septuscap

Yet another reason for melee.

If you've just been running your sights jitter from heavy breathing, and you may not be shooting him in center mass (or at all) with every shot, and this WILL lose you fights. While you can make him bleed with one or two shots, he is still 100% mobile unless he gets the shakes (which is random I think, and requires he take painkillers). Usually he'll just flash grey when you shoot him, after which he gets the blinking bleeding icon and can operate at 100% efficiency again. If you *can't* wait for your breathing to settle, your best option is to hit him and then find cover. He'll bleed out or bandage at which point you can finish him off. If he hits you in the head you're dead, so the difference could be you aiming for his chest while he lands a bullet in your head -- I do think it'd be nice if shooting some one makes him at least as shaky as a sprint, but at the end of the day I imagine you could turn around after being shot and let out a few bullets; go take some cover, don't just stand there watching him bleed.

I'm sorry but when some one says slower zombies will result in more "TACTICAL" decisions they're full of shit. It'd just make it easier to lose them.

The Ultima Online failure was devs caving into carebears and making Trammel, buffing melee dex monkeys, etc, what the fuck are you on.

Let's not forget the trump card of the slow zombie. You're more likely to underestimate them and get surrounded :D

It'd be interesting if power determined certain choice loot spawns and not re-entering a city repeatedly. ie. power the factory to spawn the higher end ammo clips every X minutes, or the hospital to spawn antibiotics/bloodbags, or a gas station to activate the pumps, etc. You'd have groups holding down this building or that, possibly testing the waters to trade with one another, or forming an uneasy truce in order to take on the 30 man group holding the powerplant, etc. Add in randoms & bandits for a dash of chaos and you'd have a fun fucking time.

None that outweigh the lack of trust you'd have in the group. The odds of being shot in the back would make him more of a liability than an asset; I'd be better off solo. And in that case I'd be better off solo with his makarov mags + beans :D

Yea come back in 5 years and declare the mod dead due to bandits would ya?

if walking into teammates on staircases didn't kill me. if running up a mountain didn't suddenly turn into walking with a 1 degree turn. if my character wasn't so fat he couldn't fit through doorways. if swimming didn't somehow unbuckle my backpack straps. if zombies didn't spawn 2 feet in front of me.

The problem is there are no mechanics that make it useful NOT to kill randoms. On the other hand, not only does killing randoms increase your odds of survival, there is the entertainment of being a predator stalking prey (which is basically the main draw of flashpoint style games). First off, cooperation with randoms (without voip) is ridiculously hard -- text & in-game voice are obviously inferior. Second, there is no value add to NOT killing a random except what? Blood transfusions? That is literally the ONLY sell there is at the moment for cooperation. "Oh they can give you a transfusion later" with the alternative being just eating a death and respawning. And this assumes I'm not already grouped with people I actually trust who could do the same. There need to be overarching GOALS that can involve randoms if you want randoms to possibly play nice with each other, as well as ways to "recognize" these newly found friends -- I find the current method of "hey, I'm staring at this guy right in front of me outside the hospital, is that you?" completely idiotic. Unfortunately the servers that enable names on mouse-over also let you mouse-over people behind trees at hundreds of meters out. Maybe if my group controlled a warehouse that churned out ammo and your group controlled a crane by the docks that could unload supplies it would be in our mutual interest to work together and get the power plant operational. Until then, why should I *not* kill you? It's idiotic to suggest even. Also, to the people complaining that bandits killing you for loot is "fair" and what bothers you is the bandits who don't even bother looting (killing for sport), I think you need to open your eyes -- these people exist in this world, and they would indeed come out to play in the event of an apocalypse (and already DO in chaotic areas in the world).