Trizzo

That to me constituted a joke at close to 2.30 in the morning...it was an awkward attempt

To the OP and others it's no bug...and it is challenging...but like all things it can be overcome. Use direct chat from outside (or just aggro them), give them a sam fischer whistle (or a noise of some kind but i've taken to the Chaos Theory whistle), they walk outside, then they run, then you circle back into the building and pick up the loot knowing that they can only walk indoors. Serious suggestion? It is and it works. To the OP isn't it obvious they know you want the loot, they know what it's worth, would you step aside if somebody came into your house armed with an axe stealing beans from you? For your childrens sake i hope not! But for the sake of discussion...why shouldn't zombies be on loot? Is it crazy to assume that survival minded surviors might have had loot close by before they died or succumb to infection? It makes the first weapon grab tense. I like the feeling of seeing a stupid zombie standing on axe. I outwit it and mush its head. Very satisying.

Yes i'll clarifiy. As Inception says these two ideas are not mutally exclusive, they are perspectives but there are truths supported by history and the games experience. What is true is that cooperation will always trump the lone wolf in terms of power, specalisation, survivability. Being a lone wolf is fun but being a lone wolf is pretty much just that. You can certainlly have an effect on the world but your strength in no way compares to that of an organised group. Neither your resilience, longevity, physical capabilities, capacity to recover when injured. Any negative impact that can happen to a player is worse for a wolf. Teamwork on average is preferable, in a survival sense, to being a lone wolf. History shows this. The most consistentlly powerful, well armed, healed, healthy, equipped 'individuals' in DayZ are always part of a group. What is open for debatable is whether this means people will actually cooperate in a dynamic sense. It's not impossible to gauge player cooperation levels but nobody has tried. I suggest for obvious reasons that cooperation if attemped would benift people players beyond the short term gains they get from killing. BUT this is where we all diverge. Some people have a low tolerance for stress or a low respect for others. My experience (subjective) I certainlly felt the need to cooperate more in recent patches than i have for months because trying to meet all of my needs as an individual as a lot harder when loot is scare. I found plently of surplus stuff but particular items eluded me. I was part of a clan for one week. Never again...not my style...but even that causal brainless clan could horde more shit than any of us could ever use...and they always will this as close to a DayZ truth as you will get.

Shh don't say that we will drown under a flash flood of whiny threads...he mostly ignores any responses and nitpicks one issue and is usally proven wrong again. It's a form of fun if you're having a slow night in between moving houses! Honestly though...antibios could go up a little (razor said there would be other ways to cure eventually)...BUT hotfix vol 2 cometh...so we shall see what happens

And don't tune into that frequency? Or turn it off? Or run away from it? Not meaning to sound to nasty but radios are going to be amazing for players who want an authentic in game experience without VOIP. Had a good chance to practice using sidechat today to see how two way communication with unkown parties works out. It was awsome. Somebody needed antibiotics (who doesn't these days), told him to come to X co-ord, made him run along the beach so i could see if he was being tailed or if i was being played, told him to drop his guns at a rock and run another 500 meters. Passed on the goodies, took a morphine from his bag as payment and parted. This might not seem like much but previously i never, NOT ONCE, met over side chat. Seeing as 2ways are being added I'm a litte more prone to side chat meet ups. 2ways are really gona help boredom and feeling part of an inhabited world. Hopefully green mountain will play a role in radio! Not to mention annoucing your arrival to certain areas and letting parties know about it.

When capitalising make sure you are right... Hmm what is usless that we can add? Garden gnomes and other ornamental shit. Collect it and make a base...woot,woot. And animals heads and or antlers!

It doesn't need to be stopped. There just needs to be more to do and the zombies need to respond and attack in a way that cricle straff does not stone cold defeat them.

Twas joke (in style of too damn high man) ;) as an after thought-found everything besides rangefinders from loot-

I represent the jealous have not bambis of dayz. People running from kemekna to black lake, some people begging on side chat. Bambis can’t find no cans in no supermarkets after 1.7.7. Listen you hear that? The sound of flies? The lols on side. One more crushed dream. Gotta listen to me. We gotta talk about the issue. The loot table is to damn low. As a karakte expert I will not talk about anyone up here. We gotaa listen. Our bambis can’t find no rangefinders anywhere. Nowhere! No high yields, no heli crash sights, no where to go. Why? Inception and friends hoarding shit for lols…too damn high

I don't think he realises the secret power of buldings...or running past the zombies in a slighty bigger radius than pre this patch.

SOoo... a clan works together for whatever goal they have a goal in mind. But two people, we assume are interested in survival, must have have no potential to be able work together because they are just going to kill each other? If this were true how and why were clans formed? More importantly why doesn't every clan end in betrayl and bloodshed due to scarcity? This has to be true if your if all of your arguments are correct. In a broader social sense if individuals have no incentive to cooperate how was human civilisation formed? Why is there social cohesion? And in your example, and in all of them, our two strangers have no capacity to build trust. That is how most relationships are formed. You build it through shared experience. This includes clans, where new members need to earn their keep. There is of course potential for it to go awry. And as for your rule that people who are out for themsevles don't give away supplies I give away antibiotics, morphine, ammo, weapons regularly. Since i specalise in this (and you banditry) i am rarely betrayed and know what to look out for. Argh…you miss every point teaming up doesn’t give you more loot it just lets you search for more. It lets your specialise. Making up random statistics like 25% of X time…what is this This isn’t even an answers to the question, which you conveniently avoided. It’s a non-answer filled with irrelevant factoids about a real life apocalypse. You were on the cusp of understanding why using an ideal outcome as an example is a poor example to use in support of a wider argument but just ended up back at the same outcome. Good stuff! No you didn’t and even gave examples of people working together for the sake of benift. It’s a strange way to argue against the benefits cooperation by giving examples of why groups work together. Eventually you might not draw an arbitrary line with clans.

Naive? Only if you think by saying "cooperation" i infer rosey fields of flowers were heros frolic merily with bandits who both offer a helping hand to bambis. Cooperation doesn't imply morality or a good ethic, just a desire to survive. History has demonstrated that groups that tended to cooperate were stronger as a whole, think colonial settlers vs indigenous populations, homo sapien vs neanderthal. Indiviudals and or smaller groups of with strong indviduals lost out to the stronger groups with weaker individuals because diversification, specialisation and increased output steamrolls individuals.

You both miss the point so hard it hurts. I'll make it simple. When does one benefit benift more from sharing? In times of glut (when they don't acutally need it) or times of need? (when they do nedd it) *Loot is hard to find as one person *Two people can cover more ground to find more loot *Two players can share loot that one person can't hold (i have a maky, he has revolver, i pick up his ammo). And the strong survive? Well groups that cooperate have histroiclly done better than those that don't, no matter the scarecity of resoucres. I've given away antibiotics before...heck i colleclted ammo i didn't need in 1.7.7 to give away to people when i found them. No need to do that in any prior patch when most guns spawned with 4-5 mags. And yes 1.7.7.1 is piss easy compared to 1.7.7. Thats a fact. And in 1.7.7.1 loot is not terribly scare, especially food. Even you agree with me, even if you don't know it. Just examine what you said. You agree there there should be benift in cooperation (lets not even bring up altruism), this makes sense in terms of your chances for survival. Well....I have a technique to double the your chances of finding loot (which helps surival) for no extra input! Crazy! Who'd of thought you could do this...it's called cooperation. You only have to share any surplus you find after both your indvidual needs are met. It appears that the thurst of your counter argument is the belief that you benefit less from cooperation when you need it more. <_< Scareity and how this effects banditry is a seperate issue from the merits of cooperation but i'll take it up with you. Riddle me this, are you more likely to survive a firefight (because bandits are trying to steal your valuble stuff) or recover quicker in a group or with a teammate?

Since you are fine with pass speculation off as fact allow me to indulge. Less resources puts an empahsis on player cooperation because when resources are limited cooperation yields higher results for individuals (within a group) due to the fact that more loot will be found overall. Surplus is shared and indvidual needs are meet. Lets think on the reverse. Does cooperation flourish in a world with ample loot, guns, cars, food, drink spawning everywhere, where an individual can look after every need by themsevles? (thinks about 5 patches ago and shudders) Because every firefight has an ideal outcome? Now think about how how finding less ammunition (because loot is less) and adding serious zombies effects this scenario. Hordes (that will be added in the SA) that will be drawn to gunfire when their AI is finally fixed. In 1.7.7 (for the one session i got to play on it) i had a firefight with 4 bandits. Both sides run out of ammunition...it was hilarious. The final bandit had to run across an open field to use his last few rounds to shoot at point blank range because he was running so low. Again we come to cooperation. Cooperation is better in low loot servers. One perosn is a mule to carry different types of ammo, different guns, nothing is left behind. Where a solo player passes over weapons that do not share ammo types groups pick them up.

You're never alone, except on an empty server (and who the fuck wants to be on one of those)

Oh my! Why didn't I think of this sooner...a good knock to the head and you drop your shit like stunned mullet...very sexy

Z's in buildings is great. I usally approach houses from the back side, listen for moans. If i think its going to cause to much fuss with other zombies aggoring of the zombie inside i skip the building, or try to steal a peak inside on of the windows. Very fun feeling weighing risk reward, very much looking foward to the day that all the AI is legit. Not all buildings of course but ones with zombies inside might have a higher chance of loot, as said above maybe they turned inside defending something of worth?

Is Track IR or Oculus Rift going to be supported at launch?

At the top of the page I looked on bemused. As i scrolled down my brow furrowed. My jaw open. I gave beans and called a doctor. He asked what was wrong. I said DayZ. He hung up.

Forget where those helicopters come from what about those nades?...

Well that depressing to hear.

Happy? YES! Not ecstatic but certainly better off. Anger and piss poor syntax make it hard to find the 'compassion'. If you started with this it would have been better. It's not our responsibility to sift through shit to find your gold. And golly when you tried you gave some pretty reasonable suggestions. 2% antibiotics seems reasonable. That was the old AS50-M107 spawn me thinks? And i found bugger all of them stone cold from loot, it would be a good starting point. Zombies hitting harder is always a good idea. And lessen the chance of infection but offset this with an increase in the zombie damage? This a fresh idea if im not mistaken, one i could support.

Not an oxymoron because privacy is not defined by a sign up cost or ease of entry. This isn't the public square, there are terms and conditions. Missed for a fourth time.

Why would we ban the game because it contains strong langauge? The distiction which you have missed three times now is that you are on a private forum, with rules as part of singing up. If you violate the terms and conditions you can expect a response. It's pretty easy.

There's those leaps of logic again. +18 also has nothing to do with free speech, it's a content warning and that's it. Also in no way relates to what you can say on seperate forums.