Quigleyer

Cue that choir music.

Now that you can wash yourself without soap can there be an option in the context menu to wash yourself without soap if theres any in your inventory to conserve it at the cost of it taking longer ? I'm having to pull my soap out and droping it on the ground so conserve it for clothes.

I have a rather weak system and run the game at lower resolution.  It's great, looks fine and is enjoyable- however the menus are very large on my screen as expected.

I've noticed the game allows me to render the UI in a different window with it's own set frame rate to save on performance.  I wonder if that window could also be set to a separate (possibly higher) resolution, allowing me to play the game at lower resolution while the menues are at a higher one to save screen space.  

This recent update to the IWBUMS has solved this issue on my computer.  I dare say this now runs better than the last version, nice job dev team.  If you were experiencing this issue before try it again on the 64 bit version.

This recent update to the IWBUMS has solved this issue on my computer.  I dare say this now runs better than the last version, nice job dev team.  If you were experiencing this issue before try it again on the 64 bit version.

Its hard to say really, some users managed to fix the issues by lowering a bunch of settings, you can also make sure that your drivers are up to date, from a glace at the logs it seems like you might be a few versions behinds.
Other than that, I suppose you will have to wait for future optimizations on the build or the computer.

Go to %ProgramFiles(X86)%\Steam\steamapps\common\ProjectZomboid
 
Double click the ProjectZomboid32.bat file (the one with the blue and white gears,  not red and black circle). 
 
See if that lets you play.

Seems like it is an out of memory error, can you try turning Double Sized Textures off and Texture Compression on in the options?

Hope this is in the right place, sorry I'm new here.  I will abide happily by any moderating decisions made about the proper place for this and apologize ahead of time.
 
Hey folks, I'm back to playing this after a long break.  Survival mode is umpteen times more fun for me now and after 10+ dead characters I'm starting to get to the point that I'm playing with the nutrition system and living long enough to see the results.
 
My 5 weeks broke down like this:
 
First 3 weeks:
 
I needed to gather and stay quiet, I ate on the run a lot.  This time period was one spent eating entire bags of chips and pies in one sitting.  Every morning I got myself "well fed" and went out to gather.  I never let myself be any kind of hungry for too long.
 
After day 14 I noticed I had gained a lot of weight, by day 21 I was up to 89 kg and had the overweight trait.  Gaining 10 kg (22 pounds?) in three weeks is a little insane for someone who is running around, bashing zombie brains in, jumping through windows, chopping trees, and in constant "fight or flight" mode through sheer panic.   For comparison the guy who did the Super Size Me documentary gained 24.4 pounds (~12 kg?) in his first month (four weeks) of eating nothing but giant McDonalds meals and living a nearly entirely sedentary life.
 
QUESTION: does anyone know the cap for calories burned per day?  
 
Week 4:
 
It was time for a change, and I had enough materials to begin truly fortifying.  I had two safe houses and chose one to move all of the food to and began constructing a log wall.  Because I was relatively safe the whole time I let myself get hungry (and very hungry).  Only twice did I lose the hunger moodle, and it was from eating a lot of low calorie canned food.  Within a matter of days I was down to 84.X kg and had lost my overweight trait.  If you just let yourself get hungry and run the timer quickly you'll see the kg just melt away... and keep melting... and melting...  
 
Week 5:
 
Log wall is constructed, I'm pretty safe, I have a medium-sized stash of canned and dry food, and I started to get crops coming in.  I'm currently trying to maintain weight and finding it incredibly difficult.  In real life I am a very efficient dieter and have lost 180 lbs (90 kg) through diet and exercise in my lifetime- calorie counting and approximation is something I can do in my sleep.  But obviously this is a game and it comes with hidden mechanics and caps that aren't entirely obvious to the player in the game's current state.  
 
I have some suggestions on things I think could improve this portion of the game:
 
1)  Starvation mode (a moodle?)
 
This is a real thing- a lot of people call it "hitting a plateau" in weight loss.  Your body essentially thinks you're in for a long starve and starts to covet your body's excess fat- sometimes you will even eat muscle away in lieu of fat in more prolonged instances.  Losing weight becomes incredibly difficult, you become very agitated, and if you go long enough EVERYTHING HURTS.  
 
The human body can only metabolize so much of itself within a given time.  I don't know the exact numbers behind it, but I do understand a lot of it is based on the weight of the individual.  If you think you're still losing weight it's probably water weight and you're actually de-hydrating yourself.
 
---- So if we look at it like that I think "starvation mode" can work as a cap on the amount of weight one PC can lose in a given amount of time- let's just say one week right now.  The limit doesn't necessarily need to apply to real-world numbers and the number would more reflect what was balanced in the game world (so we can hit that sweet spot of realism and balance).
 
---- Since this would essentially cap some negative effects from not eating for that given week (after you've lost the allowed amount of weight) you could start to accumulate other negative moodles that apply so it's not overly abused.  The longer you're starving the more moodles you get.  ON EDGE, IN PAIN, and QUEASY  would apply perfectly here- but I'm sure there are other options as well.
 
The idea here is just a bit less of a fall for slacking on your micro-management, and it even adds some "realism".  You can't just steadily lose weight, it doesn't work like that.  Realism and balance!
 
Doing it this way (and not adjusting the cap on calories allowed to be burned per day) is better, in my opinion, because the more you would reduce the cap of calories burned the less of an impact doing activities has on your need to eat, which is NOT good, IMO.
 
2)  Calorie Counting devices (items)
 
I think the game would really benefit from devices that specifically make the nutrition side of things easier.  Devices like calorie counting watches, both for estimated calories burned and for calories consumed, would really be a cool way to help micro-manage the numbers game.  The idea here is that we keep the system complicated, but we can get some aid from rarer items scattered around the world to make it less tedious if we are lucky enough to find one.
 
http://www.keepinspiring.me/10-best-calorie-counter-watches/
 
---- One of the biggest issues I'm having with this portion of the game, despite diet-watching being a thing I do well in real life, is that I'm at a total loss as to how many calories I'm burning doing any one activity.  Without an external way to tell the players approximately how many calories they're burning doing stuff they will NEVER know.  Does chopping trees burn calories?  Does walking?  Sprinting?  I don't even know which activities burn calories, let alone how many calories.   That's what this idea is supposed to solve.  
 
---- I would suggest that week 1 players (the first week?  The game-learning scenario) get this as a starting device, personally.  New players need to be able to have access to these numbers quickly, or else they'll just be entirely overwhelmed.
 
CONCERN:  This game takes place in 1993.  I was too young in '93 to know if devices similar to these were around, but I don't think it's too far-fetched to think they were.
 
 
From what I've seen playing this IWBUMS build I'd say the developers are totally on the right track.  This is a fantastic addition to the game and only brings in more depth to a genre that's typically lacking in things to do.  This system only has minor shortcomings in my opinion and is looking really solid.
 
 
 
 
 

I must be doing something wrong with guns in this game.  I have never, ever said, "man I'm glad I fired that gun" after doing so in this game.  It usually comes with a large amount of regret and a solemn oath to never do it again...

I must be doing something wrong with guns in this game.  I have never, ever said, "man I'm glad I fired that gun" after doing so in this game.  It usually comes with a large amount of regret and a solemn oath to never do it again...

I must be doing something wrong with guns in this game.  I have never, ever said, "man I'm glad I fired that gun" after doing so in this game.  It usually comes with a large amount of regret and a solemn oath to never do it again...

I really like your first argument, but with the second argument I wonder- do you live in the southern United States?

My neighbor (back home now, at my mother's house) still fires his gunpowder cannon every 4th of July.  People aren't exaggerating... it's REALLY like that.  There are guns everywhere- hunting season sounds like a mini war.  The other neighbors have some kind of mounted tripod machine-gun that I'm positively sure is illegal. I had 22 classmates in my high school that parked across the street in a guy's field because they wouldn't take their guns out of their cars when they came to school in the morning.  For reference there were around 400 students total in the school (so it's kind of a lot of people...).
 
Around those parts people are just as likely to own a gun safe and leave their guns on top of it as they are to actually lock the thing. And my county wasn't even that "backwoods".
 
If you could only come visit in November you'd hear more gun shots out in the piddly little country (I was actually born in Kentucky, but lived most of my life in VA) than you'd ever hear in any city.  You stop flinching at gun shots you hear them so much, and so close. 
 
But I like the balance argument, and that they aren't developing guns because it's not a zombie-killing game specifically.  I think that makes sense, and I personally agree it's more fun.  But it's not... realistic, if that really matters.

I must be doing something wrong with guns in this game.  I have never, ever said, "man I'm glad I fired that gun" after doing so in this game.  It usually comes with a large amount of regret and a solemn oath to never do it again...

I must be doing something wrong with guns in this game.  I have never, ever said, "man I'm glad I fired that gun" after doing so in this game.  It usually comes with a large amount of regret and a solemn oath to never do it again...

One of the points Kim was making to me earlier that intrigued me was that there were several different ways to nerf guns.  Stuff like panic's effects, zombie attraction, the effectiveness of the firearms skills in general, etc., etc.
 
I can see that, that's definitely good thinking.  But my reservations still come from thinking of the game in the longer term, and I think multiplayer is the future of the game.  I know that, as you had pointed out Kim, there are lots of good reasons to think twice about initiating in PvP, but it could also be said those reasons are diminished the more armed people you have at your back.  If a group of 10 people can get on a server and find enough guns to supply themselves as quickly as they would in a realistic southern United States I think that multiplayer balance is going to be hurting as a result.  
 
There's part of me that thinks that's a good thing, part of me that thinks it's a bad thing.  On one hand it's really cool that a group of marauders could join a server, arm themselves, and cause some mayhem.  That's something that could totally happen in the zombie apocalypse (like those crazy motorcycle guys in both iterations of Dawn of the Dead), and that adds some spice to it.  But on the other hand that sounds like a big blow to the balance of power that comes from long hours of building up a fortress and scavenging for supplies.
 
With enough armed people that could find guns easily you could just form a firing line.
 
Honestly keeping it as an option is always going to be the best bet, but I think we all agree with that (whether it be mods or weapon spawn rates, etc.).  It's just about how vanilla will play out...

I really like your first argument, but with the second argument I wonder- do you live in the southern United States?

My neighbor (back home now, at my mother's house) still fires his gunpowder cannon every 4th of July.  People aren't exaggerating... it's REALLY like that.  There are guns everywhere- hunting season sounds like a mini war.  The other neighbors have some kind of mounted tripod machine-gun that I'm positively sure is illegal. I had 22 classmates in my high school that parked across the street in a guy's field because they wouldn't take their guns out of their cars when they came to school in the morning.  For reference there were around 400 students total in the school (so it's kind of a lot of people...).
 
Around those parts people are just as likely to own a gun safe and leave their guns on top of it as they are to actually lock the thing. And my county wasn't even that "backwoods".
 
If you could only come visit in November you'd hear more gun shots out in the piddly little country (I was actually born in Kentucky, but lived most of my life in VA) than you'd ever hear in any city.  You stop flinching at gun shots you hear them so much, and so close. 
 
But I like the balance argument, and that they aren't developing guns because it's not a zombie-killing game specifically.  I think that makes sense, and I personally agree it's more fun.  But it's not... realistic, if that really matters.

Somehow, I don't think most people will accept guns nerfed even further than current, even if the reason  is so that loot spawns appear more realistic.

Yes, but that's not my point.
 
The topic of firearms and the lack there of is one I see all the time, especially with my American friends who actually live in the south.
 
My point is that gun culture is a huge thing in Kentucky, especially in the 90s. To cut it out of the game in the argument that it will be too easy to 'win' because the player (who may or may not have firearm skill) can find a Hunting Rifle in somebody's wardrobe on top of whatever is in the gun shop, and just more guns in general, is almost an unnecessary precaution. (I'm assuming that that was the reason rifles were only given two or three spawn options but I could be wrong).
 
Like you said, Project Zomboid is far from a typical zombie-killing game in the sense that it's not about zombie killing. You don't have to restrict guns to make that point. One thing people forget here is even if you manage to scavenge 50 shotguns, you are only using one of them at a time, and as it stands it isn't that difficult to maintain a shotgun and find ammo for it.
 
That said, there is a huge opportunity here to capitalize on the gun culture and make it seem as Kentucky as possible, while still preventing guns from completely overtaking the game. I mentioned before that this is something the developers should really test and take results on when they do end up adding more guns before saying "this is fine and there is no reason to change it". I stand by that statement, and I think I justified why I feel that way in my first post.
 
 
 
 

I really like your first argument, but with the second argument I wonder- do you live in the southern United States?

My neighbor (back home now, at my mother's house) still fires his gunpowder cannon every 4th of July.  People aren't exaggerating... it's REALLY like that.  There are guns everywhere- hunting season sounds like a mini war.  The other neighbors have some kind of mounted tripod machine-gun that I'm positively sure is illegal. I had 22 classmates in my high school that parked across the street in a guy's field because they wouldn't take their guns out of their cars when they came to school in the morning.  For reference there were around 400 students total in the school (so it's kind of a lot of people...).
 
Around those parts people are just as likely to own a gun safe and leave their guns on top of it as they are to actually lock the thing. And my county wasn't even that "backwoods".
 
If you could only come visit in November you'd hear more gun shots out in the piddly little country (I was actually born in Kentucky, but lived most of my life in VA) than you'd ever hear in any city.  You stop flinching at gun shots you hear them so much, and so close. 
 
But I like the balance argument, and that they aren't developing guns because it's not a zombie-killing game specifically.  I think that makes sense, and I personally agree it's more fun.  But it's not... realistic, if that really matters.

I really like your first argument, but with the second argument I wonder- do you live in the southern United States?

My neighbor (back home now, at my mother's house) still fires his gunpowder cannon every 4th of July.  People aren't exaggerating... it's REALLY like that.  There are guns everywhere- hunting season sounds like a mini war.  The other neighbors have some kind of mounted tripod machine-gun that I'm positively sure is illegal. I had 22 classmates in my high school that parked across the street in a guy's field because they wouldn't take their guns out of their cars when they came to school in the morning.  For reference there were around 400 students total in the school (so it's kind of a lot of people...).
 
Around those parts people are just as likely to own a gun safe and leave their guns on top of it as they are to actually lock the thing. And my county wasn't even that "backwoods".
 
If you could only come visit in November you'd hear more gun shots out in the piddly little country (I was actually born in Kentucky, but lived most of my life in VA) than you'd ever hear in any city.  You stop flinching at gun shots you hear them so much, and so close. 
 
But I like the balance argument, and that they aren't developing guns because it's not a zombie-killing game specifically.  I think that makes sense, and I personally agree it's more fun.  But it's not... realistic, if that really matters.

Several issues with your 'challenge.' The overarching one being the focus of the game. There's also many other types and amounts of shovels, corn, and shoes than the game represents. PZ isn't a game about killing zombies and never has been. Guns are a secondary objective and a relatively low priority compared to other things, as they well should be given the focus of the game.
 
On the other hand, there's also the issue that many parts of the US require guns to be locked up in safes when stored in the home. Even in areas where they needn't be, many people do anyways for obvious reasons. Gun safes aren't really just something you can pop into with a crowbar. They require extreme power tools or other methods that are really out of the scope of the game, again tying back into that not really being the focus of development. One can safely assume these items are well out of reach of players, which makes the volume of available firearms much more consistent with what you'd fine in reality.

In my current playthrough the power finally went out so I went to fire up my generator and it wouldn't power anything but my lamps. The fridges stay dead as do the overhead lights turned on with switches... My base is the knox bank in muldraugh so might just be an issue with that building, I'll have to experiment some more before I file a bug report.

EDIT: did some more testing and generators are indeed broken. While fridges DO cool items they make no sound until you walk far enough away that the area reloads and overhead lights continue to be unusable even after that. Was this a balance change to make using lamps required? If so you get a thumbs up from me, just fix the fridges not making sound until you leave the area.

As I recall it goes like this: when a zombie hits you, it rolls to determine if it's a "punch", a scratch or a bite. This roll is affected by thick skin, I just have never seen any values on that. If you get a scratch, a second roll is done to determine if you will zombify. This roll is also affected by thick skin (-10% reduction according to the wiki, thx for looking that up King Kitteh!). Finally, if you get a bite, it's a second roll with a flat 96% chance of zombification with no possible modifiers (that I know of). So the roll that determines damage is separate from the roll that determines whether you zombify or not.
 
FYI, even if you're lucky and do not get infected from a bite, you are still extremely likely to die from the massive fever you're still going to get. You're not pulling through unless you have a huge food supply you can afford to eat up within a few days :/

As an ex-player of DayZ from back in the day when a bandit was a guy who held you up for a can of beans, and didn't KOS, I couldn't agree more.
 
This is why I think it should be admin-controlled for multiplayer. However my stance comes from the view that a lot of servers end up turning respawning loot on or increase the amount of guns themselves (or just use mods) to do the same thing. As it is, there is plenty of room to play with when it comes to adding powerful guns into the pool. Other than for PVP in multiplayer, maxing out your gun skill isn't entirely desirable at the moment. 
 
This is the kind of thing testing would be required for since Project Zomboid does not have much in common with those kinds of game and has plenty of unique features in it's own right. The medical system and panic, as well as the effects of having a low aiming skill , are very de-motivational for KOS style combat in a non-PVP server.