Dinnj

Server's great. Been playing a bit and it seems super stable which is great. I guess the only thing it's missing is a few more players, but it being relatively quiet is still a nice change of pace. (That helicopter certainly spices things up, too!).Would be great to have competing clans here, though.

This mod has peaked far too soon. Nonchalantly brushing off people's feedback as if it doesn't matter is fucking retarded, it's no surprise anybody posting in this thread has never attempted to create a player community. Keeping people interested throughout alpha is, like it or not, absolutely critical to future successes. All the cretins posting just to kick a player when he's down just screams shitty community. Don't get me wrong, OP will probably not be missed, but the dozens like him who will stop playing that don't post on the forums to signal their departure are going to start adding up.

Player diversity creates a more interesting and complex gameplay. Splitting up certain types of players into certain types of servers drastically reduces this great aspect of Day Z - differing sorts of people with different goals and motives.

Stop trying to oversimplify the mod with weird immersion breaking mechanics to make life more convenient. "Shoot the red one" is not fulfilling or interesting.

Oh god why, we've already had this exact idea and I just don't want to explain why it's so damaging all over again. Use the search function? I hope it wasn't one of those threads that was lost, we'd just about started to resolve it.

No, no unless extremely slowly, yes, yes, no absolutely not never mention this ever again, no, no, absolutely not.

That's the sorcery of modern weaponry though, and why guns are so dangerous. It doesn't matter if that .45 ACP impacting your heart was fired by an elite navy seal or your 6 year old playing with your gun because he thinks it's a toy. Physics is going to treat that bullet the same way. I think all reducing damage would do is make the game far less realistic and ultimately frustrating. I'm sure people know how unrealistically hard it is to kill people with a Mak..

I wouldn't mind some kind of cool effect from being isolated, or something that is just a token of "You're getting a bit paranoid having no one to watch your back", so long as it didn't actually affect gameplay and was curable by medication. A heavily subdued form of Amnesia style insanity effect might be interesting. Anything that would negatively affect gameplay for lone wolves, including something curable with meds, is still punishing them for their play style; because they now require a fourth consumable on top of food, water, ammo.

So you are saying the sights should come out of alignment randomly to allow for human variables? If the actual change was to make the guns less accurate just to imply human inaccuracy, I'd probably just stop playing. Nothing screams immersion breaking like pointing a modern assault rifle at someone, firing, and missing at like 100m. Guns are as accurate for all players, some players are definitely, definitely, better shots than others. Variation already exists. It is not hard to aim a gun. Maybe a small amount more sway to make 300m+ crack shots more difficult, but anything more than that and I'll disagree.

I really like these ideas. They are infinitely better than "make bandits starve faster" or "make everyone red vs blue groups herp derp" Or the dreaded "Make everyone red vs blue vs xyz groups herp derp" GJ. These would be very interesting.

Absolutely not. Never post this again. Never shamelessly plug your poison idea into other threads. It's shit like this that would ruin this mod.

I guess the bandits will be shooting the survivors on sight, and the survivors shooting the bandits on sight. Have fun with your red vs blue, even if this even works.

This is where you should have ended your post and decided it was best to leave it.

Stop re-hashing awful, already failed, ideas.

Mmmmmm cameras. Everybody has some form of video record device on them these days... makes sense. Can imagine it being hard to implement .. ohwell

Are you guys even trying anymore? We need some fresh stuff! Regurgitating bad ideas isn't useful. Still, thanks for trying, I guess.

Nope.

Realism = making everyone react the same whut l2rp xaxaxaxaxaxaaxaxa

No' date=' you see here you're trying to hoodwink me and I don't appreciate that. An artificial stat bonus is still a punishment for other players. In relative terms it's the same as saying "People who don't use this system have reduced chance of knockdown and increased hunger/thirst rate." For a hilariously massive discussion on why this is true, I posted probably 1,000+ words relating to this on the general PvP discussion thread. It's basically because this game is a rivalry/excludability applicable situation. If you don't believe that giving blatant effectiveness bonuses to one group punishes those who don't get it, you are either going to have to take my word for it, find that thread, or more likely I am going to end up quoting myself here. You have to be far more intelligent about it (I'm not saying I can do a better job, I've only ever been good at pointing out problems more so than solutions). Subtle perks that don't add [b']real effectiveness are the way to go. Cool features, fun, stuff like that. Not balance changers.

Like I said, adding a bonus for doing it would work. Just don't punish people artificially for some kind of obscure balancing act.

No. It is not a valid point. If you shoot someone from miles off and the zombie is next to them, the zombie should go for them over you. It just makes far more sense. Good idea, TKJ, hadn't thought of this. I like the concept greatly, but some of the ratios you made in your OP are a bit poor, if I'm honest. At equal distance the zed should pretty much always go to the shooter imo, unless they have a silenced weapon or something. It would make sense if you were quite far, though.

Game - alpha Wait for radios. I'm more than sure they'll happen. Noobs can ask for advice on the forums. They can ask friends on steam. They can read guides or watch youtube videos. You really don't give players as much credit as they deserve. They aren't totally helpless gibbons. If they have to learn the hard way because they neglect resources of the meta game, good for them. You must understand OP that what you are telling us is a bad thing is totally subjective. I mean I for one am happy about this removal of global chat. There's just no way to convince us of opinion if we don't agree. There is no real problem that needs to be fixed. The system you suggest sounds too simplistic, and quite nonsensical. "They will introduce radios, instead; let's introduce radios but unrealistically" Bluh? Nope.

Current situation - Most players shoot on sight if they feel even slightly threatened. Your class situation - "Oh look he's an engineer, he could repair my car I should just run up to him and start talking." Yeah good luck with that. Don't oversimplify the game.

A suggestion should fulfill one of two points. Added immersion. Better gameplay. This doesn't add either. Why? Immersion - This is totally unrealistic, everyone is different. I would probably go insane being around others all the time non stop, and I would be utterly fine on my own. Gameplay - People won't die to their insanity. They'll still shoot on sight. It adds the potential of people meeting up to chat but it also prevents lone scavenging as you said. You're discouraging some game styles are much as you encourage others. I just don't see the point. My suggestion to you - Think about this some more. Think about a different suggestion along the same lines, i.e. one that can encourage occasional conversation and exchange with other players (Some kind of reward, human interaction does get important to everyone after some extent; ) but no punishment if you don't. The concept of making people talk to each other for some kind of incentive is a good idea. The concept of punishing people for not talking to eachother isn't. Carrot vs stick: Carrots tend to add to game play whereas sticks tend to reduce from it. N.B. You cannot make the carrot so good that it negatively affects people who do not take it. Keep that in mind.

Great post, OP. I couldn't believe my eyes (Especially after you linked your thread in another ;) ) that this wasn't some mindless tard asking to oversimplify the game. Good job. 5/5