.63.. Some changes are for the worse.

[Guy Smiley 534]

5 minutes ago, thebaddestass said:

That sway is what made combat mechanics in Dayz different than any other game.   It also required skill to master so 10 year old COD players can't just come in and know how to play it.  That is the trade off for running, not being able to aim well.  That is what makes Dayz, the choices you make sometimes have dire consequences.  But you say that is "a little over the top"  Hell let's just take stamina out, because it is "a little over the top."  Let's stop hunger and thirst because it is "a little over the top."  Let's add a ton of other stuff to "a little over the top too" and just make this a PUBG clone!!!! WOOOHOOO!!! exactly what the gaming community needs, another PUBG.

It's going to happen when modding comes out.   DayZ will turn in PUBZ.  It's inevitable.  Just look at the mod.  Went from a really good survival game to pick your starting area and starting gear then go pvp. Rinse and repeat.  The true die hards will stick with the main concept of DayZ but sadly, those servers won't be very busy or there will be very few of them.

[thebaddestass 23]

1 minute ago, Guy Smiley said:

It's going to happen when modding comes out.   DayZ will turn in PUBZ.  It's inevitable.  Just look at the mod.  Went from a really good survival game to pick your starting area and starting gear then go pvp. Rinse and repeat.  The true die hards will stick with the main concept of DayZ but sadly, those servers won't be very busy or there will be very few of them.

I am perfectly fine for modders to turn dayz into pubg.  What I am NOT OK with, is the BI DEVS listening to the community that wants Dayz to turn into Pubg, and then the BI DEVS make Dayz = Pubg, no mods needed.  Which I know it won't be that drastic as their will still be plenty of survival elements etc.

I am just EXTREMELY UNHAPPY with the change in combat mechanics in .63.  Just as other have said, this flies in the face of their previous design decisions.  And again, it all but solidifies that this was done to make the console port easier. 

If this stays, I am done with DayZ and BI.  You don't turn your back on the community that has supported you for years, just to sell some console copies.

[Red_Ensign 990]

On 5/9/2018 at 10:03 AM, odin_lowe said:

I really enjoy the new stamina system. If you want more defense (clothes, press vest, anti-stab vest, vests in general) then since they are heavy you get a reduction to sprint, and the more weight you have the less stamina you have. This is simple, yet efficient and authentic. I feel it's a good way to cancel the "power COD" style of double carrying with hundreds of rounds.

Even the reloading mechanic is great imo. It's no that different from 0.62, or maybe I played too much or had a similar style, as I used to put mags in my action bar to change them and it's the same with 0.63, so I don't see the problem. Even reloading mags with the action bar is more fun, and less "cheat" like than it was. I mean come on, full infinite sprint while you go into the inventory, empty ammo box and fill mags in an instant?!?! Nope, not for me. I never really liked that.

The only thing that bothers me is the ADS, and it's a known "issue" right now, if you've read the status report.

yeah I have to agree with the new stamina system too.  someone carrying 100 pounds of gear should NOT move as fast or run as long as a new spawn with nothing.

I'd also like people who've been wounded recently to be slowed down for a while even after throwing on a splint.  maybe they'll get around to that.

it's a survival game, and it should be about decisions and consequences.  that may be less fun for a while because nobody's used to that, but in the end it'll be a richer game experience.

[-Gews- 7443]

14 hours ago, Solopopo said:

I didn't realize this quote was included in your response to me at first. I actually agree with this statement. I think aiming difficulty has been a little over the top. It became way better when they stopped the wild sway that used to happen, but still very hard.

It doesn't seem "over the top" in Operation Flashpoint, ARMA, ARMA 2 or ARMA 3. Or Squad. Or whatever realistic game, since all have this. Even more 'arcade' titles like PUBG or Insurgency have this.

The dispersion is based (or should be based) on real life spread.  Therefore, like I said in another thread a short time ago, that statement says that real-life weapons are too inaccurate, and that is ridiculous.

It seems right that a shotgun has the same accuracy as an SKS, which has the same accuracy as a Model 70, which has the same accuracy as a derringer? Not to me.

One thing many people like about DayZ is the relatively 'authentic' weapon simulation. It's no good to toss components out the window, ESPECIALLY those components no one has complained about.



If you don't even have a value for 'accuracy' how can you claim your game has 'authentic' weapons?




.

Edited May 13, 2018 by -Gews-

[Guy Smiley 534]

3 hours ago, -Gews- said:

It doesn't seem "over the top" in Operation Flashpoint, ARMA, ARMA 2 or ARMA 3. Or Squad. Or whatever realistic game, since all have this. Even more 'arcade' titles like PUBG or Insurgency have this.

The dispersion is based (or should be based) on real life spread.  Therefore, like I said in another thread a short time ago, that statement says that real-life weapons are too inaccurate, and that is ridiculous.

It seems right that a shotgun has the same accuracy as an SKS, which has the same accuracy as a Model 70, which has the same accuracy as a derringer? Not to me.

One thing many people like about DayZ is the relatively 'authentic' weapon simulation. It's no good to toss components out the window, ESPECIALLY those components no one has complained about.



If you don't even have a value for 'accuracy' how can you claim your game has 'authentic' weapons?




.

To be fair, the only person that ever claimed DayZ to be "authentic" in any form was Dean Hall himself.

[thebaddestass 23]

3 hours ago, -Gews- said:

One thing many people like about DayZ is the relatively 'authentic' weapon simulation. It's no good to toss components out the window, ESPECIALLY those components no one has complained about.

 

Well said!!!

[-Gews- 7443]

1 hour ago, Guy Smiley said:

To be fair, the only person that ever claimed DayZ to be "authentic" in any form was Dean Hall himself.

I mean, Peter Nepesny just said "DayZ is meant to be authentic ...".
But that statement ended with "..., not realistic".

Which I take to mean, they aren't going to add mechanics that are overly complex or frustrating just for the sake of realism. But weapon dispersion isn't one of those insane hardcore mechanics. It's always been there. It's in at least dozens of other popular games.
 

[Guy Smiley 534]

5 minutes ago, -Gews- said:

I mean, Peter Nepesny just said "DayZ is meant to be authentic ...".
But that statement ended with "..., not realistic".

Which I take to mean, they aren't going to add mechanics that are overly complex or frustrating just for the sake of realism. But weapon dispersion isn't one of those insane hardcore mechanics. It's always been there. It's in at least dozens of other popular games.
 

I wholeheartedly agree but you still need to realize that it's only a stress test and a lot of mechanics are not in.

[-Gews- 7443]

Just now, Guy Smiley said:

I wholeheartedly agree but you still need to realize that it's only a stress test and a lot of mechanics are not in.

It's stated in the status report that they don't plan to add it at any point. I think it's an important feature so I will endeavour to get people talking and hopefully community feedback can change their minds on this one.

[Guy Smiley 534]

27 minutes ago, -Gews- said:

It's stated in the status report that they don't plan to add it at any point. I think it's an important feature so I will endeavour to get people talking and hopefully community feedback can change their minds on this one.

I was going through the status reports and I didn't see any mention of this. Do you have a link for it?

[emuthreat 2837]

FWIW, I think maybe dispersion is only necessary on automatic fire to maintain an authentic feel.  Most unmodified guns have negligible dispersion (reads precision for those with a science background) at the effective range of each weapon if one isn't trying to punch a hole in the center of a coin.
As @-Gews- was hinting at, accuracy is dependent on the skill of the operator, and precision is the result of the quality and consistency of the system.

Here is a handy little graphic to illustrate the difference:

 

 

If they wanted to go for a true authentic feel, they could use available data from manufacturer and consumer bench tests to assign a base rate to each gun in the game, but this seems over-complicated, unnecessary, and poorly representative.  Considering that mosins in particular can vary greatly in precision based on any of a number of variables--wear, cleanliness, and barrel harmonics being foremost--it seems that any such 'realisim' assignments would be arbitrary, or random within a range of tolerance, and only add unneeded complexity.  

 In most cases, the cleanliness and wear of the weapon would have a greater effect on dispersion than the condition of manufacture.  When considering that bullet drop and skill of the user have a greater impact on accuracy than any precision modifier would contribute to in most practical instances, it makes no sense to add another layer of complexity that will be either negligible, or overshadowed by other mechanics.

The dispersion on pristine guns firing single rounds at a time should be almost nonexistent for most rifles at less than half of their effective range, and practically negligible for most pistols at human sized targets within intended ranges of less than 50 meters. 

I can see the need for some sort of dispersion mechanic for authenticity, but I think that this should be based on condition and cleanliness of the gun to avoid overcomplicating things any more than necessary (even though as I type this I think it would be cool as hell to assign each gun a base value based on design).
A very simplified assignment would be to give each gun a base dispersion of 0 MOA pristine, 0.5 MOA worn, 1 MOA damaged and 1.5 MOA in badly damaged condition.  I have no idea if they ever plan on adding a cleanliness mechanic to guns, but it would be cool if they did.

Have a pristine m4 and put 60 rounds through it, and have a budget of 10 more rounds while being that dirty before it becomes worn.  Run around for two more hours without cleaning it and it becomes worn.  Put 30 rounds through an automatic pistol, and have a budget of 15 rounds or 3 hours before it becomes worn.  Put 30 rounds through a Winchester and have a budget of 10 rounds or 5 hours before it becomes worn.  Put 20 rounds through a mosin, have a budget of 5 rounds or a half hour before it becomes worn.

Continuing to shoot any weapon while fouled to decay point will have 0.5 MOA precision penalty.


It can be done.  But the question is does it need to be done, and what parameters should be assessed and should they be weighted ?



Discuss

Edited May 14, 2018 by emuthreat

[Sqeezorz 839]

Influences:  Human/Natur(Rain/Wind)/Ammunition/Weapon Barrel.

here only weapon and ammunition:

 

[-Gews- 7443]

3 hours ago, Guy Smiley said:

I was going through the status reports and I didn't see any mention of this. Do you have a link for it?

https://dayz.com/blog/status-report-may-8-2018

Relevant portion:

"Another thing is that after the rewrite of the weapons we are missing implementation of dispersion - random cone-shaped spread defined by angle. Previously it was used as kind of an inaccuracy from the manufacturing process where long barrel weapons were most accurate and short barrel ones were least. We are not using it anymore as I think ‘fighting’ some random nonsense on mid to long ranges is over the top, as players are already challenged enough by mechanics like sway, recoil, zeroing, actual bullet speed and drop - all that combined with character movement, which is enough."

He says they are missing 'implementation'. It could mean they don't have the dispersion mechanic working at all. Or it could mean they have it working, but went and changed all the values to "0".

 

41 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

If they wanted to go for a true authentic feel, they could use available data from manufacturer and consumer bench tests to assign a base rate to each gun in the game, but this seems over-complicated, unnecessary, and poorly representative. 

I will disagree with this for the reasons I've previously listed, which include:

-some guns are more accurate than others, and this should apply to DayZ's weapons
-if DayZ's weapons don't have something as basic as an "accuracy" value, DayZ's weapon simulation is in no way authentic
-dispersion was in BI games since Operation Flashpoint without complaint
-dispersion was in DayZ mod without complaint
-dispersion was in DayZ standalone post-0.47 without complaint
-dispersion is in many other games both realistic and unrealistic—without complaint
-lack of dispersion takes away from depth, character, and realism of weapons



I don't see any reason to defend the dev's decision here. It's a bad one. Would this be defended if a random dude came to the forum and suggested it one year ago?

If someone went to ARMA's subreddit or forums, and suggested they remove dispersion from every weapon in the game, I suspect many people would assume he was a massive troll.
 

I think that says something.

 

48 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

Considering that mosins in particular can vary greatly in precision based on any of a number of variables--wear, cleanliness, and barrel harmonics being foremost--it seems that any such 'realisim' assignments would be arbitrary, or random within a range of tolerance, and only add unneeded complexity.  

All weapons vary. Yet the average Mosin is less accurate than the average Tikka. And the average pistol is less accurate than the average rifle. No one will argue such points. So you put a reasonable value.

Off the top of my head for the average Mosin it's probably 3-4 MOA. For a Winchester 70 anywhere 1-2 MOA would satisfy me. For a pistol or shotgun, 8+ MOA. That took 15 seconds, woo. It's not too hard to come up with such things. If they have trouble they can even simply go to the ARMA series and pull approximate values from there. Better than nothing!

Just because we can't get it perfect (something which is not even possible) we should not try to represent weapon dispersion at all? 

 

57 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

The dispersion on pristine guns firing single rounds at a time should be almost nonexistent for most rifles at less than half of their effective range, and practically negligible for most pistols at human sized targets within intended ranges of less than 50 meters. 

For an average pistol something like 3" at 25 yards is appropriate. Shooting off a bench rest. According to my notes that's about dispersion=0.00375.

And you're right, at 100 yards it can still hit a half-metre circle approximately 93% of the time. But a 0.2-metre circle, the hit percentage drops to 1/3. That's a fair difference if someone is just poking their head out.

----------

What about a Mosin, let's say it makes 3.5" at 100 yards. Maybe give it dispersion = 0.00109.

At 300 m it can hit the 0.5-m circle with 97% confidence. But the 0.2-m circle? The number drops to just 42%. Meaning a skilled player would aim for centre-mass.
 

And if you need to snipe heads rather than torsos, you had better find a superior weapon.

And with the new hitboxes shown containing lungs, heart, liver and spine, accuracy starts to matter more. A few inches could be the difference between a heart shot, a punctured lung, or even a flesh wound.




Weapons losing accuracy if they are not maintained or become shot out is a neat idea but doesn't assuage concerns with removal of dispersion. I don't agree with giving any weapon precision of 0 MOA under any circumstances. 

If we are talking mechanics a neat thing would be to have match-grade vs surplus, for certain types of ammo (eg, in this game probably not necessary for pistol rounds.) In some circumstance a surplus rifle with match-grade ammo could equal a match-grade rifle with surplus ammo.

 

 

[Yuval 221]

You guys forget you're the minority of the good old DayZ playerbase. Ten times the amount of the current active playerbase stopped playing DayZ because what you liked about the old engine. This is a new chance for DayZ to redeem itself, don't ruin it for everybody.

[sneakydude 480]

Should be decent maybe in a year, ill check back then. Looking good that they released to exp though.

[emuthreat 2837]

48 minutes ago, Yuval said:

You guys forget you're the minority of the good old DayZ playerbase. Ten times the amount of the current active playerbase stopped playing DayZ because what you liked about the old engine. This is a new chance for DayZ to redeem itself, don't ruin it for everybody.

The added difficulty from "authentic" simulation would add prestige to success and likely draw skilled players from various other combat platforms to test their skills in DayZ.  With modding, everyone will get what they want anyways.  Why not provide the most comprehensive platform possible?

@-Gews- I agree with everything you are saying, but will and implementation is the issue.  I padded my suggestions with a certain amount of gamey realism in the spirit of going with the flow.

@sneakydude Experimental is not out yet.  Stress tests occasionally, and offline mode are the current .63 experience.

Edited May 14, 2018 by emuthreat

[Sqeezorz 839]

1 hour ago, -Gews- said:

.
And with the new hitboxes shown containing lungs, heart, liver and spine, accuracy starts to matter more. A few inches could be the difference between a heart shot, a punctured lung, or even a flesh wound.
 

That's exactly what, it's a controversy. On the one hand, they increase the rigor of hit-boxes. On the other hand, this innovation is destroyed again by simplification to "only headshots". It's like boiling water to make ice cubes when we look at weapons AND hit system.

[plasma (DayZ) 17]

Wow. Half way though May and still nothing.  Think about it. Brian is gone and they are starting to remove public servers for "Internal Testing".   The game at this point is irrelevant and probably will never be released.  

[Solopopo 330]

On 5/13/2018 at 2:55 PM, thebaddestass said:

That sway is what made combat mechanics in Dayz different than any other game.   It also required skill to master so 10 year old COD players can't just come in and know how to play it.  That is the trade off for running, not being able to aim well.  That is what makes Dayz, the choices you make sometimes have dire consequences.  But you say that is "a little over the top"  Hell let's just take stamina out, because it is "a little over the top."  Let's stop hunger and thirst because it is "a little over the top."  Let's add a ton of other stuff to "a little over the top too" and just make this a PUBG clone!!!! WOOOHOOO!!! exactly what the gaming community needs, another PUBG.

Also @-Gews-, let me be a little more clear. I was referring to the wildly broken sway that they fixed which used to be in .62. I was saying that the current system in .62 is better than it used to be, but still hard.

A common complaint about DayZ SA is that it doesn't feel like the mod. In the mod you needed to be more stealthy, because players couldn't stutter dodge like in SA, but also because it was easier to land shots at range in general. It actually isn't really that hard to hit a target with the right gun and scope in real life. It isn't like a one in million chance to hit a 300m shot. It's fairly easy, even for a novice, with the right equipment. Consider how many people the recent shooter in las vegas hit. He wasn't a professional by any stretch of the word, but he killed dozens. There is a limit to how much difficulty is actually realistic. It isn't realistic just because it's hard. He hit 481 of his shots. He fired 1100. That means his accuracy was 44 percent. His range was a little greater than 300m. Sorry to use such a grim example, but it sure makes the point.

Also, if realism is primary concern in this thread, I don't understand why anyone is bothered by a stamina system. There isn't anything remotely realistic about infinite sprinting without limit while carrying great weight. No one travels on foot at their full speed. There is always more in the tank for emergencies. Melee combat will be more strategic as well because of the stamina system. Purposefully wearing opponents down will be a thing now. Exhausted opponents running for dear life won't be able to just turn around and go all out on you. This is realistic to me, much more so than the current system.

I think you guys haven't opened your eyes to the possibilities in all honesty. It is different, but it's for the best. We don't want the old clunker of a game that we've had this whole time. It has been hard to land shots in the alpha because the alpha is crappy. You are mistaking bad ballistics design for realism and challenge.

Edited May 14, 2018 by Solopopo

[ZomboWTF 527]

i don't know about you, but once 0.63 hits life, it is going to solve a lot of problems for old dayz players which plagued the standalone, and is going to make me play again:

1) Unlimited turn speed: this one is big for me, as i love to snipe people from afar. Hitting people at full sprint speed without anything stopping them is almost impossible, since they can switch direction in an instant with their mouse movement, this made firefights straight up stupid, and shows why "clunky" wasn't always bad

2) Unlimited stamina: why not just sprint all the way to NWAF in 15 minutes and try to get your gear back? unpunishing fast movement speed made the game to a map where 90% of towns are ghots towns and everyone is at NWAF or Tisy... fuck that, stamina is great!

3) Loading bullets into mags: refilling a mag in an instant in a frefight was stupid, unrealistic, and made the fights faster than they should be in a survival game

[soulfirez 901]

Damn i was hoping they would tie weapon accuracy to the weapons condition to give merit to using weapon cleaning kits( not strictly realistic but it is a game) but removing accuracy all together seems pretty bad for a game going for authenticity ( and having a mil sim back ground ). People were drawn to arma due to authenticity , i thought they were doubling down with dayz not going more arcade?I have loved the stamina and the hold the mouse down to do actions change ( Hey it feels right to me , i am probably just strange though ).

[ZomboWTF 527]

1 hour ago, soulfirez said:

Damn i was hoping they would tie weapon accuracy to the weapons condition to give merit to using weapon cleaning kits( not strictly realistic but it is a game) but removing accuracy all together seems pretty bad for a game going for authenticity ( and having a mil sim back ground ). People were drawn to arma due to authenticity , i thought they were doubling down with dayz not going more arcade?I have loved the stamina and the hold the mouse down to do actions change ( Hey it feels right to me , i am probably just strange though ).

is weapon precision really depending on the weapons state though? most weapons either fire or jam, even if there would be dirt in the mechanism itself, the precision would be 100% after the first shot

if the weapon gets somehow damaged (bent barrel, dislodged or misaligned sights etc.) this would probably lead to worse accuracy, but the precision would still be okay... but these inds of damage wouldn't occur during normal usage

i am not a weapon enthusiast, i am going at this from a purely logical standpoint

Edited May 28, 2018 by ZomboWTF

[emuthreat 2837]

11 hours ago, ZomboWTF said:

is weapon precision really depending on the weapons state though?

Absolutely.  It's more apparent when using lead ammunition, such as extremely cheap .22LR.  But the rifling will eventually be deposited full of fouling, which will seriously affect the accuracy of a gun until it is cleaned.  Mosins are famous for using corrosive primers and not cleaning them will permanently degrade the barrel over time.

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

Let me see if I'm following this.

Dispersion is completely gone and the devs are stating definitively that there are no plans to reimplement the mechanic? And the removal of dispersion makes a handgun precisely as "accurate" as a sniper rifle?

I really hope I'm very wrong and missing something here because, if that's correct, that would make DayZ the first shooter I've ever played that didn't have some variation of this weapon characteristic.

[-Gews- 7443]

16 hours ago, ZomboWTF said:

is weapon precision really depending on the weapons state though? most weapons either fire or jam, even if there would be dirt in the mechanism itself, the precision would be 100% after the first shot

Of course it depends on weapon state, how it affects accuracy depends on what damage or wear you are talking about.

For example, this won't help things.





We just have one weapon health stat in 0.62 so it's not complex.

2 hours ago, ColdAtrophy said:

Let me see if I'm following this.

Dispersion is completely gone and the devs are stating definitively that there are no plans to reimplement the mechanic? And the removal of dispersion makes a handgun precisely as "accurate" as a sniper rifle?

I really hope I'm very wrong and missing something here because, if that's correct, that would make DayZ the first shooter I've ever played that didn't have some variation of this weapon characteristic.

That's what it says in the report. So it seems to leave only zeroing ability and trajectory. Accuracy of a weapon, it's no longer "a thing". The status report mentions "sway" and "recoil" also, but neither of those affect your trajectory. Wow, recoil!

The reason given for removing accuracy variable is that dispersion is "over the top" which, when it is kept to realistic levels, is demonstrably untrue (six years of DayZ say hi, for one).