Let's talk about heavy weapons

[Templar72260 0]

I don't think that the ones against want a real game. They just want a game where you have to throw rocks at your opponent because one knows that in case of a zombie apocalypse there is no way that all the heavy weapons/vehicles which existed before would still exist. They would simply disappear, eaten by the zombies.

 

All jokes aside, it depends on what you want. If you want a real game you have to accept that some people will have heavy weapons because they were in the good place at the right time ; you cannot possibly say you want a real survivor game if you want to put aside REAL THINGS. 

 

The Walking Dead's scriptwriters did not think that having a tank was impossible, why should we ? Heavy weapons would not simply disappear and God knows that soldiers have them. 

[soulfirez 901]

I don't think that the ones against want a real game. They just want a game where you have to throw rocks at your opponent because one knows that in case of a zombie apocalypse there is no way that all the heavy weapons/vehicles which existed before would still exist. They would simply disappear, eaten by the zombies.

 

All jokes aside, it depends on what you want. If you want a real game you have to accept that some people will have heavy weapons because they were in the good place at the right time ; you cannot possibly say you want a real survivor game if you want to put aside REAL THINGS. 

 

The Walking Dead's scriptwriters did not think that having a tank was impossible, why should we ? Heavy weapons would not simply disappear and God knows that soldiers have them. 

Strangely the mod never had them when it became popular hell it started all this madness... i just love guys with no idea throwing blanket statements out there like facts.. plenty of real games out there that dont have heavy weapons and plenty that do.. So kinda  silly point...

 

Be like me saying only real men only use bolt action rifles absurd its just straight hurp derp talk..

Edited February 15, 2014 by SoulFirez

[Monkfish (DayZ) 339]

You counter that heavily armed humvee via shooting out that mother fuckers tires. Lob a molotov onto the hood. Start plinking away at the rest of the tires. Sure, they still have the mounted gun, but do they get out at risk getting shot by everyone that sees it, or stay in their heavily armed immobile fortress car?

And the fresh spawns that are being lit up by it, as described, do this how? Throw stones at it and shout some nasty words over direct comms?  :rolleyes:

[over9000nukez 199]

As a player the only real thing I can do is voice my opinion and vote with my play.

 

If heavy weapons and vehicles are added to the game I will just stop playing.  Dayz appeals to me because it is at its core survival (though more survival needs to be added, I had more fun when almost starving trying to get to the next town).

 

All the videos I have seen of Dayz Mod didn't look like survival at all.  If I wanted a military based game there are tons of other options that give me that.  

 

Dayz gives me the fear of starving, fear of strangers not the fear of an attack helicopter.

 

Back in the day I played SWG MMORPG, imo it was vastly more challenging before they added vehicles.  I spent most of my game play running to the furthest corners of the planets to mine the best materials...  Due to the mobility issues that gave me purpose on the server and I became a successful materials merchant and I had fun doing it while others had fun doing other things.  The moment vehicles were introduced everyone threw up mining equipment and my job became worthless and not nearly as rewarding.  I prided myself going through the work to find the best mining locations for the best materials...

 

I fear even vehicles will do the same to dayz, part of the struggle is moving from location to location on the map, you get rid of that struggle and the game is just that much easier.

the reason why vehicles and turrets WOULD be good is to cause fear for you (the starving guy) and wouldn't it be awesome if your going down the street, you hear in the distance, something big, you just into a house, all the sudden you see 6 guys on a pickup truck , with mounted turret, geared to the teeth,

 

we're not saying its going to be COMMON, but the very organized people, who play the game like pros get their reward, after hours of searching for parts and such to build such a machine.

[over9000nukez 199]

Hi.

 

I admittedly didn't read this entire thread.

 

That said, god no. Please no artillery style weapons. Thats all we need, a clan of douche bags gathering the crap then nuking cities. It would be like the hackers that ruined the mod. All over again, and again, and again. :facepalm:

 

Regards.

wouldn't it be cool though if bandits DID role through town and started causing chaos, it would be fugging awesome, ofc this would take super organized group to be able to build something like this, hours, maybe an entire day or a group of 5 all spread around the map searching every military hotspot, then actually getting together and building it after finding all the right pieces to the puzzle

[Daemonkid 493]

I don't have a problem with crew served weapons, as long as they remain CREW served. 

For the mortar as long as it takes 1 person to carry the weapon in their hands, and the other person needs to carry a box in their hands that holds the ammo. (A special storage box that CAN only hold mortar rounds, and the ammo and the box should be rare at that) When the box is droped on the ground it allows the person to load the ammo, but the ammo must be taken from the box then inserted. This will require 2 people for the operation of the mortar, and maybe a 3rd for perimeter defence.

 

For crew served HMG's I see no problem with this either, as 1 person will have to be the ammunition carrier/loader. 1 Carries the main weapon system, the other the tripod. This will take time to deploy give you limited arc to engage enemies. Your speed will be limited when carrying it. The ammo would be significantly rare. These weapon systems wouldn't be pick up and shoot, there would be effort into making them effective weapons to use.

Sure there would be people who would troll with the mortar, but with all the effort going into actually using it, it would be a waste to use it on fresh spawns.

[Martmital 436]

I can see the positives and the negatives...  Ultimately, I don't care.  The game ain't gonna please all the people all the time. 

[Templar72260 0]

Strangely the mod never had them when it became popular hell it started all this madness... i just love guys with no idea throwing blanket statements out there like facts.. plenty of real games out there that dont have heavy weapons and plenty that do.. So kinda  silly point...

 

Be like me saying only real men only use bolt action rifles absurd its just straight hurp derp talk..

 

Not speaking about video game but about reality. I am not speaking of the mod or any other video games. I am speaking about the probability of finding a heavy weapon in an area filled with military bases/airfields deserted because of a zombie apocalypse. 

 

So if you want to have a proper debate try and read correctly other people before "throwing blanket statements out there like facts" haha.

 

To conclude, I'd say that I don't give a rat's ass about having heavy weapons or not, to tell you the truth I'm just practicing my english ! 

[-Gews- 7443]

I don't want mortars and recoilless rifles.

 

 

 

 

 

However RPG-7s could be in.

 

Chernarus just went through a war. RPG-7s are not uncommon, in fact they are extremely common among not only armies but also guerillas and insurgents, which Chernarus had.

 

If you don't want the RPG-7 because you don't like it, my only words are "too bad". Hey, maybe they WOULDN'T be found - but I totally disagree with people either suggesting or dismissing weapons just because they don't like them.

 

 

 

But that argument could also apply to mortars and recoilless rifles so maybe I'm a bit biased... but if it's handheld, common and portable, I am okay with it.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Gews

[worst2first 71]

Vehicles were far too easy to repair and maintain in the mod. Ramp the difficulty and rarity up and make the weapons unusable without an actual crew and it could be implemented in a way that wouldn't break the game. This is a survival game. Humans survive by organizing and once they're organized they are going to find ever better weapons, strategy and tactics. Finding an RPG, mortar or HMG and figuring out how to work it is a lot more likely than repairing and maintaining a multi-million dollar helo. I would prefer to see a few crew-served and heavy weapons and never see helicopters again (unless they have some specific scenario purpose and are only used by NPCs like an occasional UN overflight to survey the area or something).

Edited February 15, 2014 by worst2first

[Daemonkid 493]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But that argument could also apply to mortars and recoilless rifles so maybe I'm a bit biased... but if it's handheld, common and portable, I am okay with it.

That's the thing, we don't want them to be easily portable and easy to use. We want them to require teamwork and effort to maintain them. We want them to have significant draw backs for other gains.

It would require a team effort to make them viable weapons. Imagine getting the jump on a small clan that has a machine gun team running through the woods trying to set up their machine gun, there is 3 of em'. You take out the 1 guy whose has his main weapon out, the other 2 scramble, trying to drop the pieces they have in their hands so they can pull out their gun and engage you. Their not quick enough and you just ganked a teams heavy weapon team.  

[-Gews- 7443]

That's the thing, we don't want them to be easily portable and easy to use. We want them to require teamwork and effort to maintain them. We want them to have significant draw backs for other gains.

It would require a team effort to make them viable weapons. Imagine getting the jump on a small clan that has a machine gun team running through the woods trying to set up their machine gun, there is 3 of em'. You take out the 1 guy whose has his main weapon out, the other 2 scramble, trying to drop the pieces they have in their hands so they can pull out their gun and engage you. Their not quick enough and you just ganked a teams heavy weapon team.  

 

Yes, I get it - I don't see how mortars and recoilless rifles are useful - it's not a war, survivors would have no use shelling empty villages from kilometers away. And from there people could argue for scout cars or BMPs.

 

Things like RPGs and 12.7mm machine guns, those seem more useful to me. Although something like a DShK on a wheeled mount weighs 350 lbs empty so maybe technicals would be more useful.

[Combine (DayZ) 247]

I still don't get people jumping up and arguing in favor of fresh spawns. Or people dismissing this as totally stupid. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean the idea and any supporters (to whatever degree) are totally retarded. Some did imply this.

 

The idea is that SOME heavier weapons might be a good gameplay addition. Obviously, they'd come with their advantages and disadvantages. No, you won't be able to run with a mortar or heavy MG in your hands at the enemy while auto-firing all your ammo at them, totally nuking them.

 

However, if you can manage to deploy and / or maintain such a more or less crew based system, then it may have its advantages when fighting larger groups of enemies (tip: Massive amounts of zombies once they're in). Be it via MG or mortar. You all only look at the PVP aspect. Sure, it'll be seamless, but PVE also plays a role. Especially if the cities will be full of zombies.

 

And again to anyone arguing "BUT(T) THE NEWSPAWNS!". No. That argument is somewhat flawed because a team might camp coastal areas way more efficiently. And still ignore any pleas in comm range.

 

The idea is that it's balanced enough and that not everybody and some newbie can use it. And if a large group can pull it off efficiently and even have some ammo to, say, attack a city for some minutes, then that's fine. They might as well camp the city for hours with their standard ammo supplies without HW. What's worse?

Edited February 15, 2014 by Combine

[Rudette 435]

I am not really sure about heavy weapons myself.

Survival demands a practical approach and a lot of larger weapon systems don't exactly lend themselves to that approach. Fortifying positions, maybe, but not for your run-of-the-mill scavenger.  If they came with all the associated weaknesses and what have you I suppose I would be ok with it. But the idea of heavy ordinance and vehicle mounted weapons(especially) don't sit well with me from a gameplay standpoint. I don't want them implementing anything that makes me feel safe.  I'm also not a fan of all our late-game gear making us look like G.I. Joe. ...Doesn't feel authentic.

Perhaps a stamina system and benefits to traveling light might alleviate some of my concerns though!

Edited February 15, 2014 by Rudette

[discipled 62]

Most of the suggestions I saw in this thread = HELL NO!

 

We don't need any military grade rockets, grenades, or huge machine guns.

 

I personally hope there is no explosives besides a few improvised explosive devices such as molotov cocktails and pipe bombs.

Agreed. We already have alcohol tinctures. I don't see why, combined with a rag and then with matchs, can't make molotov's.

[Daemonkid 493]

Yes, I get it - I don't see how mortars and recoilless rifles are useful - it's not a war, survivors would have no use shelling empty villages from kilometers away. And from there people could argue for scout cars or BMPs.

 

Things like RPGs and 12.7mm machine guns, those seem more useful to me. Although something like a DShK on a wheeled mount weighs 350 lbs empty so maybe technicals would be more useful.

Not supposed to be useful in the traditional sense. I'm seeing it more as a static base defence, or base assault weapon. 

If the ammo was rare enough, it would be a trophy weapon more so than a constant effective one. Move it into position before you choose to strike the base, maybe you only have 1 round. But that 1 shell, if on point would absolutely cause the defenders to loose their shit. Or if say you team spots another hostile team trying to stage an assault, and you have a mortar set up for such a situation. 

I can understand the negatives people are posting, but it would be an awesome support weapon for bases more so than a weapon you would use to just troll people.

[worst2first 71]

If these weapons are implemented, they should be rare enough and difficult enough to use that using them against new spawns would be pointless. That is not to say that some idiots wouldn't do that but when fortifications and bases are implemented, we need a way to assault and damage them. If you have one or two rounds, it would be foolish to waste them on new spawns when you could be raiding a base. A mortar or RPG could be used to clear barricades or create breaches for your clan / squad to exploit. Smoke rounds would be incredibly useful and arguably more valuable than HE. 

[deepfried 95]

I've no problem with heavy weapons like machine guns and rocket launchers being added in but ONLY if there is a realistic weight/fatigue system à la ACE.

[gibonez 3633]

Yes, I get it - I don't see how mortars and recoilless rifles are useful - it's not a war, survivors would have no use shelling empty villages from kilometers away. And from there people could argue for scout cars or BMPs.

 

Things like RPGs and 12.7mm machine guns, those seem more useful to me. Although something like a DShK on a wheeled mount weighs 350 lbs empty so maybe technicals would be more useful.

 

 

Recoiless rifles and mortars would be extremely useful once base building is a thing.

 

Mortars in particular would be extremely useful as they are so versatile.

A organize group could set up a single or 2 mortars if lucky enough  inside of their base then proceed to draw a map, with coordinates of all of their bases previous engagements.

 

Set up coordinates for previous areas where people attacked or ambushes there base from things such as tree lines, hills overlooking their base.

 

After having pre set up these firing solutions when they come under attack and know the location they could fire a few mortar shells relatively quickly to repel an attack.

 

 

Mortars and mortar shells are heavy so they wouldn't be tugged around and used indiscriminately.

 

They would be used for attacking bases and defending them.

[DMentMan 707]

don´t want this

[MagneticToast 102]

I definitely want IEDs but no mortars or any of that crap.

[frosti 2165]

I definitely want IEDs but no mortars or any of that crap.

 

y u not want to mortar Electro?

[Martmital 436]

Once physics is implemented and we can interact more with the environment, sticks and stones will my weapon of choice... 

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

Wait, are we wanting DayZ or another Arma remake?  

[bfisher 561]

Why not have a 60mm mortar?  I mean you couldn't carry much else.  It's not going to help you against other players or hoards of zombies unless you were supporting some sort of clan operation.

 

The Mod had satchel charges, grenades, light machineguns, Ural army trucks, Hueys and Little Bird helicopters and no one seemed to mind.

 

In the future, why couldn't players craft a "technical" by attaching armor plating or heavy weapons to a jeep or pickup truck?

 

 

These items should all be rare or require extensive crafting or repairs.  We don't want Battlefield or COD, but we don't want everyone fighting with axes and Makarov pistols either.