Day Z Update Probably The Cruelest Yet?

Having taken over a week’s break from playing Day Ztoo much else to play! – I’m yearning to go back and examine the changes wrought by the 1.7.1 update, which makes some of the boldest changes to the mod so far. Let’s take a look…

The biggest change? Taking away the starting weapon. Yes, you don’t even get the lowly Makarov pistol in your starting inventory. The tradeoff is that you do get a Flashlight, so at least you might be able to see your enemies before they kill you in the dark.

And they’re more likely to kill you, too. Zombies can no longer see through walls, but they can see further and hit harder, so you are more likely than ever to be horrible mauled by the undead. This seems like it will be the most controversial change. It’s always been possible to pick up a new weapon pretty quickly, but that this update now makes it harder to crawl past zombies to get to the stuff you need, which is causing a lot of forum grumbling.

However, there’s also now an option for melee combat. Previously there was no option for this, and despite being able to pick up a knife and a hatchet, they were only good for chopping trees and gutting animals respectively. Now the hatchet can be used offensively, and there’s also a crowbar for Gordon-like zombie-fending.

Rocket has also added five seconds of persistence for characters in the world on logging out. Which means people who quit the moment they encountered a hostile are still likely to die. Still no fix for this sort of behaviour, however.

Right, yeah, fuck this blogging lark, I’m going back in…


  1. Gap Gen says:

    Can you at least beat zombies with your flashlight?

    • golem09 says:

      The most important question for this is: Do the Zombies still run like zigzag bullettrains?

      • boggler says:

        Solving this will not be easy for Hall.
        The Zombies do zigzag because they are animal agents.
        Hall didnt use the agends of the opfor or other digital humans.
        All zombies are pigs with a zombiecoat.
        If he wants the for a real pathfindig, he must write an own one!
        Or he takes the opfor pathfinding and ai…with the result bye, bye low level consumer Pc’s and bye bye crowded Servers.
        The whole day-s wolrd functions with the trick, take a ready made Island from Arma, put animals with zombieskins on it, give the order to walk to each player they see and kill him by steanding near.
        So every ai is abonned in this mod…and without ai is pathfinding complicated. Ask the Spanel-Brother…they are working since a decade on it!

        -apologys for my crapy english-

        • nanowired says:

          good to know!

        • Monkeh says:

          I’d accept your apology if you hadn’t written ‘Day-S’… or is sombies the Spanish word for zombies? :P

        • defunkt says:

          Pretty sure it’s not peculiar to Animals or Agents. Create zombies with Man entities and move commands still result in the same zig-zag pathfinding.

    • Gap Gen says:

  2. The Sombrero Kid says:

    The Zombies can only see through walls right now & can hear you from miles away though, it’s getting fixed soon, also the flashlight doesn’t do anything, it’s basically impossible.

    It seems to me he’s taking shotgun tactics to design, firing off a load of features to deliberately break it & see what happens, it’s pretty obvious to me that unless it gets more depth people are going to get sick of it, not to say i’m not enjoying it, but i at least am enduring his fumbles in the hope that he’ll eventually pull something coherent together.

    • Runs With Foxes says:

      It’s almost like it’s in alpha stage or something.

      • Drake Sigar says:

        So was his comment.

        There, now you’re trapped in a loop!

      • fenrif says:

        The problem isn’t that it’s in alpha, it’s that Rocket doesn’t seem to have any idea where he’s going with it. He claims he wants it to be a no fun non-game but adds in things like psychic heartbeat morality sensing. Which is fine… But it’s really inconistent as to what he’s said he wants to do with the game.

        And the main problem is that each patch adds in too much new untested stuff, which introduces horrible bugs. So then Rocket releases a hotfix, which inexplicably adds in like 4 or 5 new things too, and even more bugs. If it’s an experiment then why not add in one thing at a time and see if it works, what needs improving, wether it should stay, etc. And then once it’s sorted add in the next feature.

        • nanowired says:

          The psychic heartbeat is because it’s REALLY FUN to play the game as a bandit right now.

          • TariqOne says:

            Is that in or confirmed to be going in? All I’ve seen is a poll on it.

          • VelvetFistIronGlove says:

            It’s there, it works as described, but is thoroughly useless.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      He’s always said it’s an experiment. And what an experiment!

      • S Jay says:

        He has the right to not like the experiment as much as Rocket has the right to experiment.

        • Vorphalack says:

          I don’t believe Jim was contesting that right, merely clarifying the intent of the developer.

      • The Sombrero Kid says:

        Experiment, doesn’t exclude applying the scientific method to the design, infact just the opposite, it requires it. (I feel like i need to repeat, cause it sounds like I’m being overly negative, that I’m really enjoying DayZ)

        • Mctittles says:

          I don’t feel the scientific method applies here at all. He’s not trying to prove a fact, but rather form an opinion.

          If the scientific method were applied it would waste so much time.

      • Deano2099 says:

        Besides, I like the fact that after getting thousands of players he’s decided he’d rather refine his audience than grow it.

    • Unaco says:

      Indeed. And it’s intentional. Rocket has said that he wants to ‘break’ the game, deliberately. It’s an experiment, as Jom says.

    • caddyB says:

      Yeah, you mean like minecraft?

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      I’m not outraged or anything but as a game programmer, I strongly disapprove of the approach, again not to say i’m not enjoying dayz.

      • Mctittles says:

        As a “game programmer” myself, I think this is a great method. If you want to waste time, go by the book. If you want to try out something new then try it.
        He updates so damn often I don’t see how people can complain. First it’s all complaints that no one has the balls to try something new.
        People don’t try something new because they don’t want to deal with the backlash that WILL happen.

        People fear change, but also complain when there is no change. Breaking out of the cycle is a violent process.

  3. Runs With Foxes says:

    Anything that makes people value their survival more is generally good in a survival game.

    • HexagonalBolts says:

      It doesn’t make me value my survival more, I care way less, without a weapon it’s almost impossible to get to any items so I just have to do a series of tedious and ridiculous trips into zombie infested areas that almost always end in death. Death is so frequent and inevitable that I don’t care about it any more.

      • 4026 says:

        See, the fix for this would be a “karma” system, where you choose / buy your starting loadout with an allotment of karma points that you’re awarded based on how long your last life was.

        So, if you played your last life carefully, avoiding players, hoarding food and rationing water to eke out the last breath possible even though you’re weaponless, you might earn enough karma in your next life to spawn with a Makarov and a mag for it. If you then take that Makarov and charge into Cherno with it, blazing away at anything that moves, then it’s back to a can of beans and a bandage for you next time, Sonny Jim.

        It’d need some balancing for newbies, who may have frequent deaths before they ‘get it’ (maybe your karma has a minimum threshold for the first 5 or 10 hours of play), but broadly I reckon this could have the desired effect of reducing deathmatch play, making people value their lives and not guaranteeing totally defenceless spawn zones for bandits to farm.

        • sinister agent says:

          The problem with that is that it’s explicitly and directly rewarding certain behaviour, rather than just giving you an environment and letting players find their own rewards, come what may. It’s the latter that’s why Day Z is so popular to begin with.

          • 4026 says:

            True enough. I’m just assuming that with comments about making others “value their survival” more, people are implicitly trying to encourage certain types of behaviour. Namely, prolonging each life. I’m also assuming that people want to discourage other types of behaviour (bandit deathmatch in Cherno, for instance). I think the system I propose would work for its stated aim.

            EDIT: As a bit of an aside, “You’re rewarding specifc behaviour, players should be free to make their own adventure” is broadly applicable to almost any game element: military spawns encourage players to loiter around airfields, loot dropping from corpses encourages player-killing, Zed respawns encourage sneaking rather than wasting your ammo shooting them, etc. Not all these explicit incentives for certain behaviour are bad.

            More generally, I’m saying it’s difficult to draw a line between where “providing an environment” ends and “explicitly rewarding behaviour” begins.

        • HexagonalBolts says:

          I don’t think that would work, because someone who had never played the game before would have the biggest disadvantage and someone who had played the game loads would have a big advantage, when in reality in this complex game it’s the new player that needs help and the person who knows cherno and elektro like the back of their hand who wants a more challenging experience.

          • 4026 says:

            Sure, I acknowledge that. You’d want to limit the system carefully: for starters, no-one should be able to buy themselves a better starting weapon than a Makarov, regardless of how long they survived previously (they can plough any extra points into buying extra beans or a map or something). And, as I said, newbies should recieve an artificial boost.

            Or, on the assumption that newbies are truly new, they shouldn’t even be given the task of choosing their own gear and potentially flubbing it: they get a standard loadout for their first 3 lives (or 5 hours, or whatever). Then, after that, the Karma system kicks in.

        • Joshua Northey says:

          This is frankly genius and the best idea I have seen regarding this game in a all the posting about it. It is exactly the type of mechanic the game needs to encourage people to actually value their lives.


      • Bonedwarf says:

        I gave it a go the other day.

        Started near a house. Ran for it. Assumed I’d be able to get inside. Couldn’t. Found a shed. Same thing. Found some buildings. Nothing in them.

        Basically I ran around for half an hour. Saw neither a survivor nor a zombie. Never found any weapons either.

        Said “Sod this” and went and played regular Arma 2 instead.

        • Meusli says:

          I think you were invisible, there is a new bug which I experienced myself that makes you spawn invisible. No stuff shows up and no zombies spawn on the map. You can tell you have it if you do not have the debug window, This shows your stats, number of zombies and blood amount amongst other stuff. There is a fix for this in the forums.

  4. HexagonalBolts says:

    It’s unbelievably brutal now. It’s just too hard for new players. I know we have all the purists over on the DayZ forums who seem to think that any increase in difficulty is always indisputably a good thing, but starting without a gun makes progression a tedious affair of repeatedly doing suicide runs until you eventually get lucky.

    • Cooper says:

      Yes, but it also scares off / makes bored the CoD kiddies who would just run into Cherno and shoot anyone. Die. Then spawn and run back into Cherno. The coast has been a constant deathmatch zone for too long.

      Rocket doesn’t seem to care too much that he has 100,000 players; he seems like he’d rather have a tenth of that sometimes.

      EVE has to care about their difficult learning curve because they have money to make. rocket can heighten the learning curve as much as he likes, and keep only the players prepared to deal with that.

      • nanowired says:

        The CoD kiddies are the ones who enjoy the no gear on newbies approach. This allows them to take out all their fancy automatic rifles, pistols, etc that they’ve gathered and hid all over the map, and start plugging away at people who have spawned without fear of being shot back.

      • wengart says:

        So now we have this brave new world where having any gun at all makes you king of the mountain. Why cooperate with someone when I can just shoot the damn fool and take his food?

    • Armitage says:

      People on the forums don’t seem to mind starting without a weapon, but they really hate the buff that zombies recently recieved.

    • Mctittles says:

      Have you ever played a rogue-like game before? I’ve played ones that I often die on the first level if things don’t go right. The point is to see how far you can get.

      I think this game has the same point. See how far you can get. If you die often, then it’s kind of working as intended.

  5. neofit says:

    Anything that makes people go “wow, nices stories, I’ll buy Arma2 to check it out”, login, get ganked repeatedly, then ragequit and stop consuming server resources is good :D.

    • HexagonalBolts says:

      Do you really want to be part of a community based on “ganking noobs” and selfish claims on server resources?

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      There’s a fault in your logic there, I think.

      • fenrif says:

        “He’s always said it’s an experiment. And what an experiment!”

        Maybe the experiment is less to do with game design and more to do with marketing?

        • DickSocrates says:

          No? Do you know what experiement means? It means try things, see how they turn out. This is turning out bad, that’s fine. He’ll make appropriate changes.

          • fenrif says:

            So the idea that it’s a gameplay experiement is fine but the very notion that someone could jokingly suggest that the game is an experiment in advertising for ARMA 2 is laughable.

            Do YOU know what experiment means? :S

        • MFToast says:

          Who run barter town?
          link to

  6. Sp4rkR4t says:

    It’s a hell of a step forward and once the melee system has been sorted and the bugs with zed detection through walls, etc get sorted it’s going to be epic.

  7. Maxheadroom says:

    I do really want to try this but given that I dont own Arma2 CO (and wasnt that fussed about it on it’s release) i’m a bit reluctant to shell out £25 just to get a free mod.

    Hopefully it’ll feature in the Steam Summer sale though

    • DXN says:

      FWIW, I’m finding Arma 2 a *lot* more fun than I was expecting, having bought it for Day Z. Playing with the RPS folks (Tuesday and Sunday evenings!) is a joy!

      • slerbal says:

        Yay! Glad you are enjoying Arma in all its forms. DayZ is incredible but Arma2 has other amazing missions and mods too (though none quite to zeitgeisty) and the ARPS crew are always good fun to play with :)

        • wengart says:

          There is also a new American crew playing on Thursday’s at 8PM EST.

  8. 4026 says:

    “…pick up a knife and a hatchet, they were only good for chopping trees and gutting animals respectively…”

    You chop trees with a knife and gut animals with a hatchet?

    (Apologies for tedious pedantry, but misuse of “respectively” annoys me on a par with misuse of “literally”)

  9. Clavus says:

    “Rocket has also added five seconds of persistence for characters in the world on logging out. Which means people who quit the moment they encountered a hostile are still likely to die.”

    Actually that was reverted in one of the 4 hotfixes that came out soon after 1.7.1. There’s already a in the works which should fix some zombie behavior and most importantly their incredible perception.

    It might seem the game got much harder, but you can now actually lose zombies by running away as fast as you can, while trying to break the line of sight wherever possible during your escape. So far I’m surviving just fine. Other players are still my biggest threat.

  10. fionny says:

    Zombies are still avoidable its fecken players playing rambo all the time thats getting old… I honestly dont think there is a friendly player in the game, everyone just shoots… its getting really really fecken old now.

    • 4026 says:

      I’m not sure that’s even fixable. As long as there’s the possibility that the other guy might shoot you, whether for your beans, for self-preservation, or just for shits and giggles, people are going to open fire pre-emptively.

      And then other players will factor that into their relations with other players and so on and so on. It’s a vicious circle.

      Even suggested solutions like introducing more co-operative actions for players (like bloodpacks) or different “roles” (medic, weapons technician, etc.) will have the perverse effect of making the roving mobs of teamspeaking clan members (who trust one another already) stronger at the expense of the lone player trying to find someone, anyone, to give him a transfusion.

      • drewski says:

        It’s quiet the dilemma.

      • Yuri says:

        Oh, it’s quite fixable. Database wipe. Bam, EVERYONE on every server now starts with a new character and without weapons.

        There have been no database wipes in over a month that i’ve been playing.
        I’m hoping there will be one eventually. After all, it is an alpha, so seeing how things work out from scratch after you’ve introduced a bunch of new features should be pretty important.

        • 4026 says:

          Er. What? I mean, sure, that’ll stop players killing one another – because they won’t be capable of it – for the approximately two minutes until either one bandit finds a weapon or two non-bandits do. At which point, anyone holding a gun starts to look at other players as potential threats at best, and lootsacks at worst.

          And then the shooting starts.

          • roryok says:

            better solution: remove all weapons from the game.

          • Armitage says:

            That is exactly correct, a wipe wont do a damn thing. Rocket is allready looking to re-invent the bandit / humanity mechanic. Hopefully what ever he comes up with will encourage coop behavior and discourage pointless violence between players.

          • Syra says:

            Right now you can tell if someone is a bandit by looking at them (your heart starts to race). I was doing some BeanWarring being bored of being too powerful and living reclusively in fear of losing all of my max military tech and decided to dump it all for the trenches… now I’m giving people minor cardiac incidents. Oops.

        • rittenhaus says:

          Er, my corner of the database gets wiped almost every other patch.

      • VelvetFistIronGlove says:

        It’s a symptom of life being almost valueless.

        If you’ve been playing for a while (especially with a group), you’ve got a tent or three with almost everything in it that you need to get back up to speed again very soon after spawning. Or even if you don’t, you just follow the line of deer stands to Stary Sobor or the NW airfield, and server hop a bit to farm the best loot.

        If you know what you’re doing, dying in DayZ only sets you back an hour or so. Consequently, you have little to lose if you’re shooting someone on sight, even if you miss and they kill you instead.

        The game needs players to value their own lives if this situation is to improve at all.

    • jellydonut says:

      Get friends. Problem solved. Why would you play a game like this alone?

      • 4026 says:

        I guess the point people are making is that they want to make friends and fragile alliances in-game, and enjoy all the tension that that brings, rather than simply having to drag their same ol’ reliable friends into a posse based on metagame trust that roves the countryside pumping rounds into anyone else that comes close.

        • sinister agent says:

          This. Playing it alone is amazingly tense. Bringing along a bunch of people that you know you can trust renders most of the dilemmas toothless, and means that you will barely interact with anyone else anyway. There are loads of games I can play with other people I already know, but Day Z is the only one where I can wander for hours alone, have almost nothing happen, and still have a terrific, dramatic and exciting time.

          Not that there’s anything wrong with playing it with friends, mind – I certainly don’t have a problem with people doing that. But I see a less unique experience in it myself.

    • Cooper says:

      There’s been a sea change in player attitude.

      Early on, before 1.5.4 or whenever player population epxloded, it’d be very common to be able to address a stranger first, find out their intentions, and avoid a shootout. Sometimes it was even possible to find ad-hoc groupings with strangers.

      Now there is no point even bothering to ask “friendly?”. Which is a shame. Those who have the backings of clans and friends who play as often have a vast advantage; there is now zero reason to try and group up with strangers.

    • Apples says:

      Really? I played for quite a few hours on various servers and over various lives and only got shot by a player once. Every other time I encountered someone, we either awkwardly ignored each other, both ran away in opposite directions, or talked. There were “Guy over there, friendly?” “Friendly!” exchanges going on constantly on global chat too.

      Maybe it’s changed recently, the community seems to move fast, but I was surprised at how little PvP was going on.

      • rittenhaus says:

        This depends a lot on which server you’re in. I find it helps quite a bit to avoid servers with lots of clan-tagged names in the list.

  11. lamontagne says:

    I’ve been having a blast with this recently but will probably be giving it a rest for now, the balance is not as expected according to Rocket and he says it may take a few minor patches to bring it into line.

    I noticed that BIS are now selling a Chernarus paper map; admittedly it’s fairly overpriced at £10 but I have to admit to being tempted, the idea of navigating the world and adding annotations is really compelling.

    • abigbat says:

      or you could just, you know link to

    • Palodin says:

      Its a really nice map actually, reasonably high quality. Comes with all the other maps from ArmA/ArmA2 as well so its not that big a ripoff. Still, you can get a PDF version of it at link to

    • Clavus says:

      Already have that map laying next to my keyboard. Very useful. Also it’s a great lesson in why people shouldn’t read the map and drive at the same time. I crashed our quadbike while trying to read the map. The vehicle damage somehow made the entire server grind to a halt too :V

    • sinister agent says:

      Am I really the only person who refuses to use a map unless I’ve actually found one in the game?

      • 4026 says:


        It’s cheating. I know it’s cheating. And really, I’m only cheating myself. Out of the experience of wandering, totally lost, through a hostile landscape and finally – finally – finding a use for my Russian GCSE in deciphering Cyrillic roadsigns to figure out where I am. But, for some reason, I can’t resist the compulsion. Within 30 minutes of starting to play, I’d fired up an online map, combed the wiki for tips and – god help me – found and memorised the salient points of this page.

        I blame the habit on Paradox’s grand strategy games, in which it’s impossible to have fun (or understand what’s going on at all) without having the community wiki and forums open in another window.

      • Redsplinter says:

        Definitely a minority in my experience. The first thing my tiny playgroup did once we found a suitable online map was determine it works in the steam browser overlay. PROTIP: swapping into the overlay while holding a button locks the button down if you release it and leave the overlay. (W and/or right mouse are the happy buttons that get this treatment.)

        So. Annotated map + auto-walk = players, bugs, zombie telescopic sight, and stupidity are really the only threats.

        …if we leave out the fact the fracking hatchet takes up a main weapon slot. I used to carry a few around to give to people. Now I can’t even carry one and a proper gun :/

      • olemars says:

        I draw my own map on a used napkin as I go along.

      • Skabooga says:

        You’re not the only one, Sinister Agent. I too try to avoid looking at a map unless I’ve found one in game, although I did make the occasional exception when people were waiting for me to arrive somewhere and didn’t want my getting lost to waste all of our time. Besides, now that I’m more familiar with the map, I can generally find my way between the major cities with little trouble.

      • Syra says:

        I don’t need a map, I am an explorer and now I pretty much know where everything is by heart.

  12. Mungrul says:

    I think the was the cruelest.
    All that and “More common items” only spawned on zombies.
    In other words, food and drink.
    So yeah, no gun to start with, incredibly limited ammo when I did find one, and then no food readily available.
    Sunday night I died of thirst & starvation after almost 4 hours of play, and I hadn’t found a single tin of beans, can of soda or even a canteen.

    I only found out it was a bug afterwards, and initially thought rocket had gone off the sadistic deep end.

  13. tripwired says:

    Wow, as if it wasn’t hard enough already to find decent loot and survive bandits, although I welcome the addition of a starting flashlight as I rarely have time to play during server ‘daytime’.

  14. Stuart Walton says:

    Ammo needs to become more scarce. I was running around with over 10 Stanag magazines at one point. When killing a player costs you less than 1% of your ammo, there’s little reason not to. If you only have a handful of bullets, then you’re less likely to shoot in case you miss.

    Anyway, it’s more fun throwing a smoke grenade at a survivor than shooting them. }:)

  15. sinister agent says:

    It’s always been possible to pick up a new weapon pretty quickly,

    Speak for yourself. I played for a week before I found another gun. Then I found another one of the same make, of course. Bah.

    Not sure I like the idea of no starting weapons – the game’s weighted towards bandits enough as it is. Well, that’s not entirely accurate – I like the idea, but in practice, I think it will work out badly in a multiplayer game. And the torch is not half as desirable as disabling the pitch black nights.

    But still, it’s an early alpha, so change is inevitable, and if anything they do is disastrous, they can always switch it back.

    • lamontagne says:

      Anecdotally, the griefing has dropped off quite dramatically; three’s little reason to kill spawns for just a bandage, a torch and some painkillers – you don’t spawn with food or drink anymore either so there’s little to gain.

      • TariqOne says:

        You’re still a moron if you don’t shoot on sight. Indeed what little a survivor you encounter inland may have accrued becomes all the more attractive. And what little you’ve accrued becomes all the more precious.

        I’d like to see the game get to a state where shoot on sight is an option, not the only intelligent option.

    • thebigJ_A says:

      You start with nothing worth being killed for, not even food, so only griefers will bother.

      And, no offense, if you went that long without finding a gun, you weren’t trying hard enough. Nearly every single barn has a weapon in it, sometimes houses do, deerstands, office buildings, grocery stores. You should have teamed up, so someone could show you the ropes, or at least gone online and educated yourself. Within a twenty minute walk of wherever you are, there are hundreds upon hundreds of potential weapon spawns.

      Anyway, loot’s completely rebalanced. Now I feel there’s far too many weapons about personally.

      • sinister agent says:

        You start with nothing worth being killed for, not even food, so only griefers will bother.

        Yeah, but you don’t know what other people are carrying until you’ve killed them. I gathered lots of food and bandages and ammo before I found a gun, and have seen my share of dead guys with useful stuff on, too.

        I searched every town and village and building I found. Took me bloody hours, crawling around on my arse, inches from every zombie I saw. I found plenty of spawns and barns and that, but none of them had any weapons in. Found tonnes of ammo though, useless as that was. And when I did eventually find a gun, it was on a corpse.

        . You should have teamed up, so someone could show you the ropes, or at least gone online and educated yourself.

        I didn’t need showing the ropes. I was just unlucky. I searched every settlement I found, and there weren’t any guns. I know how to search a village; it’s not complicated. And looking everything up online spoils the fun – half the appeal of Day Z is that it’s obvious what you need to do. You’re hungry and thirsty and poorly armed. Obviously, you need to find food and supplies and a weapon. You do that by searching. It’s pretty elementary really, that’s half the point.

        I’m not saying there are no guns, just that I didn’t find one for ages, despite looking for a gun being the only actual goal I had (at one point, I had to bluff having a headshot lined up on a wannabe bandit to scare him off, because I didn’t have enough ammo to finish him).

      • Armitage says:

        Honestly, I know where to look for weapons. It took me over 2 hours or 4 lives to find any weapon. In that time, I was either prone trying to sneak past zombies, running my ass off from the zombie who detected me from 200 meters away.

        The mod is buggy as hell, so please try and appreciate that your experience may be different then others. Don’t assume that everyone else is a noob or a moron. From your post, I could easily assume you are an ARMA2 / DayZ hipster elitist. But I won’t, because I realize you are a person not a stereotype.

        • thebigJ_A says:

          Two hours is about right, especially when you’re new. He said “a week”. If you can’t find a weapon in a week, you’re doing something wrong. Maybe you’re staying near the coast, where everything’s been looted. Maybe you’re on a bad server. Whatever. There’s no elitism about it, I’m no great player, I’ve never played Arma before DayZ. But I’ve experienced enough to know when something doesn’t sound right.

  16. TariqOne says:

    He really should experiment with incentivizing cooperation or disincentivizing shooting on sight. If only tiny incentives. Whatever people say that’s the key immersion breaker at the moment.

    I’m fully in favor of making the zeds more dangerous, and the melee. The ability to lose zeds is great too. But taking the gun away was dumb. It would have been better to have drastically reduced starting ammo or at a minimum give you a starter hatchet.

    The flashlight is virtually useless and arguably a net negative. All it does in most cases is bring zeds and mouthbreathers down on you. Better than a flare but just slightly. On balance this really is yet another boon to the powerful and the dudes gearing up in their locked servers, but whatever. Still a cool game despite efforts to make it completely unplayable and a griefer paradise.

    • lamontagne says:

      I’d argue that there is incentive to co-operation already and that’s safety in numbers.

      As soon as artificial incentive is added into the mechanics intimations are made that there may be a preferable way to behave in this game or that there is a particular way you think people should behave in the given situation.

      I do understand what you mean though, initiating pick-up group play is frought with danger, I play solo because to my experiences with this reality.

      EDIT: What I meant to communicate is that the benefits of co-operation in this game are outweighed by the pursuit of self-preservation, which is fair enough I think.

      The idea that not intending to shoot another character should result in other player being penalised for not sharing you intention (or rewarding them if they do) goes against my interpretation of the game’s appeal.

      • TariqOne says:

        And yet it absolutely in its current state rewards them for NOT sharing my intention. And penalizes me at the same time. A double-whammy. Why is that not only fine, but sacrosanct?

        It’s fun as hell as it is, but I’d like to see some modest stabs at making behaving as normal humans would a not-stupid-as-fuck approach to the game. Currently behaving like a human is totally stupid as fuck.

      • lionheart says:

        The important thing to do is not then to add more artificial systems, but to make the game more realistic. In real life people group together and cooperate because they are stronger in groups; even the most impressive man in the world probably couldn’t beat 3 average assailants in combat.

        However there are some insurmountable problems making the game unrealisitc, mainly that of teamspeak, which ensures that some people don’t need to build up in-game trust, they can just use real world friends. This single factor is hugely unbalancing for the game. It’s like being dropped in with a flawless military communications network when other people are using smoke signals.

        If DayZ were a stand alone product there might be some features that could curtail this advantage. I’m sure that people would be more likely to band together if they could converse properly in a more human way. If microphones were mandatory and there was directional sound you could shout to those you ran into from cover. It would provide a basis for building trust. The way most humans build trust is entirely absent from this game; everyone looks similar, is dressed similarly, has no facial expressions and so on. If you could speak to someone you would have the basis for the way we band together in the real world.

        In crisis situations people in the real world quickly find something in common and form alliances. Having seen documentaries about the costa concordia’s sinking, it was startling how quickly people grouped together, by common language, then nationality, then areas of the world, then age, class etc. Imagine if eveyone on board had been wearing faceless sound proof helmets and identical clothing, how much cooperation would there have been?

        • TariqOne says:

          Agreed. As a good illustration, there’s a video where the video poster is out to gank a survivor, but the guy keeps yammering on at him gregariously in VoIP direct, making small talk, and the would-be ganker just can’t bring himself to shoot the guy.

          Everyone thinks that the world is all cannibalistic badassery when it falls apart but in reality people are fundamentally social and in the main decent-enough creatures who just want to eat, sleep, fuck, and be left in peace.

          • sinister agent says:

            That’s the thing. If humans were doomed to become universally psychotic loners the minute civilisation falls, there wouldn’t ever have been a civilisation to begin with.

    • woodsey says:

      It’s already incentivised, as is shooting people, as is looting the towns, as is staying in the forest to live.

      If people want to shoot you they’ll shoot you – that’s not an immersion breaker, that’s people being scared of you or deciding they’d rather have your gear all to themselves.

      ‘Still a cool game despite efforts to make it completely unplayable and a griefer paradise.’

      It’s a mod in alpha being tested. I imagine he pushes things a bit further one way or the other on purpose so it’s easier to gauge people’s reactions and then scale back. He’d noted in the post for this patch that the no-gun start was just an experiment, just to see what happens.

      • TariqOne says:

        I don’t want to rehash at length points I’ve made elsewhere here but again: there is currently an optimal playstyle which is reinforced by the game itself and its limitations. That’s fine too, because it’s a game and I expect games to be limited.

        The optimal way to play is either to bring friends and shoot everyone you see, or lone wolf it and shoot everyone you see. That is evident by player behavior. Any other playstyle, e.g., being nice, is gimped and one must choose to play suboptimally for the sake of one’s own internal roleplay if they wish to roleplay that sort of person.

        And to me, yes, it is immersion breaking. It runs contrary to thousands upon thousands of years of human history, in which humans, as pack animals, instinctively gravitate towards one another and form bonds and societies in face of the harsh and unforgiving wilderness full of beasties. Not so in DayZ, and that’s fine and understandable.

        In a world where you log in and out, a chance friend made today at impossible effort and risk will likely never be seen again, there is no material consequence to death either for the killer or the killed, most people look identical, there are no women, there is no persistence of community or reputation, no one suffers the effects of acting like a savage or crushing loneliness etc. etc., the incentives simply aren’t realistic. It. Is. A. Game. It’s a game, and it imposes a ton of limitations and artificial behavioral corridors on you already. All the purists need to stop acting like in its current state it is ultra-real and therefore must not be fucked with.

        And on that last point, why is “hey it’s a mod, he’s supposed to break it” a fine argument when he breaks it to make it harsher, but not when someone asks for him to tweak it to try and make it a place where survivors more naturally band together as people really do in these situations. Then it’s all “no way man that’ll break the game.”

        So I stand by my initial point: He should experiment with means of making shoot on sight less OP. It’s an alpha being tested.

        • sinister agent says:

          I rather suspect the answer there may come in the form of long term survival – some way of ensuring that players need to form groups in order to achieve certain goals (e.g. something like fixing up the cars/helicopters, which generally you can’t do alone because there’s too much stuff to carry). I’m not sure how that could be achieved without some kind of persistent item storage or something abstract stored alongside the player profiles. But I’m sure they already have some ideas.

          • TariqOne says:

            Nail on head. It really is the failure of true persistence and therefore real consequence that drives the issue, at least IMO.

          • Ingall says:

            I think requiring human interaction to counter the infection could be a mechanism for encouraging people to band together. Have the infection de-humanise people slowly and if they’re out alone in the woods they eventually succumb to the disease and become one of the undead (not in the game, they just die, but that’s the story of where the Z’s came from). To prevent this, players need to be around other players to retain their humanity and fight the disease.

        • Zelius says:

          “The optimal way to play is either to bring friends and shoot everyone you see, or lone wolf it and shoot everyone you see. That is evident by player behavior.”

          I disagree. I play alone and have only had to shoot another player once, which was after I told him not to follow me. I’ve only had about three other run ins with players, two of which ended in a stand-off, but nobody had to die. And my character has been alive for 38 days now (with a playtime of about 40 hours).

          My point is, you just have to be careful. Taking care not to be spotted by other players is infinitely safer than just trying to kill everyone.

          • TariqOne says:

            Fair point, and exactly how I play. That’s a workaround, but still not cooperative play and suboptimal any time you happen across someone in a barn or some other tight quarters.

          • rittenhaus says:

            Right, and I’ve grown a lot in scouting skills as a result, but if I see someone else before they see me, and I have a clear shot at them, I always take it. I don’t want to play as a bandit, as a murderer. I’m not much interested in other people’s loot. The point of DayZ, to me, is to survive though, and killing on sight greatly increases one’s likelihood of continued survival. As others point out, that’s not how things would be in real life. If DayZ continues to assert itself as a realistic zombie apocalypse simulation, the unrealism of rewarding murder at every turn has to be addressed in some fashion.

          • orionstar says:

            @rittenhaus: But that’s the thing – how many ‘realistic zombie apocalypses’ have you been in? In an apocalyptic situation, there really isn’t anything (aside from your own morals, I guess) that stops you from killing another man. If that man is carrying more stuff, then you’ve just increased your chances of survival but gave away your position to zombies and other bandits

        • Enso says:

          I have to say that while humans do have a history of co-operation, there has also been an immense history of not just warfare between civilizations but also individuals, and individuals in similar situations. In fact there are still people today who behave in this way so I would suggest that it is actually quite realistic in that way.

          Living in a ‘civilization’ or a specific society gives you the kind of perspective that it is the world but it’s just your world, it’s just one world, one way of life on this planet.

          I’d also like to note that pack animals do live alone. Animals such as wolves and lions, in their youth, can live alone and challenge pack leaders to replace them.

          • TariqOne says:

            Sure. It doesn’t take much breadth of mind to recognize that humans are capable of a range of awful behaviors, banal evils, and downright butchery.

            And it doesn’t take much but a passing knowledge of the globe to recognize that cooperative, communal survival is the human norm, not some occasional aberration in a sea of lawlessness. To suggest that anyone positing that humans are generally social beasts who tend towards cooperative social structures is just blinded by their narrow, sheltered view of the world is, shall we say, somewhat weird.

          • Enso says:

            But it seemed like you were saying you wanted to implement a system that forces (or encourages ;) ) social cohesion when I think that there are already incentives to cooperate. Because we live in societies it’s an obvious idea to form groups but I think that if we woke up tomorrow and had no knowledge of creating communities, or the zombie apocalypse had begun, it would be pretty difficult to set them up. There’s a slight disadvantage because this is a game, so people let loose, but uniting people is a tough job.

            One idea could be to try and find a group of friends, set up your own passworded server and go looking for people who want to join a society. Then when you reach a population you are comfortable with you can remove the password, allowing the danger of newcomers being untrustworthy. Depending on your population this could reduce the risk of getting killed, if you organised your people to go out in teams for supplies. Of course there’d still be the risk of a clan coming to wipe you out.

  17. thebigJ_A says:

    There’s so much more unmentioned. Audability of players was far too high, that’s fixed in a few hours. Among a whole bunch more. Rocket’s crazy prolific, he’s already about to pop out 7.1.5!

    Oh, and there’s this: link to

    which i thought more people upset about how things are right now should read.

    And it’s not at all impossible to survive now. What with totally rebalanced loot, and the ability to lose zeds, you’ll quickly find bits of gear to survive if you play smart. The game’s finally got some progression, finding a 2-shot shotgun, or a makarov, feels like an accomplishment, rather than everyone getting an AK within 20 minutes and the threat of death by zed disappearing.

  18. oceanclub says:


    * Player spawns in sea
    * Player spawns with one arm tied behind back
    * Zombies now run at 200 mph
    * 25% chance gun will explode on firing, embedding red-hot scrapnel in your face (5% per sec blood loss) and making you scream loudly, thus attracting more zombies (who run at 200mph as aforementioned)
    * Player spawns with one leg tied up
    * Player entirely clad in yellow spandex

  19. akeso says:


    There goes any new growth for their player base

    Now the game is even more built around already having friends who play.

    • jellydonut says:

      The only reason I picked it up was because others were playing it.

      How about coordinating with interested friends to play together? It’s no fun surviving the apocalypse alone.

      • nanowired says:

        BEFORE the gameplay killing patch, it was hours of waiting for them to get off the coastline from wherever they spawned and meet up with you. It was fun then.

        Now, however, every time someone moves they’re going to aggro a zombie, and you’re going to have to wait for someone to spawn and run in from the coast.

        • thebigJ_A says:

          Except they’ve fixed the distance zombies see you, and are reworking the detection mechanics. It’s not terribly hard to avoid the feckers, you just can’t crouch walk right in front of them like you used to. You can even get away from them when they see you now, so I don’t see your point. The system was adjusted, not made harder, adjust with it.

    • Jimmy Z says:

      Why do you say that as if it’s a bad thing? Playing with friends *should* be encouraged and lone wolves *should* have a hell of a hard time. So in my eyes, all is well.

      • akeso says:

        In the long run, yes, but not at the start.

        Part of the design curve for open world persistent multiplayer games (mmo?) is that you allow for players to start off and explore on their own so they can find players to become more effective.

        Punishing players who don’t already have friends who play when they start only ensures you are going discourage a lot of new players from trying out your game and experiencing the fun that can later be had.

      • TariqOne says:

        All well and good if you have friends who play games, and those friends are interested, and haven’t ragequit (like mine — wimps!).

        The game makes it pretty impossible to make friends, though. The effort in spending an hour or more trekking across the map, broadcasting your location, combined with the risk that you haven’t drawn every fuckwit to you, and the risk that your new friend isn’t actually one of those fuckwits, or a total incompetent, is totally outweighed by the fact that you’re unlikely to ever see your new friend again.

        It just isn’t worth the risk and work 90% of the time. And on the 10% of the time you happen across someone naturally and decide to make yourself known rather than hide, on 95% of those occasions the fuck just takes a potshot at you.

  20. says:

    Can you play multiple characters? Or is it always just one?
    (i.e., could I keep one character for random play, one for playing with buddies, etc)

    Also, Day Z needs a new logo when it goes beta.

  21. mrosenki says:

    Here’s an idea that perhaps add some incentive to NOT becoming a bandit – the LAW.

    How about there are one or two leftover military outposts in the game that do feature NPC units. These outposts could be used for trading and a safe-haven for survivors. There players could also join up to accumulate vehicle parts etc and form cooperative groups.

    Now the crux would be that any bandits would be shot on sight by the NPC military units.

    Of course Bandits could form gangs and take over these outposts, but it should be made extremely difficult and require the kind of organisation needed in decent ArmA coop missions.

    The location of these outposts should initially be random, but could be found either on notes found around the maps, or over radios laying around in the cities.

    Just had this idea, curious what you guys think…

    • Magnusm1 says:

      I like this idea. But it seems hard in practise. Seems unfitting for the game tough to have a “safe heaven” and people that will protect you.

    • Vorphalack says:

      I had a similar idea for NPC law enforcement. Taken from Baldurs Gate 2 when following the evil path, maintaining a low reputation could spawn a group of fairly tough, hostile NPCs whenever you enter a new area. It should be possible to do something similar in Day Z by spawning NPC bounty hunters to track player killers. To make that work you would need some way to telegraph that a player was being hunted, otherwise it would seem too randomised when the kill squad show up. The more player killing a player participates in, the more dangerous these kill squads become, and the more frequently they spawn.

      If you were too use your idea of a neutral ground as well, it should might be viable to create a bounty board system. Non player killers could get very vague location information on active player killers, and if they manage to land a kill, loot a bounty trophy from the body which could be redeemed for supplies. That would make two types of game play interesting; bandit based on how long you can stay alive, and bounty hunter based on how many player killers you can hunt.

  22. blackmane says:

    I played Day Z for a reasonable time and went through some versions, rollbacks etc. Still my biggest issue with the game is non-existent Zombiehorde mechanic. Plus I`m not a fan of the running highspeeding zombie, but more of limping, staggering and grappling type of zombie. I know, it´s a ARMA engine issue, but let me dream on.

    Killing zombies should be easily done by headshots but almost impossible by hitting any other part of the body, except by heavy calibers, which should slow them down a good portion, throw them off their feet etc.

    A single Z should be no match. Headshot, done. A small pack of Zs could be outsmarted by breaking line of sight, running through builidings etc. Singles and packs could be spawned as group.

    But what about the much dreaded zombie horde? I´ve seen none yet.

    Let´s say you are at an important builiding, looking for loot. At the entry of the builing you killed 2-3 Zombies to get in. Let there be a spawn-timer, that spawns a random number of Zs in the vicinity, every 20-30 seconds. I´d like to see a horde building up around in citys when players rampage around, or spending to much time in buildings or areas, while gunning down everyone, everything. I´d like to see a horde cutting off their way to escape by sheer numbers, staggering and moaning, grappling and biting.

    I know, thats a big big change in the mechanics… but maybe sometime a game like this will pop up.

    • Enso says:

      This mechanic has been in for quite a while. Zombies spawn in your vicinity while in built up areas and build up slowly into larger numbers.

  23. TariqOne says:

    Totally random aside, I take issue with the characterization of the Makarov as “lowly.” It’s low-noise and a fine little oops-aggroed-a-zed gun. Plentiful ammo. Line up a headshot, problem solved, generally without waking too many of the neighbors.

    I try to keep my sidearm as the low-noise solution, and sacrifice power for subtlety with that slot. The G17 is the perfect upgrade: just as quiet, slightly more powerful, reasonably common ammo, and clips double the capacity of the Makarov, making it very inventory-friendly. Obviously the M9SD is the king of handguns but I’ve found exactly one in my travels.

    The Mak does suck for PvP, granted. I’ve had a spawnee empty a Mak at me and not kill me. The rifle slot is for self-defense against players and when you’ve really stepped in it. There you have a range of solutions although the humble AKM is pretty much all the power a survivor really needs. Even the Winnie is fine, range issues aside.

    • nanowired says:

      It’s great for pvp as well.

      The characterization of “lowly” came after people started backpeddling away from their comments that “Just having a makarov is fine against bandits” when referring to the fact that the coastline was going to become a huge free for all when the bandit skin was removed.

      Now, the same people say that the Makarov doesn’t do any good – pvp or otherwise- against bandits and you should just spawn without gear and be happy about it. Especially happy about being sniped in the head.

    • VelvetFistIronGlove says:

      I prefer the M1911 as the next upgrade from the Makarov. Nearly as quiet (zombies further than about 20ft away don’t seem to hear it), ammo is also plentiful (you can combine revolver ammo into M1911 mags), and it’s much harder-hitting.

  24. Syra says:

    I’m experimenting with making a video series of DayZ :)

    link to

  25. stinkytaco says:

    Rocket has his head up his ass. It was once almost a fun mod. Now it it all about killing noobs on the beach

    Fuck this mod. The dev is a complete fucking moron.

    • nanowired says:

      It’s interesting. Records show that murders went up when they added a Bandit skin, since it validated that playstyle. But when they removed the bandit skin, the murder count went up EXPONENTIALLY. Once the game is playable again it’ll be interesting to see how far the murders go up once people don’t die from zombies faster than the bullet can reach them.

    • TariqOne says:

      I don’t think he’s a moron. I do think he’s making some modest missteps made by others in catering almost exclusively to the more poisonous elements of the gaming community. The hardcore bro is no one’s friend at the end of the day.

      I’m all for making it harsh and unforgiving. But I would not follow the mouthbreathers blindly in their race to the bottom. There needs to be some balance and some room for random humanity or it really will degrade into a shallow and unsatisfying experience. And when the bros get bored and move on to the next thing, where does that leave you?

  26. gwathdring says:

    Every time I try to get into it I end up being gunned down by another player within about twenty minutes. I’ve tried staying away from cities, but they still get me. Maybe I’m unlucky. I started ditching all my ammo just to spite the bastards, but then I just ended up running from a long train of zombies across the countryside. My longest play so far happened during a 15 minute run after I’d already been alive for 10-15 minutes. Zombies behind me the whole way. Then some bastard shot me. He found some flares.

    • TariqOne says:

      I’ve found I can basically live forever (if I don’t get unlucky) by following a few rules:

      Only play at night;
      Avoid all coastal towns unless medical supplies are required;
      Raid inland small towns with brick buildings and supermarkets;
      When in doubt, crawl;
      Use deer stands for weaponry needs;
      Never ever go to Stary Sobor;
      Never ever go to International Airport;
      Never ever play on an overly populous server;
      Never ever use flares, keep fires to a minimum, use any gun-mounted lights judiciously if at all;
      If you see someone, hide.

      Inevitably, though, it gets old and I decide a run to the Berezino hospital or scouting the Stary camps or playing in some daylight might be fun. And inevitably, almost, that’s when I get popped.

      • sinister agent says:

        I play almost exclusively at night (except when it’s pitch black) and always move slowly and carefully (although I’ll run in shortish bursts when I’m obviously a long way from anywhere civilised). To be honest those two things alone are enough to give you far more longevity.

    • Skabooga says:

      Hmm, that does sound remarkably unlucky. Maybe it’s the server you play on, it being full of bandit types? Although if you randomly join whatever is open, that’s probably not the case. I don’t know. Keep trying? The game is not necessarily like that. My last few deaths at the hands of other players have been when I knowingly took a risk and entered high conflict zones like the military base at Stary Sobor or the Northwest Airfield.

  27. jroger says:

    My first spawn was in the middle of the night. I didn’t see anything, fell in the water and lost my whole inventory, except for the Makarov. I applaud the addition of a flashlight in your stating inventory!

  28. xaphoo says:

    I don’t know if any of you have played in the last couple hours since came out, but now zombies no longer have super hearing and sight and are about as easily evadable as they were in earlier patches. This is an improvement.

    I also don’t know if I’ve been playing the same game as some of you. I haven’t been killed on the beach since the starting Makarov was removed and direct chat made mandatory. People largely cooperate in cities these days. I warn people when I hear them near, telling them to respond if they are friendly. If they respond in the affirmative, we loot the area together. If they remain silent, we fight, and I give plenty of warning for this. This works because most people don’t like lying over voice comm. If they say they are friendly with their own voice, I believe them and have yet to be proven wrong.

    Despite the ups and downs and increasing bugginess, the game has gotten a lot more cooperative and less focused on griefing and banditry in the last week or so.

  29. gamerab says:

    Finally, a game to bridge single and multiplayer? Perhaps. While its easy(**) to play solo or with your mates (which one gives you best chances of survival is debateable) is this the 1st game to successfully bridge the gap? As an experiment (the developer’s description, not mine) its certainly a brave one but will it succeed? Playing with your mates can be great fun – sitting round the camp fire sharing freshly cooked meat (where’s the beer!) and reviewing the session progress – feels quite surreal. Playing solo is quite a challenge; you’ve got nobody to give you blood if you’ve bled out; nobody to lend you food, water or ammo when desparate. Then you have the evil campers to look out for; a single shot to the head and you did’t know what hit you.
    The challenge is to bring these camps together; can cooperation prevail? It may take some time before we know the answer.
    (**) has made things easier; zombies can still hear through objects, so if you hear a zombie but cannot see it BEWARE; 1.7.2 (Monday) will make this easier.

  30. R1ckyChav3z says:

    Hi guys!
    My friends and I started playing Day Z and we are recording our adventures as we play the game and so far I have Day 1 up and we are currently recording Day 2, where we started playing together as a team. Also I shot one of my friends accidentally in the face. If you’d like us to add or change anything or want us to make a video explaining how to do something, leave a comment below.

    Hopefully you like the video and subscribe to my channel, as we continue making videos for the Day Z community.

    Day 1 – Introducing the Game and running around in circles in Utter Terror:
    link to