Experimental Update 1.12 (Changelog)

[Roddis 23]

1 hour ago, BJayLee said:

 

Please give me a logical explanation to why you think your wanted version of combat is better, instead of the childish, "it's suppose to be realistic" shit. It's a game, meant for enjoyment, not a real life simulator.

Well.

This is my standard scenario on Dayz. I like to play stealth and to be very aware of my surround. Im one that approach towns crunching just to say. 

And yes Im not a laser shooter, just a normal one. 

What usually happen is...

I see you first, almost ever, cause usually you rush towns (or whatever) just running, with your weapon already raised.

I decide I dont want to interact this time, just shoot, so I shoot you.

The first hit make you just aware of me, but you are perfectly fine, you know you have at least 2 to 3 minutes to heal up the wound first that it start to be a real threat to you. 

You now just start to zig zag around, and I manage to hit you maybe a second time (in 50% of cases let say).

Nothing again, you now know that you have less time to heal up, you have to hurry, but you are substantially still 100% able to fight back.

So, now you perfectly know where Im and all my RIGHT advantage to had you on my sight first (because I wasnt running around like a duck) its gone and now its just a matter of who dance better and who aim better. 

Its not unusual that you, with 2 or more bullet inside your character, just turn toward the shots origin and one tap me on the head, because well, I was not zig zagging around and I not even want to, cause it seems so dumb to me to have a fight "dancing".

So my opinion is that your right advantage to have a better aim should be somehow compensated to my better playstyle that make me have eyes on you first.

This stun could achieve this goal. With it you cant 100% relay just on your laser aim and zig zagging style, you should now start to be more aware of your surrounding, trying to be the first who see the opponent.   

Edited April 5, 2021 by Roddis

[Buakaw 274]

3 minutes ago, Roddis said:

....

Just no.

[Roddis 23]

Just opinions.

[DefectiveWater 534]

With your opinion the game rewards those who play slower and are a worse shot than others, decreasing the gap in skill difference. Decreasing the ability to shoot back, and donk their rear if they can't kill you in first few shots without stunning/staggering you.

That's a no go for me.

If you engage in PVP, you better be damn sure that you will kill somebody before they can whoop your rear.

Tweak the zig zagging/movement/weight, don't add the stagger.

Edited April 5, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[Buakaw 274]

29 minutes ago, Roddis said:

Just opinions.

Games have been ruined by such opinions before.

[William Sternritter 449]

33 minutes ago, Buakaw said:

Just no.

Just yes, to all of that. I'm not doin the whole, carefully planned approach, setting up a vantage point and sniping someone routine, just to see them shrug off a shot of 7.62x39 and run away. That is why I don't even bother with those cartridges and go straight to x54 or .308.. 

 

2 minutes ago, DefectiveWater said:

With your opinion the game rewards those who play slower and are a worse shot than others, decreasing the gap in skill difference. Decreasing the ability to shoot back, and donk their rear if they can't kill you in first few shots without stunning/staggering you.

That's a no go for me.

That is your decision to run around in the open and shoot up close. Your decision and your risk. This is not CoD where you have guaranteed hit on someone. It requires skill and planning and damn good aim to shoot someone at 300-400 meters. Just because you don't do that, does not mean that no-one should. You don't want to get shot from afar? Stop moving out in the open. 

[DefectiveWater 534]

38 minutes ago, William Sternritter said:

Just yes, to all of that. I'm not doin the whole, carefully planned approach, setting up a vantage point and sniping someone routine, just to see them shrug off a shot of 7.62x39 and run away. That is why I don't even bother with those cartridges and go straight to x54 or .308.. 

Aaaaaaand that's the point of those (x54 and .308) large rounds... You land a good shot, and they are dead. If you want a one shot kill, you go for the big guns, that's their point. With this proposal of stagger, ANY gun larger than 9mm will be such an easy way to kill somebody, as long as you keep hitting shots and they have no way to recover from the stagger.

If you want an easy kill with 7.62x39, aim better. Aim for the head... or land multiple shots at the (not staggered) target.

PVP shouldn't be watered down to: I'm going to sit here, and just wait for somebody to come across my sights so I can perma stun them while they can't do nothing about it.
or... : He shot me first, and while I was stunned, my gun wasn't shooting/ I was unable to move and react, so the enemy continues to shoot, and shoot and shoot and shoot... oh I'm dead, while I haven't fired a single shot because of stun, fun gameplay. Uninstall.

You decided to shoot, you better be confident in your aim, not this cheesy stun BS.

Edited April 5, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[moeb1us 91]

7 hours ago, BJayLee said:

Dear Devs

Here's some free advice, dont listen to anyone's feedback unless they give logical reasoning behind why its better for the game and more enjoyable. All these comments about having ballistics realistic, instead of balanced for good gameplay, and yet no one can give a reason to why its better or more fun, simply because its not. I have already explained all the reasoning behind why its not better in previous comments and im not repeating myself again just because people are illogical and cant understand basic reasoning. I hope you guys realise that good/enjoyable gameplay is more important than realism, and if you want DayZ to succeed, sacrificing good gameplay for realism is not the way to go. A game like this, you implement realism as much as you can if it adds to the game experience, not ruin it.

Said the guy with five posts, aiming at one of the most respected board member with almost 7k posts. lol. even answering you is too much.

[moeb1us 91]

It's 2021 and dear devs, if these ballistic changes are not meant as a joke, I honestly at a loss on what to say. Your imcompetence with editing numerical values in config files is legendary and you manage to repeat this, AGAIN.

I always suspected you have intern throwing dice. While using like four decimal places in numbers that were pulled out of your asses. For the love of god I hope this is not green lit by Adam and it's some dude messing around when he shouldn't. God damn.

[William Sternritter 449]

21 minutes ago, DefectiveWater said:

Aaaaaaand that's the point of those (x54 and .308) large rounds... You land a good shot, and they are dead. If you want a one shot kill, you go for the big guns, that's their point. With this proposal of stagger, ANY gun larger than 9mm will be such an easy way to kill somebody, as long as you keep hitting shots and they have no way to recover from the stagger.

... 

or... : He shot me first, and while I was stunned, my gun wasn't shooting, so the enemy continues to shoot, and shoot and shoot and shoot... oh I'm dead, while I haven't fired a single shot because of stun, fun gameplay. Uninstall.

Now, I fully understand the issue with stagger and I'm not a fan but there has to be some effect if you're getting hit. As it was already said, you can't just waltz off like nothing happened. And yes, as it was pointed out by others, there are more clever ways to go about it (hit on stamina, shock damage, etc.). 

HOWEVER; at any given point you are running the risk that you'll get a bullet and be dead. I'll say it again, this is not CoD where they need you to feel happy and satisfied that you killed someone. Even up close, you can get one shot and that's it, black screen. Should that happen over a distance longer than 50 meters there is a good change you will never even see the shooter. Latest stagger mechanic has NOTHING to with it. I've shot people at point black, shot them at 400 meters ... all the same. And yes, I also got killed by someone with good aim, but I'm not going to cry that I didn't get to shoot back.

It's your responsibility to be vigilant and quick if you want to survive. Game just gives you the tools but no one gives a damn that you didn't get to fire back. If you got shot without a chance to fire back, that was the point of shooting at you. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by William Sternritter

[Derleth 1357]

1 hour ago, William Sternritter said:

Just yes, to all of that. I'm not doin the whole, carefully planned approach, setting up a vantage point and sniping someone routine, just to see them shrug off a shot of 7.62x39 and run away. That is why I don't even bother with those cartridges and go straight to x54 or .308.. 

 

That is your decision to run around in the open and shoot up close. Your decision and your risk. This is not CoD where you have guaranteed hit on someone. It requires skill and planning and damn good aim to shoot someone at 300-400 meters. Just because you don't do that, does not mean that no-one should. You don't want to get shot from afar? Stop moving out in the open. 

Amen to that. Making mistakes and getting caught in the open should come with a penalty. You are not "outplaying" someone if you bunnyhop/zigzag and easily return fire instantly after getting shot, you are simply making use of arcadish game mechanics. I got into DayZ during 0.62 just because this kind of gameplay wasn't possible. Combat was lethal, often over in moments and utterly unfair. And why should a "fast" playstyle be rewarded more than slower and more tactical? There are so many other games with high-paced run and gunning being more or less the only way to play the game, I am very happy DayZ are finally showing signs of moving away from that. Now, there are ample opportunities for the better player to outplay his opponent anyway, they just need to get used to that running into a situation without care might not be the best strategy.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Derleth

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Roddis said:

...

I asked for a logical explanantion. If you really thought about this logically then i wouldn't have to do it for you and type this much.

Just to be clear everything below is referring to the current stable patch not 1.12.

Also zig zagging is a problem that should be fixed via a movement change, not oh lets make everything one shot so you dont have a chance to do it. Although you are seriously exaggerating how effective it is, you just wait for his stamina to run out and then take your shot or wait for him to take aim whilst you already have your shot lined up and its a free shot.

Judging from how you described this scenario, you are not using a automatic weapon and are using  rifles such as Mosin, Blaze, CR-527, Tundra and the Repeater, at which all of these weapons will deal signifficant damage just from a chest(even with ballistic protection) shot except the CR. Therefore causing the target to have reduced movement speed, giving you an even bigger advantage(this is assuming damage drop off isn't a factor but if it is, then you plan and play around that), and if you are using a weapon of lower caliber that isn't automatic then you should be aware that you are using a low tier weapon and should be playing around that.

Meaning if you see the guy first, instead of just shooting blindly, be smart. Think, is this an engagement i can win, what weaponry does he have, does he have ballistic protection via vest or helmet, if he doesn't have head protection then play for that headshot. Also, if you are hitting someone twice in the chest with one of the higher damage calibers then they are in critical condition(i think they would actually die period unless damage dropoff is apart of the equation) meaning zig-zagging is not gonna be a option as they will be moving slow as hell.

After these first two shots, your target is practically a sitting duck waiting to die. If the target spots your location, and you allow him to peek you, and headshot you, even though you have the advantage of knowing his location, and been pre-aimed waiting for a peek, then at that point you screwed up by allowing that to happen.

One, by not going for the headshot kill on your initial shot, two not paying attention and realising he has a weapon capable of 1 shotting you(also dependant on your own ballistic protection and his weapon caliber), and then using that information to decide whether you want to relocate to keep your position unknown so he doesn't have the chance to take the shot.

All this considered, your self-claimed "better playstyle" isn't better at all. Having eyes on someone first is only the first step(keeping in mind getting eyes on someone first can be just as much coincidental as it can be due to your "playstyle"), after that things get complicated. All these variables to consider that you just simply ignore and blindly shoot. As i said earlier you want a dumbed-down combat system, so you dont have to think past the first shot, and in your given scenario it appears you dont even think about your first shot anyway. If you did you would of gone for a headshot or maybe even decide not to take the engagement if said target is better armed ontop of better ballistic protection.

So no your playstyle is not better, you lose these engagements because you simply dont deserve to win them. Besides, in your scenario at least you died to well placed headshot, when what you're asking for is to die instantly to a body shot. Also, this scenario gives you an actual combat interaction, as i've said before, DayZ thrives on heart racing moments in pvp, but there is nothing intense about 1 shotting everyone, especially for the victims, their screen just goes black without any type of combat interaction(Even if the target still loses the engagement at least its was an actual engagement). It's a dumbed-down, boring combat style that removes any outplay potential(how many times do i have to type this).

Again, im only scratching the surface of how this scenario could be played out and it pains me that i actually have to.

Also, the fact that you think people only rely on "laser aim and zig zagging style" is part of the reason you're losing engagements like this if thats as in depth as you can think in a combat scenario.

Oh one more thing, if you really dont see the problem with the pvp stun, then you really dont know anything about pvp and shouldn't be giving feedback on it. Dont mean to be a mean im just blunt like that, sorry.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, moeb1us said:

Said the guy with five posts, aiming at one of the most respected board member with almost 7k posts. lol. even answering you is too much.

Explain why it matters how many posts i have when everything i said is backed by logical reasoning. If i said something without reasoning then yh why listen to me i get that. But i pride myself on been logical and thinking about things from as many perspectives as i can instead of just my own. 

What do you mean aiming at one of the most respected board member? Everything i said was based off of all the comments i saw when i scrolled through, not targeting one individual as you are targeting me.

 

[DefectiveWater 534]

Everyone's opinion has the same weight, we all are DayZ players after all. It's up to DayZ devs to take this discussion as a guideline (or ditch it all together and do something else) and to decide on what they want to do next.
The fact that somebody has 3 posts, or 300, or 30k doesn't matter as long as they are voicing their opinion, that's the point of this thread.

There is no right or wrong opinion and everyone has slightly different vision of what DayZ should be, that's why there are so many different modded servers to begin with. But there is one thing that is important, balancing the fun aspect between the shooter and the target, stun shifts that balance towards the shooter, making it biased and less fun for the target.

There is no need to argue.

DayZ is supposed to be authentic (maybe it's a wrong word, I'm not native English speaker) to reality, not 1:1 realistic (obviously, you just CAN'T do that) , but very much inspired in certain aspects by reality (for example day/night cycle, it's inspired by reality, but isn't nearly as long as reality, because for a game that would be too much). That's why so many people want realistic gun ballistics; bullet velocity, range, recoil... but, there is no thing such as HP in reality, and that's where Game Balance steps in, and that's the major part of game development.

Edited April 5, 2021 by DefectiveWater

[Tonyeh 454]

1 hour ago, William Sternritter said:

Now, I fully understand the issue with stagger and I'm not a fan but there has to be some effect if you're getting hit. As it was already said, you can't just waltz off like nothing happened. And yes, as it was pointed out by others, there are more clever ways to go about it (hit on stamina, shock damage, etc.).

Maybe getting shot should result in that stagger movement that the player gets when your starving? The one where you're doubled up.

That would allow the player to possibly get to cover and gather their wits.

As it stands, it's a bit silly. I just pumped two 7.62's from an SKS into an unarmoured player there and they just ran off. That should not be happening. I'm not sure if stunning the player in the fashion outlined is the exact answer though.

[Roddis 23]

1 hour ago, BJayLee said:

...

You made good points and Im not lying I have little romanced my storytelling. Also, my bad english deny me to proper communicate in general and I have to go always down to a sort of ''colloquial'' dumb way to express myself.

In few words my point is that as for now, fights on DayZ reward too much pure PVP and aim/firefights skills imo.

Running around without ''awareness", substantially ignoring your surrounding, is by far the more convenient way to move around, because you know that if you get shot a single time you have 90% chance to evade that scenario. 

And then, if you are good at shoot, you probably will fight back and even win that match anyway.

This is not bad per se, nothing against this, but its more a COD style approach. 

Now, if you know that a first shot can be a death sentence, maybe you would slow down your approach, becoming more "tactical" so to speak.

To an approach of ''let rush that town. If someone is there...well I will fight him back" maybe we would go more to a ''let me assure no one is there, and let me approach it carefully cause if it is and he see me first, Im dead'.

Its just my feel of the game. I would like to see less people running mindlessly and more people crouching cautiously so to speak.

 

[Buakaw 274]

3 hours ago, moeb1us said:

Said the guy with five posts, aiming at one of the most respected board member with almost 7k posts. lol. even answering you is too much.

How does it matter how long you have been a member?  An opinion should be judged by how well it is reasoned, not by how long the person it came from has been a member for.

And respect is something you have to earn. Displaying elitism, a close-minded attitude and a reasoning based on outright self-interest with no regards for the game or community doesn't earn any respect.

3 hours ago, Derleth said:

Amen to that. Making mistakes and getting caught in the open should come with a penalty. You are not "outplaying" someone if you bunnyhop/zigzag and easily return fire instantly after getting shot, you are simply making use of arcadish game mechanics. I got into DayZ during 0.62 just because this kind of gameplay wasn't possible. Combat was lethal, often over in moments and utterly unfair. And why should a "fast" playstyle be rewarded more than slower and more tactical? There are so many other games with high-paced run and gunning being more or less the only way to play the game, I am very happy DayZ are finally showing signs of moving away from that. Now, there are ample opportunities for the better player to outplay his opponent anyway, they just need to get used to that running into a situation without care might not be the best strategy.

But you are wrong. Zigzagging was just as bad in earlier versions of DayZ, stamina was very high and not dependant on gear, meleeing was like jousting. It hasn't changed at all.

You are not "outplaying" anyone by camping and stunlocking them either. Do you seriously suggest that if you camp, you should get rewarded with easy kills with no chance for counterplay of the other person? 😕

You are acting as if you never got surprised by a player with good positiniong in your entire life and that there is only 2 types of people: those that are aware and play cautious and those "cod players" that run around cluelessly. But those are just 2 extremes on a very broad spectrum of player skill levels, play styles and choices. You are just creating an "us vs them" kind of narrative, which is utterly misguided.

The solution to zigzagging without inertia is not a stunlock.

1 hour ago, Tonyeh said:

Maybe getting shot should result in that stagger movement that the player gets when your starving? The one where you're doubled up.

iirc, starved movement is basically very slow walking, so almost the same as getting stunned. not a big difference whatsoever.

 

But let's inspect the claim that people just "shrug off" AR bullets:

Getting shot in the chest with a 556 currently

• causes you to lose 55% of your health unless you wear a plate carrier, which greatly lowers your stamina, reducing it to brief sprints
• after a few seconds, having health lower than 50% causes you to walk a lot slower than normal, it just isn't instant
• causes you to flinch
• causes bleeding, which if not treated quickly, will turn your screen grey and result in unconsciousness/death after a few minutes, depending on the amount of bleeding

That is quite a lot already. And you want people to get stunlocked too? 😅

 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Buakaw

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Roddis said:

...

 

I get what you're saying but the style you're asking for already exists without every weapon 1 shotting, the current stable patch allows you to chose what style you want to play. I like the tactical approach and play that way myself and so do alot of other people. Some people prefer to be less cautious and take risks which more often than not get punished unless you make a mistake.

The whole run and gun without thinking arguement just doesn't apply because most times you claim someone is running and gunning, it might seem like that from your perspective but from their perspective, it is completely different. You dont know the decisions they take and why but at least they are giving the ability to make those decisions.

Im not against 1 shots completely, im fine with high caliber rounds such as .308 and 7.62x54 1 shotting people to the head through ballistic protection, and critically injuring someone through the chest with a plate carrier, at that point they are unable to escape unless they hit a really nice shot and headshot you which can only happen if you give them that opportunity. So instead of you just seeing the guy first and him dying instantly he now has that slimer of hope to hit that one shot, but if you are the better/smarter player you shouldn't be letting that happen(of course there is the odd outlier where someone does something crazy out of desperation). Of course you could always take your time and go for the headshot yourself, at least then the kill is somewhat earned compared to a body shot.

At the end of it the current stable patch allows for player choice to decide what type of style you wish to play in different situations whilst maintaing balance and favouring the player who makes better mid-combat decisions instead of just having no mid-combat decisions at all. Whereas in 1.12, you're forced to play a certain style or you're just going to get 1 shot to the chest out of nowhere by any of the rifles except the ka-74, vss and sval. No automatic weapon should 1 shot unless its a  headshot and they have no ballistic protection, its just bad gameplay.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Guest

[Joe Scrub 37]

On the topic of zombies and melee:

A new modifier has been added to the infected which now mean they only receive 50% of melee damage taken to their HEAD... Why?

And the rebalance of melee weapons seems way off - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T157673



Some examples:

-The buffs to fist damage and shock now makes punching too powerful, you can kill a player with 4 heavy punches to the head and the increased shock damage makes punching people uncon very easy.
-The lit torch now deals very high shock damage for what is essentially a stick and it hits through blocks even with light attacks, previously this weapon dealt NO shock damage.
-The damage on the previously 'high tier' 2-handed melee weapons has been very heavily nerfed - a splitting axe light attack now does the same damage as a heavy punch and less damage than bat.
-A LIGHT hit from a sledgehammer deals the same shock damage as HEAVY hit from a shovel, why is the shovel so much weaker, seems it should be on par with the sledgehammer.
-A shovel heavy hit is only twice as effective for shock damage as just punching with bare fists (20 vs 40), and the light attack is barely any better at all (15 vs 20). Same story for normal damage (10/15 vs 15/25)
-In addition to having their damage heavily nerfed, the two handed axes now deal very high shock, on par with or exceeding the shovel, which makes no sense given they are traditionally high damage low shock. The result of this is that there's no distinction in useage between the two handed axes and blunt tools, there used to be a tradeoff between damage and shock for sharp vs blunt but now they're all the same with slightly different damages.
 

It's also worth noting that all the weapons with a DAMAGE rating of 30 or higher are capable of two-hitting players DEAD to their head with a heavy hit, making many of the common melee tools too powerful.

Brass knuckles, hammer, tire iron, pipe wrench, lead pipe, crowbar & bat are all low-tier melee weapons which deal at least 30 damage with a heavy attack and can two-hit players dead with headshots. These are common tools and deal too much damage since 1.11, the balance was generally much better in 1.10, other than the 1-hit KO of the sledgehammer and shovel.

Was there any reasoning behind these changes? As with the huge buffs given to melee damage in 1.11 there is no mention of them in the changelogs and some of the numbers seem to have been plucked out of thin air with no thought to balancing.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Joe Scrub

[William Sternritter 449]

1 hour ago, Joe Scrub said:

On the topic of zombies and melee:

A new modifier has been added to the infected which now mean they only receive 50% of melee damage taken to their HEAD... Why?

After playing some more and trying out the stealth kills, I honestly don't get there changes with infected. Yes I like that they are tougher but creating this artificial weakness, while reducing other melee damage as you write ... just feels like an entirely different game all of a sudden. 

[William Sternritter 449]

2 hours ago, BJayLee said:

No automatic weapon should headshot unless its a  headshot and they have no ballistic protection, its just bad gameplay.

You see, this is where realistic ballistics come in and this why we need it. What you're saying is to have basically hardcoded values no matter what, but that is ... CoD. DayZ is based on Arma, which is a realistic military shooter which means that not only it matters which round you fired but also at what distance, what is the target wearing and in what condition, are there any obstacles in the way etc.. Do you realize you can shoot and kill through walls in DayZ? That is another layer of complexity to the gunfight, that is another layer of strategy. When to engage and whom. But a rifle round will kill you at a certain distance. Pistol round will kill you at a certain distance. Because it has enough power to do that at that distance.

What other people usually ask for is more complexity with regards to the damage. Critical zones that determine the severity of your injury and the body's reaction to it. Why would you dumb it down, to rifle round against armor or nor? It makes no sense. Body is not just head = insta kill and rest of the body = sponge. You say that you want tactical approach and yet you want to nullify all tactics that comes with the complexity of firearms. Not only that you are contradicting yourself here but to bluntly paraphrase you, if you don't understand ballistics then you shouldn't be giving feedback on it.

 

@Buakaw can you please describe your usual firefight? 

Edited April 5, 2021 by William Sternritter

[Derleth 1357]

2 hours ago, Buakaw said:

How does it matter how long you have been a member?  An opinion should be judged by how well it is reasoned, not by how long the person it came from has been a member for.

And respect is something you have to earn. Displaying elitism, a close-minded attitude and a reasoning based on outright self-interest with no regards for the game or community doesn't earn any respect.

But you are wrong. Zigzagging was just as bad in earlier versions of DayZ, stamina was very high and not dependant on gear, meleeing was like jousting. It hasn't changed at all.

You are not "outplaying" anyone by camping and stunlocking them either. Do you seriously suggest that if you camp, you should get rewarded with easy kills with no chance for counterplay of the other person? 😕

You are acting as if you never got surprised by a player with good positiniong in your entire life and that there is only 2 types of people: those that are aware and play cautious and those "cod players" that run around cluelessly. But those are just 2 extremes on a very broad spectrum of player skill levels, play styles and choices. You are just creating an "us vs them" kind of narrative, which is utterly misguided.

The solution to zigzagging without inertia is not a stunlock.

iirc, starved movement is basically very slow walking, so almost the same as getting stunned. not a big difference whatsoever.

 

But let's inspect the claim that people just "shrug off" AR bullets:

Getting shot in the chest with a 556 currently

• causes you to lose 55% of your health unless you wear a plate carrier, which greatly lowers your stamina, reducing it to brief sprints
• after a few seconds, having health lower than 50% causes you to walk a lot slower than normal, it just isn't instant
• causes you to flinch
• causes bleeding, which if not treated quickly, will turn your screen grey and result in unconsciousness/death after a few minutes, depending on the amount of bleeding

That is quite a lot already. And you want people to get stunlocked too? 😅

 

 

I'm not so sure about stunlock, as discussed earlier so no need to drag it out again. And yeah I had managed to un-remember the non-stop sprinting of pre-0.63, but on the other hand there was more intertia then (unless I'm imagining it, too much time has passed) and the violent weapon sway after sprinting was brutal, you didn't want to get in a firefight after a long rush. So yeah, I do believe connecting shock damage to depletion of temporary stamina definitely is something they should look into. Already you lose all your stamina when puking, getting slammed by two 5.56 in your platecarrier should do that too - but you'd be able to stagger off or go prone and crawl for cover.

[Derleth 1357]

28 minutes ago, William Sternritter said:

After playing some more and trying out the stealth kills, I honestly don't get there changes with infected. Yes I like that they are tougher but creating this artificial weakness, while reducing other melee damage as you write ... just feels like an entirely different game all of a sudden. 

Yeah, that they're not stunlocked by melee attacks is a good change, makes them more dangerous by default since more attacks will get through, causing more bleeds and damage to equipment. So the extra layer of magic padding on their head is an unnecessary and strange change. I'd like to know the thinking behind it, it just doesn't make any sense. I really hope that is removed before 1.12 goes live because it only adds frustration through an artificial challenge for which there is no counter other than hitting them a few extra times.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Derleth

[William Sternritter 449]

Also, I do not understand how blocking should work, because infected seem to ignore that. 

[Derleth 1357]

1 minute ago, William Sternritter said:

Also, I do not understand how blocking should work, because infected seem to ignore that. 

Seems very random if it works or not, most of the times block does nothing whatsoever on 1.12. I've started using the evade instead, but that is only feasible in 1 vs 1 situations, when there's more than one zed bearing down on you it does you no good.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Derleth