Petition: No more randomness in weapons, SKILL based combat.

[Evil Minion 943]

While I would like to see the combat mainly skill (judging your environment like wind, weather and distance) and planning (good equipment, player condition) based there should be some random elements as well:

(1) Dispersion
depending on
- weapon condition
- ammo condition
- weapon type
Every weapon type should have a base dispersion that translates into effective range - high for pistols and very low for long rifles.

(2) Bias
This should be a one-time effect: Instead of shooting exactly straight every weapon will come with some random bias (fixed for this single weapon). This effect should be small but noticable over longer distances so you have to get used to your weapon before you can snipe people. The maximum bias should depend on the weapon type.

(3) Recoil
I think there should be a small random element in recoil as well to avoid complete negation during full-auto fire.

Overall if you and your equipment are in prime condition, you know your weapon, you judge your situation perfectly and your target is within your effective weapon range you should hit it. However, if one of those conditions is not fullfilled you might end up missing.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Evil Minion

[Katana67 2907]

See it would be much better if they moved to fictional "hand crafted" firearms, then nobody could come all 'gun nerd' waving facts sheets and ballistic charts.

 

That's just it, though. It's not about "realism" for me. It's about making it more WYSIWYG. And making it a shooting mechanic that actually values player input and prowess. This is one of those rare cases where making something more "realistic" translates into making something more rewarding, skill-based, and straightforward all at the same time.

 

While I don't like the others speaking for "the community," DayZ is and always has been a game which heavily features firearms. It's never claimed to be anything other than that. I dislike the connotation of DayZ as ARMA with zombies, as that's a bit simplistic. But firearms, and moreover, a wide variety of firearms will be a main tenet of DayZ (as we're seeing already).

 

Making that shooting mechanic more straightforward and less random, makes all the sense in the world to me in terms of actually representing the player.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Katana67

[cuddly_rabbit 102]

 

While I agree that shooting should be skill based, I think that the random dispersion should stay in the game - hear me out:

 

• Most weapons should not be pristine, and hence dirty/damaged making them less accurate
• Pristine weapons should be 100% accurate, but it should also take you time to either find the gun that's pristine or find the parts (stocks shouldn't affect the spread but whatever).
• Weapons should get damaged over time/extensive usage - cleaning should be available in order to increase the longevity of the weapon.
• Guns should be rare as hell.

 

Exactly this.

Keep random dispersion.

I would add that we play a game (voluntarily) in which our character is untrained in the use of guns. If you can't take the fact that you are not the top-shooter... play any other shooter game.

To reflect this, dispersion are the same as "random mistakes" that lead to missing the target.

Add reaslism, but keep dispersion to simulate the "survivor =/= expert" aspect.

Edited May 19, 2014 by cuddly_rabbit

[pilgrim* 3513]

True nobody would complain then.

 

The thing is in any other community nobody would be complaining but the bulk of this community comes from Arma and mil sim games.

 

 Nobody complains about realism in rust why ? because that game is started off as being unrealistic.

 

Dayz SA is some messed up smash up of realistic and completely unrealistic additions its a mess.

 

the bulk of the community is certainly not from ArmA, I think. Read the forums.

 

for "gun realism" maybe ArmA3 would be a better choice ?

 

or this ?

 

Edited May 19, 2014 by pilgrim

[gibonez 3633]

the bulk of the community is certainly not from ArmA, I think. Read the forums.

 

for "gun realism" maybe ArmA3 would be a better choice ?

 

or this ?

 

 

I would safe its pretty sound to assume the bulk of the community is indeed coming from the mod thus from arma.

 

Especially this early on.

 

As the game goes on sure more new players will join in ones with 0 exposure to arma but for right now I would say most of the people who looked forward to SA were from the mod.

[Whyherro123 2283]

I would like to see something similar to the mechanisms of World of Tanks.

For example, a tank has listed stats (top speed, gun accuracy, reload time, turret rotation rate, etc) When you start out, your crew is utterly horrid, and performs at about half the listed stat rate, to represent inexperience. As you compete and do better, your crew progresses in skill rates, until they reach 100%. Now, your tank performs at the 100% of the listed stats, and NO MORE. You can only go above the listed stats values by attaching modules (like telescope sights, automatic loaders, etc)

I feel that that would be both an effective way of adding skills for firearms, and other skills as well.

[xalienax 621]

Exactly this.

Keep random dispersion.

I would add that we play a game (voluntarily) in which our character is untrained in the use of guns. If you can't take the fact that you are not the top-shooter... play any other shooter game.

To reflect this, dispersion are the same as "random mistakes" that lead to missing the target.

Add reaslism, but keep dispersion to simulate the "survivor =/= expert" aspect.

we should not be simulating the ineptness of your "character" this isnt warcraft with some leveling system. shooting accturately and quickly should be hard, but it should ENTIRELY based on the precision of the human in THE REAL WORLD controlling that character that determines the effectiveness.

SKILL NOT LUCK.

[gibonez 3633]

I would like to see something similar to the mechanisms of World of Tanks.

For example, a tank has listed stats (top speed, gun accuracy, reload time, turret rotation rate, etc) When you start out, your crew is utterly horrid, and performs at about half the listed stat rate, to represent inexperience. As you compete and do better, your crew progresses in skill rates, until they reach 100%. Now, your tank performs at the 100% of the listed stats, and NO MORE. You can only go above the listed stats values by attaching modules (like telescope sights, automatic loaders, etc)

I feel that that would be both an effective way of adding skills for firearms, and other skills as well.

 

Why not take this approach and apply it to real life realistic attributes. such as

 

• Reload time
• stability - sway
• Recoil absorption
• handling - how fast you can bring your gun up to fire

[Whyherro123 2283]

 

Why not take this approach and apply it to real life realistic attributes. such as

 

• Reload time
• stability - sway
• Recoil absorption
• handling - how fast you can bring your gun up to fire

 

That was what I was implying. 

[fuke (DayZ) 22]

Dispersion is fine as is, these are supposed to be real guns not some Airsoft toy that you can spray full-auto with perfect accuracy while standing up after running at a full sprint for 20 minutes.

[Katana67 2907]

Dispersion is fine as is, these are supposed to be real guns not some Airsoft toy that you can spray full-auto with perfect accuracy while standing up after running at a full sprint for 20 minutes.

 

Errr... the airsoft guns that I've handled when I was a bit younger were the most insanely inaccurate things on this side of Mars. It's a smoothbore musket, with wind-gust loving plastic pellets.

 

I think you've got your properties reversed.

[gibonez 3633]

That was what I was implying. 

 

Sorry I assumed you grouped the actual dispersion into the equation.

[cuddly_rabbit 102]

we should not be simulating the ineptness of your "character" this isnt warcraft with some leveling system. shooting accturately and quickly should be hard, but it should ENTIRELY based on the precision of the human in THE REAL WORLD controlling that character that determines the effectiveness.

SKILL NOT LUCK.

We should simulate exactly that ineptness of the player character, as it is the core difference between DayZ and MilSim characters.

I guess, we have to agree to disagree here. (sun)

Edited May 19, 2014 by cuddly_rabbit

[Katana67 2907]

We should simulate exactly that ineptness of the player character, as it is the core difference between DayZ and MilSim characters.

 

But we're not playing a character, the avatar in DayZ is ideally meant to represent the player.

 

It's not Tom Smith (real-life) playing Snake McDuff (DayZ character). It's Tom Smith playing as Tom Smith.

 

This is a common misconception, DayZ's "characters" aren't really characters. They're just vessels, avatars, stand-ins for the real-world player behind the screen.

 

Artificially simulating "ineptness" isn't possible when I consider my "character" to be ex-military, and yours is not. Point being, the idea of a "character" in DayZ is entirely invented by the player.

 

We're not all playing as the same person. We're not playing as a separate person at all. We're playing as ourselves.

[cuddly_rabbit 102]

But we're not playing a character, the avatar in DayZ is ideally meant to represent the player.

 

It's not Tom Smith (real-life) playing Snake McDuff (DayZ character). It's Tom Smith playing as Tom Smith.

 

This is a common misconception, DayZ's "characters" aren't really characters. They're just vessels, avatars, stand-ins for the real-world player behind the screen.

 

Artificially simulating "ineptness" isn't possible when I consider my "character" to be ex-military, and yours is not. Point being, the idea of a "character" in DayZ is entirely invented by the player.

 

We're not all playing as the same person. We're not playing as a separate person at all. We're playing as ourselves.

That's the way you play.

Not the way I play.

I always keep the layer of having a character that is clearly detached from myself in games.

Makes the game much more realistic and cooler, and keeps me as an oorp element out of the equation.

As all characters are just survivors, it is no problem to just force the "you are just a normal person, no ex-military, no pro-hunter, no [add whatever weak reason you could find to be "better than average"]" approach.

The difference between "expert killer" and "mere normal person tossed into bad situation" is what makes DayZ different. In a good way.

It's actually one of the only real potentials that keeps it apart from generic, boring shooters.

Edited May 19, 2014 by cuddly_rabbit

[Katana67 2907]

That's the way you play.

Not the way I play.

 

Which is exactly what I'm saying, the idea of a "character" is entirely up to the player. Not the game.

 

The game is there merely to give us the tools to play (hence the sandbox), not artificially dictate who we can play as.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Katana67

[pilgrim* 3513]

But we're not playing a character, the avatar in DayZ is ideally meant to represent the player...//..This is a common misconception, DayZ's "characters" aren't really characters. They're just vessels, avatars, stand-ins for the real-world player behind the screen..//.. We're playing as ourselves.

 

Yes -you are playing 'yourself' when you are cold, wet, hungry, tired, and suffering from blood loss

 

which I guess (.. I hope..) you are not, when you're sitting in front of your PC at home ?

[gibonez 3633]

Yes -you are playing 'yourself' when you are cold, wet, hungry, tired, and suffering from blood loss

 

which I guess (.. I hope..) you are not, when you're sitting in front of your PC at home ?

 

Yes and when you are cold, wet, hungry, tired and suffering from blood loss your weapon functions the exact same way.

[Katana67 2907]

Yes -you are playing 'yourself' when you are cold, wet, hungry, tired, and suffering from blood loss

 

which I guess (.. I hope..) you are not, when you're sitting in front of your PC at home ?

 

Is there a point here? You're saying that in order to play "as yourself" that you have to retroactively experience the same circumstances in-game... in real-life... simultaneously?

 

Whenever they get holodecks, let me know.

 

I guess the meaning of "represent the player" is lost.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Katana67

[pilgrim* 3513]

Is there a point here? You're saying that in order to play "as yourself" that you have to retroactively experience the same circumstances in-game... in real-life... simultaneously?

 

Whenever they get holodecks, let me know.

 

I guess the meaning of "represent the player" is lost.

 

You were talking about accuracy, weren't you ? Don't you see the connection between being - tired, hungry, cold, wet, suffering from blood loss - and your ability to shoot straight ?

If you don't see the point here, perhaps you ARE a little tired, yourself... but no blood loss I hope?

 

xx

[mithrawndo 166]

The thing is in any other community nobody would be complaining but the bulk of this community comes from Arma and mil sim games.

 

Right here is the problem. Whilst most people who have made DayZ a success both as a mod and as a standalone by promoting it (and it is a financial success before anyone gets all alpha-nazi on me), the 2 million and counting players who've signed up for this are not veterans of Arma. We don't particularly care about military super realism and in all honesty looking at how standalone has been constructed so far, I think it's fair to say that BI might well be stepping out on a limb to ensure that the game doesn't end up feeling and playing like Arma. For evidence of this, look at sales of Arma 1, pre-dayz sales of Arma 2 and sales of Arma 3, versus sales of DayZ Standalone and post dayzmod sales of arma2.

 

We've come from things like Project Zomboid and it's the experience we seek, not purely the gun play.

 

This said, I'm 100% in favour of stopping weapon attachments having a multiplicative effect on dispersion: Having this leads to there being a best and worst attachment, and that's counter productive to my mind. Attachments should only add functionality (scopes, rails and maybe hopefully at some point straps), cosmetics and handling improvements.

[gibonez 3633]

Right here is the problem. Whilst most people who have made DayZ a success both as a mod and as a standalone by promoting it (and it is a financial success before anyone gets all alpha-nazi on me), the 2 million and counting players who've signed up for this are not veterans of Arma. We don't particularly care about military super realism and in all honesty looking at how standalone has been constructed so far, I think it's fair to say that BI might well be stepping out on a limb to ensure that the game doesn't end up feeling and playing like Arma. For evidence of this, look at sales of Arma 1, pre-dayz sales of Arma 2 and sales of Arma 3, versus sales of DayZ Standalone and post dayzmod sales of arma2.

 

We've come from things like Project Zomboid and it's the experience we seek, not purely the gun play.

 

This said, I'm 100% in favour of stopping weapon attachments having a multiplicative effect on dispersion: Having this leads to there being a best and worst attachment, and that's counter productive to my mind. Attachments should only add functionality (scopes, rails and maybe hopefully at some point straps), cosmetics and handling improvements.

 

Don't get me wrong.

 

Coming from an Arma background does not mean we want military tactics and weapons in the game.

 

Heck we love the focus on civilian weapons and equipment and alot of us would love nothing more than the game to only have civilian weapons and to not have any high end military gear.

 

However that being said we expect weapons to perform and function like weapons, coming from an arma background we expected Dayz to atleast have realistic feeling weapons and gameplay the focus on unrealistic gameplay elements was not something we expected.

[Katana67 2907]

You were talking about accuracy, weren't you ? Don't you see the connection between being - tired, hungry, cold, wet, suffering from blood loss - and your ability to shoot straight ?

If you don't see the point here, perhaps you ARE a little tired, yourself... but no blood loss I hope?

 

xx

 

No, I was talking about playing a character vice playing as yourself. As per the context of cuddly_rabbit's comment, not your irrelevant interjection.

 

However, yes, I was talking about accuracy in the sense that we're playing NOBODY. Meaning that we're not playing as Commander Shepard, Master Chief, or Sam Fisher. Conversely, we're not playing as John Q. Moron or Sally J. Civilian. We're playing as NOBODY, the game isn't forcing us to play a character.

 

So it's completely pointless to say that "Oh, we're not a military dude so we need to simulate our characters being inept in firing a weapon." We're not playing as a SFOD-D operator any more than we're playing as Sally J. Civilian.

 

I don't recall ever mentioning anything about weather or the status of our avatars dictating accuracy, which is a separate issue entirely from what was being discussed. If you'd like to talk about that, then talk about it. Don't interject it where it's an irrelevant consideration.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Katana67

[Franchi (DayZ) 146]

I am pretty sure if you give me a gun and throw me in a life and death battle, I would need luck to hit something too...

 

We are some random survivors, not ex-military soldiers with expert gun training...

Lets make an experiment, go outside, get a Bow and Arrow and try to hit a Target 100m away. Lets see how accurate you shoot even after a day...

 

Bad argument is bad.

 

The effective killing range of a modern compound bow is about 50m, 60m is doable but a tad unethical. Olympic level archery takes place at 70m, 100m and beyond is mass fire range for bows sure you can get lucky, and there are probably people out there with the skill to do it reliably, but that is roughly equivalent to a 2000m+ rifle shot, yeah it can be done but not many people can do it.

 

On the other hand there isn't a long rifle in my collection that I can't use effectively at 100m, hell Ive shot guns with barrels that look like sewer pipes that are still point of human at 100m.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Franchi

[pilgrim* 3513]

You want accurate guns - guns that act like real guns

So do I, so do we all.

Hey dudes, EVERYBODY wants guns that perform like real guns. OK no problem.

But this poll does not ask that, it says:

<< SKILL based Combat >>

 

Now - in a game - WHAT does "SKILL based Combat" have to do with "gun realism" ?? I REALLY hope you understand these are 2 different things.

If you have gun realism HOW do you get "SKILL based Combat" into the gameplay?

I'm not going to suggest answers, I already wrote about the problem and got no answer from the ArmA gun lobby.

I guess you have some propositions of how to implement "sway", "recoil control" etc., and how those will work in the game and be playable. Remember also, these gameplay elements have to be server side or cheaters will just shut them off (like players turn off post processing). Then the game will fall straight back to being ArmA2 again. Who needs that?

 

Read what Mithrawndo said a couple of posts earler - understand what this means for GAMEPLAY in a SURVIVAL+ZOMBIE game that has GUNS in it.

 

Because what this game HAS, that is NOT in ArmA2 is - hunger, fatigue, cold, wet, bloodloss, shock (fear) - and that's WHY this game exists.

If you only want accurate guns, play ArmA3, or wait till the devs get around to "accurate guns + survival gameplay"

If you want to play DayZ then PLEASE SUGGEST how to implement Combat GAMEPLAY that will advance the game. SKILL based Combat does NOT mean 'point and click', I hope.

 

Please understand this.

Do you think the dispersion variables were programmed in by mistake? Maybe the dev turned around to get a coffee and a cat walked across the keyboard? Why would he spend his time messing up perfectly good ArmA gameplay to produce a different game that plays differently? What are those devs aiming for?

 

So we all agree, guns can mirror real world guns, that will be cool. No silly attachments, cool. Really not a problem.

Now lets hear your proposals for "SKILL based Combat in a computer game"

 

because "SKILL based Combat" is what this poll is about, right? That's what's written at the top of this thread. SKILL based Combat, in a mouse-and-keyboard, server-side simulation, survival game. Be creative, gun people, propose solutions.

 

ok, thanx for listening

xx pilgrim

 

edit: I obviously didn't make this clear: Take SWAY for instance - Do you think that the SERVER imposing movement on your sights while you try to target accurately, will lead to improved gun-skill as you get used to it, or lead to greater irritation, in the game ?

Edited May 20, 2014 by pilgrim