Katana67 2907 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) In real life you could simply alter the way that you were holding the rifle to allow you to move through a doorway, I don't see this adding anything to the game other than inconvenience. Certain weapons are designed for certain things. Mosin-Nagant rifles are not designed to be easily moved around indoors. SBRs, SMGs, and pistols are. So why should a Mosin user have the same indoor mobility as someone with a weapon designed for CQC and not for long-range engagements as the Mosin is? That lack of discrepancy is what detracts from the game for me. Until that sort of "real-life movement" is simulated (which seems highly unlikely given the inflexibility of the engine), this is the in-game precedent we have to work with. Removing it outright detracts from the significance of each individual weapon. Adding more pros and cons to weapons makes all of the sense in the world to me, rather than having them all be the same in this regard. And, as others have said, said "real-life movement" could be simulated (rather crudely, but sufficiently) with the current system of pressing the space bar to lower ones weapon. Whereas this requirement would be lessened/unnecessary with shorter weapons to justify their advantage in CQC. Edited December 22, 2013 by Katana67 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pvtpile1981 1 Posted December 22, 2013 How does it make sense to be able to swing a long ass rifle with a bayonet attached to the end inside of a little tiny hallway? It doesn't. This needs to come back so that players are forced to make more tactical decisions about what weapon they carry on them and what weapon they use in doors. If you have a long rifle you need to be forced to switch to a sidearm inside, or carry a more compact weapon. This changes the rules of engagement and makes it so that not one gun will rule them all in the game. you shouldn't be allowed the best of both worlds, both inside and outside engagements. FUK no, ive had to put with that terrible feature since ArmA 1, for the love of god Rocket dont put weapon colission back in. The guys that make the ACE mod for arma 2 and arma 3 removed it from thier mod and it is one of the best decisions they made. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paradox87 4 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Kay, no.. just because you have a long rifle inside of a building you should be forced to use a sidearm or a melee weapon? Really? Cause in real life I'm fairly certain the M4A1 was designed for close range combat. As for mobility through doorways, in real life you'd be able to work the gun around corners of doorways much easier than can be replicated in a video game. So.. if we're going for realism here, like how everything else is in the game, the current system is perfect. Is it perfect, no.. and it never will be, but I've been dealing with that crappy system that you want put back into the mod since ArmA 1, so no thank you. Edited December 22, 2013 by paradox Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mhashemi@gmx.net 10 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Hell f***ing no. There is a reason the removed that in the mod and every mod of the mod. I like realism, but it added more annoyance than anything positive. Edited December 22, 2013 by gouki Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
machiavelli 38 Posted December 22, 2013 This thread is troll, right? I mean, of all things to be added/changed from the alpha, someone is bringing up one of the most annoying aspects of an arma engine.If held out perfectly straight, you probably wouldn't be able to swing around with a mosin in a tight hallway. But must we really implement a specific action a player must take in order to turn around? Irl, it could happen in less than a quarter second. Add some kind of button mashing in Dayz for this, and you've just made it worse and ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
St. Jimmy 1631 Posted December 22, 2013 The weapon can be easily raised if you want. Keep it always lowered and use raise key but don't toggle it unless you're outside. I can easily hold ctrl or space to do this. I like this suggestion but I'm not 100% sure would it be necessary for DayZ but the dev team seems to want to simulate movement with altering the negative mouse acceleration so this would be the logical next step. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrscratch 20 Posted December 22, 2013 There's no reason a team as talented as those working on this can't setup some sort of body shifting like Arma3 has that functions automatically based on your positioning that does not interrupt WASD based movement. I mean hell they got their game setup so you have to find some sort of object to open a can of food, water purification, portable gas stoves for cooking etc etc etc. Anyways immersion is all part of the game and it is absolutely possible for an idea like this to be pulled off without effecting gameplay dramatically so there shouldn't be any reason that the staff shouldn't make a minor note about it somewhere to come back to it later down the road. Alpha Absolutely irrelevant information in regards to a suggestion thread. Now if the original poster said something along the lines of "THE ZOMBIES WONT RESPAWN" then yes, such an obnoxious response is completely relevant to an ignorant post. However this is not an ignorant complaint. You're bandwagoning the "I'm an alpha tester look at me" train. All the features that are planned or being thought about are not going to come until later in development, hence Alpha. Be patient.One of our minor jobs is to have these types of discussions so that they can enter the "being thought about" phase. Dude, there are what? Three firearms in the game at the moment? We have some time to wait.Irrelevant. Beans! :beans: Derp right backatcha. Can we get stability and continuity in game before we worry about petty shit? Who cares if your gun clips through a wall if zombies and players do to? Priorities. :thumbsup:There is a 100% chance that the DayZ team is going to look into the "stability and continuity issues" in the near future. Look if you people do not fully understand the importance of a suggestion thread when partaking in an alpha build then don't bother with those types of threads. Thats a terrible idea because it makes the already terrible movement mechanics worse. There's a fine line between realistic and silly."That's a terrible idea because of my own personal performance" said shamE. Little did he know that it's actually possible to implement something like this without effecting his movement. It makes perfect sense ffs lol .... in real life would you turn around holding your hands and weapon horizontal in tiny hall ways ? no.... you would hold it vertical but the game wont allow this and if it did it would be very clunky and awkward as its arma engine after all and in real life moving your weapon into vertical would happen seamlessly and almost instantly. Sorry but you haven't thought this through at all and your topic is useless :)Sorry you haven't fully thought this response through, but it is possible. The things is its just adding shit for the sake of adding shit. When i said instantly i meant very fast ...think about it in real life your in a small hall way and have the rifle in your hands and holding it horizontally and turn around but as you turn around you instantly notice the wall and send signals to your brain to quickly move your weapon in a vertical or almost vertical position as it will hit a wall if you don't. That message is instant and you carry out and complete that action within a few seconds ...a rifle isn't heavy enough to add several seconds to doing this and that's just common sense and not just a view held because of watching streamlined arcadey video games as you put it. In a game your cant replicate this kind of thing especially in the arma engine as its so slow and clumsy ...you would have to think of the gun your using then think about the way you would have to move your character and then the button you would have to press to change the way your character is holding his weapon then you would have to actually carry out the action of pressing the button then having to wait for the character to then carry out and complete the animation/action and all this takes way too long and just makes the game feel painfully slow and unrealistic. Anyways the topic is moot as the OP seems to think people move around holding guns only horizontally in tight spaces lol.You almost made a constructive response, but you depended on hyperbole too much to push your view on what you personally think the executed action would look like. Fuck this whole thread. Isn't the movement clunky enough through doorways now? Sometimes I can't even turn around in a hallway without my weapon impeding me. Hell, sometimes it's hard enough to walk straight through a doorway. Do you people seriously walk through the buildings in this game and go: "gee, I wish it was harder to maneuver in here." There are too many morons on this forum suggesting ideas like this who have no grasp of the constraints of the game engine. You think the developers can just do a little coding for your OMG SO REALISTIC ideasTry holding shift so that when you are indoors you walk just like you do in real life. I don't know about you but I find real life is a bit clunky when I'm jogging around my house. Oh and don't forget what I already mentioned above ["That's a terrible idea because of my own personal performance" said shamE. Little did he know that it's actually possible to implement something like this without effecting his movement.]. FUK no, ive had to put with that terrible feature since ArmA 1, for the love of god Rocket dont put weapon colission back in. The guys that make the ACE mod for arma 2 and arma 3 removed it from thier mod and it is one of the best decisions they made.You are basing a thought off of the work of some guys like you and me did many years ago. You should be visualizing the thought in regards to what a highly experienced team with modern day BI connections can do instead. Hell f***ing no. There is a reason the removed that in the mod and every mod of the mod. I like realism, but it added more annoyance than anything positive.Not a very constructive response. Honestly this thread is disgusting and unprofessional in terms of responses. However this is the type of thing you get when you can just buy your way into early alpha access. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JESUSARIUS REX (DayZ) 163 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Certain weapons are designed for certain things. Mosin-Nagant rifles are not designed to be easily moved around indoors. SBRs, SMGs, and pistols are. So why should a Mosin user have the same indoor mobility as someone with a weapon designed for CQC and not for long-range engagements as the Mosin is? That lack of discrepancy is what detracts from the game for me. Until that sort of "real-life movement" is simulated (which seems highly unlikely given the inflexibility of the engine), this is the in-game precedent we have to work with. Removing it outright detracts from the significance of each individual weapon. Adding more pros and cons to weapons makes all of the sense in the world to me, rather than having them all be the same in this regard. And, as others have said, said "real-life movement" could be simulated (rather crudely, but sufficiently) with the current system of pressing the space bar to lower ones weapon. Whereas this requirement would be lessened/unnecessary with shorter weapons to justify their advantage in CQC. They shouldn't have the same mobility, but the point everyone is trying to make is there is no way to add a FAIR system. It's better to just leave it the way it is. In real life, you can slide a full length rifle like a mosin nearly parallel to the door, in order to peak around the corner. YES, it would be MORE clunky than a pistol, but there's no way to simulate what i just described in DayZ, so there's no point at putting someone at a HUGE disadvantage for "realism" that's not very realistic in the first place. Believe me, I play airsoft, and a M4 is super easy to use in CQC, in fact much easier in real life than DayZ. Edit: And with what people are suggesting, a Mosin would be WAY easier to use irl than in DayZ. And while pressing space may seem like a good idea, it's not. In real life you don't think about moving your weapon in tight spaces, it just happens. Pressing space requires you to think about what to press after you get stuck. Edit2: This was actually possible with the ArmA2 collision. In reality, when entering through doorways, you don't strafe through them sideways. You approach it along the wall, then turn towards the doorway, stick your gun through it, step through it while checking the side of the room opposite to you, then immediately turn to face the side of the room you approached it from. You can replicate this maneuver with the gun collision very well, and it's not even difficult. Just never try strafing through the door and you're pretty much golden. I know you don't strafe through a door irl, but you can't "slide" through door (know what i mean?) in DayZ like real life. Hence why I think strafing through doors is fair. Edited December 22, 2013 by JESUSARIUS REX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burneddi 13 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) I think you guys really need to stop with the "In real life, gorilla warfare trained armed forces clear rooms in a quarter of a second and are home in time for dinner!" -arguments. They contribute nothing to the discussion, and have very little to do with it in the first place. Also, I think I'm catching on to the pattern here -- it's not that you selectively choose to ignore every refined argument and idea in this thread, it's just that you never read them in the first place. It seems like a lot of the replies are by people who see the thread get bumped to the front page, open it, read absolutely nothing but the opening post, and think that makes them qualified to contribute with their incredibly correct opinion while ignoring all the discussion already present in the thread. Simulator games like this have always been about realism. Realism in this context means "mechanics and events that reflect reality", not "the act of playing it feels like real life". What I mean by this is that the game aims to look, play and feel realistic, but must do this within the confines of traditional mouse and keyboard (and potentially joystick/gamepad) input. It also means that real-life practical experience (things such as muscle memory etc) does not directly carry over into the game, whereas theoretical knowledge will. So while in real life to eat a can of beans you found on the ground you would reach into your pocket, take out your can opener, open the can and enjoy your meal, in DayZ, you must first put the can in your backpack, drag your can opener on top of it, relocate the now opened can that has been moved into the first free slot in your inventory, right click it, select "Eat", sit through an animation of your character moving the food to his mouth, select "Eat" again.. And repeat the last few steps until you're full. Does this make the game unrealistic? No. Would you be able to do some part of this process way faster in real life? Probably. However, that doesn't matter at all. Someone being able to chug down an entire can of baked beans in one fell swoop instead of eating it a quarter of the can at a time is no argument for making the bean-eating process of DayZ match that speed by eg. removing the opening mechanic and making everyone consume entire cans at once. Now where am I getting with this analogy? While a simulator game's mechanics should reflect how things work in reality as much as possible, the execution of those mechanics does not need to be realistic. The absence of immersive motion-tracking VR technology is no argument for missing out on a feature like realistic gun collision indoors in a milsim(-based) game that has a large amount of indoor areas. "We can't give it perfect and instantly intuitive controls!" is no argument for leaving out significant chunks of realism in a game where realism is a key aspect, and certainly a much more important aspect than fluid shooter mechanics. The usage of the movement controls in DayZ/ArmA2 is a skill in and of itself. A skilled player can manipulate the controls to a high degree of precision and be unhindered by them, and as such perform in the game in a realistic manner. Part of the learning curve of this game (and also all the ArmA games I've played) is learning and getting used to the controls. Yes, initially they feel clunky and bad, and may really be clunky and bad, too, but after you get used to them, the gaming experience can be a highly immersive and fun one. Besides, the purpose of this alpha testing is to implement and test the core features of the game. Leaving out features because they cannot be polished right away is just dumb -- polishing is supposed to be done much later on in development. As you should've read and understood when you purchased and took part in it, the alpha is not here to satisfy your DayZ cravings and make your DayZ experience comfortable. The alpha is here to test and develop the game, and if you don't want new features in a testing and development stage because "they're clunky, unfinished and unpolished", well, you shoudn't have bought the alpha in the first place. Edited December 22, 2013 by Dejecaal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nihilum 209 Posted December 22, 2013 That's a terrible idea because it makes the already terrible movement mechanics worse. There's a fine line between realistic and silly. ^ this.There is a reason the movement animations were redone as well as all the existing doorways widened to where they needed to be.It wasn't to go back and make movement clunky again to appease a handful of idiots nit picking on something like this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JESUSARIUS REX (DayZ) 163 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) I think you guys really need to stop with the "In real life, gorilla warfare trained armed forces clear rooms in a quarter of a second and are home in time for dinner!" -arguments. They contribute nothing to the discussion, and have very little to do with it in the first place. Also, I think I'm catching on to the pattern here -- it's not that you selectively choose to ignore every refined argument and idea in this thread, it's just that you never read them in the first place. It seems like a lot of the replies are by people who see the thread get bumped to the front page, open it, read absolutely nothing but the opening post, and think that makes them qualified to contribute with their incredibly correct opinion while ignoring all the discussion already present in the thread. Simulator games like this have always been about realism. Realism in this context means "mechanics and events that reflect reality", not "the act of playing it feels like real life". What I mean by this is that the game aims to look, play and feel realistic, but must do this within the confines of traditional mouse and keyboard (and potentially joystick/gamepad) input. It also means that real-life practical experience (things such as muscle memory etc) does not directly carry over into the game, whereas theoretical knowledge will. So while in real life to eat a can of beans you found on the ground you would reach into your pocket, take out your can opener, open the can and enjoy your meal, in DayZ, you must first put the can in your backpack, drag your can opener on top of it, relocate the now opened can that has been moved into the first free slot in your inventory, right click it, select "Eat", sit through an animation of your character moving the food to his mouth, select "Eat" again.. And repeat the last few steps until you're full. Does this make the game unrealistic? No. Would you be able to do some part of this process way faster in real life? Probably. However, that doesn't matter at all. Someone being able to chug down an entire can of baked beans in one fell swoop instead of eating it a quarter of the can at a time is no argument for making the bean-eating process of DayZ match that speed by eg. removing the opening mechanic and making everyone consume entire cans at once. Now where am I getting with this analogy? While a simulator game's mechanics should reflect how things work in reality as much as possible, the execution of those mechanics does not need to be realistic. The absence of immersive motion-tracking VR technology is no argument for missing out on a feature like realistic gun collision indoors in a milsim(-based) game that has a large amount of indoor areas. "We can't give it perfect and instantly intuitive controls!" is no argument for leaving out significant chunks of realism in a game where realism is a key aspect, and certainly a much more important aspect than fluid shooter mechanics. The usage of the movement controls in DayZ/ArmA2 is a skill in and of itself. A skilled player can manipulate the controls to a high degree of precision and be unhindered by them, and as such perform in the game in a realistic manner. Part of the learning curve of this game (and also all the ArmA games I've played) is learning and getting used to the controls. Yes, initially they feel clunky and bad, and may really be clunky and bad, too, but after you get used to them, the gaming experience can be a highly immersive and fun one. Besides, the purpose of this alpha testing is to implement and test the core features of the game. Leaving out features because they cannot be polished right away is just dumb -- polishing is supposed to be done much later on in development. As you should've read and understood when you purchased and took part in it, the alpha is not here to satisfy your DayZ cravings and make your DayZ experience comfortable. The alpha is here to test and develop the game, and if you don't want new features in a testing and development stage because "they're clunky, unfinished and unpolished", well, you shoudn't have bought the alpha in the first place. While i agree with you, the problem with the movement is the muscle memory. Yes, you can't eat beans in one gulp, but we're talking about combat, not eating from a can. The time it takes to turn, lower your weapon, turn more, and raise it is just so long that i feel it's detrimental, because you will be 100% dead by the time that happens. Opening your beans 10 seconds faster isn't a life or death situation. turning around is. And yes, in real life it would take longer to turn around with a rifle, but it would take so much longer in game. I'm not saying it's a bad idea or should never be implemented, I'm just saying the way people WANT it implemented is extremely unfair. Edited December 22, 2013 by JESUSARIUS REX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrscratch 20 Posted December 22, 2013 ^ this.There is a reason the movement animations were redone as well as all the existing doorways widened to where they needed to be.It wasn't to go back and make movement clunky again to appease a handful of idiots nit picking on something like this. I don't find this informative enough, it's kind of like someone giving an opinion on their own personal experiences and someone else agrees that their own personal experience is similar to the previous. Both statements are not constructive. Here's an example of a constructive response: but the point everyone is trying to make is there is no way to add a FAIR system.I disagree. If someone was to say stick a can of beans right next to your eyeballs then your bodies first reaction is to subconsciously shift your head and shoulders back away from said beans. The engine already has the ability to "Lean Left" and "Lean Right" that does not interrupt movement so I don't see why it would be a problem making the body "Lean Back" slightly automatically when you move too close to a wall. The only real valid claims I've been able to pick up from this thread is that alot of people had issues with some old system or they fear a forced weapon lower / handgun switch etc. With a automatic lean back function it would actually make it easier for newer players to navigate tight spaces because your upper body is shifting slightly back when too close to wall which inadvertently improves your ability to see which in turn improves your situation awareness. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JESUSARIUS REX (DayZ) 163 Posted December 22, 2013 I don't find this informative enough, it's kind of like someone giving an opinion on their own personal experiences and someone else agrees that their own personal experience is similar to the previous. Both statements are not constructive. Here's an example of a constructive response: I disagree. If someone was to say stick a can of beans right next to your eyeballs then your bodies first reaction is to subconsciously shift your head and shoulders back away from said beans. The engine already has the ability to "Lean Left" and "Lean Right" that does not interrupt movement so I don't see why it would be a problem making the body "Lean Back" slightly automatically when you move too close to a wall. The only real valid claims I've been able to pick up from this thread is that alot of people had issues with some old system or they fear a forced weapon lower / handgun switch etc. With a automatic lean back function it would actually make it easier for newer players to navigate tight spaces because your upper body is shifting slightly back when too close to wall which inadvertently improves your ability to see which in turn improves your situation awareness. An Auto system would be different than pressing space. I can agree with an auto system, if its done right. That's a good suggestion. I just REALLY don't like the idea of getting stuck and having to press space to turn. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
burneddi 13 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) While i agree with you, the problem with the movement is the muscle memory. Yes, you can't eat beans in one gulp, but we're talking about combat, not eating from a can. The time it takes to turn, lower your weapon, turn more, and raise it is just so long that i feel it's detrimental, because you will be 100% dead by the time that happens. Opening your beans 10 seconds faster isn't a life or death situation. turning around is. And yes, in real life it would take longer to turn around with a rifle, but it would take so much longer in game. I'm not saying it's a bad idea or should never be implemented, I'm just saying the way people WANT it implemented is extremely unfair.Yes, it wouldn't really fit into the run-and-gun way of playing many (most) people have nowadays, that is entirely true. It's not entirely unrealistic, though. Entering a room with hostiles in it through a doorway without flashbanging it would probably get you killed in reality. Similarly, getting shot in the back in a hallway is almost sure to get you killed in reality, too. Reality differs from video games, and your average soldier (let alone a survivor) is not a Hollywood action star. This game isn't designed to be a "fair" game in the sense that some other first-person games involving guns might be. In something like Counter-Strike, if you enter a room with two hostiles waiting for you, if you're really good there's a good chance you'll come out of top. Similarly, if you get shot in the back in a hallway in Counter-Strike, if you're good you can just 180 and pop them in the head. Of course in reality, in both of these scenarios it'd be rather unrealistic to come out on top like that. So what I'm saying is, precisely because it's a simulation game, the player does not necessarily have to be given any sort of a realistic chance to survive in a life and death situation. It's not really a competitive game. EDIT: Don't get me wrong, an automated system (such as the automated weapon raise system suggested earlier) would be vastly superior. I am simply suggesting that the spacebar implementation be used as a placeholder of sorts, as there is lots of animation work involved in an automated system. EDIT2: As a slightly off-topic curiosity, do you walk around with your weapon raised? I keep mine lowered almost all the time because it lets me move faster. Edited December 22, 2013 by Dejecaal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JESUSARIUS REX (DayZ) 163 Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Yes, it wouldn't really fit into the run-and-gun way of playing many (most) people have nowadays, that is entirely true. It's not entirely unrealistic, though. Entering a room with hostiles in it through a doorway without flashbanging it would probably get you killed in reality. Similarly, getting shot in the back in a hallway is almost sure to get you killed in reality, too. Reality differs from video games, and your average soldier (let alone a survivor) is not a Hollywood action star. This game isn't designed to be a "fair" game in the sense that some other first-person games involving guns might be. In something like Counter-Strike, if you enter a room with two hostiles waiting for you, if you're really good there's a good chance you'll come out of top. Similarly, if you get shot in the back in a hallway in Counter-Strike, if you're good you can just 180 and pop them in the head. Of course in reality, in both of these scenarios it'd be rather unrealistic to come out on top like that. So what I'm saying is, precisely because it's a simulation game, the player does not necessarily have to be given any sort of a realistic chance to survive in a life and death situation. It's not really a competitive game. EDIT: Don't get me wrong, an automated system (such as the automated weapon raise system suggested earlier) would be vastly superior. I am simply suggesting that the spacebar implementation be used as a placeholder of sorts, as there is lots of animation work involved in an automated system. EDIT2: As a slightly off-topic curiosity, do you walk around with your weapon raised? I keep mine lowered almost all the time because it lets me move faster. I understand it's not fair lol. If someones behind you, you will probably die anyways. I'm just pointing out how it take more time. Maybe you hear footsteps, ya know? Really all I care about is being able to clear rooms without getting stuck in the door, and collision would hamper that I mean, in the alpha i would be open to try it. I just think it won't work. As an experiment, it may not be a bad idea, and may become permanent. Bah, I honestly I think I'm not being open minded enough. It's alpha, so i can be changed at any time. Also, I keep my gun down the majority of the time, like when I'm in the woods or just observing. I keep it up when in cities or villages though. Not because I want to shoot the first person I see, but because it's the sad truth I might have to lol. Edit: And also for the occasional zombie^ ;) Edited December 22, 2013 by JESUSARIUS REX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OfficerRaymond 2064 Posted December 25, 2013 (edited) -lol snip-Look out, here comes Dr. PerfectPost. It's great you think you know what 'should' be posted, but honestly you look pretty fucking arrogant. Edited December 25, 2013 by Max Planck 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrscratch 20 Posted December 25, 2013 Look out, here comes Dr. PerfectPost. It's great you think you know what 'should' be posted, but honestly you look pretty fucking arrogant.Irrelevant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ozelot (DayZ) 394 Posted December 25, 2013 (edited) Look out, here comes Dr. PerfectPost. It's great you think you know what 'should' be posted, but honestly you look pretty fucking arrogant.Look out, it's the forum police again. Woo woo. Here comes the sirens. And here's "Officer" Raymond to the rescue. Hopefully he has better training than these guys: [*snip*] But probably not. Edited December 25, 2013 by Max Planck pointless Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Max Planck 7174 Posted December 25, 2013 Look out, here comes Dr. PerfectPost. It's great you think you know what 'should' be posted, but honestly you look pretty fucking arrogant. You really need to work on your attitude. You have been asked nicely, you have been warned, and this is probably about the last time that'll happen.Take a break, 48 hours. Look out, it's the forum police again. Woo woo. Here comes the sirens. That's not helpful. *snips fired* And neither is this. Back on topic, please. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atom Quark 437 Posted December 25, 2013 (edited) I would rather see it where its harder to roll on the ground with large backpacks. Edited December 25, 2013 by AtomQuark 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Gews- 7443 Posted December 25, 2013 I would rather see it where its harder to roll on the ground with large backpacks. Hey, that's a good idea. Don't know that never crossed my mind. Even attempting rolling would be absolutely pointless with all that camping gear on your back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gerandar 212 Posted December 25, 2013 It takes you way longer to turn around in a tight hallway with a giant rifle with a bayonet at the end than a tiny pistol does. Period. only if your some kind of mouth-breather who can't fathom the idea of holding your weapon on an angle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xX_fr0st-w0lf_Xx (DayZ) 343 Posted December 25, 2013 That movement in arma 2? That clunkyness? You want it back O.o Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ozelot (DayZ) 394 Posted December 25, 2013 only if your some kind of mouth-breather who can't fathom the idea of holding your weapon on an angle.What the hell? What kind of space-age angle do you expect to hold a five foot rifle in your hands at inside a tiny little hallway that's going to let you turn around instantly whenever you want? Because it's not at any of the 360 degrees that exists in this universe. Maybe some secret one in the alternate troll world where it's 720/60 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites