Artillery Strikes

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

no you are asking for an I win button with a mounted missile launcher to a vehcile. I am sorry I do not think this will enhance game play for all of us just because you don't know how to deal with snipers/countersnipe

L2p and when you do, you might find that you dont need missles to kill people, just good gameplay

its not only intended for snipers but for those pesky bases which no man can set foot on. base building seems to be a common suggestion on these forums and the only way to counter them is to blow them up. Wouldn't you love to see how these roaches scramble from their safezones thus eliminating a lot of the inbreeding in this game.

[Faceman Peck 93]

Arent you the same monkey that wanted automated train travel service up and down the coast because you are sick of running?

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

Arent you the same monkey that wanted automated train travel service up and down the coast because you are sick of running?

I believe that would be you. Your location tells me you are flying a tank.

[apache25 133]

artillery is an ok idea but calling artillery strikes is just retarded and gives players an unfair advantage morters would be good

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

artillery is an ok idea but calling artillery strikes is just retarded and gives players an unfair advantage morters would be good

i believe you just called yourself retarded.

[Faceman Peck 93]

I believe that would be you. Your location tells me you are flying a tank.

I never asked for automated train travel I was against it.

My location has absolutely nothing to do with your suggestion, and clearly it is not well received nor have you explained how this would help all of us. You can frag bases with the m203, nade them, or use satchel charges. Why is it we need artillery strikes?

All your responses to anyone that has opposed you in your thread you have had some weak/lame response that lacks any kind of clarity or sense.

At the end of the day, am I all for implementing anything that would help the majority of this community, not just your personal interests. Clearly this is all about you, so good luck with that.

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

I never asked for automated train travel I was against it.

My location has absolutely nothing to do with your suggestion, and clearly it is not well received nor have you explained how this would help all of us. You can frag bases with the m203, nade them, or use satchel charges. Why is it we need artillery strikes?

All your responses to anyone that has opposed you in your thread you have had some weak/lame response that lacks any kind of clarity or sense.

At the end of the day, am I all for implementing anything that would help the majority of this community, not just your personal interests. Clearly this is all about you, so good luck with that.

Well lets start with train travel first. I understand you are against it, so how would you go about destroying it if it were to be implemented. that's right artillery strikes.

Secondly, your location tells me everything about my suggestion. A flying tank is a rocket artillery in my dictionary.

Thirdly the weapons you listed are all limited in range and damage so having something like an artillery unit to plow down bases or take down unsuspecting sniper teams would be the way to go.

[Faceman Peck 93]

I have never seen such absurd stupidity so I really can't tell if your'e joking. Judging by my forum name I would assume you would know I took this name from a movie in which, yes they actually fly a tank. And no, no one liked your train idea, and no one seems to feel that artillery strikes are even remotely necessary. Are you trying to troll or use these absurd responses to hide it? I really can't be certain your responses boggle my mind.

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

I have never seen such absurd stupidity so I really can't tell if your'e joking. Judging by my forum name I would assume you would know I took this name from a movie in which, yes they actually fly a tank. And no, no one liked your train idea, and no one seems to feel that artillery strikes are even remotely necessary. Are you trying to troll or use these absurd responses to hide it? I really can't be certain your responses boggle my mind.

Artillery will create a huge impact in this game cause how else would you deal with such large scale camping behaviors. I'm not the one trolling i believe you or anyone else haven't provided me with better criticisms to challenge the idea.

[Faceman Peck 93]

no one wants it but you just like your automated train. Good luck with your failsauce im outta here

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

no one wants it but you just like your automated train. Good luck with your failsauce im outta here

I don't understand why no one wants it cause no one explained it.

[Bearded McGee 121]

I don't understand why no one wants it cause no one explained it.

WE don<'t understand why anyone would want something that would deter to the present and working game mechanics.

There are bad ideas, then there's BAD ideas.

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

WE don<'t understand why anyone would want something that would deter to the present and working game mechanics.

There are bad ideas, then there's BAD ideas.

This doesn't explain why it's a bad idea.

[rollo23 57]

I think random artillery strikes and airstrikes should be in the game but they should be a random occurrence not player controlled for example the russian army have pulled out of chernarus but from time to time they will shell/bomb the major zombie populated areas (electro, cherno ect) this would keep city campers/snipers on there toes incase they become blown into tiny pieces.

[Bearded McGee 121]

I think random artillery strikes and airstrikes should be in the game but they should be a random occurrence not player controlled for example the russian army have pulled out of chernarus but from time to time they will shell/bomb the major zombie populated areas (electro, cherno ect) this would keep city campers/snipers on there toes incase they become blown into tiny pieces.

There's no reason for this from any point of view. Be it for gameplay reasons or from a tactical point of view.

Even a prissy sissy sniper sitting on top of a hill is better than a random occurrence that can kill you.

[dutch_miller 159]

This doesn't explain why it's a bad idea.

We shouldn't have to explain why it's a bad idea. Every remotely intelligent person reading this doesn't need an explanation.

[a_ruttle 199]

its the only way to counter snipers in the game.

The whole thing about day Z is if you want to survive going to places guaranteed to have snipers overwatching you have to be patient, comb nearby potential hides for snipers do a little countersniping realistically even if you had the arty you wouldn't know where the sniper is anyway. The only use for arty in Day Z is griefing by firing into say cherno or elektro, your suggestion is bollocks

[Caplock 9]

Stfu and get off of dayz.

[heliman (DayZ) 26]

The whole thing about day Z is if you want to survive going to places guaranteed to have snipers overwatching you have to be patient, comb nearby potential hides for snipers do a little countersniping realistically even if you had the arty you wouldn't know where the sniper is anyway. The only use for arty in Day Z is griefing by firing into say cherno or elektro, your suggestion is bollocks

lets put it this way, you find a good vantage point and you camp all day long with your clan and by clan i mean you have multiple spotters and snipers camping the area and the only way to unsettle their camping realistically would be to arty their positions. You don't need to know where a sniper needs to be in order to arty, just the shells falling close to their positions should be enough to unsettle them.