Adding dynamism to gunfights

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

-Let the player keep their weapon in the scoped and ready to fire stance when running. 

-Vary the speed a player runs with their gun out and scoped depending on how heavy the gun is. A dexterity stat is already in the game used to determine weapon turn rate, this should be easy.

-Make the weapon shaking dependent on the dexterity stat.

-Enable running sideways 

-Enable shooting while running

 

BAM, the light weapons now have a niche and you can fight in a manner different from CoD!

Have most of the people in here got real-world experience with weapons, or are we all basing this off movies/T.V/other games/our own imaginations?

 

I have over 9 years infantry experience and  I can't hit a fucking thing past around 50m while moving at even a normal walk. The speed you have to move in order to maintain a decent sight picture is ludicrously slow.

The problem is only magnified by using optical sights (see what I did there?). Even 50m is pushing it. If you somehow manage to maintain a sight picture while walking at a 50m target, the first round you fire is going to knock your aim off anyways, forcing you to re-establish it.

 

Those videos you see of soldiers crossing open fields and firing while moving? They aren't hitting a goddamn thing. I would be very surprised if they even hit the wall the enemy was using as cover while running like that. That sort of tactic only works in real life because GUNS ARE FUCKING SCARY.

 

I challenge you to go to a 200m range with an M16 (I use a C7A2, but same difference), throw a 3x magnification sight on there and hit a man sized target from the standing position. Your arms get tired and start to shake after 10 seconds. Your breath rocks your muzzle up and down each time. Your whole body starts to contort with the effort of keeping the weapon up. When you fire a round, the recoil rocks you back on your heels and skews your aim. The wind affects the flight of the round. If you can reliably hit at 200m standing with a rate of fire greater than say once every 5 seconds, I'll mail you a 24.

 

The weapons are fine the way they are.

[Katana67 2907]

Christ, when did this become a dick-measuring video game/firearm "experience" resume-off?

 

Focus on the arguments made, not the people making them.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Katana67

[Etherimp 1323]

You sure are acting like one, I was replying to the part I quoted ABOUT forum warriors, you know, pointing out that they have gotten worse?

And if you believe that there was such thing as Operation Irani Freedom, and that a .50 BMG will disenigrate and throw you back 40 feet instead of cutting through and nearly cutting you in half, then you are full of shit. But you havent said anything like that, so why would I be bashing you? I just quoted what YOU said about forum warriors. Chill out dude, your acting like one.

 

 

 

You have your people mixed up... You didn't quote what I said. You quoted what SoulFirez said ABOUT me, calling me a forum warrior. Hence why I responded to it. 

[Etherimp 1323]

Have most of the people in here got real-world experience with weapons, or are we all basing this off movies/T.V/other games/our own imaginations?

 

I have over 9 years infantry experience and  I can't hit a fucking thing past around 50m while moving at even a normal walk. The speed you have to move in order to maintain a decent sight picture is ludicrously slow.

The problem is only magnified by using optical sights (see what I did there?). Even 50m is pushing it. If you somehow manage to maintain a sight picture while walking at a 50m target, the first round you fire is going to knock your aim off anyways, forcing you to re-establish it.

 

Those videos you see of soldiers crossing open fields and firing while moving? They aren't hitting a goddamn thing. I would be very surprised if they even hit the wall the enemy was using as cover while running like that. That sort of tactic only works in real life because GUNS ARE FUCKING SCARY.

 

I challenge you to go to a 200m range with an M16 (I use a C7A2, but same difference), throw a 3x magnification sight on there and hit a man sized target from the standing position. Your arms get tired and start to shake after 10 seconds. Your breath rocks your muzzle up and down each time. Your whole body starts to contort with the effort of keeping the weapon up. When you fire a round, the recoil rocks you back on your heels and skews your aim. The wind affects the flight of the round. If you can reliably hit at 200m standing with a rate of fire greater than say once every 5 seconds, I'll mail you a 24.

 

The weapons are fine the way they are.

 

 

We aren't talking about 200 meter shots here... We're talking about 10-20 meters down a hallway. 

Example: Standing at exit of barracks, strafing to the side to fire into the barracks, and strafing back. . .

 

Or, standing outside of the Jail, strafing out, strafing back.

Of course it should not be done instantaneously, but in its current state, the game MAY send you randomly stumbling across the entire width of the doorway all at once (or it may not..), then you have your entire upper body wobble for an full second before being able to regain  your balance.

 

Do me a favor, go pick up an object you have laying around your house that is about gun sized, and try strafing around the corner of your hallway and you tell me if your whole upper body wobbles for a full second right when you stop. If it does, you may require a breast reduction and some work on  your inner ear because your  equilibrium is off.

 

 

Once again, nobody is suggesting you be able to pull off 360 no-scopes whilst bunny-hopping from 200 meters...

 

...we're just asking for smooth and responsive controls/mechanics. Stop blindly defending DayZ.. Yeah, it's good.. It's fun, but it's far from fucking perfect.

 

The fact that you defend the movement and gunplay saying that they're fine is disturbing. I'm pretty sure everyone who actually plays this game including Dean and the Dev team realize both of those aspects of the game need some serious work..

Edited August 3, 2014 by Etherimp

[DeatHTaX 1217]

You realize its about "realism where it creates depth" and not about "realism because realism" while most "anti-realism" arguments are used by people who are afraid of depth (mostly because they don't want to be forced to think or learn when playing a game) - which in turn would kill this game (because a sandbox game without a story lives from depth).

 

So the first part was just my opinion and the second part was the reall argument - tradeoffs are making the game more interesting. So you have to decide whether to run at full speed or to shoot at your enemy. The point is that a gun aimed in the general direction of your enemy and firing (think of recoil) would restrict your movement. So no problem with firing while running but only with appropriate downsides like lower running speed and much less accuracy.

 

You don't always need realism to create depth. Yknow what creates depth? Having a movement system that actually meshes well with the game and is responsive.

 

And you sure sound like a realism cuz realism based on your complaint about the "aim up" movement. Seriously the "Have you ever tried this in RL!? SO unrealistic" argument is growing very tiresome...This is not real life...it is a game...and there are certain rules you have to bend to create a willing suspension of disbelief, and to make everything work within its OWN world that it creates, NOT ours. That why when I play skyrim I'm not saying "Omg thur is no wai in RL I could should that dude and he go flying NEEDS REALISM" because those are elements that exist within the Skyrim universe, and it all meshes well to a cohesive and fluid gaming experience. Never once do I sit there and say to myself "wow there's no way I would shoot someone with a bow and kill them instantly". See what I'm saying?

 

There was absolutely nothing "depth breaking" about the previous patch aim-up movement. 

 

The previous patch aim up movement was just fine. It helps to keep combat situations flowing and dynamic, and allows you more control of your character. The more they slow down the character and just add to the cumbersome feeling of the movement mechanics, the more boring combat gets for me. I'm not saying I want to be sprinting around noscoping kids and crap like that, but please....stop making the movement system even MORE bogged down with all of these ridiculous changes. 

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

We aren't talking about 200 meter shots here... We're talking about 10-20 meters down a hallway. 

Example: Standing at exit of barracks, strafing to the side to fire into the barracks, and strafing back. . .

 

Or, standing outside of the Jail, strafing out, strafing back.

Of course it should not be done instantaneously, but in its current state, the game MAY send you randomly stumbling across the entire width of the doorway all at once (or it may not..), then you have your entire upper body wobble for an full second before being able to regain  your balance.

 

Do me a favor, go pick up an object you have laying around your house that is about gun sized, and try strafing around the corner of your hallway and you tell me if your whole upper body wobbles for a full second right when you stop. If it does, you may require a breast reduction and some work on  your inner ear because your  equilibrium is off.

 

 

Once again, nobody is suggesting you be able to pull off 360 no-scopes whilst bunny-hopping from 200 meters...

 

...we're just asking for smooth and responsive controls/mechanics. Stop blindly defending DayZ.. Yeah, it's good.. It's fun, but it's far from fucking perfect.

 

The fact that you defend the movement and gunplay saying that they're fine is disturbing. I'm pretty sure everyone who actually plays this game including Dean and the Dev team realize both of those aspects of the game need some serious work..

 

As another player already stated, the defensive player rightly has the advantage of steady aim and no flanking in that scenario. The assaulting player has the advantage of know when he is going to pop out. Have you ever heard the term "accuracy by volume of fire"? Your first second and third shots may not be laser accurate hits, but by rounding the corner and firing until either you die, he dies or you run out of ammo, you are able to sway the odds somewhat in your favour.

 

It seems like many players treat this game like they only need one shot to come out on top of a firefight. Most assault weapons carry 30 round magazines for a reason. There is no sense in saving 28 of those rounds for the next fight when you might not survive this one anyway. If I have an AK/M4 in this game, I try to carry a minimum of 4/5 mags on me, plus an ammo box if possible. Reason being, if I can manage to survive the initial exchange in a fight, I will usually come out on top.

 

This is a pretty good example of what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5_IbxfB1ZA#t=157

 

Reference the guy firing half a mag into the target in the corner.

 

By the way, thanks for attacking me personally, not the issues at hand.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Merrick362

[Etherimp 1323]

As another player already stated, the defensive player rightly has the advantage of steady aim and no flanking in that scenario. The assaulting player has the advantage of know when he is going to pop out. Have you ever heard the term "accuracy by volume of fire"? Your first second and third shots may not be laser accurate hits, but by rounding the corner and firing until either you die, he dies or you run out of ammo, you are able to sway the odds somewhat in your favour.

 

Yeah. I said that... That was me. And I don't see what this has to do with the issue at hand, AT ALL.

 

 

It seems like many players treat this game like they only need one shot to come out on top of a firefight. Most assault weapons carry 30 round magazines for a reason. There is no sense in saving 28 of those rounds for the next fight when you might not survive this one anyway. If I have an AK/M4 in this game, I try to carry a minimum of 4/5 mags on me, plus an ammo box if possible. Reason being, if I can manage to survive the initial exchange in a fight, I will usually come out on top.

 

Again.. How does this have anything to do with the issue?

 

 

By the way, thanks for attacking me personally, not the issues at hand.

 

I reread my post a few times and still can't figure out where I attacked you personally, you illiterate twat.

 

There, now I attacked you personally.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Max Planck
We don't use that kind of language around here, with 1300+ posts you should know better. 24hours off.

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

[qoute]

As another player already stated, the defensive player rightly has the advantage of steady aim and no flanking in that scenario. The assaulting player has the advantage of know when he is going to pop out. Have you ever heard the term "accuracy by volume of fire"? Your first second and third shots may not be laser accurate hits, but by rounding the corner and firing until either you die, he dies or you run out of ammo, you are able to sway the odds somewhat in your favour.

 

 

Yeah. I said that... That was me. And I don't see what this has to do with the issue at hand, AT ALL.

 

 

 

 

I reread my post a few times and still can't figure out where I attacked you personally, you illiterate twat.

 

There, now I attacked you personally.

 

 

I'm saying the movement/gunplay is fine. Rather than rely on first round hits, compensate by firing more rounds. You have 30, why only use 2?

 

Reread your last three blurbs if you're confused about what you wrote.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Merrick362

[pale1776 375]

You have your people mixed up... You didn't quote what I said. You quoted what SoulFirez said ABOUT me, calling me a forum warrior. Hence why I responded to it.

Ohp, wrong quote. I wasnt pokin, I was just sayin.

[Etherimp 1323]

I'm saying the movement/gunplay is fine. Rather than rely on first round hits, compensate by firing more rounds. You have 30, why only use 2?

 

 

Firstly, apologies for my last post being completely incomprehensible due to formatting issues..

 

Secondly, I can't believe you're actually suggesting firing more rounds is somehow preferred/superior.

 

And finally, I STILL don't see where I attacked you personally.. Maybe you could just save us all of the trouble and quote exactly how I attacked you.

 

No. Just no. And it still has nothing to do with the fucking MOVEMENT OR GUNPLAY.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Etherimp

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

Firstly, apologies for my last post being completely incomprehensible due to formatting issues..

 

Secondly, I can't believe you're actually suggesting firing more rounds is somehow preferred/superior.

 

No. Just no. And it still has nothing to do with the fucking MOVEMENT OR GUNPLAY.

I give up. Trolling complete, Etherimp. Good job. Maybe other, more objective readers will understand.

[Sula 1205]

Any further posts made in this thread had better be civil. I am not wasting more time treating you like adults if you're going to act like kids.  I will simply ban anyone I see doing more acts of childishness such as swearing.  Just keep the conversation civil and if you can't do that then don't post.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Sula

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

 

First and last warning .....doh! Sula beat me to it.

 

Any further posts made in this thread had better be civil. I am not wasting more time treating you like adults if you're going to act like kids.  I will simply ban any more acts of childishness such as swearing.  Just keep the conversation civil and if you can't do that then don't post.

 I was just typing out the same thing but not as pleasantly. Guys, Behave.

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

Sula, if you are referring to my original post, I apologize. I was cursing to emphasize my point. 

[Grimey Rick 3417]

ITT:

 

People arguing that this video game inhabited by zombies and in which a morphine/splint miraculously cures a broken arm/leg in seconds should have its movement designed with a "realistic" blueprint.

 

These also tend to be be the players that haven't played it nearly enough to be put in every situation where the s***ty movement gets you killed more often than not for no other reason than being s***ty. There's no strategy to it, it's just bad. I don't play a video game to pretend that I've carried assault rifles and attempted to shoot them while running, I play this game because video game. This isn't a military simulator. It isn't even a survival simulator. It's a survival game with zombies that's loosely based on authenticity of environment.

 

Also, NEWSFLASH, DayZ isn't a game where your sole purpose is survival. Survival in both the Mod and the Standalone is trivial at best when you remove other players. It's a game where after establishing your camp/supplies, you go out to kill other people for theirs. It's a game that contains assault rifles, shotguns, bolt-action rifles, semi-automatic rifles, pistols, various sharp and blunt melee weapons, and even f***ing helicopters for a reason.

 

We're not here to make friends, we're here to survive and then blast other people away. This game needs to be balanced around PVP and encounters with other players, not around making the horribly s***ty zombies somewhat viable enemies by nerfing the controls into oblivion. Your job should be to make the controls accurate, smooth and balanced while simultaneously making the zombies harder. Keep the zombies harmless and let us have our *somewhat* decent controls back until you figure out whatever the hell you're doing with the zeds. Go play State of Decay, take notes, and stop being lazy with this terrible zombie A.I. It's been eight months now and we're slowly creeping closer to beta -- let's see some progress.

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

Because, quite frankly, military simulations are fucking boring.

 

 

That's funny, because I find ArmA quite fun. A lot more fun than any other fast paced shooter out there, that's for sure.

[slippery gypsy 107]

ITT:

 

People arguing that this video game inhabited by zombies and in which a morphine/splint miraculously cures a broken arm/leg in seconds should have its movement designed with a "realistic" blueprint.

 

These also tend to be be the players that haven't played it nearly enough to be put in every situation where the s***ty movement gets you killed more often than not for no other reason than being s***ty. There's no strategy to it, it's just bad. I don't play a video game to pretend that I've carried assault rifles and attempted to shoot them while running, I play this game because video game. This isn't a military simulator. It isn't even a survival simulator. It's a survival game with zombies that's loosely based on authenticity of environment.

 

Also, NEWSFLASH, DayZ isn't a game where your sole purpose is survival. Survival in both the Mod and the Standalone is trivial at best when you remove other players. It's a game where after establishing your camp/supplies, you go out to kill other people for theirs. It's a game that contains assault rifles, shotguns, bolt-action rifles, semi-automatic rifles, pistols, various sharp and blunt melee weapons, and even f***ing helicopters for a reason.

 

We're not here to make friends, we're here to survive and then blast other people away. This game needs to be balanced around PVP and encounters with other players, not around making the horribly s***ty zombies somewhat viable enemies by nerfing the controls into oblivion. Your job should be to make the controls accurate, smooth and balanced while simultaneously making the zombies harder. Keep the zombies harmless and let us have our *somewhat* decent controls back until you figure out whatever the hell you're doing with the zeds. Go play State of Decay, take notes, and stop being lazy with this terrible zombie A.I. It's been eight months now and we're slowly creeping closer to beta -- let's see some progress.

slimey rick for the win again ....nerds

[gibonez 3633]

Because, quite frankly, military simulations are fucking boring.

 

 

 

 

I gotta ask then why would you buy dayz then ?

 

You understood the lineage and the history of not only dayz the mod but the developer right ? You did realize that they specialize in making military sims and dayz even if it tried to be arcadey would retain much of that lineage and past experience.

 

Even if Dayz tried not to be a military simulator in the end it will still feel close to one.

[evil koala 22]

ITT:

 

People arguing that this video game inhabited by zombies and in which a morphine/splint miraculously cures a broken arm/leg in seconds should have its movement designed with a "realistic" blueprint.

 

These also tend to be be the players that haven't played it nearly enough to be put in every situation where the s***ty movement gets you killed more often than not for no other reason than being s***ty. There's no strategy to it, it's just bad. I don't play a video game to pretend that I've carried assault rifles and attempted to shoot them while running, I play this game because video game. This isn't a military simulator. It isn't even a survival simulator. It's a survival game with zombies that's loosely based on authenticity of environment.

 

Also, NEWSFLASH, DayZ isn't a game where your sole purpose is survival. Survival in both the Mod and the Standalone is trivial at best when you remove other players. It's a game where after establishing your camp/supplies, you go out to kill other people for theirs. It's a game that contains assault rifles, shotguns, bolt-action rifles, semi-automatic rifles, pistols, various sharp and blunt melee weapons, and even f***ing helicopters for a reason.

 

We're not here to make friends, we're here to survive and then blast other people away. This game needs to be balanced around PVP and encounters with other players, not around making the horribly s***ty zombies somewhat viable enemies by nerfing the controls into oblivion. Your job should be to make the controls accurate, smooth and balanced while simultaneously making the zombies harder. Keep the zombies harmless and let us have our *somewhat* decent controls back until you figure out whatever the hell you're doing with the zeds. Go play State of Decay, take notes, and stop being lazy with this terrible zombie A.I. It's been eight months now and we're slowly creeping closer to beta -- let's see some progress.

You seem to be under the misconception that the state of the game now is all it was ever designed to be. Though you may prefer an open world scavenger deathmatch, it was stated from day one that they have much more planned. 

 

slimey rick for the win again ....nerds

Cute pom poms, bro.

[Capo 323]

These Arabs with American weaponry seem to recommend it. They must be legit.

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=397_1361145329

 

They're leaning. 

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Koala, even wben the game is out of beta and done...its still going to be a game focused on player interaction with zombie and survival elements, from what i can conceive from the developers. I mean seriously what else is there to do once you have all your gear, all your loot, base/fort/w.e? Go out and interact with other players. And the truth is the vast majority of that interactio will be pvp, because thats the most exciting, dangerous, and enjoyable (until this patch) aspect of the game for the majority of the community. Its just an awesome adrenaline rush.

Im sorry that you are under the impression that this game is going to be some kind of bear grylls survivor game where you eat bark, get water from pig sh$&, and fashion alaborate headpieces out of leaves.

It just wont be. You'll have to accept that fact.

I mean it'll have some awesome survival elements in the future, i hope, but pvp and player interaction will trump it all.

[Grimey Rick 3417]

You seem to be under the misconception that the state of the game now is all it was ever designed to be. Though you may prefer an open world scavenger deathmatch, it was stated from day one that they have much more planned.

Oh? Like what?

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

Koala, even wben the game is out of beta and done...its still going to be a game focused on player interaction with zombie and survival elements, from what i can conceive from the developers. I mean seriously what else is there to do once you have all your gear, all your loot, base/fort/w.e? Go out and interact with other players. And the truth is the vast majority of that interactio will be pvp, because thats the most exciting, dangerous, and enjoyable (until this patch) aspect of the game for the majority of the community. Its just an awesome adrenaline rush.

Im sorry that you are under the impression that this game is going to be some kind of bear grylls survivor game where you eat bark, get water from pig sh$&, and fashion alaborate headpieces out of leaves.

It just wont be. You'll have to accept that fact.

I mean it'll have some awesome survival elements in the future, i hope, but pvp and player interaction will trump it all.

No, you have to accept the fact the game will be all of that, not just your pvp playground.  Everyone is free to play how they choose but must also deal with the fact they may get thrown in to a situation that they are unprepared to deal with.  

Edited August 4, 2014 by Caboose187

[evil koala 22]

Oh? Like what?

 

I don't have any quotes from the devs at the ready to share, but I've read talk of the addition of more homesteading type things.. farming, building, etc.. And I don't think anyone can even say the core survival part of the game has been fleshed fully out yet. Right now we have players and a (very) few retarded zombies.. and food and water everywhere. Not much of a survival game.. So you're right.. right now DayZ is a scavenger deathmatch.. but I don't think that's the game they want to make. I'm sure PVP will have a substantial role in the game, I just don't think it was ever intended to be the sole purpose. It's just turned out that way so far because they started with a combat simulation.

[evil koala 22]

Koala, even wben the game is out of beta and done...its still going to be a game focused on player interaction with zombie and survival elements, from what i can conceive from the developers. I mean seriously what else is there to do once you have all your gear, all your loot, base/fort/w.e? Go out and interact with other players. And the truth is the vast majority of that interactio will be pvp, because thats the most exciting, dangerous, and enjoyable (until this patch) aspect of the game for the majority of the community. Its just an awesome adrenaline rush.

Im sorry that you are under the impression that this game is going to be some kind of bear grylls survivor game where you eat bark, get water from pig sh$&, and fashion alaborate headpieces out of leaves.

It just wont be. You'll have to accept that fact.

I mean it'll have some awesome survival elements in the future, i hope, but pvp and player interaction will trump it all.

 

When the survival gameplay is fleshed out and actually becomes a challenge, there will be plenty to do outside of PVP. Did you ever play Project Zomboid before they removed NPCs and roaming zombie hoards?