Search the Community

Yea, exactly. It's supposed to be in open testing, but it's not. The last update was almost a month ago. The game is still in testing phase, but only internally. As an external tester we/us/the community has nothing to test. We have a build that has mostly gone through QA (which is questionable at best), with no objectives as to what to test. Is there some bug that is exceedingly hard to find that we should be looking for? No - we have no idea because no one told us. We can't even DO basic testing. We have no low-level information that could be used for performance profiling. Even basic stuff like a frame-rate counter is missing. Can we report on strange areas of that map that have abnormally high DP, poly count, shadow count, etc? No, because we don't have the tools. Could we report on crashes in detail? No, because the current log system is atrocious. I would love to do real testing, as an alpha 'early access' test would imply, but I can't since there are literally no tools to test with. What's worse, is that if I try to use 3rd party tools to get the information needed to properly test the game, I'd likely get banned because it messes with the renderer and would look like a cheat. Like I said before, I know it's not a full release, but the dev team acts like it is. There's no debug tools, there's no render info tools, there's no real logging, there's no frequent builds, and the builds that we do get go through QA. All of these signs point towards a game that the devs think is no longer in testing, but is instead a full release. How am I supposed to test the game in "open testing" without any of the tools required to do so? Ignore the comments on QA, but that doesn't explain how basic stuff such as water-bottle fainting got through it. If there was no QA, that would make sense. But there is, and they (should) have access to the internal change log. That log probably shows that something related to the water bottle changed, and as such, it should be tested. Obviously, that wasn't the case. QA should test for bugs, and a bug got through. If I've somehow missed what's going on, please tell me. But what I've outlined is basically what every studio does during development. Change happens -> Change gets logged -> logged changes get tested by QA. Yes, I'm aware that SC2 had 16k builds, that is a ton, and I wouldn't really expect any game to get that high. And yes, DayZ has tons of internal builds, again that's expected. However, what's unexpected, and quite frankly strange, is that likely 99% of those builds never see the light of day. Every single project I've ever worked on has had daily, or worst case weekly builds internally. However, in the case of DayZ, the testing team is supposedly the community (according to the steam page, rocket, etc.). Unfortunately, this testing team is almost always limited to monthly builds with zero in the way of testing tools, objectives, etc. The only explanation for not releasing a build is basically that it's completely unplayable. I.e. it doesn't launch, or fails to connect 100% of the time. However, that obviously can't be the case all the time. I can believe it happening every now and then, but not for periods so long that no semi-stable build exists for over a month. If you're really worried about a thousand posts of "this game doesn't even run", add a nightly branch to the game, and change the splash screen text to say so. That way, only the people who are committed to testing will actually run it. They won't complain about random bugs, since they're expected, and if the build actually comes with anything in the way of tools, they might give some very useful information. As for the SC2 video, I could say that your statement is just as wrong. In the first clip, he simply says that "they started with the SC1 units": he never says that they started with only the SC1 terran units. He then goes on to say they began to add NEW units, which started with the Terran team. Again, no where does he say that ONLY terran existed at this point; only that terran were the first to get new units. In fact, by the 2nd build, you can see that there are newly done terran and zerg units (1:08). Remember, features are not things like units, features are game systems. Even in that first build, they had unit movement, building, resource gathering. It's possible that they also had combat, but it's hard to say, since it wasn't shown. The only mechanical systems that weren't in at this point were the Protoss energy grid and Zerg creep. When he goes on to say that they started working on Zerg/Protos, this likely only refers to implementing new models/icons/etc. not the team as a whole, as like I stated before, Zerg units are clearly visible much earlier (1:08 in the video). Without the actual builds to play with, or at least a much more detailed explanation as to what was in each one, it is hard to make solid claims on what is in or not. However, you are most certainly wrong about when Zerg/Protoss were implemented in an initial form, just based off the evidence in the same video. As for my opinions, well, ok. I'll get some links. As such, you'd expect only the smallest of bugs to get through to the final game (keyword: final game)Yes, final game. However, the way DayZ is being treated, it feels like the dayz team thinks its a final game, or close to it. Why QA things in an Alpha? Why do art passes? Why add non-gameplay critical elements such as 40 different shirts when basic elements are still missing? These aren't alpha-stage things, these are late-beta things. What doesn't make sense is how bugs like 'passing out after drinking from a water bottle' gets through QA (Opinion).Not really an opinion. It's a known bug that you pass out (or at least collapse) after drinking from what a water bottle. What's the point of QA'ing a product if stuff like that gets by? You might as well just push without it going through QA. That way players get more frequent builds, and the same bugs will likely be in there. Use the public as QA, since that's what they signed up for. DayZ Development progress makes no sense (Opinion). Well no, it doesn't. That's my whole argument. You don't QA an alpha. You don't art pass an alpha. You don't road marks from Q2, then continue to miss them throughout all of Q3. It should go Q2 -> Q3. Instead, it seems like Q2 stuff was missed ('advanced weather', world containers, fast-time servers) and was then pushed aside for Q3 stuff - which was also missed (multi-core, central loot, fixed zombies, advanced animals, barricades, basic vehicles, mod support, player stats, horticulture). Now were in Q4, and I honestly doubt we'll see those three Q2 features in by the end of the year. Everything is behind schedule, and there's been no update to the road map to represent this. If you want things to make sense to me, and probably most of the community, we need transparency. Why did those three Q2 features slip? What's the status on them? We got a vague mention to horticulture 2 weeks ago, and that's about it. Maybe update the roadmap on Steam, or really anywhere, that outlines what we'll have and when we'll have it. Firstly, this isn't a "this game is buggy" post. This is the exact opposite of this: it's a look at how the devs are handling the game, and how their actions don't fit that of a game that IS in alpha (Opinion)Ok, the first bit where I can agree it's an opinion, but one with valid backup. Since you didn't 'opinion' flag the definitions of alpha/beta, I'm going to assume that we both agree on what those are. So, if the game is in Alpha as you, the steam page, and basically everyone claims, I have a few questions. Firstly, why are art-passes, such as re-textures, new barrels, new hangers, etc. all happening in Alpha? Alpha is, as per the definition which you seem to have agreed with, mostly used for grey boxing. However, beta is for art passes: that's conflict #1. Next we have the whole thing of 'feature freeze' and 'optimization'. Feature freeze occurs first, since if you optimize and then add features, you'll almost always break features. But again, we're getting things like code optimization, animation optimization and stuff, all while in alpha. Conflict #2. Why do we have so many weapons? Are they all really so unique that each one has a totally different game system that must be tested? Why are new pants/jackets/etc. always being added? Do those also contain new mechanical features that we haven't been able to test? Again, the answer is no. Conflict #3. I could go on, but there's really no point. Things are happening in Alpha that should happen in beta, and things that should happen in Alpha haven't happened yet. The later is fine, but it's somewhat annoying when it appears as if it's being delayed by the former. Look at the new Unreal Tournament pre-alpha. I can download and play it right now, and almost all of its weapons/hud are right from UT3. The maps are grey boxes. Meanwhile in dayZ we have these nicely polished assets with bug-tested and optimized code. This isn't an alpha. So, we now understand what alpha and beta phases are - so, which is DayZ? Well, it's an akward limbo between the two(Opinion)This is basically the same as above. Actions which should only occur in Beta are happening in Alpha. Things that should be happening in Alpha have been pushed out to at least next year. An alpha, by nature, SHOULD be full of bugs, since fixing them isn't the top priority. Beta is when you remove bugs and increase usability. "Bow animation polishing" - I don't even need to comment on this(Opinion).Again, same thing. Anything along the lines of 'polishing' should be in beta, if not late beta - not alpha. And yes, alphas have bugs. That's not really an opinion. Lastly, I want to bring up something that everyone has been asking for for a long time: vehicles. The approach taken on this also makes very little senseThis isn't how you would do an alpha feature implementation(Opinion) Well, it doesn't. Here's a nice post from someone who worked on Crysis 3, and it shows how they developed their game. As you can see, the level starts off as a mostly grey box with extremely low quality art. Then once they were happy with it from a mechanical standpoint, the art was tuned. Here's a thing on the new Unreal Tournament, which also shows dev progress (they post tons of stuff, it's great). In UT, you can hear him talking about how everything (elevator move speed, item placement, etc.) is all super temporary, and that's he's still messing around with it. But regardless of it being incredibly unfinished, I can still go out and download the current project - which is often updated several times a week. But instead, if we look at the latest dayz change log, all we get is that vehicles are in early prototyping. That's good, but what does it mean? Can we see any of the car models placed around? Are any of the parts pickable yet, even if they are trash? No, none of that is available, because as Rocket said, the dayz team is going to 'one-shot' it, and put every single mechanism in at once. The road-map agrees with this, as it says that initial, "simple vehicles" would be in by Q3 and more complex vehicles with upgrades would be out in Q4. Neither of that has happened, and the differentiation of the repair system, part-swapping and the vehicle system is never made. No where does it say "at first vehicles will be super basic, with no repair system", it's just "at first we will have bikes/card". Like I showed above, that's not how anyone does it. You would release basic vehicles as static art first, then as drivable, then maybe as repairable/refuel-able and then finally as upgradable. From a logical standpoint, the first feature which is required for testing is vehicles(Opinion).I don't see how this is an opinion. For any of the vehicle sub-systems to work (repair, refuel, part swap), vehicles need to exist first. I can't test the repair system without a vehicle to repair. However, this isn't how the devs are handling this(Opinion).Two quotes above show that this is exactly how it's being handled. Vehicles will be added in basically one big 'patch', which adds all the features. There's no breakdown of sub features which will be released one at a time. It's either nothing or everything (and then more vehicles). They instead want to one-shot the ENTIRE vehicle system, with repairing, fueling, combining parts, etc. This is NOT how you do an alpha(Opinion).Again, not an opinion. Quotes show vehicles will be done all at once, and the stuff from Unreal/Crytek shows how that's not how you do an alpha. You would first add grey-box vehicles, then basic-functioning ones, and then ones with proper sub-systems. I can get even more documents showing that you never do development all in one go, and that it's broken down into sub-systems, but I really hope that's not necessary. So where does this leave us? Well, it leaves us in a situation where there's realistically very little hope of the game being even feature complete any time soon(Opinion).Road map said Q3 for vehicles. It's Q4 and we don't even have Q2 features. If we're lucky, we'll hit that point at the end of 2015(Opinion),Currently, the road map has been wrong by about 100%. Features that were supposed to be in by Q2 are (at best) going to be in by Q4. That means 6 months = 12 months. Most of the Q3 features aren't in yet, and likely won't be in during Q4. Extrapolate that and you end up with end of 2015 for the completion of 'Q4' vehicles. Will that be 100% accurate? I don't know, I don't have a time machine. But unless you feel like making a 100%, unbreakable, set-in-stone promise (with some sort of consequence) that vehicles will be 100% complete BEFORE the end of 2015, it's not really a false claim. meaning that it'll have taken over two years to get out of alpha. However, this shouldn't be the case(Opinion)I very much doubt that alpha began the very day that DayZ was put on steam. The first version was released on December 16th, 2013, and that was version 0.28.113734. The current version, 0.48.124737 was released on Aug 8, 2014. That gives us a 235 day time span in which the game incremented by about 0.2 in terms of versioning. Now, that transition isn't linear, obviously, but it's a good scale to use. Remember that a long time ago, rocket said that the alpha would be released in December 2012. For that claim to make any sense, development had to have started by then. So that gives us a year and 3 months to work with. Interestingly enough, if we use that 235 days = 0.2 version increment, and scale it back by the entire 0.28 version history, that gives us about 329 days. Subtract 329 days from the actual December 16 release date, and you get January 21, 2013. Not too far off from the initial estimate release date. So basically, we have two separate confirmations that development must have started in 2012, exactly when is unknown, but 2012 is pretty much assured. That means that by the initial release, dayz had been in Alpha for pretty much a year. By the end of this year, it will have been two years. And, again, unless you want to make a statement that guarantees the community fully, complete vehicles by the end of 2015, that means we'll still be in Alpha at year 3 (two years of public release). Why should this not be the case? Well, the main factor is that games, even games as big as DayZ, don't take 3 years to get out of Alpha. World of Warcraft, which even at release, was a bigger game than DayZ, took 4-5 years to go from concept to release. Minecraft, which is the same in many respects, started in May 2009, and was released as 'official' in Novemeber 2011 - that's 2.5 years. In addition, pretty much every commercial game takes about 3 years to make. So yea, taking 2+ years to get out of alpha shouldn't happen. Adding new features, such as vehicles, should not take all that long to implement.See above. It's almost certain that any other major dev studio would have an internal beta by now, assuming development started in late 2012. As it stands, the current Steam page is a lieWARNING: THIS GAME IS EARLY ACCESS ALPHA. Well, it's not. I've covered why. PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT. Well, i'd love to. Too bad I have no tools to do any supporting. Again, covered above. PREPARED TO HANDLE WITH SERIOUS ISSUES. There aren't any, since builds are so sporadic, and since it goes through QA. It states that DayZ is "in alpha" and that you shouldn't buy "unless you want to actively support the development of the game". Neither of these statements are trueIt's not in alpha, I've covered that. And I'd love to actively support the development, but I can't because everything is QA'd, everything is locked down, there's no debug tools and logging is non-existant. As shown above, the devs (somehow) belive that DayZ is in BETA, and they do NOT want people actively supporting the devlopment of the game, short of giving them money(Opinion) Prove me wrong. Art passes and polish are for beta, you yourself agreed to that definition. And like I said, I'd love to support development with more than just money, but since there's literally no tools, and 3rd part tools would get you banned, I literally can't help you. Just give me something half as good as RenderDoc and I can give way more detail as to why the game runs horribly at random times. Give me wire-frame and comment on models. Give me network logs, and network people (not me) can comment on that. Give me access to lower level game settings, and I can tweak them to make the game run better. Literally anything would be better than what we have now. If the statements were true, we would have far fewer guns/shirts/hats and the initial stages of the vehicles available for play(Opinion).Yes, because grey-boxing is what happens in Alpha, as does system development, and not art passes. Hope that covers everything. If you really want links... sure.

Uh just letting you know. You are probably talking about Dayz Standalone and not the mod. And to let you know in the past status report they have said they have begun work on vehicles. So we may see it sooner or later.

Er, no. The dayz derivative mods were never approved, or authorized, and further, they are totally unrelated to the Official Community Mod. I'm not sure of the exact timing, but I'm fairly sure the first of the derivative mods actually came out before the official mod was handed off to the community development group, although I COULD be wrong. The external mods were a result of someone reverse engineering Dean Hall's Mother Hive system, and re-writing it from scratch, then modifying the DayZ Client files to create a variation of the mod (dayzland.eu taviana). Players tend to mix several topics: 1. Derivative Mods - These are all the variations of the original Mod by Dean Hall, they can use any version of DayZ, Origins for example used the last version of the mod that Dean Hall updated, and then never updated to any of the versions made by the community development mod. 2. Public Hive - This traditionally refers only to the "official hive" where all character data is the same regardless of server logged into. HOWEVER, LOTS of the derivative mods and even server hosting companies offered either/or "public hives" or "shared central hives", where all servers of the same mod on the same host would have common player data. 3. Private Hives - these are servers where player data is local to ONLY that server. It was ONLY on this level of hosting that you see the lowest common denominator garbage like 1000's of vehicles and load out malls. This is such a flawed mindset "hardcore DayZ mod supporter"... All you are doing is limiting your own playing experience by being snobby like that. Now that the DayZ Mod License is public, it's clear that the derivative mods are totally allowed within A2. Your fears for modding in SA are totally unfounded, there is almost NO chance of BI or DayZ SA team opening up access to the hive or even server software... so what you will likely end up approved mods that alter the client files only, with possibly a webpage interface to alter SOME server settings... IF even that. IF we end up in a situation like we did with the mod, where someone reverse engineers the hive system I think you'll see BI pursue it legally if there is ANY attempt to use DayZ SA Content on it. I think saying that the community developers got "shut out" by Dean/BI is both hyperbolic and inaccurate at best. When I was contributing to the mod we experienced a similar delay, and a public "raking over the coals" of Dean Hall for it, and he was neither happy about it, or AWARE of the update. Sending ONE email to Dean Hall or Hicks ONCE and then waiting for a reply isn't exactly the best strategy. I have no idea if they changed that since, but it was FOR SURE the methodology being applied at the time. "Handing over" the official mod is a MUCH more slippery slope than anyone here is outlining as well. DayZ is a wholly owned property of BI/Dean Hall, so they are legally responsible to ensure that nothing included in the mod updates presents them with unwanted legal exposure. As far as hosting the public hive, that's something I'm SURE an ISP would be willing to do for free in return for being promoted as the "official" server host for the mod... but again you are then talking about something that BI Lawyers will need to get involved in. IMO Dean/BI allowing modification of DayZ files in A2 at all is awesome... having kept the public hive up for so long has been ENORMOUSLY generous. I for one, prefer their focus being on SA. In regards to SA's development I'd say you're looking at what is an obvious progression of development upon a pretty predictable timeline... The ONLY (imo) major failing was/is the failure to properly communicate the development timeline... and it's been a repeating problem. At least Hicks has laid it out above... I'm only disappointed that they are essentially writing off 2013 for having been a year that happened.... They announced SA development and dropping the idea of "Super Mod" in Sep of 2012 for god's sake.... by april of 2013 I was sending emails advocating a more aggressive development approach. I had hoped that was already happening but this whole assertion that we're only 11 months into development pretty much clarifies that they were mainly busy counting money in 2013 lol. All fun poking aside, I'm still fairly confident it's going to be a great franchise/game eventually.

welcome. cars are not a priority as we are in early alpha, expect them to come in around christmas (these vehicles will be moto bikes, bicycles, and other small things.) private hives when the game reaches beta.

You wish. In 2 weeks, there'll be 9 threads on how running is broken, 3 on on how great it is, 2 complaining it wasn't on the road map, 5 demanding vehicles be the top priority, 2 complaining zeds are too fast and OP as well, 1 about sprinting upstairs in fire stations breaks your legs and 1 from you complaining scope sway when walking and aiming is unrealistic.

Zzz... Bows already suck, stop trying to butcher them more for the sake of "realism". If I had my way with realism, there would be broken down cars and working vehicles with empty fuel tanks everywhere. That's an apocalypse. But then there will be the people qq'ing saying it should be endgame content only. You really can't win it all.

Yup thats great news. I am not sure why they are waiting for vehicles to implemented when they could have nailed the player movement speed early on. It is not like vehicles will be so wide spread to have any meaningful effect on the average player.

This thread is still going? Impressive. No, we are completely justified in complaining about bugs. QA exists purely to stop bugs from getting into the public version of the game. In any AAA, or really any mid-sized studio, they'll test out the game on a bunch of hardware/software setups, with a bunch of different in-game settings. As such, you'd expect only the smallest of bugs to get through to the final game. Again, calling back to the Company of Heroes 2 bugs I found with a friend, those bugs were so insanely obscure and hard to reproduce (yet still game-breaking if done), that it took nearly an hour specifically trying to replicate it once. That kind of bug I can accept getting past QA, since it requires testing way outside of what anyone would do in-game (a normal game lasts ~20 min). What doesn't make sense is how bugs like 'passing out after drinking from a water bottle' gets through QA. This is something that everyone does in-game, and requires zero setup: just get a water bottle, and drink it. Or, if you paint the fairly new AK-folding buttstock, it causes it to disappear. This list goes on. These are all very easy to reproduce, and all of them should have been caught by QA. However, they weren't. By definition, QA is supposed to stop bugs from getting out, and in this case they didn't - which means they failed. If, however, that QA team didn't exist, it would mean two things. 1, more frequent patches as they wouldn't need to go through QA, and 2, a legitimate reason to not complain about bugs. Just take Firefox for example: there's the regular build and a nightly build (as well as few others). If I find a bug in the regular edition, it's incredibly annoying and Mozilla failed to deliver a decent product. If I find a bug in Nightly, well, that's the point of Nightly. If DayZ wants to put out a nightly build beside the current build (some kind of extra-experamental build) then yea, I'll hop on that asap and never complain about bugs again (or, at lest until mid/late beta). I'd have to disagree there. The StarCraft video showed a much better development process. The difference here is that StarCraft 2 never had a paid/open Alpha. While the Alpha existed, it was only for a very select few (high-level professionals, etc.). DayZ on the other hand has a paid/open Alpha which is pretty much all anyone has to go on, and is, as such, the only thing we can compare to. Firstly, look at the number of builds. In one year, SC2 had about 1300 different builds available - at a constant rate, that's about 975 in 9 months. DayZ has had 17. And, to avoid the whole "but DayZ is actually open", just look at Planetary Annihilation, which had 20 different builds in the span of 6 weeks during its initial alpha. Then we had the way they implemented things. The first thing Blizzard did was add the SC1 stuff as a starting point. DayZ kind of did this, but ignored things like ARMA2/3s gigantic weapon list, vehicles, and so on. Then they went on to add other major features, like cliffs and lighting (since it was a new engine). Right now, we haven't even reached a build comparable to the 2nd clip in that SC2 video. DayZ SA still doesn't equal the mod in terms of features, while the SC2 build had all the features of SC1 implemented (although much more rough). And then yes, the last thing they did was tons of optimizing at the end. As far as I'm aware, this is how every studio does things. As for the call-back to my OP, I would like to hear what misinformation I posted, or what opinions I presented as facts. Everything I posted was based upon the current public version of DayZ, as well as my experience with game development.

That is exactly why. They handed over the mod to the community and look what happened. Over run by bastardized versions of DayZ called Epoch/Overpoch. 1000's vehicles and self blood bag ftw, right?

I like the current speed of sprinting (so getting around without vehicles isn't extremely time consuming). However, I agree with this statement: The shock condition could last 5-15s or so depending on the cartridge.

Like Caboose said, you are renting it, not owning it. Its exactly like renting an apartment and being told animals arent allowed. If you own it you can do what ever you want, but if you rent it, you have to follow the rules of the "landlord". That being said, theres a distinct difference between private-shards and private-servers. A private-shard is a "piece" of the database, closed off to other servers, but this means you can have multible servers running on the same shard, so communities can have several servers, where characters transfer between. A private-server is a completely private, and self controlled, installation of the server pack, with full acces to server files, server logs and database. Exactly like we see in the mod. Agreed, nobody needs this to be a good admin tbh. Acces to certain logs is not a bad idea, the question is what logs are really needed? Changing of server setting is also not a bad idea, but i really doubt we will ever get any kind of option to alter gameplay drasticly (turn pvp off, alter amount of loot, zombies, etc.) I think the server settings will be identical to the public servers. Getting players unstuck is BI's problem, not the admins. In order to unstuck people you need database acces to change the coordinates of the player. Teleport is just a no go tbh, nothing good ever comes from a teleporting admin. When you write admin map, do you mean a map that shows the location of all players and vehicles? If so, no way.... The cons far outweigh the pro on this matter. No good can ever come from magicly having a map of everyones location. I want to add, that all the people who say "change server" or "why do you care" doesnt understand this issue at all. If we dont play by the same rules and nobody cares how the servers are run, it will become the same mess that we had in the mod, which had a VERY bad effect on the mod and the community in whole. This is not a matter of "you can do what ever you want, once you get a server". This is a matter of giving admins tools to help them run a server, while at the same time not giving them tools they can abuse. Most of the tools we have in the mod, are being abused like crazy by thousands of admins, every day. We need to prevent that from ever happening in the standalone, or the game will go down the drain. I want to play on private shards for the obvious reasons. Having a community and playing with the same people on it. You cant do that on a public server. I still dont understand how you can be so careless, when people are fucking up your game? Instead of not carring, what about not giving the admins tools they can abuse? You can be a good admin without database acces and without having a magic map, you can see people on.

Most of you are talking about two extreme points: giving admins complete control and giving admins no control. But there is a big grey area in between. I think, admin shouldn't have: - access to the database - the power to spawn items/vehicles But we should discuss granting the power to: - access the logs (maybe not full access, but enough to enforce their gameplay rules - as stated in the above mentioned devlog from August 1) - change server settings (accelerated time, PvE/PvP) - teleport (getting players unstuck, setting up events, finding hackers/dupers/glitchers) - see the admin map (to catch hackers who teleport/speedhack)

You May Be LOST, but You Will Never Be Alone. The Lost BoyZ clan is proud to present our very own DayZ Mod server! As the clan keeps expanding, the clan also grows in it’s ability to provide an infrastructure for everyone to enjoy and play in. At first, we started with only a handful of servers, but with the emergence of kind players consistently donating both their time and money while other players donated their skills in the forms of video recording, photography, editing, and even provided more complex competencies such as programming and scripting. With this in mind, our DayZ Mod server would not have been possible if it were not for the efforts of Talindor. Talindor is a respected member of the Lost BoyZ clan and one of the admins for our DayZ Mod server that has a particular skillset and the resources to make our DayZ Mod server come to life and change it to suit the needs that many people have been requesting from service providers with implementing mechanics such as Banks, ATMs, currency in the form of coins, A.I. adjustments, convenience mechanics such as deployable vehicles to ease the stress of travelling, and even environment changes to make the land of Chernarus a living, breathing world. Many of you who are reading this are possibly thinking about one group in particular when reading this and that is Custom Combat Gaming (or commonly known as CCG) already provide these servers and service to people.This is only the partial truth and say that our servers are not only more mechanically exciting…(finding the proper words for this one) We have coin currency. We have Banks and ATMs just like the CCG community. However, unlike CCG, our Banks and ATMs do not have a currency limit, which all CCG servers sit at a currency limit of 250,000. This makes it frustrating when newer players and experienced players die and unable to keep any of their hard earned cash that hinders general progress. An added bonus is that when a player establishes a base, they are able to transfer currency with the use of ATMs through the system we like to call “Online Banking” so you can transfer what you want, where you want. Banks are placed outside of trader cities and spread out to ensure that the server always have a healthy amount of Player versus Player no matter where you go and enforce that there are still consequences in the post apocalyptic world. We have deployable bikes for those who die. This helps the ease of crossing our expanse world after suffering from it’s cruel (and sometimes unusual) punishments. Players are not the only thing you should worry about. Our unscripted A.I. adds random and unique encounters. Some will try to kill you, some will try to rob you, and others will simply want to trade with you and each comes with their own random behavior set. Unscripted environment means missions will spawn for players to accept and embark in to earn in-game loot. Real time Day and Night cycle with complete weather effects that will alter gameplay tactics. Do you fight in the rain 24/7 friendly Admin support for the DayZ Mod server for all technical support and assistance Servers are always adapting and adding new content, mechanics, and designs. We are not building a new server; we are building a community for all to join. And so much more... Don’t believe us? Come join us at our new server by visiting our website at http://are-you-lost.enjin.com/home or by searching for our server at [skull Rock] Single Currency|Gold Coin|Banks|West Coast [u.S.A.]

hi guys first up cheers rocket its awesome i love the detail and depth but game play is lacking if its a game put some game in it and if its a simulator then don t restrict people cause people would make whatever they have to work maybe take a leaf out of epochs book man one kiwi to another swallow that pride (however deserved) and realise 1. tents or something yeah safes are a bit unrealistic but hey so is not having anyway to set up camp/homebase you always go on about realism well camping and tents are more real than zombies 2. take another lesson this time from state of decay shit game but you can barricade existing buildings once again pretty real and probably what most people would do 3. epoch again AI nuff said 4. I know you dont like vehicles once again realism i get it petrol goes bad real quick and cars would not be an option really quickly but everywhere in the world ive been there are bikes everywhere and what about horses? on a more supportive note love the ideas i was reading somewhere that you want to make zs affected by hunger level injury etc fucking brilliant and you have gone a long way to make their paths more realistic the leaping at you is lame and the fighting system is a step bacward from the mod though also idea for building just put in padlocks and adjust the sheds everywhere to lock make them breakable though not trying to be a dick here but theres one thing you cant tweak and that is people and in real life people woud hoard spend some money on a psychologist as a consultant possibly? ive played this mod since the beginning ive seen many fail on the way and i think numbers dont lie epoch wins not because its exactly what people want but because they try to make it more open not try and make everyone polay the same way zombies rule nz rules .......standalone .....not quite there yet yes i realise its an alpha

Cars will come, some day. They will change the way that groups control servers, and there will be a swift change from roaming bandit groups to well organized and managed groups who must adapt to the situation of the apocalyptic world (or in our case, Chernarus). Vehicles, presuming they are incredibly rare, will become a status symbol. "Shit, they have a car! They're high on the food chain, aye comrade tovarich?" However rare they be, a rusted hatchback or shoddy Lada isn't really a status symbol, correct? If anything, they're rather impractical and probably only a tool of necessity, no matter how rare. Group warfare and PvP are demanding, and a simple truck just can't quite fit the needs of a combat team. Chernarus is a heavily militarized country, bordering a land hungry neighbor and recovering from a violent civil war. It's not like they have anything like a... BRM-1K COMMAND RECONNAISSANCE INFANTRY FIGHTING VEHICLE! I can hear the moans, the cries. "But, ewwwww, survival game and stuff *insert poorly laden and clichéd argument here*!" The most organized groups are the most effective, and the most effective have the nicest toys. Your average joe Berenzino camper couldn't maintain a bike, nonetheless an armored personnel carrier. "What? It can carry troops, too?" Yes, yes it can! State of the art Soviet engineering, with features like; A FCS reminiscent of WW2 era tanks, a 73mm HE cannon, 7.62 coax, powerful optics, and a long range radio. Plus it can carry seven troops. Thoughts?

Dale does have a point that SC2 as an example (and all sequel/franchise based games) have both a solid brand to launch from, as well as previous resources such as textures/balance data/models/story/gameplay mechanics/general code... the list goes on. While DayZ incorporates elements of FPS, open world mil-sim from ARMA games and other elements of MMO etc, the scope and functions as a whole are from what I can tell, mostly new. Other games & developers can sidestep this issue, as imagining, creating and executing the way things work are mostly if not wholly pre-existing. Take some imaginative sandbox games such as minecraft and terraria as another example. They all incorporate elements of this or that, and at the end of the day you're just laying down textures and objects but the idea and vision and execution are so far beyond other games before them, that the challenge is quite immense. I'm not saying DayZ is some groundbreaking messiah, though i do love it, but lets have some consideration for both the professional and artistic aspects involved in the game's creation :). Kids pick up trigonometry with general ease now-days. Could you imagine being pythagoras back in the day and saying FUCK ME these three sided shapes have a predictable nature that I can exploit, they even apply to circles. Aren't they all pretty and curved? Discovering Fire? Inventing the sandwich? It's all well and good to look back on the trail that others have blazed and say 'that's easy watch me do it' but to be out there threshing takes a degree of effort that is not always acknowledged. Also, I'm guilty of providing analogy here or in other similar threads too, but we've really got to move away from the software-physical product analogies as the two are so far removed... software and coding is like pulling planets from the cosmos (ANALOGIES!!) it's so abstract and imaginative/creative that the two do not really even compare. As an aside: again it changes from territory to territory, but incorporating real-world products (such as pepsi/coke/Heinz and brand-name weapons) in a free modification of another product is a far cry from including those copyrighted and trademarked items in a dedicated, stand-alone product that you sell for money. If you make no monetary return most people overlook it. The second you start making money, those companies start to consider whether the attraction of your product is based upon the brand-power that their product(s) have built, and they start demanding compensation/just payment for said use of their names/images/performances. This is why games like GTA made by big big companies do not list badges or model names of the vehicles they include (but still mock them in their hillarious sarcastic ways).

I agree with you...servers should not be locked and statuses should be checked daily to enforce the rules. But unless people like you and me make the effort to report them then it will continue to happen cause lets face it....enforcement will never happen properly. Once private shards are implemented then servers can be locked and whitelisted but for now, locked servers are an abuse of the server agreement. All in all though, I still stand by my previous statement...admins simply need more powers to deal with hacks! The abilty to see who's killing who, who's teleporting etc and it needs to be done before base building, tents and vehicles are added or it'll be a repeat of the mod all over again. I don't rent a server these days as I got fed up with the hacking on the mod and the constant stream of players notifying me, just took up too much of my time trying to trace evidence etc, but the leader of the clan I now play in does and runs it strictly in accordance with the rules. Its good admins that need the tools to deal with this and provide a good playing experience for the servers player base.

Nah they are static vehicles AFAIK. Always the same spot for me.

it makes perfect sense to me to remove the zombies if they're completely broken, especially as testers. they are bugged as hell and capable of killing or maiming you despite defending yourself sensibly, which only gets in the way of playing/testing every other part of the game. if vehicles were implemented tomorrow, would it not be wise to disable unnecessarily impeding (and broken) parts of the game that prevent most testers from using them? if active development was being done to the zombies then they should obviously be present for testers to see what's changed, but (and forgive me for not keeping myself too up to date) as far as i'm concerned, zombies have only gotten worse since i started playing the mod/SA, and i haven't seen any work being done to them since i can remember.

Something I'd like to suggest for vehicles is being able to shift gears and use the parking break, or actually needing to do so. IE you could park at the top of a hill, gas the engine a little to get you moving downhill and turn off the engine and silently coast down to the bottom of the hill and keep rolling till gravity takes it's toll. Or alternately put a vehicle in drive and it'll keep going forward at about 10-15MPH. Could do this to recreate the 'Ambush' scene from Super Troopers (since DayZ already has a history of people hiding in the trunk of cars :P) EDIT I also suggest this so we actually have variable speeds, not just full speed and stop. While I mastered taking the Bus through Vybor at high speed while being shot at with AS50s I'd much rather be able to go slow without having to keep tapping W and S at different intervals (don't have a throttle... :( )

I would like all the vehicles to be completely empty of fuel and ammo all of the time. Because the way I see it, armour shows up and decimates hundreds of zombies. Eventually it runs completely out of ammo and has to attempt to run zombies down and flee. Eventually the gas runs out too and with the very noisy engine the zombies quickly show up, and have a good go at it before the soldiers realise no help and food at all is available and have to get out and run. If possible I would like a APC to be a super rare spawn, with heaps of zombies around. The ground around the APC would be viscous mud where a horde of zombies swarmed around for hours. The sides of the APC should be coated thick with the blood of zombies. Tens of metres in all directions from the APC should be the bones of the operators picked dry. Inside the APC should be one or two AKS-74U carbines which I think are used by armoured folks when they have to infantry. One gun and operator corpse should be unaccounted for suggesting he managed to escape, maybe he held off while the other two tried to escape and snuck out at night.

Once vehicles are introduced I see no problem with balancing things out with more powerful infantry weapons such as Anti Tank or Anti Material rifles so that erasure of said vehicles is practical and quick. But those critters should be cumbersome and the ammunition take up 4 slots (2 x 2) for a 5 round magazine or 1 to 5 loose rounds. BOYS ANTI TANK RIFLE WEIGHT 35lbs (unloaded) Length 62 inches(standard) or 56 inches (Paratroop model)

Well, yes, they can be boring at times, but I think the problem with releasing an alpha and taking the usual development route is that it's a lot more risky (hell, it's risky releasing an early access game in general, but that's besides the point). A lot of times with games like that it's a hit-or-miss type of thing, if a game is released early and found to be boring, typically people will not come back to it, whereas games that are updated regularly and add new stuff tend to at least keep people interested longer. Yes, it's usually at the cost of slower overall development, but that isn't always the case, and a lot of times people become disinterested or way too hyped for games that take a while to release anyway. I can't say for sure, but completely rebuilding a game with a whole load of new content and improvements while at the same time trying to keep the core feel actually takes a lot longer than developing a brand new game. Black Mesa: Source, for example, took a very long time to finish, and they did quite a good job with it. That was just an HD remake, but the thing is, they were forced to stay within the same boundaries of the original game so that it didn't play much differently while at the same time feeling new, and that's the hard part about re-doing games or creating sequels. Now, I will admit, that DayZ development seems (can't say for sure because we've never had an actual inside look at it) to be a bit unusual, because oftentimes the developers want to have a half-decent (although buggy) version that they're happy with releasing, rather than just releasing what they have when it's ready in the most basic form. Vehicles are taking a while because they want to put a good amount of time into them, and they're not as far off as people think (only a few more big updates presumably). Is it at all perfect? No. The game has it's flaws and I certainly wouldn't run the company exactly the same were I in charge (thank goodness I'm not), but so far I'm liking what I'm seeing. Yes, the waiting and anticipation for the HUGE things really does suck, but seeing how dedicated the devs are to their game, I'm not worried that 1.0 won't be quite the experience

I was actually contemplating this for down the road. Definitely die from too many causes right now, not necessarily from not so smart play. I have also surrendered and agreed that tents are at least reasonable for all the articulate reasons given. The tents don't necessarily allow you to gear up instantaneously. Too many things can keep that from happening. They are not too easy to hide and therefore can be ransacked. Vehicles are even harder to hide. In the mod I couldn't keep my 4 wheeler from being found 100% of the time. I even found and stolen bikes that people probably thought would never be found.

I'm on the fence about whether you can access it after dying. In the mod if a buddy hopped on I could say "Hey, there's a DMR with a few magazines the the tent in the usual spot for you." Having insurance after you die because you can go run back to your (vulnerable, nobody's ever guarding it 100% of the time) tent to gear back up will make people reckless because they can afford it, but I would say 3/4 of my deaths in this game don't come from players, zombies, or survival mechanics. They come from a random server restart while I'm in a building causing me to fall through to my death, or evil stairs and ladders. Sometimes random character resets. These are they'll polish those bugs out, don't worry issues, but I'd enjoy it simply to help myself for after that happens. Now, alternatively you could have disappearing tents after you die. You store everything you've worked for whether it's actual playing or hopping servers to die to some BS issue like I said before or to get shot. You're back at square one. Unless you have a partner who also has a tent then no big deal. Groups thrive, individual players suffer. Now how do we deal with vehicles for that? We've been told vehicles are going to be a REAL pain in the ass to get going. Are we going to say the person who put that final nut on the tire has now tethered their life to that vehicle and if they die the vehicle's player vitals sensor connected to explosives causes a large explosion that can be heard for kilometers (if they ever fix the sound)?