dutch_miller

https://www.stealthmachines.com/

Utes probably

I like it, this method was really effective in The Last of Us. Dying in the game really wasn't a big deal, it was just a checkpoint system essentially. However, the deaths were so violent and disturbing that you really were scared of be killed in the game, even if it didn't really mean a big loss.

What are you talking about? There's plenty of people north on most servers... I've seen more people in my experience playing at the NWAF than I ever have at Cherno. Almost every time I've died in this game I've been north.

http://www.talkenglish.com/Grammar/Grammar.aspx More specifically: http://www.talkenglish.com/Grammar/capitalization.aspx

I can't tell you how many times this has been suggested. It's blowing my mind, really. Krihelion is exemplifying the point I make every time I hear this. Making a player's life more valuable will lead to WAY more KoS'ing. Here's my thread on the topic:http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/144881-valuing-player-lives-faulty-logic/#entry1432126

You really don't think people kill in self-defense? If somebody shot at you and missed, you wouldn't shoot them back? I guarantee you that happens way more than a bandit saying they are friendly and then shooting. If there is a mask system, literally every single bandit will use it and you likely won't even have a chance of removing their mask. People who don't use the mask, which will largely be people who are not bandits, will get punished every time they kill someone in self-defense, which makes the punishment even more specific to the people who don't deserve it. Your last statement is really the point. There's no effective way to make punishment specific enough that only people who are "dicks" are punished.

I've shot people with m24's and DMR's that haven't died in one shot plenty of times. They both effectively do 8000-10000 damage, unless it's a head shot. If the player is already injured, which is often the case, then most rifles will kill them in one shot. I haven't included this before, but I've always thought the amount of sniper rifles in DayZ should be drastically reduced. It takes very little effort to obtain one for how deadly they are, and when literally every server with 20+ players has at least several people sniping cities and the airfield, something needs to be changed. The amount of griefers in this game is absolutely ridiculous because of how easy these weapons are to acquire. AS50 is the example of a .50 rifle that I've been using the whole time, because it's something that has been in the game and used extensively. .50 weapons previously in the game didn't have enough repercussions for using them. If they were implemented with realistic qualities, I'd argue they'd be obsolete anyways.

Those are barely punishments, you run slightly slower and most bandits take pride in their skin (partly because it hides the backpack). Most "asshole" bandits won't be close enough to for you to see them when they kill you. Most of them will be sniping or camping high loot areas. The bandits that are sloppy are the ones that nobody would really care about, and they would be punished. Often times the person that shot you in close quarters isn't really a bandit, but was surprised by you and got the first shot. Those people would be punished instead of bandits who, in your terms, deserve it. The system would leave the real targets unaffected while further punishing those that kill in self-defense.

Whoever could create a smooth, effective, and stable system that works the way it's supposed to for this in Arma would be a fucking genius.

You've liked enough of my posts about the topic of bandits to know that I don't like them. But I respect that they are playing the game the way they want to play it, in the same sense that I am. They should be allowed to play the way they want to. The thing is, DayZ gives player a very open-ended way of playing the game. Everybody can play the way they want to, and that's the beauty of it - I don't want to take that away. Punishing people for choosing what is seen as the immoral way of playing ruins a player's freedom of choice.

I don't like the idea of punishing playstyles. This idea is targeting dedicated bandits who, no matter what you do, will never stop being bandit. The idea is ineffective at that approach and would be seen as just a way of getting petty revenge on a bandit. Besides, how would you know who killed you in SA?

Does it though? Splinter Cell is a stealth game and that kind of maneuver is a core part of the game. Arma is a completely different type of game and the engine isn't nearly smooth enough to really allow holding a human shield.

If it's design flaw and not a glitch, the chopper glass should be changed to be penetrable by 7.62 rounds; like most other choppers in the game. I really doubt it's intentional that they wanted the chopper to be bulletproof. I really doubt it. The M24 is not a one-shot kill unless it's a headshot. I don't know where you're getting that from. You have 12,000 blood. The M24 deals 8,000 blood damage. The AS50 deals 174,000 blood damage. It can be zeroed for twice as far, it has a faster fire rate, and it makes less noise. They're not even close to equal.

Because then it's the same thing as a water bottle and would be redundant.