Civilian mags in civilian places...

[UltimateGentleman 355]

So you find yourself a Sporter, CR, or any pistol except the Longhorn and Magnum or an SMG in a civilian area.

 

No mag to go with it best you get is chambering the gun until you go to a military area and get lucky enough to find a mag for your gun...why?

 

We need mags to spawn in civilian areas, almost all of the guns there are pretty much useless, once you find a military area you're probably just going to get an AKM or something anyway. Beyond the Mosin and SKS all the guns in civilian areas are virtually useless.

 

A chambered gun is of course better than no gun at all but there's no benefit to going to an airfield or whatever and getting a 30 round mag for the Sporter or the SKS mag thing when you can just get another, better gun there anyway.

 

 

In all my hours playing I think I've found like one FNX mag in a non military zone and that's about it, found more than that but clearly dropped by players.

[BeefBacon 1185]

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/205747-pistol-magazine-rarity/?hl=%2Bmagazine+%2Bspawn

 

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/205013-the-troubling-issue-of-magazines/?hl=%2Bmagazine+%2Bspawn

 

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/203363-sporter-22-mags-loot/?hl=%2Bmagazine+%2Bspawn#entry2044176

 

While these topics mostly cover the notion of weapons spawning with magazines, I'm almost certain that they conclude, in some respect, that magazines should at least spawn in the same areas as their respective weapons.

[Katana67 2907]

Spawning in the same types of buildings, yes please, and it's being worked on in .48 if the feeds coming out of Reddit are to be believed.

 

Spawning magazines at the same time, alongside of their respective weapons, no thank you.

 

And I'm a little confused about the FNX. It only spawns in military buildings, the same applies to its magazines. Not sure I see a problem with that. Sure, the FNX is a "civilian" weapon in the most vague sense that it isn't really used by a military currently. But it's functionally the same as most service pistols, if not more so.

[11tw 106]

Spawning magazines at the same time, alongside of their respective weapons, no thank you.

why? If I owned a shotgun (I don't) then oddly enough I would probably own shells for that shotgun. And if I owned a rifle I would probably own rounds of that rifle's caliber. Now this doesn't mean that the rounds should spawn right next to the gun. Ideally they would spawn somewhere else in the house. Also, there shouldn't always be lots of ammo, or always any at all. But the odds should be boosted by quite a lot.

Edited August 3, 2014 by 11tw

[Katana67 2907]

why? If I owned a shotgun (I don't) then oddly enough I would probably own shells for that shotgun. And if I owned a rifle I would probably own rounds of that rifle's caliber. Now this doesn't mean that the rounds should spawn right next to the gun. Ideally they would spawn somewhere else in the house. Also, there shouldn't always be lots of ammo, or always any at all. But the odds should be boosted by quite a lot.

 

Because I want gearing a weapon to be a dedicated process. If we're spawning magazines next to weapons, then that process gets truncated and streamlined to an extent. Having "civilian" magazines spawn in residential buildings makes them more common and likely to be found already, I don't see any reason why we would need to go further than that.

 

It becomes a 2+1=3 process, rather than a 1+1+1=3 process.

 

"Realism" be damned (even though, the concept of magazines and weapons being together in real life is situational), it makes for a better gearing process in my opinion and makes the use of weapons all the more consequential.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Katana67

[11tw 106]

Because I want gearing a weapon to be a dedicated process. If we're spawning magazines next to weapons, then that process gets truncated and streamlined to an extent. Having "civilian" magazines spawn in residential buildings makes them more common and likely to be found already, I don't see any reason why we would need to go further than that.

 

It becomes a 2+1=3 process, rather than a 1+1+1=3 process.

 

"Realism" be damned (even though, the concept of magazines and weapons being together in real life is situational), it makes for a better gearing process in my opinion and makes the use of weapons all the more consequential.

I agree that gearing up should be a dedicated process. Therefore weapons should spawn very rarely, but when they do there should be some ammo with them. This makes it more balanced because people aren't screwed over by chance. And using "quotations" for words isn't really a fair way of arguing.

 

Look! I can do it:

I don't really care about "a more balanced gearing process".

 

All you are doing is suggesting there is something wrong without explaining what.

 

So, in response, please explain why someone who owns a Mosin having Mosin ammo in his/her drawer upstairs is an example of "realism" rather than realism. Just for the sake of clarification.

Edited August 3, 2014 by 11tw

[Katana67 2907]

And using "quotations" for words isn't really a fair way of arguing.

 

I'm quoting because the words are used differently by different people and I don't particularly assign much value to those meanings, so I put them in quotations to indicate a colloquial use.

 

I'm sort of over how pedantic people get on this forum. I put things in quotations to indicate that they're either a quoted text... or because the terms are subjective and I can't be accountable to everyone's interpretation.

 

If you want me to put the term so-called before the word realism, then I can do that all day. The quotations accomplish the same objective.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes

Edited August 3, 2014 by Katana67

[11tw 106]

I am saying that putting 'so-called' in front of realism would be just as bad. You have to explain what's wrong with someone else's argument.

 

Instead of focusing on my actual argument, you are instead focusing on parts you can discredit (which is a kind of straw man argument). Why not instead adress my actual argument? Can you tell me why someone who owns a Mosin wouldn't be more likely (but not certain) to own Mosin rounds? If you aren't going to actually adress this then don't bother replying.

 

p.s. I say what I mean. When I say realism, my meaning is that it follows with reality. So, it makes sense that ........ would happen because it seems more realistic. If I had some special meaning then I would explain it.

Edited August 3, 2014 by 11tw

[Katana67 2907]

I am saying that putting 'so-called' in front of realism would be just as bad. You have to explain what's wrong with someone else's argument.

 

Instead of focusing on my actual argument, you are instead focusing on parts you can discredit (which is a kind of straw man argument). Why not instead adress my actual argument? Can you tell me why someone who owns a Mosin wouldn't be more likely (but not certain) to own Mosin rounds? If you aren't going to actually adress this then don't bother replying.

 

I put the quotations around specific words, not your argument. See "realism" and "civilian" because those terms are subjectively applied.

 

Don't stand there and tell me that I'm not focusing on your argument, when you're then one being pedantic and requesting that I clarify how I use quotations... which we're now, subsequently, talking about quotations instead of the topic itself.

 

I'm more than willing to get back on-topic if you are.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Katana67

[11tw 106]

Brilliant! As I said in my last post (but you for some reason ignored):

Can you tell me why someone who owns a Mosin wouldn't be more likely (but not certain) to own Mosin rounds?

in your own time.

[Katana67 2907]

 

 

I ignored it because I never asserted it in the first place.

 

Mosin owners would be more likely to own 7.62x54R in the real-world.

 

That doesn't mean that likelihood should be represented in DayZ. Hence why I said "'Realism' be damned" in my first effing response.

[11tw 106]

Ah, thank you for clarifying. I thought you were arguing that my suggestion wasn't realistic because of your use of sneer quotations. Tbh your use of scare marks has made it more difficult to tell what you meant. If you had just said: 'realism be damned' I would have been more sure what you meant.

 

And secondly, realism is very important in a survival game. It is about simulating an actual survival situation. So the more realistic the game is, the better it will get.

Edited August 3, 2014 by 11tw

[Katana67 2907]

Ah, thank you for clarifying. I thought you were arguing that my suggestion wasn't realistic because of your use of sneer quotations. Tbh your use of scare marks has made it more difficult to tell what you meant. If you had just said: 'realism be damned' I would have been more sure what you meant.

 

And secondly, realism is very important in a survival game. It is about simulating an actual survival situation. So the more realistic the game is, the better it will get.

 

There's nothing sneerful, whatever you mean by that, about using scare quotations.

 

I cannot be held accountable to everyone's subjective interpretation of "realism." What I think is realism, may not be what you think is realism. Hence why I put it in quotations.

 

The need for which is demonstrated in your final statement, "So the more realistic the game is, the better it will get." I don't believe that, hence why I put "realism" in quotations because it means different things to different people.

[11tw 106]

I used the word sneer because that is a word for scare quotes. Some people call them sneer quotations or sneer marks, because they are often used for sarcasm.

[The Aquatic Land Walrus 565]

How about what Unturned did?

Guns there spawn with partially filled magazines that can be filled with their respective ammo boxes. Of course, it'd be fleshed out in DayZ. We already have boxes of specific ammunitions. Just think about it. IRL, you'll almost never find a gun in someone's house that doesn't either have ammunition within the house, or isn't loaded with a magazine already.

Edited August 3, 2014 by The Aquatic Land Walrus

[11tw 106]

+1 to that

[Funkmaster Rick 373]

A lot of these arguments only make sense in the real world, and not necessarily in a zombie-filled world where people have already been surviving for years.

[UltimateGentleman 355]

A lot of these arguments only make sense in the real world, and not necessarily in a zombie-filled world where people have already been surviving for years.

 

And also died without much of a fight.

 

I'm not asking for there to be ammo and mags everywhere but the occasional gun with a mag in it and like 2 bullets, to show that someone went down fighting.

 

Or guns hidden away in a cabinet some victim never got to before they died, maybe we could have basements or attics to explore with them occasionally too. Suggested this before but also people who've killed themselves, could find decayed bodies with handguns laying on the floor next to them with clips.

DayZ needs things like that, it's a desolate atmosphere not a dreadful one where most everyone has been killed.

 

It would be cool if they added old rifles like Winchesters and put them in places like that, the sort of thing people keep in their family.

 

 

 

It's just really unbalanced to have slim pickings everywhere but military zones they're treasure troves...

 

Back to your point Funkmaster, so why would there be no clips and little ammo in random, untrained civilian houses who most surely died quickly when the apocalypse hit...but there's tons in military areas where trained soldiers would have been using it up and given that survivors have been around years, would surely have been looted by the time the game is supposed to start?

 

Doesn't make sense, if survivors have been in the land for years military zones would be empty, yet NWAF has more ammo in it than you could ever feasibly need.

[arvinzd 10]

1+ for this idea.

i have sporter 22 with 150 rounda

And never used it :(