HardTarget

As a forewarning, this is an idea regarding player identity/identifying fellow/enemy players, in which I've been trying to work the mechanics out on it. Also: If you're the lazy type, I always put a TL: DR at the end, but I suggest reading it all through if you intend to comment. A bit of talk has been had regarding servers which have enabled the current default Arma identification system (That hover-over mouse that says "HI MY NAME IS"), and a good deal find it fairly exploitable, while others want it as a means to tell who is who. My personal opinion is, indeed, that the biggest exploit of "tree-line scanning" (I.E. Using it to scan an area to try and pick out a name) is definately a reason it shouldn't exist, but I don't feel we need to punish everyone to having to use other means to identify people, just because of a system. If the system or mechanic is bad, replace it, rather than erase it. So, how would we make an ingame option that allows you to notice who's who in DayZ? Note: I'm aware there are threads on this issue, but I feel as this is an idea that (AFAIK) is unique, I gave it it's own thread. If a Mod prefers I merge it with a different topic, just give me a heads-up The Idea: Instead of a "hitscan OH HAI I'M " system, I think a more practical method would be to name other players, yourself. "Wait, what?!" you may ask, and allow me to explain in detail. Let's say, you happen to see some person, running about, in a city. Let's say Cherno, if for whatever reason you dared to go near that place. You look at him, and as you watch over him, you go to the scroll menu, and a nice little action comes up, stated "Name Individual". You go, you click it, and a little chatbox menu comes up where you type in a name. YOU name it, based upon how you want to figure the person/remember them. You can call them anything arbitrary if you wish, be it something simple as "noob" or "that moron in Cherno", or you could be especially creative and utilize cursing in manners I won't use on this forum, but YOU name that person. Each time you see that character, now you have the name YOU gave him, rather than just their normal character name. This gives you a way of identifying players, without some arbitrary means of magically knowing their name, while still accepting that, "This is a game, and a lot of life's subtleties are left out" (such as actual face details, or other features to tell by). This makes it a bit interesting, and a way of recalling players. Say after you named this guy running through Cherno as "Zombie Pulling Dolt", after seeing him draw a horde, and you go into Cherno, you see this man again. You see his name as what you named him prior, or "Zombie Pulling Dolt", and realise "Oh, that's the idiot who dragged that horde with him". You take that knowledge of what you saw them do, and how you personally remember them to make a decision on how you act with that person. Obviously, if he drew a crowd, you likely don't want to get near him, or if you're the other kind, give him a small bullet in his cranium for his troubles. With prior player knowledge on how other's acted, you can act more accordingly. Story time, if you're a TL: DR'er, skip this part to the "Mechanics" section. More importantly, however, is the fact that this can, over time, be changed/lost. Let's say you meet someone sneaking at Stary, and labeled them "Suspicious Stary Stalker", or for something easier, "Stealther01". You later run into that person, again, but you managed to sneak up on him. You recall he was very weary and careful about the zombies, and had attracted practically nothing. Obviously this person is far more skilled in stealth than the average joe survivor, so you think "is he in a group? Could I ask him to join up with me?". You decide (going against the current consensus of "Shoot him" offhand), since you're behind him without his knowledge, to tell him to remain still or you'll blast his head in. He freezes, and surprisingly he's not a jerk-off who DC's on first sign of danger. He says "I'm just looking for morphine, my legs broke", and you realise the whole time he's been crawling about was from lack of functional legs. You decide to let him be, you'd rather not risk losing your hide to try and help, but you'd rather not get blasted in the back either. You head off after dumping a single morphine in his bag and notifying him, but without you knowing, he turned around, and he makes a mark on you, before healing himself. He's marked you as "Friendly" on name. Later on, you end up pulling a horde that was only 5, but found to be 20 by the end of it. "Stealther01" happens to pop up on your screen, and you figure you're boned now, but the zombies begin dropping as he fires, instead of you. He comes up, thanks you for the prior morphine in his bag, and heads on his way. You change his name to "Nice guy from Stary", and later on, if you ever meet again, you can recall he's not a jerk. Also, this works for the un-named. Say, from the prior story of the Cherno hoard-attracter, you find someone you HAVEN'T named, and you're face to face. You don't know this person, you have no way of telling their intentions, so you waste them. You or them, right? Or maybe you're off in the NWAF, and if you've been in a group, you probably know the times you screamed over some sort of third-party VoIP "IS THAT YOU?!", you don't see a name, it isn't one of your friends you already know. Suddenly, there's a way to make notes on the events, and the people in them, while not magically knowing their name. You make the nickname for them, and it leaves it up to more than just "I have to shoot everyone because I don't know who is who". Mechanics: So how does this handle in a game sense? Obviously as little on the servers if possible, so my idea is make it purely clientside. Your own computer memorizes the data based upon character ID's, and when it gets info on a character from the server, it compares it to it's own database. That way, it's as little data from the server as possible. Note: When I say "database", I mean in comparison like an SQL or .dat file which is located on your own drive, in your own Arma directory, that saves an ID and a name you put to that ID. Each time the indicator ingame gives you an ID handed by the server, your client will check if that ID is in the local client database. If it is, then it pulls the name itself, reducing as much as possible on any server stress. The question now is the cases of "what if's". "What if I die? Do I remember them? What if they die?", and this is really up to the playerbase, and more importantly, Rocket (if he decides this is worth a damn), how to do it. The first part is, if you die. Do you recall? Do you not? My vote is for no, you forget EVERYONE you formerly knew on your last character, because your new one should have no ties to your former. Of course, this is debatable, and I leave that up to you all to think through, and obviously you can easily re-find teamspeak/vent/mumble friends to re-mark them. Second, what if someone you remember dies? And this is where it gets a bit tricky. Yes, we have a lot of people who do die now, so if you name someone, only for later them to be shortly killed (and your memory of him/her wiped), it could prove useless over the long run. I think, that if you name someone, it should tie (for your end, clientside) to their Arma ID, and that you will remember whatever title you gave them, until you yourself die. A way to make notes of people, without it vanishing, especially if you end up killing THEM. You can see them come up later, and recall "oh, I had a former firefight with this guy because of , I don't want to be anywhere near him", or maybe you're just the type to shoot him again. For whatever reason. The only thing promoted by this is by surviving longer, especially from interactions with other people, or at the least by observing their behaviors. Exploits/Ways to Prevent Exploitation: "How does this fix the exploits?!" and it doesn't. The next part does: It's unusable unless you can clearly see the Head/Upper Body of the player. How that would be coded, I'm not sure, maybe by a pixel image check or something regarding the hitscan of the current identification mechanic. But, the major reason for it is this: You would have to clearly see the upper body or head, so that you can't just weave through trees or areas and see a name pop up. Not only do you have to name someone yourself with a name you chose first-most, you have to see them at least clearly enough to see that part of them, making it far harder to exploit. You see a pair of legs in a tree? No luck, you don't know who's legs those belong to, and suddenly you're tensed, only to ask your buddy over TS and find out that was him as he turns around. It has to revolve around the most notifiable parts of the human physique as with real life, which is the upper body structure, and importantly, the head/face of a person. This way, it's not a simple "tree-line scanner", which just pops up a name, or gives you an action to make a name without making sure you can actually SEE them, before allowing you to mark it. However, the above LoS/Check mechanic may be too hard to code, so what else? Maybe add in a distance you can mark? 500m? 600m? Maybe a low sadistic 300m or less? No idea, the numbers can be tweaked though. Anything to prevent it from being used to see someone when you SHOULDN'T be able to tell what you're looking at. Maybe even a "button spam preventer", where the action is always there, and if you spam it too much you can't use it for a long duration, so that it doesn't just come up when you see someone, and if you don't get a marker from randomly clicking a few times, you got to wait before abusing it. You got a better mechanic to prevent an exploit for it? Tell me! I'd love to hear how, it would make it a far more viable option. Addition 1, Hoik's Suggestion (edited by Hard): Before seeing a name of a player you've formerly marked, you must keep your vision focused (hitscan their model) on the individual for 5-10s. Helps prevent "scanning" or seeing them when you shouldn't. Possible backdraw - Won't know who you're aiming at if you end up face-to-face suddenly with someone, however if that happens, the custom player face may be a give-away. Addition 2, General Concensus (Distancer): You must be within a certain viable range to identify individuals (seems the thought is around 300m). May be extendable if using a scope or binoculars. Addition 3, Callaghan (No Extra Junk): As far as my memory goes, modding the Arma2 recognition and using it on servers should not add in any of the other settings people may dislike (3rd person, crosshairs, etc). However, it may be tied into Recruit mode, and those other server settings. If it is, the indicator should be hand-crafted to prevent it from becoming an issue/forcing in extra settings people may not want. Addition 4, Orosian (visibility factors): Factors, such as how bright it is ingame/current time of day (dawn, dusk, midday vs night), weather effects (fog, rain, etc), and distance affect how quickly you can recognize someone you've seen before (Utilizing the current visibility system already in-place for DayZ). The more factors that would degrade your vision/the lower the visibility of the person you're looking at, the longer it takes (+1/2s per factor/ -1 or 2 for each additional visibility bar on target) before you see the nickname you marked someone with. In Closing: So you find someone, and you can name them a nickname of your chosing (whatever you chose), so long as you yourself can clearly see them (or managed to click them without the lock-out prevention). This allows you to identify players, and to know of who might be who, who may be in a group (if you saw a pair/bunch together), who to avoid and who to trust, without some arbitrary identifier, and without meta-gaming it 24/7, while preventing exploitation. I hope it'll be a helpful tool, and some of the exploit prevention mechanics will prevent it from becoming a "tree-line scanner", but that's to be found out. TL: DR - You name a person a nickname you chose, if you can actually manage to see them, and from then on-out, it comes up so long as you can see them. Allows for identification, and to prevent exploitation, which the current identification mechanic can be exploited. Thoughts/Comments/Actual Constructive Criticism? Leave something below!

What you're suggesting reminds me of what Okt mentioned earlier regarding player details/character visual data (Although that was in his linked former thread). However I'm not sure I'm entirely keen on a "swap" mechanic. I feel descriptions (if implimented) should all be handled by basis of the player's own ability to memorize, rather than a set ingame mechanic. I'm alright with having player descriptions, but how would they be handled? Would they be made for each new character someone makes? Auto-generated on respawn? Also, while some think the view distance should be very close (25m~ish), what Razz said I feel holds true, we have a LOT of life's subtleties that are left out in a video game medium for simulation, so we can't entirely identify a lot of the give-aways that would tell who is who. Furthermore, if we want pure "realism", tear all the darn weapondry out, this amount of guns would not be around in this area of Russia in an apocalypse. I say it should be extended to typical Arma 2 encounter distances, or at least 100m. I would NOT want to use this mechanic if it required I had to hump up to some guy when I can rather take the time to just keep an eye on them from afar (I am fine with the need however to use scopes/binoculars for this distance). Anyway, back to lurking for any additional new ideas/input, I'm thinking over some of the other aspects myself to see if I can come up with any better systems/new ideas.

Glad this has gotten attention, and a good amount of points have been brought up. The only thing I'm going to warn is to be careful with the bump use, allow the thread to slip a bit to the back, Forum rules and all. I'm certain other ideas of merit are laying about waiting for their moment to shine (Oktyabr's former mention in a thread very akin to this one, for example). If any new discussion/comments regarding it appear, I'll take the time to respond and have a discussion regarding mechanics/points or anything else. Until then, I'll be in the background watching it (unless I think up something new to add). Although I have loved the points people have brought up regarding certain ideas, has definately refined how the mechanics functions (particularly most of it seems centered in the identification aspect, rather than naming, as no one wants it to be exploited too much).

Oh damn, surprised I didn't see that former thread Oktyabr. Although a lot of discussion HAS been admittedly have on recognition, so I can see potential overlap by accident. I'll try to read through all the comments as I can, so I can get a clearer view/new ideas on how to alter the concept. The main issue I see within recognition at the extremely close distance you listed (25m) limits understanding who you're observing to a very, very close-quarters scenario unless you keep eye contact at all times on them/don't break line of sight. This is, after all, DayZ implimented into Arma2, which many of the firefights and encounters are not always at such an extremely close distance. I've had a few, but most of my firefights end up at the very least 100m if not more, away from others. Maybe it's from how I play, I may be biased in that case. The colour for "friendly/foe" is amusing, but the idea behind it was just to add it as a means of naming people, without adding in an artificial mechanic to tell the "good from the bad", so to speak. The other question I lay with that colour theme is, that you've been near someone x amount of time, how does it recognize barriers/walls/etc? That may end up exploited by hiding near someone through a wall, only to have their name come up in green later so you can more visibly "see" them, despite knowing little-to-nothing about them, or even confusing someone else since they'll see green and hesitate, despite the fact you have every intention of mauling them. I don't think a mechanic to "label" if they're nice or not is needed, it should be by the player's memory alone in my opinion, no system to identify that for you. The identification should be personal to your own recollection of that individual, so long as you're certain it's the same person. Certainly your way holds merit, but I (personally, and nothing against you) think it's against the vision of the game that it's up to the player to do what he can himself (the same reason we don't need to read books/manuals in DayZ to pilot a helicopter, all up to the player). Still, great minds and all that right?

Interesting, perhaps also have it (since it's a sound file I presume) attract zombies within a certain radius. Multi-purpose it. Risk giving away your position to draw zombies to a spot to more easily sneak around/get into buildings. There will be those who abuse the whistle, but the point is it does give you away due to the sound, so if a bandit uses it, while you can't ever be sure of someone's intentions, it DOES give their position away. Although as Zipper said you can do this yourself, I have to note not everyone can whistle (although, if we want to bring realism into this, I guess you can point that out as well, since not everyone can, why should all survivors?) Still, amusing little idea you got, and it might just serve the purpose you're looking for.

I agree' date=' hence why I've brought up other ideas. Some people are indeed putting in better ideas that are more feasible than what I suggested, such as Hoik's 5-10s idea. Also, as noted from all the other posts (as well as your own) that a distance would probably go a long way to prevent people from exploiting, which I had offered as a suggestion beforehand. 300m unscoped/500 scoped/binocs? Or maybe 100/300? A lot of people are saying to add a distancer in, so what are the numbers that we should try out first? I think it's the wording I used, but as I said in the OP I want to make it as little on the servers as possible, I.E. purely clientside. When I say "database", I meant like a sort of SQL file that the client can reference with any potential ID matches given to it by the server. The server already ID's and tells your client about the ID's of other players/characters, so it wouldn't add to the overload. So, say you write someone as "Foe" ingame, your client knows their ID is from the server prior. Later on, you see this person again, and the client checks, in it's own file, for the ID if it's present or not, comparing it to the data already given to it by the server. That way, no extra loading is taken on part of the server. I would argue then it serves it's purpose! :D That would be hilarious, so long as it doesn't tell you who had given you what name. The amounts of ridiculous names a long-life could hold with much interactions would be quite the amusing case. Not sure how that would be potentially coded though, with as little server load as possible. -------------- I'll take some time to now edit the OP to put in some stuff talked about here, as I'm certain we'll have a few oddities who will post without reading the discussion, and I want to make sure the finer points brought up by those who have discussed are addressed.

Surprised at the amount of positive response, although can't say I'm complaining! The one thing I'll talk about while here is what Hoik said, regarding ways to prevent exploiting. The false-positive is amusing, but I think the one piece of brilliance was the prolonged examination. I believe this is somewhat implimented already (you get the mark of "man" on a person for a bit before a name at times with normal Arma recognition), but would work well with the idea to prevent "scanning" of areas. Have it so you have to hover over the person for 5-10s before you saw the nickname you gave someone would definately make it far more difficult to exploit it if you didn't already have a clear view of someone. Also, descriptions of players may be possible, but I wouldn't know the exact details of how to "spread the word" so to speak. If you guys think up anything new, leave a note! Anything that helps refine the idea, or point out a possible exploit will develop it further.

@Howler: Yes, it is, since it's just "name popup", so to speak. Although it's different in that you chose the name, and you have to actually see them, the problem is a game can only be as realistic as the medium allows. I'd love it if we had custom everything about our characters to easily tell who is who, but sadly, we have to work in the confines of an engine. Although I hope the text isn't nearly as big, that blatantly large text can be annoying for longer names. @Johnchio: Whoa whoa whoa, hold up, one idea at a time mate! First off, not sure on the map part, there is a server setting akin to this where, if you view someone, the last place you viewed them appears on the map. A lot of people dislike this (myself included), and I really don't agree with that part, myself. As for the "buddy/Enemy" list, Rocket's stated before he doesn't want to add anything that benefits any sort of playstyle, and having friendlies immune to being shot by me would benefit anyone in a team. No go on that end. Glad you like the idea though.

1.) Only acceptable if something can be done about the immensely dark'ish night. While I don't personally have an issue with it, there's a reason there's a dedicated sticky thread regarding how damn dark the night is. It needs an offset somehow if you remove the only way of seeing well for certain people. Also, as stated before, Flares are a natural enemy of NVG's, they make it IMPOSSIBLE to see anything with NVG's on. 2.) True, the sync is off at times, but this is more an issue for the server hosters themselves typically. A well run and operated server usually is synced quite effectively. 3.) No, Rocket has stated before this will BREAK how the game operates, as it utilizes this cycle (in ticks) to be able to tell when to spawn items, how long things have been left out/haven't been around, etc. Altering the cycle mucks up the code. 4.) I'm up for more bicycles, not sure on more vehicles. I am often running so I don't have a good opinion on this. 5.) There are discussions dedicated solely about this already, we know, their super-human pimp slap has gained a lot of notoriety. So has their odd spawning behaviors. However, no need to "tier" them, that's silly (imo). 6.) If you haven't played Arma 2 normally, I suggest you do so on Vet difficulty or something, you'll see that the NPC's have a nack at seeing you at insane distances and quite easily (500M+ out if you stand up, 300~M if crouched, will see despite any sort of cover/bushes), and they're quite the shooters. I prefer the only armed people are player controlled ones, that's my opinion. 7.) There's a reason they exist is my answer. 8.) Already topics about it, general consensus is it needs to go AFAIK. 9.) Also other threads regarding these, although if any "random events" are added I hope it doesn't involve gun-totting NPC's. Anything like the roaring of jet engines as an SA-80 or somesuch jets across overhead is fine, but it should be more atmospheric than otherwise (the Heli with the watchlight idea at night was brilliant, forgot which thread that was in). 10.) Pistols, I understand. Most, ignoring the M1911 and Rev. are 9mm, and such weapons IRL are not difficult to stabilize and quick-fire the trigger excessively. Yes, it'll be harder to account for, but it's possible. I say it's fine as is, if someone gets you with it, kudos to them for using a pistol. As for snipers, haven't experienced an issue with this sparing the DMR, most are single fire and take a bit, and if you have to hit at a farther range than 50m the recoil WILL make you have to re-aim yourself momentarily. 11.) Arma 2 issue, not sure if there is such a fix available. If it is, it should take some time to flip, not like a Halo "flip" where you press a button and the thing flings itself around. 12.) Wasn't aware of this, amusing. 13.) Drop is quite substaintial at certain ranges, sparing weapons that can zero in (M24/M107), but even then you got to account and figure out the range (unless it has the "rangefinder" built-in with certain regular servers. Removing that server option on most/if not all servers would help). 14.) I won't go into this, aside saying this is more of a community problem from people going up in arms about being killed, and turning around only to kill everyone from there-on out. The benefits are there, and they're greater than the items/beans you can pick up off the other person. 15.) Fine by me, keep the heli-hiders from dumping their damn loot far outside the map, unreachable to anyone without a vehicle. Perhaps not in the exact mechanic way you stated, but something of the sort, like a missile lock-on if in a vehicle, and just shot by snipers otherwise if you leave the border too long. Something unique to DayZ.

@Time Glitch, A respectable way to word it. Hopefully that can be something that people will consider at least. If a single post I make can convince a single person to be a little more weary to try interaction in this game, it was worth it to take the time to post. It's a community driven game after all. @OUberLord, glad we can agree, although what you mentioned with viciousness and self-serving due to anonymity is true. As they say "Give a man a mask, and he will tell you the truth". We all aim to work to our own ideals, but the benefits of working together are often subtle and missed. I could scower the NWAF alone, or with someone watching my back. It's just figuring out who ingame isn't a jerk that I can do that with which took time. @Rko, Undoubtedly.

@ Malek, That's true, we really, desperately need VoIP in a 100% working state. Although I tend to get it to work, I know it's right now giving certain people hell. Hopefully Bohemia can manage to squeeze out a final patch that will fix it. @R Lee, I assume your post was directed at mine, so I'll answer as such. I'm in the sun, all the damn day, working on a Shade Tobacco Farm in literal Courage the Cowardly Dog nowhere's-ville. I am sick of the sun, I just enjoy playing a game that has survivalistic aspects. If that makes me "take it too seriously", then fine, but that's like saying "Stop getting so scared in a horror game you idiot!". DayZ is a survivalist game after all, and so I try to enjoy it in a survivalist manner. Hope that's understandable. @Doxshund, Bandit skins will be removed on Thursday, although just try to avoid the "Bandit Hunters" without having to go nuts on other players.

@ Valhingen, you don't need to, just be weary when you see someone. If you want to make the right choice, I'd suggest myself (Although feel free to play the way you want) that you observe the person first. How does he interact with others? With the enviroment? Is he even someone you'd want to group up with? I've watched people and seen them backstab, shoot on sight, or generally run around and attract the entire city on them. These were the people I avoided. I then saw some who were a bit more cautious, who still shot others on sight, and avoided them. When I see someone who's however, cautious and doesn't just open fire on the get-go, I sometimes group up with them (I tend to stick alone or in my own personal group of friends), or I let them be. @ TKJ, glad you enjoyed it, also the P6 Mantra is something I picked up while watching a documentary on Army Snipers, so there's a reason it works damn well. @Redz, Thanks a lot, although I personally feel it's a bit common sense, as my friend says "Common Sense has become Uncommon Sense these days". @Ariel, couldn't agree more, the "Raise/Lower Weapon Toggle" is something that should be exercised a lot, as it is IRL with Weapon Safety (just as with Trigger Discipline). Don't point your weapon at another (I understand pistols are a bit more finnicky atm though). @Jorden, there is, and as Rocket has stated he doesn't want an artificial system in to promote it. We as the players have to decide ourselves how this pans out, so if we want it to end up other than a Deathmatch, we got to work to make it more than a deathmatch. Here's to making that happen. @LordOpeth, I lol'd.

Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance, aka P6. I probably don't fit with the majority, as I tend to stay far on the outskirts and hardly run into people, and the few times I do (sparing the NWAF), I have had sight on them far before they knew I existed. Such as by Kozlovka, I was in the woodlands, with a SVD Camo (which was lost due to the bandit to survivor swap (had to fight my way OUT of the NWAF)), and noticed a group of three on their way through. I got into a position, looked, and asked over side - "Group North of Kozlovka, Identify". I just wanted to know who I was looking at (vet server, no name tags), and the survivor of the group (two bandits in it) immediately went prone (fat lot that did him, I was already up in a higher altitude so I could still aim down on him) and he goes "FRIENDLY!" over chat. At this point I realised he probably wasn't all that greatly used to the game as this point, as I told him "Alright, just hold fire and keep moving", as I crawled away in the woodlands. Never even went up to them, but I had the choice. I had the tactical advantages of surprise, altitude, and presight, I could have easily open fired once, killed him, and watch his buddies scramble away (most people just tend to hide and DC), but I withheld myself. I just wanted a tent, so I had been sneaking through the outer towns which had pubs/shopping centers to find one. It is not hard to withhold your fire, it is not hard to find those who are unwilling to fire. Heck, I was traveling the powerlines above Cherno once with that same SVD Camo rifle to run into a survivor (With a revolver) as I darted back/forth and said over the Direct Com VoIP "Don't fire!" (I have bound my ingame talk key for DayZ to Direct channel ONLY, tends to work most of the time, if at times it's a bit hard to hear). He didn't fire, we walked up, chatted a bit, I asked if he needed anything, he was set, and we parted ways. I could've teamed up, heck, as I had been lone-wolfing for quite some time (and still do a lot), but I wasn't in the rush to party together. I could've been shot, or shot back. The SVD is highly accurate and puts a man down harshly, I could've not tried to initiate a conversation and just shot him before darting about like a moron. TKJ, you hit the nail on the head. It's those who fire first, on claims that "I need to, to survive!" that make this harsh on themselves. I only do it for select areas (NWAF/Electro/Cherno), but aside that I won't shoot on sight. No matter how "right" they think they are, they're just causing it to become the exact thing they claim they hate, because they're unwilling to die. And most of the time, it's to lose what? A simple Winchester? A revolver? Alice pack? I've had a M16A2 ACOG with a Coyote Backpack, GPS, every tool, food and water and everything out the backside spare NVG's, and died, from trying to say "hi" to a survivor. Funny thing was, it was in 1.5.7 so he just died shortly after due to zombies (He shot a Lee in Electro), and the server then crashed, so my stuff was sacrificed to the item god. I don't care what people do, but don't try to be on a high-horse claiming you "need" to fire first to save your butt and your "precious loots". I've lost tons of stuff only to start over again, and you're worried about losing at most a simple winchester and revolver? You really want to live, get the hell off the shoreline, stick to the shadows and go North, but don't cry that you have to fire first because the "big mean man" shot you first that one time and made you butt-hurt. Either admit you're doing it just because you like shooting people, or because it's a bad area (Airfields/Electro/Cherno), but don't act like you aren't causing the issue yourself. I like combat, and I'll fire in dangerous areas at others, but I can pretty much guarentee I will not shoot someone outside those areas just on sight (or because of a "skin", which thank Rocket he's making pick-up skins you can find). TL: DR - Be the change you want in the world. Stop shooting and claiming you "need to", and start trying to find ways to identify if someone would shoot you or not. Observe, collect data, and act on that intel. It'll save you a lot of headache than just running up to someone asking "friendly" and finding out you were wrong.

Just as a quick note: It is true that NWAF has the most spawn spots for military loot, but the reason the Barracks are told to be the "best" spots is because they are the very few areas that spawn certain items. NVG's, for example, are ONLY spawnable in the two NWAF barracks, as well as the Dragonuv SVD Camo. Check the loot sheet that was linked by Zero477, and you'll see some specific instances. It also has a chance for ammo crates, the 5.56 having 20 STANAG mags and 10 STANAG SD Mags, the 7.62 having 10 mags for each major rifle (DMR, M24, and SVD Camo), and a .11% chance for a M107, if you really feel like sacrificing a backpack ( I don't personally) for a rifle that'll pulverize anything. So really, you can ignore them for the most part for safer areas, but if you want a specific item that only the barracks spawn, well, you're stuck hoofing it to the NWAF and trying to avoid getting plastered. So try to stay safe in the other areas for the most part, as Zero477 mentioned. It's far safer to risk the other areas that are far less contested than the NWAF, the NEAF will likely be the best spot, as it's so out of range few dare travel there unless they spawned on the NE shoreline. Best of luck! Regards, HardTarget

The only issue I see is with those few villages that have next to nothing in terms of usable items/spawn spots (such as Pusta and it's meager spawn spots), but I assume that as well can (over time) be adjusted. The idea that zombies slowly (Maybe a week is a bit much, but it sounds reasonable) and dynamically adapt to how often players go about certain areas is great. No longer will it be "Cherno/Electro are bad places, and NWAF is the place to go for gear" (Something which has never changed, despite the fact they are hell-holes people still dive head-first into them). These places would end up over-saturated by zombies that so much as sneezing would topple 30+ zed on you (assuming you were trying to be sneaky), and firing off a Lee Enfield would be the same as putting it to your own skull. Instead, it'll be "Okay, NWAF is flooded to hell, let's hit the SWAF/NEAF instead", which over time will also end up flooded, while the lack of activity at the NWAF will cause it to open up again (using the military-grade gear just as an example). I understand why people visit these areas, they ARE the big cities, most possible looting points, etc, but I must say it's beyond easy to just ignore the cities and loot out of, say, Zelenogorsk with next to NO ONE ever bothering to prop their heads up. Berezino tends also to be a fairly weak spot at times, despite the fact it arguably has almost as many spots to get stuff as Electro. Quick-Thought: Also, this will create flows in how often people can get/obtain gear. Since Electro/Cherno and the NWAF are THE places to go to get gear, the times that they end up flooded by zed will cause a dramatic drop in available items, causing player tensions to rise amongst each other over even what may have been meager. Since people always go for the easy-loot areas first already, the times they are flooded will create a natural "dip" in resources one can easily obtain, making that particular time span (current suggestion of 1week) far more brutal to survive in due to difficulties of gathering gear/food/etc. Once the dip passes and the main areas clear out, the amount of food and gear overall will then jump back up as people flood back in. A sort of dynamic "flow" to resources themselves, infact. Overall: +1, so long as this doesn't involve a huge amount of strain on the already-strained master server, and can be negated somehow to simple, easy-manage statistics.

I think I'm going to side here with Mr. Delicious regarding Musical Barracks. Even though the other military loot is already partially scattered (See: Firehouses in Cherno/Electro and the camps in Stary/etc), the absolute best items are confined to two buildings in the same damn area. While it helps that it adds the sense that the NWAF is the "End all-meet all" place, it just makes it too easy for those who are intent on sending themselves for the best gear to just pop in, pop out, hop, repeat. Fixing that and making it far more randomized across the map will promote a bigger deal of exploration, although the NWAF itself will remain a heavy-hit area due to the fact of how many military buildings are there. In the same notion, we can't just randomize the spawns to every random corner of the map, because "Running Simulator 2012" would be a far more apt terminology if there was NO sense of proper loot areas, and we absolutely had to transverse all over the world to find certain things. In regards, (Imo) to the talk about people finding little to do once they get good gear, I feel this game should be taken in a Dwarf Fortress mannerism. Sure, I can make a self-sufficient, impenetrable base that absolutely nothing can top in the game, but then what? Sit back and watch Urist McKittenLover make a sculpture of his cat? Heck no, if it reaches that point I purposely tear the wall down during an invasion and see how well my army can take on a horde of Goblins or somesuch. It's "fun" to die, I may hate it, it may mean time lost, but face it, entertainment itself is time lost. The reward is in the experience of trying new things, but I can understand how that doesn't manifest with a good amount of the playerbase. TL: DR - Change the top military loot from NWAF Barracks only and make it a bit more scattered, that'll add more incentive to look about. But don't scatter the loot everywhere, or people will leave from the running turning from 1h to 6h to find a single item/good piece of loot. Note - I too await Chopper Wrecks to be fixed. If the cheat sheet is correct, that L85A2 is something I wanted to try out, that or the FN FAL.

Have to take a moment and prod fun: That "shooting someone only for them to shoot back" happens wayyyy too often with certain latencies and whatnot on my end, but I get what you're saying in all seriousness. Now on topic: After reading through, I'm finding myself agreeing more with you. Gunshots seem to be the overall end-all within a very miniscule amount of hits. People are at least a bit more resilient to it than the current blood-system works out (imo, although I've never been shot IRL so feel free to prove me incorrect on this). I recognize the default Arma II wounded animations/carry and drag ones from before, had to help a stupid NPC squad mate one too many times already. So perhaps far less immediate blood loss, but replaced by the continual bleeding (As it is we can already bleed out from a single hit from a zombie unless we bandage, kind of odd to me) already implimented? It'd be more fun to play medic if more people were, well, alive to medic, so to speak. So yeah, I'm thinking you may be in the right ball-park here, the fact isn't we need a revival, but we tend to die so easily from player-inflicted wounds/gunshots far too quickly. Granted nothing stops the person from shooting whoever is knockdown into death, but it will allow at least some sort of chance to revive a person if possible. For the prevention of being shot back, perhaps the knockdown mechanic should be a bit higher for certain types of ammo? I have never been knocked down with a gunshot aside if I instantly died, so maybe the higher caliber NATO rounds or AK/AKM's should give a high chance of kicking your butt onto the ground as well if the overall blood loss from a shot is reduced and changed to more bleeding? Would also promote teamwork if it meant you could be knockdown, but potentially SAVED as well, the team scrambling to get you before you bleed out (like I said before, laying suppressive fire while someone/a medic drags your poor butt out of the field).

Although I've never personally had a problem maintaining trigger discipline (either in RL or with a simple mouse), I can see the attraction to this for some people, especially for finnicky alt-tabbing (can open the menu to prevent mis-fire, but still). I think it'd be nice, so long as it isn't overly difficult to impliment, although in my opinion other features should be put higher on the priority list.

Quick Edit: Post directed to Moon for clarity I get what you're saying, but perhaps I've ended on the wrong side of the stick where a single shot in the side took me from 12k Blood to -364 or some arbitrary negative number from a non-powerful rifle shot (like the Lee/DMR/M24/etc). Perhaps my thoughts may be a bit slanted, but I do understand what you're saying. "Lethal" is a vaguish term however, due to the multitude of re-iterations it's gotten. Lethal in medical terms is indeed terms of "no return", but there are many sorts of treatable wounds from gunshots. I will not claim to be some sort of soldier medic expert, but I doubt that a person cannot be revived if they lost blood (in a single shot, or maybe 2) in the side with proper administration of additional blood, treatment of the wound area (stitching as well), and with a good zap if their heart has indeed given out. Now, headshots/lethal heart/lung wounds I can absolutely understand. Perhaps the overall issue isn't that we need a "revival" system but that we seem to lose a lot of blood from arbitrary things/too much from certain things? I know I was at 12k recently and was shot (by a winchester) on a server, ran around a corner, and proceeded to die with -6k hp. I have no clue if he headshotted me, but it was somewhat laggy as it took a moment before the hit fully registered to me (despite the fact I swear I was around the corner by the time he shot, but that's another issue), so perhaps he did. But that's quite a lot of blood to lose in a single shell of slug ammunition. I understand it's meant as Military Sim, that's what drew me to the game before I played, and I've been playing a good deal of the single player recently. And I swear I die LESS to the Arma II bots on Veteran (I fall down and can be revived by squad mates) than DayZ. Perhaps it's been my luck, perhaps I've been headshotted and my views are slanted, I don't know. But I have yet to see a side where I actually "Bleed" out, rather than just die from a shot or two immediately. If you can point me/explain different situations where that's been the opposite, then I may just side with you. As I said before, I'd hate for this to end up an abused mechanic of different squads which will allow them to consistantly pop up their members so they never lose their gear.

While true, there are bloodbags about, so a bleedout is managable in terms of treatment (so long as it doesn't last longer than 5m in which cells would begin to die off), while vital organ damage... not so much, I give you that in this discussion. I think this is the major part that needs consideration, in terms of certain things. I would hate to have ended up in a scenario where I know I downed someone (likely out of fear of being shot myself/in a high-stakes area such as the NWAF) with a clean headshot only for their buddy to prop them up moments later. Certain factors, such as a killing head wound/being currently eaten by zombies should prohibit this from being abused (if implimented) as a way to just "up" a player, as well as consistantly up a player (who has been downed multiple times). I do love some of the suggestions regarding it, such as batteries and whatnot, so if you want to avoid the Wall of Text incoming, I'll make a TL: DR section or somesuch. First point - The suggestion of making a "timer" regarding how long a person can be recussitated (SP) is the first thing this would need. Typical bloodloss is, what, 5m before vital cells die if memory serves correctly? Obviously a bloodbag would need to be on hand, and the person would need to be revived in time before allowed to perk up from a shock. Also, being actively eaten by zombies should lower the timer each time the zombies eat the player, until it hits zero and revival is impossible. Also possibly have the "downed" animation to one of the current Arma II animations, where they fall down and are unable to move anything but their head. Second - I do like some of the ideas regarding how the defib should take up slots, by why not take this a possible step further? While having the defib as a toolkit and/or replacing the backpack, why not also add a Medkit backpack replacement as an opportunity (Rare drop at hospitals)? It will hold (due to most medical materials being smaller than other items) a larger quantity than most backpacks of medical supplies only or a bare minimum amount of slots for other items. While this may seem counter-intuitive due to the necessity to hold items, the default inventory would still work with holding a selective amount of ammo, food and water (Not to mention pistol ammo/bandages already have their own designated slots in Arma). Still, this is moot in comparison to the defib addition, which the exact mechanic of how it takes up slots should be anything short of replacing the entire backpack (It wouldn't be worth it to me to drop a 20slot ALICE or 24 Coyote Backpack for a meager chance of revival), and maybe batteries should be counted amongst industrial loot as a semi-rare chance. Three - This should be a bit of a lengthy process, and should take a good deal of medical supplies (as a few others have listed, such as Ssential). Instead of just propping over, scrolling and pressing a button to perk them up, perhaps the already default Arma II "healing" animations can be used (The person putting their hands on the other's chest already can be inferred as defib pad placement). This could create intensive moments of groups laying suppressive fire for their medic to drag their fallen comrade over to cover and THEN revitalize their friend. Obvious items would be - Bloodbag (due to bloodloss), defib, bandage and epi-pen just for basic revival. The bloodbag should ONLY revive to a bare-minimum amount of blood to avoid the player consistantly passing-out (instead of full blood) while consuming the bloodpack. The player will still suffer the "shakes" from being hit, and (if shot in the legs, persay) any broken bones that were associated pre-death, meaning additional supplies of painkillers/morphine if needed. Fourth - Finally, this shouldn't be something that can be consistantly re-used without end. I would hate to keep taking out the same player in a group (or being taken out only to be revived, taken out again, repeat ad infinium) with them perking back up over and over because their medic managed to stockpile enough supplies for five/six revives. If someone has recently been revitalized, there should be some sort of down timer before their body can physically withstand being shocked back to life. How long? I have absolutely no idea, but I'm certain that can be fleshed out over time (Perhaps 10m?). TL: DR - 5m max of being "down", batteries for it in industrial zones, should take some time to revive, and no constant revival (timer of maybe 10m to prevent reviving consistantly) --------------------------------------------- I do think it will promote a lot of cooperative gameplay and I'm really in favor of this mechanic, but I want to make sure it gets proper restrictions that prevent it from being abused, while preventing those mechanics from making it non-viable. Where that balance lies is to be determined, but I do hope to see it in the future of DayZ. +1 for Defibrillator addition