Firearms Should Not Be The Main Instrumentality Of DayZ

[wolfstriked 143]

Maybe a way to keep Rockets sanity intact is to make it server choice as to how harsh one wants the world to be.lets face it,one players fun is another players boredom.So for the people that want the harsher world they can spawn into servers that have half of the loot presently presented.Once you chose high difficulty you are stuck to high difficulty servers and vice versa.

[Slyguy65 499]

If ammunition was more scarce, I'd spend even less of it shooting zombies and save even more of it for shooting other players.

Everyone should watch this presentation: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAXqwewejwU

If true that only demonstrates the kind of player you are, and aren't, and really isn't germane... If ammunition were scarce the volume of killing would be a lot lower, more selective and much more realistic...

∆

The second one makes more sense. Campers will have to actively scavenge for ammo more, PVPers in general would be doing what survivors are doing...constantly scavenging instead of being "set for life" like you can do now.

I agree very much so with the idea ammo should be limited there is more ammo than food...FYI i think both should be scarce i mean when im killed i know its not cause they are starving lets just put it like that....if i knew food was rare and what not i would at least be able to delude myself into thinking they NEEDED my supplies...but right now i know they just kill me for the fuck of it or they are afraid i will do the same to them...

[Zeromentor 169]

Firearms are modern instruments... so why wouldn't they be the focus of a modern zombie survival game?

If I saw someone wandering throughout a town with a rifle in their hands, I would assume their intentions are to kill. If you want a reaction, use what everyone does and get a microphone and start yelling "FRIENDLY FRIENDLY" and get yourself shot and told "I'm not"

"if the same mechanics that prevail in DayZ prevailed in the real world -- the human race would have been extinct with the inauguration of firearms."

If there was a disaster like a zombie virus outbreak, it is precisely what would happen.

Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)

Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945)

Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908)

Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39)

Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88)

Tito (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987)

Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Libya, 1934-45; Yugoslavia, WWII)

Ho Chi Min (Vietnam, 1953-56)

Fidel Castro (Cuba, 1959-1999)

Al Zarqawi (Iraq, 2004-06)

Osama Bin Laden (worldwide, 1993-2001)

Just a few of what humanity does to itself. Those are people, doing BAD things to other people. Times, areas, etc.

Want to know what stops people from doing bad things? Laws. Or better yet, what are behind those laws. A rule means nothing to an individual unless there is a large group behind it forcing the rule on them. "Don't murder, cause we will get you" type deal. Want to know what stops genocides, wars and other killings? When a LARGER or more powerful group of people come in to stop them under the idea of a moral justice. Humanity can't wipe itself out because although these people want to kill each other, a MUCH larger majority does not and will stop at nothing to halt and capture them.

In this game, this SANDBOX mod, YOU have to stop them. Can't do it alone? Get a bunch of friends. Not just 3 or 4, but dozens. Dozens and dozens. Get support and go hunting for these bandits. Cutting ammunition by a small percentage won't stop them. Infact, cutting ALL ammunition out of the game won't stop them. That might only slow them down as they have to cover that 1.2km gap to chase you down with a hatchet while FRAPSing your pathetic death.

I'm tired of people thinking that everyone thinks like them and those that don't are either pursuing their own agenda, or just want an unfair advantage. This isn't minecraft. This isn't COD. This is a sandbox survival mod for a military sim game that happens to have ZOMBIES. If you don't want to play this game then DON'T. I know it is hard to understand that, but you are just one of hundreds of thousands of players and the loss of you is the loss ofa single target and a competitive looter, based on which side of the matter you are on.

I agree that there is too much ammunition spawning now, but a cut by 90% will not decrease murders. Where is my data? The same place your's is, the prior patches of this game and what people did to each other when one supply or another bugged and became nearly impossible to find. Did people get together and start trading? Some did. Did people hand it out to those without? Maybe a few did. But most killed each other by any means. When guns were taken out from spawns, people led zombie trains into each other... People are going to find ways to kill you. Too much ammunition gives people less of a reason to not shoot you, but does not force them to do so. Very little ammunition forces people to decide if they should kill you for your ammo, or leave you alone and possibly die later due to lack of ammo. People will generally look after themselves before they look after you.

Look at WW2 as an easy example. Did Britain risk it all to save Belgium or France? Nope, they retreated and came back later. Did the USA risk it all to save Austrialia? Nope. Came back later. They came back when they thought they were safe enough to do so. People look after themselves first. Beggers don't give to charity.

Edited July 14, 2012 by Zeromentor

[wulfenrider@msn.com 14]

I am with the Op on this thread.

It is also good to see inbetween the usual arguments a few good ideas and concepts coming out, arguments for and against realism and all the others.

A lot of opinion from us gamers will come from the books we read and the films we saw as we were growing up, and this can create a great friction in what we class as the correct and realistic way to steer this mod.Also your country of origin will without a doubt colour this...I am from England, we have bugger all in the way of firearms outside the Police/military and Farms.....which makes any survival/zombie film set in the UK especially exciting.....firearms are pretty alien to most Brits.

Films and books that influence me....and yes they are not all zombie films.

Mad Max

Steel Dawn

The Omega Man ( the original I am legend )

A boy and his Dog

The day of the Triffids

Book of Eli

The Road

28 days later

Deathlands ( Books )

Fallout....at the start of the game.

The common aspect of these books and films that i love is the complete abscence or the rarity of firearms and ammunition....if a shot is taken, it is a conscious decision of using a rare resource against an unavoidable lethal threat....not just blapping off a few rounds and knowing you can pickup some later, anywhere.

DayZ

1) Infected made a more lethal threat...maybe more in number...maybe headshot only...maybe they actively hunt all the time.

2) Ammo and firearms as rare as hens teeth ( damn rare )

3) Shooting making anything that walks,runs,crawls or slithers in a large radius come looking.

I hope you can see why I have the opinion to the way DayZ should be going.

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Ah whatever arguments they can dig up to push their agenda...

PVP is not going away guys. And unfairness is probably one of the most interesting elements of this game.

[leestandin@live.com 21]

I agree with the OP ammo is too abundant.

[OW22 21]

Ah whatever arguments they can dig up to push their agenda...

PVP is not going away guys. And unfairness is probably one of the most interesting elements of this game.

We're not talking about PVP. I'm not sure where you stand on this, but basically what everyone is saying is that if the ammo caches are much, much less, PVP will be more interesting. The new PVP might be people sneaking up on them with a hatchet, or having 1 bullet, and trying to get in the position to put it point blanc in their head. It's not going to go away, no, but now ammo is more of a survival situation, as it was not before.

[trashcanman 15]

PVP is not going away guys. And unfairness is probably one of the most interesting elements of this game.

Hey hey! Remember how this is a thread about eliminating PvP, and definitely not about reducing the amount of ammo?

Oh wait I just realized something. No it isn't!

Edited July 15, 2012 by trashcanman

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Hey hey! Remember how this is a threat about eliminating PvP, and definitely not about reducing the amount of ammo?

Oh wait I just realized something. No it isn't!

Ah come on, like there is an other reason to reduce the amount of bullets flying :)

[hoak 27]

Ah come on, like there is an other reason to reduce the amount of bullets flying :)

How about realism? ArmA II is after all a realism game, with an emphasis on, you guessed it 'realism', and most playing DayZ are still serious realism Fans -- even if the game did sell well recently due to DayZ the vast majority of people play are ArmA Fans...

Tell us then what's even remotely realistic, or even good game design for that matter about in magical, infinitely re-spawning, and in fact growing supply of ammunition? What's so great about derivative death-match game-play that you want DayZ to go that rout as well? Not enough of them?

Please...

:rolleyes:

Edited July 15, 2012 by Hoak

[vision1776 42]

This is why I shoot on and sight:

Any player that appears armed is not to be trusted. I dont know if they will shoot me when they see me. That is why I shoot first and ask questions later. I try to let strangers pass by but it is always a decision I need to make. I dont know if he will notice me sometime later and then shoot me. I have to kill them because they are already a bigger threat than any of these retarded zombies.

Ofcourse if you take away all possibilities to discharge any firearms you would see less PVP but then again you would see more "boring." Making bullets so scarce would make the game boring. What are you supposed to do then? Crawl around looking for food? Think about it.

A zombie domination is what people like you are looking for. Dayz isnt going to offer that so unless someone else makes a zombie domination game where coop is key, you will not see that in DayZ. The only coop you will see in DayZ is when you are in a group of trusted players that you know personally outside the game.

[OW22 21]

This is why I shoot on and sight:

Any player that appears armed is not to be trusted. I dont know if they will shoot me when they see me. That is why I shoot first and ask questions later. I try to let strangers pass by but it is always a decision I need to make. I dont know if he will notice me sometime later and then shoot me. I have to kill them because they are already a bigger threat than any of these retarded zombies.

Ofcourse if you take away all possibilities to discharge any firearms you would see less PVP but then again you would see more "boring." Making bullets so scarce would make the game boring. What are you supposed to do then? Crawl around looking for food? Think about it.

A zombie domination is what people like you are looking for. Dayz isnt going to offer that so unless someone else makes a zombie domination game where coop is key, you will not see that in DayZ. The only coop you will see in DayZ is when you are in a group of trusted players that you know personally outside the game.

This game is scaled. Everything is alright where it's at as the game, but it can change. In real life if you see a survivor, you would let them go. The thing is in Day Zed, other people you meet are more inclined to kill you because it's in a game. They know they're not really killing you, and that they'll respawn anyway, and that gives way, as in real life everyone would be giving eachother shady looks and heading the other way (except in a few situations).

Basically things go down like this: People start shooting eachother when they see eachother. More people get that mentality and kill more people they see. Those people get that mentality and the cycle goes on.

The thing is, if in Day Zed it was worth more recruiting the other player to help both of you survive instead of looting his gear as a one time only cache, maybe this would be reduced. But players can get along just fine without them, and just take the extra finds.

The problem is that since in DayZed the game supports the single player to be able to survive just fine, this is what happens. Say we got more zombies, or made some of them actively hunt the player? That adds you wanting some extra protection, and could use an extra hand. But oh, wait, now no one can do single player.... Maybe this will change with some NPC survivors or something.

I don't know, but I trust rocket or the community will figure it out. We're doing no good here going back and forth. Either players step in in-game, or some mechanic is changed.

Something's gotta give. Let's see who comes tumbling down first.

Edited July 15, 2012 by OW22

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

How about realism? ArmA II is after all a realism game, with an emphasis on, you guessed it 'realism', and most playing DayZ are still serious realism Fans -- even if the game did sell well recently due to DayZ the vast majority of people play are ArmA Fans...

Tell us then what's even remotely realistic, or even good game design for that matter about in magical, infinitely re-spawning, and in fact growing supply of ammunition? What's so great about derivative death-match game-play that you want DayZ to go that rout as well? Not enough of them?

Please...

:rolleyes:

There is a point where realism has to take a backseat, the DayZ population is transient, obody play dayZ 24/7 and depending on the time of day different peoples are logged at any time.

If you seed the map with loot once, it will be picked clean in less than an hour and the next peoples logging simply have nothing.

SInce the players are in a state of flow, the loot need to be too if you want to make it so a starving player might eventually find a can of food.

[vision1776 42]

As far as coop goes, you are right. If zombies were much harder and all over the place then I would definitely want to team up on sight rather than shoot on sight. But right now, zombies appear as you move into a town and they can barely see me. Im more concerned about players I might find in there or snipers who are watching me from the hills. Zombies are the least of my worries.

[moisan4 26]

I almost consider it a fail if I actually have to shoot a Zee (I'm Canadian, Zed sounds weird). All my ammo is for players, and the odd Zee that shows up after the shooting begins. To me this game is stealth based, and you only shoot if you absolutely have too. If you're patient and smart, you don't use much ammo anyway. Still, I like to horde it just in case, you never know. With Zee respawn rates, shooting them seems pointless. If you could actually wipe them out, even for a while, that would be a different story.

Edited July 15, 2012 by moisan4

[hoak 27]

There is a point where realism has to take a backseat...

That point, and/or when and if it even exists is an arbitrary personal preference, not a fact that 'has' to take a backseat...

...the DayZ population is transient, obody play dayZ 24/7 and depending on the time of day different peoples are logged at any time. If you seed the map with loot once, it will be picked clean in less than an hour and the next peoples logging simply have nothing. SInce the players are in a state of flow, the loot need to be too if you want to make it so a starving player might eventually find a can of food.

A valid point, but not one that obviates the discussion and exception that DayZ has by and for the most part become nothing more than slow motion random respawn death-match -- gone is the early experience where Players thought about consequences, felt remorse, and we were all Noobs making killing another Player a risky, and at best a resource depleting proposition as you didn't know where when or even if you were going to find more ammunition -- as it would be if you really found yourself in this situation...

Sorry, 'as is' or rather as it's played now, DayZ is not the game many of us got so excited about; there's little horror, basic survival is a a very simple grind, and the CoD death-match play is as derivative, boring -- and lacking in suspense and depth as it gets. This kind of neck down game-play may be your fill, but it does nothing for me...

:rolleyes:

Edited July 15, 2012 by Hoak

[deathcon5 3]

First of all, as many have said, you have to fix the unlimited ammo issues before you can worry about reducing ammo spawns. Fixing that will go a long way, further than most people think, toward accomplishing the same goals.

Once that is done, I think that limiting ammo would help in some ways, and slightly reduce pvp. However, i think it should be done primarily for the sake of realism. I personally, irl, have thousands of rounds of ammo, but me and my ammo are going to be long gone from any city at the first hint of a disaster. All ammo from stores would be gone the first day. Also, the SD ammo, SD weapons, and nvgs should be

[deathcon5 3]

First of all, as many have said, you have to fix the unlimited ammo issues before you can worry about reducing ammo spawns. Fixing that will go a long way, further than most people think, toward accomplishing the same goals.

Once that is done, I think that limiting ammo would help in some ways, and slightly reduce pvp. However, i think it should be done primarily for the sake of realism. I personally, irl, have thousands of rounds of ammo, but me and my ammo are going to be long gone from any city at the first hint of a disaster. All ammo from stores would be gone the first day. Also, the SD ammo, SD weapons, and nvgs should be

[OW22 21]

-snip-

I liked this post so much I enjoyed reading every word of it. I love the idea of bows, ever since Resident Evil 4 Mercanaries playing as Krauser. I know that in comparison to this RE is completely different in the way we're focusing on, but I digress.

A lot of talk is (or will be soon) spent on discussing players changing their environment, and in that subject, player crafting. While most households would own a handgun or shotgun, few would actually own bows, and those would most likely be rural settlements. It might be best to make a found bow as rare as finding a friendly player in Elektro. This way, the re-usable ammo is such an advantage that you either have a guy with a few bullets or a guy with a bow that can pick up his arrows. Both have advantages and disadvantages, but right now you're yelling at the screen that if this happened your suggestions would be so utterly pointless I should get a grip. This is where the crafting statement at the beginning of the paragraph comes in. Youuuuuu guessed it! Why not have the player be able to craft bows and arrows? Of course, you would need a suitable work surface and some tools, something for string and ect, but making crappy makeshift bows and arrows out of wood instead of getting the metal composite bows would be a good beginner weapon, and this sentence is way too long. Of course, those arrows wouldn't be as effective in the least, and (might break?) won't do as much damage or fly as far as steel bolts.

But hey, it's your (and other's who coincidentally suggested this in some unknown thread) idea, so edit it how you want. So what's your version of my post?

[hoak 27]

Why not have the player be able to craft bows and arrows?

Heck yeah, how about making a cross bow out of a automotive/truck leaf spring (I've done it IRL)... But more on topic, again, the population of the island is depleted to a few hundreds -- with less than half their score being uninfected humans. How it's supposed to have gotten there with a magical inventory of ammunition intact that would supply a regiment larger then was ever present on the island (even in ArmA II), with what may be the last 50 people living on the entire planet death-matching on what is really a VERY resource rich island (BTW, how about fishing for food?) for survival is fucking ABSURD, and what's more, sadly boring...

If DayZ had the statistical aberration fuck-ups doing the murdering, like it did when it was new, it would be great -- there'd be loads of suspense, interaction would be an exciting and challenging element of game design and play, and there'd be volumes of greater depth to the DayZ theater... As it's played now it's death-match dreck...

:|

Edited July 16, 2012 by Hoak

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Heck yeah, how about making a cross bow out of a automotive/truck leaf spring (I've done it IRL)... But more on topic, again, the population of the island is depleted to a few hundreds -- with less than half their score being uninfected humans. How it's supposed to have gotten there with a magical inventory of ammunition intact that would supply a regiment larger then was ever present on the island (even in ArmA II), with what may be the last 50 people living on the entire planet death-matching on what is really a VERY resource rich island (BTW, how about fishing for food?) for survival is fucking ABSURD, and what's more, sadly boring...

If DayZ had the statistical aberration fuck-ups doing the murdering, like it did when it was new, it would be great -- there'd be loads of suspense, interaction would be an exciting and challenging element of game design and play, and there'd be volumes of greater depth to the DayZ theater... As it's played now it's death-match dreck...

:|

I disagree it is not deathmatch, you have no idea the amount of people who simply let you walk past them without attacking you.

[hoak 27]

I disagree it is not deathmatch, you have no idea the amount of people who simply let you walk past them without attacking you.

Disagreement based on your anecdotal experience is immaterial -- you apparently have no idea what the PvP death-match statistics look like... DayZ as it's currently played by most players is unfortunately a death match game, it's also the most frequent complaint on the forums; go figure...

:rolleyes:

[vesmo 21]

A couple of days ago I had one of the better experiences I've had in DayZ for days (the game is getting kinda boring I have to say). I decided to go north without any supplies (compass, map, matches, barely any food, water) with a makarov and M1014 with 8 slugs. I wandered along roads to find small towns to loot. Here's where we get to the ammo part. I NEVER RAN OUT OF AMMO FOR MY MAKAROV. I shot zombies left and right, and I always found 1-3 more mags in almost any house. But when it came to my shotgun, things got interesting. I ran out of my slugs and realized I was in a very hairy situation should I run into a bandit or attract a large horde. So I started gathering those 2rnd slugs and pellets. I frantically scavenged barns and towns for those, and when I finally got the 4 rounds together to combine for 8 slugs, the gratification was palpable. THAT'S the kind of ammo management I want, not find 90 bullets for your assault rifle at a deer stand and they last until you die. Give us half empty magazines, or indeed empty magazines which we then need to fill with loose rounds that can be found.

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Disagreement based on your anecdotal experience is immaterial -- you apparently have no idea what the PvP death-match statistics look like... DayZ as it's currently played by most players is unfortunately a death match game, it's also the most frequent complaint on the forums; go figure...

:rolleyes:

Because your "anecdotal experience" is worth more?

It's always the same people that are bitching and moaning about the PvP, they also happen to be pretty vocal about it. Taking the temperature of this forum is pointless anyway, anyone can join and create 1, 10, 100 accounts to validate their jaded point of view.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Lady Kyrah

[maracusarillius_irl 2]

Less ammo and fixing the infinite ammo bug is essential.

It doesnt matter if you save your ammo to shoot players. If you have less ammo you will have to expose yourself more often to the dangers of the game. Actually play it.

Lets take an example.

Mr Noob sniper. He sits on the hill overlooking Cherno with his 50 cal. And snipes noobs. Then he server hops and oh look his ammo is full again. Rinse and repeat.

In a world with less ammo and no ammo regeneration bug. He has lets say 20 shots then he is no longer a sniping douche, hes a guy that has to go and expose himself to hunt for more ammo. he also has to pick his shots more carefully. It's a massive change to the game and we really need it.

It's fine to come in here saying oh man you give me less ammo Ill save it all up for players. Well thats fine, but unitl we test it and actually see what happens we wont know despite what the blowhards say.

I agree to this completely!!

Edited July 16, 2012 by MarcuS_IRL