Disagree. Imho, an environment is more creepy when it looks like everyday with usual colors and weather, without obvious traces of war, acid yellow rains or fogs... I acknowledge it's a question of personal tastes, so i would play a game which puts me in a simple tomorrow's day, when all people suddenly disappear. Without hackneyed stories about viruses, alien invasion, war between several political sides, nuclear bombs etc. Without a clear story the game will stay more universal (even if it has some official explanation, for the moment its environment lets us to not be involved in some concrete scenario). Even if you just add some signs of anarchy and chaos such as bigger destructions or writings on the walls, it will make a story and questions - such as "where are all these people who left so many traces if there are just 40 survivors on the whole map and few zombies in every town?"

I didn't play other apocalypses games, but we all can see releases of recent years, so i bet now being so "usual" its environment stays more unique. Shouldn't be changed for look like "one of those...", which you saw in movies or read in books. While the game is so simple, it stays rich.

I don't think making sound for spawn can prevent server hopping even for a bit. Because server hopping started and continued when the game had a sound of spawning, right? Adding the sound seems quite natural, i don't mind - as in real life sounds let us to find out a human before we see him, in the game it can prevent us from absolutely sudden encounter. But does it have such a big sense in a game which is generally about danger and makes you to run continuously and turn around every second checking your back? The suggestion isn't about preventing of hopping absolutely... Preventing from sudden danger - i have a doubt... meeting of silently moving players near your location is much more often and dangerous than a spawn, but it won't make us to ask about increasing the sounds of steps for let us to hear all players in 30 meters... or... will it? :)

Had similar problem trying to perform some action (switch weapon, eat smth.) near the wall inside of cabin. Player starts to move forward through the wall performing an action which shouldn't cause a move. Dead player on the ground as result. Seems that cranes and cabins are one problem generally (both wall and floor), so i vote up here.

Sorry, disagree... The problem is - when a player wants to do anything in the game, it would be more realistic to put everything in his hands, so weapon doesn't seem too special (why not to make the same with plastic box, emptying ammo box etc.). In my humble opinion we should consider a difference between realism of conditions or obstacles (sickness, dangers, needs in some equipment etc.) and realism of simple human's actions for this game. Shouldn't care about the second. Because for the second thing it's better to take real gun or a bow and to find real forest around own home for shooting some cans or bottles instead of enjoying simulation in front of PC. It will be 100% real and hard then.

And i think, if to reduce spawning of ammo, people won't think about saving them. They will shoot each other with the same enthusiasm, but thinking "what if loot some more ammo from that guy?"

We all guess how it works... If to reduce some highly-advantageous equipment, you'll have a "war for one point of the map". Because you should choose between making something to spawn rarely at the same known object and the logic (I don't think that's a right way to make something to spawn unpredictably and rarely but let you to find a box of 5.56 ammo in a civilian building after 100 hours). And let's not to forget that game will stay always symbolical. The reason you won't shoot with a gun around you after 30 hours, is a size of real world. A size only, and locked doors. That's all. The game shows you that you'll have a gun with ammo, earlier or later. And you will shoot, after 30 hours or 150 hours. So in fact it's a question of "should the game have military objects?" Because if there is one - you'll have "soldiers". And if you play only 20 hours, you'll meet someone who has played 320 hours. What's the difference? If a game implies ammo, you'll have it early or later and it will be eventually a question of "should ammo exist in a game?" It's all about time... all about time, and stretching of the time too much for a computer game - it's not fun. And the fun is also a question of your own thoughts. For me every time I find a box of ammo is a "wow" moment, even when I've collected 10. Because I know I need them all in preparation to meeting with "soldiers". And if to speak about difficulty, I think, the right way developers have chosen is to make zombies more dangerous, extremely fast - so you need to shoot them often. Thinking about ammo accessibility - as opposed to military equipment rarity I believe you're able to find a kind of civilian rifle for hunting in every second village house in real (if we speak about such wild villages) and in fact - together with ammo, that's more logical. So, you never will find an ideal balance, need to accept that it's a game. There will be always someone with any gun, and ammo always will be collected, when they exist at all. Seems that such things can't be specially "leveled" when all people play together pretending to simulate real life. For example to not let you to reach military base before you've ran with a bow enough. We all don't want to get a kind of korean rpg about surviving, right? :)