Attaching scopes should require a tool as well as "sighting in".

[Aimex 0]

 Keeping true to the realism factor here. We all know that one does not simply attach a scope to a weapon and PRESTO! Now off to sniper hill. Personally I would like to see less people sniping fresh spawns along the coastal cities. Requiring someone to spend rounds and risk of being heard would balance things a bit no?  If this could be implemented in any way it would really add a sense of progression that the game sort of needs right now. Scopes should be a rare find and once you obtain one and head out to the boonies to fire off a few rounds to ensure its set right for accuracy. Maybe require a screwdriver or special tool for this. 

[AgainstAllAutority 126]

Scopes are quite rare loot atm, making it even less common wont stop ppl from hunting bambies in coastal areas. Simple math.. no matter what multiplier you attach to linear function, the function habit is still same. To prevent such habbit something else should be done to game mechanics or even to meta-game scale.

Edited November 16, 2014 by AgainstAllAutority

[Conrad_The_Comrade 577]

Keep in mind this is a game, and their comes a time where you have to draw the line of realism/fun. Yes, the game should be "realistic", but no, not to an extreme. We want to be able to enjoy the game with a slight bit of ease, not having to spend days on end to acquire every little teeny part for one little thing. Yes, this game is more realistic than a lot of others, but no, this isn't designed to replicate the complexity of reality. This is where the line needs to be drawn in order to keep fans pleased. This would just be too extreme. (Keep in mind everything I said is just my opinion, don't hate)

[gibonez 3633]

Simple screwdriver would work.

As for zeroing the last I would hope for is mil/moa turrets

[airfell 179]

IRL a screwdriver and a clamp is all you really need and only takes a couple minutes to set up, but really I think Pgup and pgdown are enough for now.

[rybec 339]

Keep in mind this is a game, and their comes a time where you have to draw the line of realism/fun. Yes, the game should be "realistic", but no, not to an extreme. We want to be able to enjoy the game with a slight bit of ease, not having to spend days on end to acquire every little teeny part for one little thing. Yes, this game is more realistic than a lot of others, but no, this isn't designed to replicate the complexity of reality. This is where the line needs to be drawn in order to keep fans pleased. This would just be too extreme. (Keep in mind everything I said is just my opinion, don't hate)

If you want to dedicate yourself to using optics, why not take the time to set it up?

A button to switch from optics to irons on weapons that allow it would be greatly welcomed.

[Conrad_The_Comrade 577]

If you want to dedicate yourself to using optics, why not take the time to set it up?

A button to switch from optics to irons on weapons that allow it would be greatly welcomed.

Because it is hard enough as is (imo) to find a gun that supports a sight, and then to find said sight. I just think that they shouldn't make the game too complicated, because the majority of people (That I've discussed "realism/authenticity" with) usually agrees with me that certain things (Such as this) would just be beyond the line of fun. Theirs a limit to everything, and we don't want to cross the limit because it means less people will be interested in the game. Of course this is certainly biased since I haven't talked to the whole community, nor even a fraction of it, just a couple friends and people I've met and actually held a conversation with.

[rybec 339]

Because it is hard enough as is (imo) to find a gun that supports a sight, and then to find said sight. I just think that they shouldn't make the game too complicated, because the majority of people (That I've discussed "realism/authenticity" with) usually agrees with me that certain things (Such as this) would just be beyond the line of fun. Theirs a limit to everything, and we don't want to cross the limit because it means less people will be interested in the game. Of course this is certainly biased since I haven't talked to the whole community, nor even a fraction of it, just a couple friends and people I've met and actually held a conversation with.

Why would it be an issue that if you decide to mount optics you have to take all of fifteen minutes of playing around with it in the woods to sight it in? At the very least it'd get some people to look it up instead of believing that crosshairs are exact the moment you put it ontop of that super tacticool special forces .308 sniper rifle.

[freethink 984]

Why would it be an issue that if you decide to mount optics you have to take all of fifteen minutes of playing around with it in the woods to sight it in? At the very least it'd get some people to look it up instead of believing that crosshairs are exact the moment you put it ontop of that super tacticool special forces .308 sniper rifle.

 

yep let's make dayz even more complicated than the game it saved.

 

why not go the whole hog and require players to sleep for at least 6 hours a day logged in? Imagine the excitement of watching that "you are unconscious" screen for hours not knowing if someone could burst in any moment.

Edited November 16, 2014 by freethink

[stielhandgranate 480]

Because it is hard enough as is (imo) to find a gun that supports a sight, and then to find said sight.

 

 

Which does not mean merely finding an optic and a compatible rifle finish your endeavor. Should blood types be removed because finding a donor and a blood kit is hard? Or repairing vehicles when they are implemented?

[freethink 984]

Which does not mean merely finding an optic and a compatible rifle finish your endeavor. Should blood types be removed because finding a donor and a blood kit is hard? Or repairing vehicles when they are implemented?

 

I'd trust you putting a scope on my gun a lot easier than I would you giving me a blood transfusion

[stielhandgranate 480]

yep let's make dayz even more complicated than the game it saved.

 

The DayZ mod didn't save arma, in fact many members of pre dayz arma resent the dayz community.

[rybec 339]

yep let's make dayz even more complicated than the game it saved.

 

why not go the whole hog and require players to sleep for at least 6 hours a day logged in? Imagine the excitement of watching that "you are unconscious" screen for hours not knowing if someone could burst in any moment.

I thought we were wanting authenticity in the game? Are you that sore about the idea you might actually have to put in a couple minutes of work to make your equipment function how you want? Shame on me for liking shooting my rifles and sighting everything in.

[stielhandgranate 480]

I'd trust you putting a scope on my gun a lot easier than I would you giving me a blood transfusion

 

If I gave you an ACOG and an AR-15 I doubt you could guarantee to hit targets past 50 meters without zeroing it.

[Conrad_The_Comrade 577]

Why would it be an issue that if you decide to mount optics you have to take all of fifteen minutes of playing around with it in the woods to sight it in? At the very least it'd get some people to look it up instead of believing that crosshairs are exact the moment you put it ontop of that super tacticool special forces .308 sniper rifle.

Because some people like to play a game, not a reality simulator. Yes, the game should be hard. No, it shouldn't go over the top.

[freethink 984]

I thought we were wanting authenticity in the game? Are you that sore about the idea you might actually have to put in a couple minutes of work to make your equipment function how you want? Shame on me for liking shooting my rifles and sighting everything in.

isn't arma3 noted for being authentic to the point of putting off players? and you want to make dayz even more complicated than that.

[Conrad_The_Comrade 577]

Which does not mean merely finding an optic and a compatible rifle finish your endeavor. Should blood types be removed because finding a donor and a blood kit is hard? Or repairing vehicles when they are implemented?

I get where you're coming from, but guns, blood, and vehicles are three different things. Yes, they're all pretty "Hardcore", but they can still be done simply. Blood types, it's literally a matter of finding compatible blood (Just like finding a compatible optic for your gun). Repairing vehicles, you don't see us going into every single nut and bolt of the thing, and I don't think the devs intend that. And do you know why? Because that's taking it just too far.

[freethink 984]

If I gave you an ACOG and an AR-15 I doubt you could guarantee to hit targets past 50 meters without zeroing it.

 

And I guarantee in rl you couldn't give me a blood transfusion.

[rybec 339]

Because some people like to play a game, not a reality simulator. Yes, the game should be hard. No, it shouldn't go over the top.

There's literally nothing stopping you from using irons. Why not reward the players who want to put the effort in to give themselves an advantage?

 

 

isn't arma3 noted for being authentic to the point of putting off players? and you want to make dayz even more complicated than that.

Arma3 doesn't put off players because of being 'authentic', it puts off players for being full of futuristic/prototypes of everything. I am simply all for knowledge of how to handle and maintain firearms, knowledge of how to hunt, and general bush knowledge to give players an advantage in the game. Those who do not know could easily read up and be on the same page, while learning something useful.

[stielhandgranate 480]

Because some people like to play a game, not a reality simulator. Yes, the game should be hard. No, it shouldn't go over the top.

 

You're playing the wrong game. You can freeze to death in game and need a can opener to open tin cans without penalty. This game isn't for casuals.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Dale Gribble

[Conrad_The_Comrade 577]

There's literally nothing stopping you from using irons. Why not reward the players who want to put the effort in to give themselves an advantage?

 

Yes, nothing stops me or anyone from using the iron sights, but I still don't see the point in over-complicating a game. It's got enough authenticity as is, going even further is just an extreme.

Oh and let me say one more thing, I wouldn't necessarily mind if they did add this, I would still put in the effort for the extra sights, but I would personally prefer if they didn't put this in. 

If that makes sense xD

 

You're playing the wrong game. You can freeze to death in game and need a can opener to open tin cans without penalty. This game isn't for casuals.

xD This is honestly the first time I've ever been told "I'm playing the wrong game". Don't get me wrong, I love this game to death, I love the survival hardcore aspect. But I still think their should be limits. I don't consider myself a "Casual gamer", I don't like all of those super easy games, I like the hard games where you die over and over and have to start over and over, and where it'll take "forever" to win (Not that you can win in DayZ, even better). And you shouldn't judge someone on just one of their opinions, at least I don't think so. I love the weather effects, I love how you need an actual tool to open canned goodies, I love the death and starting over. I love everything about this game, and it'll be hard to take that away. I just don't think this would be a positive addition to the game, I'm not saying that under any circumstances should they put in anything challenging. Hope this made sense xD Kinda ranted there, just remember, I AM playing the right game, DayZ is my game xD

[gibonez 3633]

Hah the fight to make dayz become a mass market easy mode game is hilarious.

It simply won't happen complexity and depth are pivotal to dayz it is the reason people were intrigued by it.

For those that want a simple dayz don't worry surely dayz clones will come out.

Keep dayz realistic keep dayz hard.

[mfdayz 18]

It is an interesting idea and if it is hard to judge it without being able to play test it. My only concern is that there can come a point where realism in a video game no longer adds to immersion, but instead takes it away. How immersive a game is does not depend on how many realistic options you have, but rather how fluidly the player can interact with the world. In other words the game has to feel like an extension of the player. This is why having too many button combos or just too many buttons in general can become a reminder that you are playing a video game, and thus take you out of the game. If you have to stop playing a game and look up how to do something, or read a manual, that does not mean that the game is not for "casuals", it means that the game is unintuitive. And as soon as a game becomes unintuitive, then immersion suffers. 

A counter suggestion could be along these lines: The condition of the scope dictates how well zeroed in it is. This removes the complexity of forcing players to manually zero in their scope, but still includes the concept in the game in a way that players will intuitively understand.
 

[liquidcactus 719]

I would say leave it and page up/down is quite sufficient

[Aimex 0]

To clarify I was referring to "boresighting" a long range scope to a rifle. This ensures your hitting what your crosshairs are aiming at. This can be done at any close distance once you initially attach the scope. I think some are confusing that with the incremental range settings or range "zeroing". Zeroing the scope up and down using page up/down works fine and shouldn't need any additional tools since the scope has already been boresighted. I just think that if you want to be effective at long range than simply attaching any long range scope to a rifle should require this extra step. My opinion of course. Some if not most wont agree, thats fine by me. Perhaps it does skirt that fun to realism line a bit. Someone mentioned the scopes condition as a modifier. Yeah that's actually a good idea. Found a worn out scope? Gonna have to sight it in to make it work.