child protection laws in most countries. And I can't remember any kids playing Arma II with a vengeance.

So, in the case of a "real" zombie apocalypse, I take it you would shoot men and women alike, as soon as you see them? You would not care about doing anything else and hope you'd still be able to find ammo, ten years from now?

I agree that zombies should be just as threatening (everywhere) as are other players. So other players would be forced to think about uniting with people roaming the wilderness, instead of shooting them. The zombies should be the force to unite against, not the noobs.

Everytime I find and rep a vehicle, 1) either the session is lost, 2) server restarts with a password, 3) I am too weak and die while refilling or by dropping out of it, while I'm driving. Why do I drop out of vehicles when I faint? Doesn't seem to make much sense - especially not, if you are on the way to a hospital... Also - did you notice that vehicles go faster than zombies respawn? So unless you stop and wait for a minute you won't have any company at all. (I had a Ural Civ, Traktor and Bicycle, the traktor was cool, because it took me places and had huge storage; that is - until it was gone and most of my stuff with it)

I think you underestimate the difficulty with mass transport from a technical perspective. Trains would mean a lot of players in the same place, which the engine would have to sync. They move at a comparably high speed, which will result in rubberbanding and break the immersion. Also, it will limit the amount of zombies that can spawn in the area - and since the train goes through all the most populated areas it could become a game breaker. From a realism perspective and technically, it would both make more sense to organize boat trips between the main harbors. It may not be as fast or direct, but the route is almost identical and there is nothing on the water to break the immersion.

Well, boss battles are rubbish, but a lot of the threads you refered me to were either heavy WIP (and need to be read first), or didn't even get replies. I just believe there should be more than one way to play this game, without having to Skype or TS. It should all happen ingame. And for that you need better tools and more stuff to do. Otherwise it's the same as every other Deathmatch on a much larger map. Also, I think zombies should be a threat that needs players to unite against, instead of laughing at them as you sneak by.

Oh man - that is true. That's a really dangerous exploit of the hacker.

Nobody said "safe zones and crap". Everything will have to be player-created.If someone happens to make a safe zone out of five vehicles, some toilet paper and a brick and manages to maintain it - well , then they have beaten the game, imho. Because the easiest way to play Dayz at the moment is Bandit style, gun first, ask later and farm other players for items. If that is what you want to do in the future, you will find yourself staring at your kill counts only and wonder if you can beat that other guy that has over 500 kills. I am at that point and find myself utterly bored with this being the only option. Nobody wants rules or scripted events. Everybody wants a vivid and realistic world. Even though zombies aren't realistic they are a great scenario to start the "what if" imaginiation of players. What if I could do that? Then how would I do it? And who would benefit from it, who would I make suffer? The only consequence at the moment is that you're dead after a bullet to the head. There are far more and deeper aspects, I'd like to see explored. If you just want to keep running and gunning, well that's your choice and you can still do that, anyway.

Isn't that the next expansion pack for Arma II, where you can play as an animal? ^^ Doesn't changing servers work? I guess that would have been the first thing you tried, though.

Thank you, I will make some more paintings when I have time. Something in daylight perhaps. Meanwhile I made this little explanatory poster. I believe it should be hung in schools :) >>Edit<< this is the worst uploader I have ever seen on any website... http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg217/MaBo123/dayz_difference.jpg

Why should we stop trying? It's the purpose of the game to develop into a true post-zombi apocalypse. Stop trying to keep it from becoming that and start thinking, instead. As long as there is no stupified mechanism at work, and it actually means making an effort to reach goals, as establishing a trade market, I find it a valid idea. The medics have already helped hundreds of people in the game - and they weren't invented by Rocket, but by the community.

Well - when do you turn into a bandit? I shot two people without annything happening. So the statistics may lie (as always). Also remember the copius amount of people who respawned, until they were in the same place like their friends. Luckily this is fixed now. I get your strive for realism and it is true that you can approach players (you see first) from off their FOV, but it's not worth taking the risk. If you already have better gear than them, shooth them for provisions. If you have inferior gear - shoot them for their guns. <- That's something that is not likely to happen in RL, unless you are starving. You would try to work together to survive, because it is much easier to survive in groups than alone. If it were different, we wouldn't be humans, we'd be crocodiles. Read my post on page 1. It has some ideas about how Coop would actually work without causing a buttload of problems.

I understand and sympathize with your goals, but this is not going to work. Turning ff off and other intrusive mechanisms, like making you pick your side at the beginning, clash too much with the dynamics of the game of being open sandbox. This also means Dayz is a game where you are open to change. You may be a bandit at one time, but it should be able to return to the path of justice, too. I have given it a lot of thought myself, and I have come to the conclusion that one thing to unite people is to make cooperation more worthwhile. That means if people with different equipment and skills work together they can achieve more than one person alone. Example: one person can repair a car.Two people can build one from parts and when they meet on a scrapyard. Two players and one with a Saw can build a car that has a mg on the co-driver's side. There need to be more items to encourage that kind of cooperation. Trust can develop if you know you will need another player to make the most out of things. With two people + you could repair generators and refuel them, build hideouts (so you can start a fire when it rains) and generally bring back some kind of civilisation. Two players working together could clean an area of zombies, while one protects the other when he is dragging dead zombies to a pile. 3 or more zombies form a pile that can be lit up. Once all zombies in a radius have been cleared, there won't be any respawning there for two hours. Then you can use a flare gun and send a signal that you want to trade. It's all this kind of stuff that makes working together fun and rewarding. Of course deathmatching will still happen, so another suggestion would be to split the inventory (backpack + gear) into a public and a private section. Other players can take something from the public slots, but the private ones will be locked. When you die only the items in the public slots will be accessible, while the rest is lost for good. That's one way to couteract the constant looting by making it less rewarding to kill someone. At the moment, killing another player is better than looting a supermarket. Another remedy against killing players is developing addictions to counteract the nightmares you would get in real life, too. So murderers will actually need painkillers on a frequent base, or morphium, etc. which will make it less deserving to kill people at sight. It could also be that you will overdose or start fainting when you kill too much and take too many meds. Awesome would be, if it could visually be shown and people who murder a lot and develop addictions become dirty, pale and thin.

I have been wondering about this too, since I watched some videos that had the squad leader and the rest of the group show in the left corner - like in regular arma. It was only a group of 2, but I wondered how they did it. Must have been some early version, where the surivors still showed in rank. I think it should be possible to invite someone to your group when you are in viewing range. The one who invites will be team leader. A 51+ % vote will elect a new leader (e.g. like "votemap" = "votegroup"). A 50%+ vote will allow to kick someone from a group. Teamkilling/dm-ing in a group will be punished by -8000 blood; this part is optional.

As i said, I'm taking a different approach to my old idea, now. I think "factions" may also be a bit big of a word for now, so let's just call them "groups (with benefits)" instead. A good example of a working mechanism are the blood bags + hunting/cooking. You regain health from steaks, but you get blood back faster through transfusions. Do you take the risk of calling on another player, or do you do it alone? You can force another player at gunpoint to take something from your inventory and heal you. I think certain part of the inventory has to be public, while another needs to be locked. Another example that would be possible in the future: one person can repair a car, two people can build one from parts. A sniper + a spotter working together can share their provisions and live longer on one can and share one water bottle. If you slaughter a cow you get six steaks, if you put two cows together and surround them by fences they spawn a new cow every day (unless it isn't eaten). These are all mechanisms that I believe would work and cost little effort to create. Some of these mechanics mean making items more sparce, so people are forced to use them together. Or you can localize items, so players coming from the east will meet with players from the west and supplement each other. I'd also like players that play good and fair and help others, to become cleaner and well-fed during the game, while players that murder a lot and play egoistically will look dire and worn out; possibly they could develop addictions (cigarettes, painkillers, morphium, alc), which they can only lose by playing nice® again. Generally, sharing should be encouraged, but if you don't you will have to deal with the consequences and either keep a stash of meds ready (with the possibility of overdosing), or you will have to even things out by playing nice, every once in a while.

There will be factions, I am convinced of that. But I have come to the conclusion that these have to be created entirely from in-game oportunities and items. New items will be needed, because the items create factions (like the blood bags and morphine + scarce hospitals in the north brought forth the travelling Medics). All we need to get figured out is how these items can be put to their best use, e.g. by giving different players different parts of an item and they need to get together to really benefit from it. There is so much to consider - this has got to be the most difficult game to design ever, not because of its restrictions, but because of its freedom. Every change changes something else, and it is hard to predict the outcome of the smallest of things. Dayz is Chaos Theory in field simulation :)