Stand alone attachment system = COD

[gibonez 3633]

I really hate to say it but it finally hit me the unrealistic attachment system in Standalone is a straight rip off COD.

 

The similarities between these two games when it comes to the attachments is alarming and frankly makes me sad as a long time Bohemia fan.

 

Both games have universal attachment systems meaning even weapons that could not mount certain optics, bipods or stocks are able to somehow magically mount them.

 

This can be seen in COD with every optic working on nearly every assault rifle, sniper rifle, smg and pistol in the game, this can be seen in SA with the LRS mounted on the mosin this is despite the lack of a drilled and tapped receiver.

 

COD and Stand alone both also have accessories that magically make the weapons dispersion smaller or larger.

 

This is seen in stand alone with magpul parts somehow magically making the gun much more accurate this is despite the fact that in real life adding rails , magpul plastic parts or any other combination of them would do ziltch to increase the accuracy of an ar15.

 

Sadly Stand alone has borrowed from casual games such as Battlefield and COD when it comes to attachments, the lack of realism in the alpha is saddening especially considering the pedigree of military sims that the game came from. Also one of the biggest factors that made the mod so popular.

 

 

 

 

[Geckofrog7 1168]

Absolutely any problem with any modern game or anything remotely unrealistic = COD...

 

Yes, it is unrealistic, but 

1. It will probably be changed and

2. sometimes games have to make sacrifices in terms if realism for the sake of gameplay.

 

tl;dr COD has become the new godwins law.

Edited April 8, 2014 by Geckofrog7

[preacherlr 614]

2. sometimes games have to make sacrifices in terms if realism for the sake of gameplay.

This is basically how I see it, If all the M4 parts were only for style, now one would bother finding them. If you want to look at it from an " Immersion " Stand point, The magpul stock is more comfortable than a CQB or OCB stock. 

Logic.

[tiadashi 262]

Because COD came up with the concept from scratch? they didn't get the idea from earlier games? going to guess COD had very little if anything unique to it? all modern games get ideas from the history of gaming

[gibonez 3633]

Alpha much?

 

That can't easily be the answer in this situation.

 

They laid the foundation now and this is not some bug that is scheduled to be fix or something this is the beginning of what their accessory system is and it might just come to show what to expect in the future.

[P0rkchop 31]

I actually like the system

[sess130 50]

What would be the point of getting attachments, if they give absolutely no benefit? A compensator (for the mosin) would definitely reduce the recoil of the gun, and the m4 mp buttstock would make the gun more comfortable to shoulder (i.e. increase accuracy slightly). It makes sense in a gameplay perspective and somewhat irl. All games borrow ideas from others, but comparing Dayz to COD is comparing apples to oranges.

[TEST_SUBJECT_83 465]

"the lack of realism in the alpha is saddening"

Lol!

[gibonez 3633]

What would be the point of getting attachments, if they give absolutely no benefit?

 

I never said the attachments should not have any benefits.

 

Obviously red dots makes acquiring a target faster, Acogs allow you to better engage longer range targets.

 

Attachments such as stocks, compensators and muzzle breaks, hand guards and bipods should only affect the way the weapon handles.

 

Resorting to arcadey variables is absolutely unacceptable for any Bohemia Interactive game.

 

Stocks should affect the movement speed, how fast you can aim with them, how much recoil the weapon has , compensator should affect felt recoil, bipods should reduce the sway when mounted on an object or the ground.

 

However drastically increasing the mechanical accuracy of the weapon merely because it has certain accessories is not realistic and is not authentic.

 

BTW I did not mention COD to talk down on COD, I merely mentioned it because it happens to be the biggest most popular unrealistic arcade fps around.

[TheWalrusNet 6]

The random dispersion is a (presumably temporary) measure to simulate the attachments. An MP stock is more comfortable IRL, but you cant notice that through a videogame, so they decrease the dispersion of the weapon to simulate greater accuracy as a result of it being more comfortable.

 

With the amount of guns planned, it'd be far too time consuming and imo, pointless, to include seperate optics for every single gun. they will have to generalise a lot of attachments but in time this will change. I highly doubt the Mosin was ever intended to recieve the LRS, but im sure it was MUCH quicker for the devs to add an attachable scope for the mosin, than create an entirely new gun with sniper optics, im sure when more long range rifles are added that are intended to have a LRS on them, the compatibility with the Mosin will get removed

 

Basically, a lot of stuff is placeholder. With only a really small selection of guns in game, they have to include a wide variety of attachments so that we can use these guns in any situation until there is a proper alternative.

 

EDIT: Also, stocks such as the CQB buttstock DO affect how quickly you can turn with the weapon and how much room you need to make a full turn (e.g corridors)

Bipods do decrease sway and accuracy when deployed + user is prone, but they significantly reduce accuracy when deployedd + user is standing, to simulate the increased weight having an affect on the user's accuracy

Edited April 9, 2014 by TheWalrusNet

[Katana67 2907]

The only weapon that this is the case on, is the Mosin and the LRS. The rest have appropriate optics.

 

Which CAN mount Picatinny accessories, provided it's fitted with a relatively cheap scope mount.

 

Saying it's like CoD is hyperbole at best. Loads of games take liberties with attachments for pragmatic gameplay reasons.

 

You're effectively advocating for a tiny piece of metal to mount the LRS on. If that breaks your experience, dunno how to help you.

[gibonez 3633]

The only weapon that this is the case on, is the Mosin and the LRS. The rest have appropriate optics.

 

Which CAN mount Picatinny accessories, provided it's fitted with a relatively cheap scope mount.

 

Saying it's like CoD is hyperbole at best. Loads of games take liberties with attachments for pragmatic gameplay reasons.

 

You're effectively advocating for a tiny piece of metal to mount the LRS on. If that breaks your experience, dunno how to help you.

 

I am advocating for attachments to work on the weapons they would function with in real life with little to no machining required.

 

I am advocating no attachment outside of maybe a barrel or a complete upper affecting the accuracy of a weapon.

 

I am advocating realism. Realism is what set dayz mod apart from the other shooters in the market.

[pacific_coast 632]

the attachment system is fundamentally flawed.

 

i'd rather have ultra-rare variants with permanent attachment slots.

 

ie:

 

your m4a1 has either an RDS attachment slot, or an ACOG slot.

not both.

 

m4's with all magpul or all cqb or all stock no switching around

 

not "realistic" but more balanced in terms of gameplay.

"realistic" would be super customization on an individual level

[gibonez 3633]

the attachment system is fundamentally flawed.

 

i'd rather have ultra-rare variants with permanent attachment slots.

 

ie:

 

your m4a1 has either an RDS attachment slot, or an ACOG slot.

not both.

 

m4's with all magpul or all cqb or all stock no switching around

 

not "realistic" but more balanced in terms of gameplay.

"realistic" would be super customization on an individual level

 

I want the opposite.

 

I want a ultra realistic take on attachments where they function just like real life attachments would by only affecting the handling of a weapon and not things like its mechanical accuracy.

 

As far as accessory compatibility I only want the accesories to function on the weapon systems that they would in real life with little to no gunsmithing and without the need for obscure parts such as specific custom made rails for mosins.

 

One such example would be the LRS.

 

The LRS should be compatible with the b95, m4 and the sporter 22 aka ruger 10/22.

 

All 3 of these weapons easily mount the scope due them being drilled and tapped.

 

The mosin however would not be able to easily take a LRS and would require some gunsmithing to drill and tap the receiver then in addition it would require a very rare not very common accesory a short eye relief rail for a mosin . An accessory that is not only not very common in the world would be daam near impossible to find in chenarus.

 

I like the realism approach to accessories, let real life balance the game since real life has a means of balancing itself.

[pacific_coast 632]

too complicated bro

 

the devs will never go for that shit

 

i like the idea tho

[gibonez 3633]

too complicated bro

 

the devs will never go for that shit

 

i like the idea tho

 

It's actually easier.

 

It also gives the accessories more value since they will be compatible with more weapons atleast their real life counterparts.

 

Sadly we will end up getting some stupid crap like g3s and fn fals with mounted red dot sights and acogs.

[sess130 50]

I kind of agree in the fact that the weapon accuracy should never change unless affected by exterior forces (precipitation, wind, etc) but first of all they need to remove the random dispersion of the weapons for that to work. If you shoot a pistol at a zombie from 30m, it should never be a gamble if you're looking down the sights and not out of breath. As for the attachments, it would be extremely hard for them to translate the comfortability of an attachment to an increase in accuracy like it would irl, without having the attachment actually increase accuracy (every fps does it because its easy and semi-realistic). But I do believe that the LRS will not be compatible with the mosin once other hunting rifles/military snipers are added.

[gibonez 3633]

I kind of agree in the fact that the weapon accuracy should never change unless affected by exterior forces (precipitation, wind, etc) but first of all they need to remove the random dispersion of the weapons for that to work. If you shoot a pistol at a zombie from 30m, it should never be a gamble if you're looking down the sights and not out of breath. As for the attachments, it would be extremely hard for them to translate the comfortability of an attachment to an increase in accuracy like it would irl, without having the attachment actually increase accuracy (every fps does it because its easy and semi-realistic). But I do believe that the LRS will not be compatible with the mosin once other hunting rifles/military snipers are added.

 

There is already a hunting rifle that could take the lrs.

 

The b95 is a better candidate for the lrs than the mosin is.

 

As for the random dispersion yes that needs to be removed asap, and replaced with each weapons real life accuracy value.

 

Once this is done they can make accessories affect the handling of the weapon.

 

Foregrips can make the recoil more manageable when firing in full auto, bipods can attach to objects and drastically reduce the sway making suppressing fire and long range fire doable.

 

Overall the more realism they introduce the better pvp and the game will be.

[Katana67 2907]

I am advocating for attachments to work on the weapons they would function with in real life with little to no machining required.

 

I am advocating no attachment outside of maybe a barrel or a complete upper affecting the accuracy of a weapon.

 

I am advocating realism. Realism is what set dayz mod apart from the other shooters in the market.

 

There were/are a lot of things which set DayZ apart from the other shooters on the market. Mainly in the fact that it's much more than just a shooter.

 

The PU scope requires machining to mount to a Mosin-Nagant. No more than mounting an aftermarket 1913 mount. 

 

You're advocating realism. Yes. But you're advocating it blindly, without taking into account other considerations. And you're doing so in the most inflammatory way possible (i.e. the irrelevant comparison to CoD).

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[Geckofrog7 1168]

i think putting a scope on your rifle should require your character to fiddle with it wasting ammo for 4 hours trying to get it accurate, until he just gives up, rips the scope off, and just uses the iron sights. Realism at its finest.  :lol:

[bfisher 561]

i think putting a scope on your rifle should require your character to fiddle with it wasting ammo for 4 hours trying to get it accurate, until he just gives up, rips the scope off, and just uses the iron sights. Realism at its finest.  :lol:

 

Actually, that's not a half-bad idea.  Maybe when a player attaches a scope, set the cross hairs at some random point off center.  The player would then have to zero the scope by firing it at a target a known distance away and adjusting the elevation and windage manually.  It would certainly cut down on the sniper-fests.

 

 

 

Not sure what the OP is going on about.  M4 parts don't fit on the Mosin which doesn't fit on the SKS etc etc.  And newer NATO weapons use standard Picatinny accessory rails anyhow.  So I would think if they put M4s, M16s, SA80s and so on and so forth, most modern attachments would fit most modern weapons.

Edited April 9, 2014 by bfisher

[Katana67 2907]

Actually, that's not a half-bad idea.  Maybe when a player attaches a scope, set the cross hairs at some random point off center.  The player would then have to zero the scope by firing it at a target a known distance away and adjusting the elevation and windage manually.  It would certainly cut down on the sniper-fests.

 

Or just have decent scopes be rare (which they are). Or just have weapons which can mount scopes be rare. Or just have ammo for sniper rifles be rare. Not sure where these so-called "sniper fests" even occur, besides the cities, which should be suicidal anyhow.

 

It's not like there's a DMR mag in every hamlet and a DMR in every deer stand (as was possible in the mod). The "sniping" has been neutered heavily since the mod. What more do you want?

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

i think putting a scope on your rifle should require your character to fiddle with it wasting ammo for 4 hours trying to get it accurate, until he just gives up, rips the scope off, and just uses the iron sights. Realism at its finest.  :lol:

 

Hey I am not opposed to having to zero your rifle.

 

Remember I am the guy who wants this kind of sniping.

 

 

Not only because its more realistic and fun but because it means less work for the devs.

 

With this system they can just add scopes and then assign elevation values the community then goes forth and finds the zeroing for the perspective distance for each gun since each weapon has different muzzle velocities , bullet drop etc.

[gibonez 3633]

Or just have decent scopes be rare (which they are). Or just have weapons which can mount scopes be rare. Or just have ammo for sniper rifles be rare. Not sure where these so-called "sniper fests" even occur, besides the cities, which should be suicidal anyhow.

 

It's not like there's a DMR mag in every hamlet and a DMR in every deer stand (as was possible in the mod). The "sniping" has been neutered heavily since the mod. What more do you want?

 

 

That is the thing, scopes especially hunting scopes and accurate long range match shooting/ hunting weapons are not rare, in fact they are probably and should be the most common weapons in the game.

 

The problem is not the rarity or the prevalence of weapons the problem is how amazingly stupidly easy it is to snipe in dayz.

 

Add realistic fun ace sniping mechanics and instantly the whining about too many snipers fades away instantly and the value of a good rifle with a good set of irons increases.

[Katana67 2907]

That is the thing, scopes especially hunting scopes and accurate long range match shooting/ hunting weapons are not rare, in fact they are probably and should be the most common weapons in the game.

 

The problem is not the rarity or the prevalence of weapons the problem is how amazingly stupidly easy it is to snipe in dayz.

 

Add realistic fun ace sniping mechanics and instantly the whining about too many snipers fades away instantly and the value of a good rifle with a good set of irons increases.

 

A pristine LRS is pretty rare in DayZ.

 

It is entirely a problem of rarity. It can certainly be both either way. Rarity dictates how frequently one is going to have a sniper rifle in any given moment.

 

Your last statement is a supposition. Likewise, many people do not find pure realism fun.