Why Were Helicopters "Overpowered" In The Vanilla Mod?

[Etherimp 1323]

Umm, decrease view distance for helicopter pilots and passengers?  

 

There is a point at which this would "ruin gameplay" and "make them a waste of time" but there is plenty of leeway before that happens.

 

 

So in other words, compromise gameplay and realism ...?

[The Feral Kid 13]

 

So in other words, compromise gameplay and realism ...?

 

Actually what I said was "there is plenty of leeway before that [compromise of gameplay and realism] happens."

 

Gameplay:  Somewhat subjective.  Aren't you saying helicopters will compromise gameplay without any adjustments?

 

Realism:  I think it can be argued that certain factors (movement, wind in eyes, windscreen) make it more difficult to spot from a helicopter than from a ground position.  

 

EDIT: Obviously the helicopter will always have an advantage due to line of sight not being blocked by hills/building etc. and that is as it should be.  That's why helicopters are used for spotting IRL.  I am not aware that helicopters can actually see *further* IRL apart from the LOS advantage.

Edited May 18, 2014 by The Feral Kid

[gibonez 3633]

we will see if they do decide to introduce helicopters into dayz standalone it will open up a whole can of worms of problems.

 

Not to mention it will once again repeat the same gameplay that the mod was better off without.

[xalienax 621]

we will see if they do decide to introduce helicopters into dayz standalone it will open up a whole can of worms of problems.

 

Not to mention it will once again repeat the same gameplay that the mod was better off without.

couldnt dissagree more.

 

DayZ was good because it was built on arma, not inspite of it. they seem intent on pulling the two appart and tbh it has only made the game less and less enjoyable for me, and most of the Mod vets i know. I suppose this subject, much like that of mil loot will always be a can of worms. Mnay of us are only here because of our experiences with the mod and wouldnt have given the SA a single look other wise.

 

I want chopper, Cars, urals, and all the other stuff from the mod.

I want mil-loot including NVGs, ghille, proper snipers, M240 LMGs, etc

I want arma's Shooting mechanics back. bar none.

I want big squad fights at the NWAF again and in the northern woods. I miss the roaming death squads and the fights with them.

 

 to me these are as much a part of dayZ as infection, Getting hit by zombies, or bambie wars with mackerovs in cherno :)

[FrostDMG 398]

First person only COULD work in cars if they implemnted picture in picture i.e working mirrors like in Arma 3.

[Bororm 1156]

couldnt dissagree more.

 

DayZ was good because it was built on arma, not inspite of it. they seem intent on pulling the two appart and tbh it has only made the game less and less enjoyable for me, and most of the Mod vets i know. I suppose this subject, much like that of mil loot will always be a can of worms. Mnay of us are only here because of our experiences with the mod and wouldnt have given the SA a single look other wise.

 

I want chopper, Cars, urals, and all the other stuff from the mod.

I want mil-loot including NVGs, ghille, proper snipers, M240 LMGs, etc

I want arma's Shooting mechanics back. bar none.

I want big squad fights at the NWAF again and in the northern woods. I miss the roaming death squads and the fights with them.

 

 to me these are as much a part of dayZ as infection, Getting hit by zombies, or bambie wars with mackerovs in cherno :)

This exactly.

 

Also, they can learn from and improve upon concepts from the mod.

 

Get used to the idea of helicopters, Rocket has mentioned them numerous times, they're all but officially confirmed.

I can't wait for the resulting awesome fights again.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Bororm

[Etherimp 1323]

This exactly.

 

Also, they can learn from and improve upon concepts from the mod.

 

Get used to the idea of helicopters, Rocket has mentioned them numerous times, they're all but officially confirmed.

I can't wait for the resulting awesome fights again.

 

 

Maybe you don't get it...

 

I'm already used to the idea of helicopters. If they get introduced into the game I will use them. The argument for me is whether they SHOULD be in the game. In the end, my opinion and your opinion don't matter.. It's Rockets opinion which matters. There are obviously going to be people who want helicopters in the game, and there are those who do not. I am (and have been) outlining the reasons why I believe Helicopters ARE NOT GOOD FOR GAME-PLAY. For me it's not a personal issue. I'll survive/thrive with or without helicopters.. If anything, it'll make it easy to adapt back into my Mod play-style, which included hoarding vehicles and stomping camps out. I just don't personally believe this is the best thing in the BIG PICTURE for game-play and overall success/longevity of the game.

 

Whether Rocket puts them in the game or not is of no consequence to me personally. I'm a competitive guy and I have a competitive group of friends who all coordinate and communicate well together, so helicopters are good for groups like mine. But they won't necessarily be good for everyone, and that's the side of the argument I have been vocal for. See that? Yeah.. I am advocating against something that would benefit me, because I try to look beyond my own personal desires and consider things from a larger perspective, because I realize this game is more important than what's FUN FOR ME PERSONALLY.

 

You should try it sometime.

[xalienax 621]

Maybe you don't get it...

 

I'm already used to the idea of helicopters. If they get introduced into the game I will use them. The argument for me is whether they SHOULD be in the game. In the end, my opinion and your opinion don't matter.. It's Rockets opinion which matters. There are obviously going to be people who want helicopters in the game, and there are those who do not. I am (and have been) outlining the reasons why I believe Helicopters ARE NOT GOOD FOR GAME-PLAY. For me it's not a personal issue. I'll survive/thrive with or without helicopters.. If anything, it'll make it easy to adapt back into my Mod play-style, which included hoarding vehicles and stomping camps out. I just don't personally believe this is the best thing in the BIG PICTURE for game-play and overall success/longevity of the game.

 

Whether Rocket puts them in the game or not is of no consequence to me personally. I'm a competitive guy and I have a competitive group of friends who all coordinate and communicate well together, so helicopters are good for groups like mine. But they won't necessarily be good for everyone, and that's the side of the argument I have been vocal for. See that? Yeah.. I am advocating against something that would benefit me, because I try to look beyond my own personal desires and consider things from a larger perspective, because I realize this game is more important than what's FUN FOR ME PERSONALLY.

 

You should try it sometime.

The thing is, they wont just benefit you. they will re ignite the northern wars and squad V squad fights for server supremacy in the SA as it was in the mod, and that was WAY more engaging the forest running simulator with the ocasional trip into a city for food and drink. :D

[gibonez 3633]

couldnt dissagree more.

 

DayZ was good because it was built on arma, not inspite of it. they seem intent on pulling the two appart and tbh it has only made the game less and less enjoyable for me, and most of the Mod vets i know. I suppose this subject, much like that of mil loot will always be a can of worms. Mnay of us are only here because of our experiences with the mod and wouldnt have given the SA a single look other wise.

 

I want chopper, Cars, urals, and all the other stuff from the mod.

I want mil-loot including NVGs, ghille, proper snipers, M240 LMGs, etc

I want arma's Shooting mechanics back. bar none.

I want big squad fights at the NWAF again and in the northern woods. I miss the roaming death squads and the fights with them.

 

 to me these are as much a part of dayZ as infection, Getting hit by zombies, or bambie wars with mackerovs in cherno :)

 

I agree mil sim aspects is what made dayz mod so good.

 

That being said everything in the stand alone suggest they are going with a more civilian approach a more realistic approach.

 

While the realistic shooting mechanics do need to return, along with realistic movement speed and some sort of weight system certain things like tanks, jets, and helicopters would feel out of place.

[FrostDMG 398]

If you're calling DayZ a running simulator, I can't even take your topics seriously anymore.

All your points have already been counter argued 2 pages back by Etherimp. I don't see this thread going anywere, it's been spinning in circles for past page or so anyhow.

[Etherimp 1323]

The thing is, they wont just benefit you. they will re ignite the northern wars and squad V squad fights for server supremacy in the SA as it was in the mod, and that was WAY more engaging the forest running simulator with the ocasional trip into a city for food and drink. :D

 

 

Northern wars will continue when vehicles are in the game, high end military loot is more exclusive to the NWAF, and when spawns are spread out along the coast rather than just in Berezino/NE area..

 

You don't need Heli's for Northern wars.. In fact, Heli's ruin squad vs squad combat in the North because they turn it into a contest of who can run back to their body the fastest, and whoever has the helicopter wins, hands down, every time.

 

 

edit: Some of the highest tension in the game is when you're on foot and you're attempting to loot NWAF and you (or a squad of you and your friends) runs up against other squads/players, because the stakes are the highest in that setting, where nobody can run back to their body and you lose all the loot that you earned on your way all the way across the map.. or you have a vehicle you brought to NWAF, in which case, you probably lose that and you're back on foot on the coast again. With helicopters, that's no longer an issue and it's no longer an even playing field..

Edited May 18, 2014 by Etherimp

[liquidsnake 275]

Northern wars will continue when vehicles are in the game, high end military loot is more exclusive to the NWAF, and when spawns are spread out along the coast rather than just in Berezino/NE area..

 

You don't need Heli's for Northern wars.. In fact, Heli's ruin squad vs squad combat in the North because they turn it into a contest of who can run back to their body the fastest, and whoever has the helicopter wins, hands down, every time.

 

 

edit: Some of the highest tension in the game is when you're on foot and you're attempting to loot NWAF and you (or a squad of you and your friends) runs up against other squads/players, because the stakes are the highest in that setting, where nobody can run back to their body and you lose all the loot that you earned on your way all the way across the map.. or you have a vehicle you brought to NWAF, in which case, you probably lose that and you're back on foot on the coast again. With helicopters, that's no longer an issue and it's no longer an even playing field..

It never does... The one who survives hides all the bodies, always. Or at least takes the gear

Helis never caused an unfairness in the mod and they won't in SA. You just have to not be a dumbass if you don't want helis to find your camps or kill you or even spot you

 

[Etherimp 1323]

It never does... The one who survives hides all the bodies, always. Or at least takes the gear

Helis never caused an unfairness in the mod and they won't in SA. You just have to not be a dumbass if you don't want helis to find your camps or kill you or even spot you

 

 

 

You're assuming an entire squad dies before a heli can pick someone up from the coast and bring them back.. not always the case. I can't tell you how many times it's come down to "Hey watch so and so's body, I'm flying down to pick him up."

[Katana67 2907]

While the realistic shooting mechanics do need to return, along with realistic movement speed and some sort of weight system certain things like tanks, jets, and helicopters would feel out of place.

 

Well, for one, not sure it's appropriate to group those three like that. Tanks and jets haven't been a facet of vanilla DayZ, ever. Helicopters, however, have.

 

Second, helicopters feeling "out of place" isn't some sort of objective assertion... again, it's your own opinion, based upon a feeling surrounding an aesthetic.

 

Helicopters have long been featured in the zombie apocalypse genre, and I see no reason why they are incompatible with DayZ.

 

The trend I'm noticing here, is that there's a camp which views the mere inclusion of helicopters (and their subsequent advantages) to be undue.

 

Whereas the opposing camp, simply doesn't view those advantages as out of order. I'm in the latter, nobody's wrong here, though.

 

The developers are including helicopters, as a stated goal. I don't see much utility in actually debating whether or not they're beneficial to the game, when they're coming anyhow. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I disagree with intended inclusions from the developers frequently. However, the objective of this thread is to identify ways in which we can change the dynamic from the mod in highlighting the real issues that I've seen cited (there are many) which can be remedied to bring the helicopter into a more acceptable state.

[Katana67 2907]

Flying across the map in 5 minutes or less and getting a birds eye view of the entire map are not "minor issues" that "don't effect things on the ground"... It affects everything.. the entire game.. 

 

And I wholly disagree, it just doesn't translate that often into what you're asserting.

 

And when it does, it's due to the ease of use and inadequate execution (i.e. the issues highlighted in the OP) vice any innate advantage given to helicopters (hence why I asserted that you're muddling two different aspects).

[Etherimp 1323]

And I wholly disagree, it just doesn't translate that often into what you're asserting.

 

And when it does, it's due to the ease of use and inadequate execution (i.e. the issues highlighted in the OP) vice any innate advantage given to helicopters (hence why I asserted that you're muddling two different aspects).

 

 

I'm not sure if you're intentionally being dense or if you're actually convinced of what you're saying... Just in case, I'll try this one more time before I give up:

Helicopters will give the same advantages no matter how difficult they are to use, maintain, locate, etc, etc, etc, etc.

 

Having a gun disassembled and spread across your house still results in a dead body if you assemble it and fire it at someone.

 

Your argument doesn't become valid just because you keep repeating it over and over.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Etherimp

[Katana67 2907]

Your argument doesn't become valid just because you keep repeating it over and over.

 

Nor does yours. Agree to disagree on this one, being insulting isn't going to help.

[Etherimp 1323]

Nor does yours. Agree to disagree on this one, being insulting isn't going to help.

 

 

I'm not making an attempt to be insulting. You're insulting every reader of this thread by repeating the same invalid argument over and over no matter how many times it's already been countered. You've yet to adequately counter a single point.

 

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument

 

 

Here's my premise: Helicopters offer unparalleled mobility, access, speed, and visibility.

 

Reasoning: Explained in depth in my first post in this thread. In essense; they give a relatively small group of players a lot of control over a comparatively large number of players and allow them to negatively impact others game experience.

 

Conclusion: Helicopters are bad for game-play.

 

 

Listing off alternative methods of implementing helicopters will not change their inherent nature, without fundamentally changing their nature and making them NOT HELICOPTERS; which is my premise: They offer mobility, access, speed, and visibility.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Etherimp

[FrostDMG 398]

You can't argue with these people.

No matter how many experienced players give valid arguments, there's always the "lol helis r cool xDDD" response.

You know what else's pretty cool? Tanks, planes and aircraft carriers.

Just because something was in the mod or was going to be added to the ALPHA, doesn't mean we should have it in the full release.

Giving players what they want is a bad idea. Give them a couple of toys to play with, then they'll appreciate them and adapt - don't give them the entire toy shop.

[Etherimp 1323]

You can't argue with these people.

No matter how many experienced players give valid arguments, there's always the "lol helis r cool xDDD" response.

You know what else's pretty cool? Tanks, planes and aircraft carriers.

Just because something was in the mod or was going to be added to the ALPHA, doesn't mean we should have it in the full release.

Giving players what they want is a bad idea. Give them a couple of toys to play with, then they'll appreciate them and adapt - don't give them the entire toy shop.

 

 

Furthermore, most people don't actually know what they want. If you ask the average person what kind of coffee they like they respond with something like "Dark and rich", while in reality most people like something creamy and sweet. DayZ players will not realize what a huge mistake adding helicopters to Standalone is until they actually see it happen... and even then they may not realize it's helicopters ruining their experience; they'll just get tired of the same grind and quit the game or resort to trolling.

[Katana67 2907]

Your argument rests on three assumptions (all of which I have addressed with counter-arguments).

 

That the "mobility, access, speed, and visibility" offered by helicopters cannot be mitigated to any acceptable degree.

 

That "rarity" is irrelevant to something just existing, rather than rarity/difficulty justifying the advantages conferred in a helicopter.

 

And, that the fact that the mere act of flight constitutes an undue imbalance (which isn't something measurable, it's a subjective supposition).

 

I have addressed all (in highlighting different ways in which objects on the ground can be made less visible, how we can limit the visibility from helicopters innately [i.e. mitigating third person], how we can make their operation less common as to justify the advantages given, etc.) of the issues raised. You don't have to agree with them, but they are certainly as valid as the assertions you're making.

 

Like I said, ultimately, it boils down to two camps. One, which views the mere act of flight in DayZ as an imbalance. The other, doesn't.

 

That's all I will say on the matter, I won't further engage vitriol. More than willing to discuss ways in which we can incorporate helicopters in DayZ as to make them more acceptable to all.

[So Sexy 259]

Since when were the helicopters overpowered? And OP sais that 60% why helis were overpowered is due to easy spotting, how did I manage to hide from helis myself,  and my tents?

Edited May 18, 2014 by So Sexy

[maybeme 22]

On an unrelated note,

Who wishes helicopters will be affected by weather? Like low visibility, rain, and high winds.

[Katana67 2907]

On an unrelated note,

Who wishes helicopters will be affected by weather? Like low visibility, rain, and high winds.

 

A great idea.

 

Hopefully whatever weather system they end up implementing won't just be "for show" and will actually allow them to have wind be a distinct entity.

[Etherimp 1323]

Your argument rests on three assumptions (all of which I have addressed with counter-arguments).

 

That the "mobility, access, speed, and visibility" offered by helicopters cannot be mitigated to any acceptable degree.

 

 

There's only one way to mitigate those factors: Make a helicopter not a helicopter. 

Fact: Helicopters fly.

Fact: Helicopters are fast.

Fact: Helicopters hover.

Fact: Helicopters turn/rotate.

 

How are you going to mitigate that exactly? Make them slow, and not fly? DayZ already has something that does that! Walking! Or.. in the future.. Driving!

 

And how is making a helicopter more rare/difficult to maintain going to stop people from using it?... And if your goal is to stop/limit its use, why add it in the game at all? And if Helicopters weren't "overpowered", why would you have to make design decisions with the expressed purpose of "nerfing" helicopters? 

 

You say that the "power" of helicopters is acceptable, but you yourself are talking about ways to mitigate their advantages... Sounds like you've painted yourself into a corner on this one. This argument could be resolved if you just said what you really mean:

"I LIKE HELIS AND I WANT THEM IN THE GAME I DON'T CARE HOW OP THEY ARE."

 

 

There, it's out of the closet. Now we can all move along.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Etherimp