dutch_miller

I'm not one to complain about DayZ when things don't go my way, but this case is a bit more extreme than an illegitimate ban. Here's what happened in a brief summary. Myself and my two brothers play on this server constantly, and have so for months; and have killed many ATF members (the clan that owns the server). Recently, we took them down pretty hard, killing 6 players and destroying 2 choppers. They didn't take kindly to this, and decided to ban one of us. As a response, we went into their teamspeak server and talked to them, arguing that they had no proof of him hacking (which they don't) and had no reason to ban any of us other than rage over being killed; to which they followed up with some hasty backtracking and invalid excuses. After we had left the teamspeak server, we posted this on their website forums: After they ban all three of us and include some rather negative feedback - which indicated that they had largely ignored most of our explanation - we post again. But they delete the post, and in response post personal and private information on the forums, violating our privacy rights. View this as a warning if you decide to play on their server.

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.

Arma isn't exactly Splinter Cell.

This has been suggested a ton of times and Rocket doesn't like it because he wants to reduce the amount of scripted events that happen in the game, and instead make the players feel like they are what is driving the development of the map.

I'm not sold on the human shield idea either. I would also assume you automatically break out of the blindfolds after a few minutes, or until the person who blindfolds you leaves a certain radius or logs out. You can already drag and carry unconscious people, I think into cars as well. I would like to be able to knock people out, maybe with a whiskey bottle.

I've always liked alternative ways of player interaction that don't end up with somebody being killed. Non-lethal weapons and things like blindfolds or restraints I have thought could add some awesome variety in the game. If a number of ideas like this are added, there will be so many possibilities aside from death when encountering other players that you will never know what to expect and I predict it will make the game infinitely more enjoyable. There's even a lot of creativity that goes along with blindfolds and constraints. Think of all the possible outcomes in that scenario. Maybe you can drag them into the middle of a city. Maybe you'll be left tied up as a horde of zombies approaches you. So many possibilities, and not all of them have to result in the death of the player.

Most times simplest ideas are the best ideas. Today is no different. :beans: Edit: The shameless bump. Well, it's a good idea, so I'll allow it.

I entirely disagree that it takes more teamwork and gear to kill a chopper than to take one down. I've taken down a chopper crew with nothing but an M16 or an AK on several occasions, just by being patient; and like I've said before, I'm not a dedicated bandit and I don't often pvp. I have never once destroyed a chopper with a .50 weapon. That said, I've only a few times actually been able to repair a chopper and get it working. The reason you think it's more difficult to take it down is because of the game simply being glitchy, which is in its nature as a mod. You don't see the difference between an m24 and an anti-material rifle? Really? It's only far more damaging, effective at longer distances, and has a faster rate (for the as50, which shouldn't really matter that much anyway because it's a sniper rifle, not a machine gun). If there's no difference, why would so many people have wanted to remove it from the game, so much so that it was? Why would the people that lost it be so upset that it was removed? Not many people are agreeing with you here. Haha, your last statement. Wouldn't that make sense for somebody to do in DayZ? To not use their anti-material rifle on soft targets? I'm not quite naive to believe that; even for a second.

Let's not go down the realistic route. I could go down the path of sniper rifles being insanely easy to use in the game, the fact that very few people would be able to use the rifle... but those are old arguments I don't want to bring up again. When I say realistic impracticability, I suppose I really meant authenticity. What would happen with those weapons in real life? Nobody would use them. So, you emulate that. Think about it - in a real apocalypse, nobody is going to fucking sit on a hill outside a city and snipe people. In DayZ, people will. Unless you are inhumanly athletic, you cannot hike for miles on end, through rough terrain, with a .50 rifle that with ammo weighs upwards of 40 pounds or more, and a backpack that weighs a similar weight. You'd make it maybe half a mile before collapsing. I also never said that I did like the ability to carry an m240 with thousands of rounds - that shouldn't happen either. That said, I really don't care that much about realism. I care more about balance. Your argument against balance is flawed in a few ways - 1. It takes alot of teamwork and a fair amount of gear to get a chopper, as well as take one down. Both sides have to put in a considerable amount of time and effort. 2. Most of the issues you have with killing choppers are the game itself. DayZ is a glitchy game because it's a mod. It's likely the standalone will be better about that. I've been on both sides - I've shot people no problem out of a pilot seat in all kinds of choppers, but I've been unable to kill people the same way. I've shot people out of gunner seats plenty of times, while the chopper was flying (not extremely fast, but the gunner can't accurately shoot at high speeds anyway). And I don't consider myself a good sniper. 3. You're missing one of my main points. People with anti-material rifles don't have it just to take down choppers. That's a bullshit argument at best. They use it to grief players simply because it's easily the most effective and appealing way to play the game - sit far away, hidden, with a one shot kill weapon. It's easy to play that way, and far more difficult to survive against it. The game needs more even playstyles, make other ways of playing more effective and playable rather than just a single dominant playstyle. I also said that chopper mounted weapons should be removed and replaced with players being able to shoot with their own weapons.

If we really wanted to get fancy with water supplies we could add filters and iodine tablets instead of boiling it.

Please rephrase your point so it's understandable and try again.