Infantry weapon damage changes

[mebel]

ok i was on Sareema the other day as a USMC sniper...

right up on the hill near industrial port i came across a Russian soldier who was looking for me....

he was like ~10m-5m away from me, i took my time and aim between his **** and abdomen... bullzeye shot right on target and somehow he managed to survive my shot!!
i had to finish him with my M9 with 3 shots in his face.... !!!

now idk what type of body armor the guy was wearing but No way he can survive a 7.62×51mm NATO bullet from that close range for a sniper Rifle..

i didn't test long range but still...and didn't test out the other sniper Rifles so please let me know if this is intentional !!?

my connection and ping was perfect at that time.......

Same here on Opeartion Archer. I was like 10m form enemy, hit him with svd and he manged to survive it somehow. I shoot him second time and he was still up. It was in 1.4.8 though.

[AlonTavor]

Same here on Opeartion Archer. I was like 10m form enemy, hit him with svd and he manged to survive it somehow. I shoot him second time and he was still up. It was in 1.4.8 though.

Not possible to survive 2 SVD shots point blank. Its just bad lag compensation.
The hit effects are purely client side and should not be trusted.

[Mostacho]

Same here on Opeartion Archer. I was like 10m form enemy, hit him with svd and he manged to survive it somehow. I shoot him second time and he was still up. It was in 1.4.8 though.

Sometimes the hitbox bugs or something like that, and the shot does not count

Just one more reason not to take such penalizing damages on an engine like this

[Mats391]

Sometimes the hitbox bugs or something like that, and the shot does not count

Just one more reason not to take such penalizing damages on an engine like this

I read that a couple of time, care to explain? Why is higher damage bad in those cases?

[inb4banned]

I read that a couple of time, care to explain? Why is higher damage bad in those cases?

He's saying these changes don't make sense since server decides to eat that 1 bullet that's supposed to kill somebody and 4 shots at a distance turn into 6. You can't make weapon balistics realistic and consistent with this engine, it simply doesn't work.

[Mats391]

He's saying these changes don't make sense since server decides to eat that 1 bullet that's supposed to kill somebody and 4 shots at a distance turn into 6. You can't make weapon balistics realistic and consistent with this engine, it simply doesn't work.

But where is the difference to it requiring 2 hits like before? Then the server would still eat the bullets. Or is this solely saying "its a game, dont even try"?

[Mostacho]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Mats391;2163777']I read that a couple of time, care to explain? Why is higher damage bad in those cases?[/quote]

This guy explained better than I would:

[quote="inb4banned""]He's saying these changes don't make sense since server decides to eat that 1 bullet that's supposed to kill somebody and 4 shots at a distance turn into 6. You can't make weapon balistics realistic and consistent with this engine, it simply doesn't work.[/quote]

I have some doubts myself, would you mind answering too?

the old damage was good, the gameplay was fun and overall balanced, there was no need to change it so drastically. It took years and years to get most maps balanced, why do you think changing the most basic part of the game, shooting, is a good idea now?

I would like to know what gameplay balance aspects were taken into consideration before pushing this update?

All for the sake of muh reality? It is something so simple to understand, this engine does not support this wacko stuff you guys want to force in.

[Mostacho]

But where is the difference to it requiring 2 hits like before? Then the server would still eat the bullets. Or is this solely saying "its a game, dont even try"?

The difference is in the damage that a single shot can do now

At least in the insurgent game mode with 1 shot, If you dont die, you get so fucked up that you can not do anything else, it is hard even to patch yourself

So it is all related to the damage you do and take, which curiously, was the only thing altered

[inb4banned]

But where is the difference to it requiring 2 hits like before? Then the server would still eat the bullets. Or is this solely saying "its a game, dont even try"?

What he's trying to model doesn't work, is inconsistent, not realistic, bad for gameplay so what the fuck is the point of trying to model something when it fails on all levels?

[Mats391]

The difference is in the damage that a single shot can do now

At least in the insurgent game mode with 1 shot, If you dont die, you get so fucked up that you can not do anything else, it is hard even to patch yourself

So it is all related to the damage you do and take, which curiously, was the only thing altered

But that works against hitreg issues. If before you needed 2 hits to register and now only 1, frustrating situations where the enemy refuses to die should be less. That is also what i heard from some oceanic players as an argument to go for even higher damage.

[inb4banned]

Mats391;2163796']But that works against hitreg issues. If before you needed 2 hits to register and now only 1, frustrating situations where the enemy refuses to die should be less. That is also what i heard from some oceanic players as an argument to go for even higher damage.

Are you serious with this logic

[bahiakof]

I also think the new damage system was not a good idea to be applied to the (BF2) engine: Refractor 2 (closed source).
All R-CON and R-DEV do a great job, I've been following the progress of Project Reality since 2007, but I feel like they need to work on the behavioral part of the players on the servers now.
Project Reality gives a lot of freedom to types of players who can not really have them (novices and "vanilleiros"), and these end up simply disrupting the entire team, either by: wasting of tickets, assets and so on.

[blayas]

Mats spoke about the higher damage, which helps against failures in the hits detection Logically.

  And in my opinion the lethality must be high, corresponding to realistic ballistics as far as it is applicable, low lethality destroys an environment conducive to a tactical game and strategic depthnes.

In addition, it should have realistic consistency based on palpable and realistic data And real principles and concepts when the data is not available or partial available, as the last change is moving to did, without arbitrary buffs or nerfs justified by a dumb balance.
The only changes that I may not have liked were those that reduced lethality under certain conditions, not all of them evidently because in some of them there really should not be as much lethality, but I still believe that Energy transferred to the target would take him out of action in some cases, case of 12 gauge shotguns, and carabine~submachineguns calibers at close-med distances.

[DogACTUAL]

I still believe that Energy transferred to the target would take him out of action in some cases, case of 12 gauge shotguns, and carabine~submachineguns calibers at close-med distances.

Same here, many pistol cartridges and the shotguns still don't have, even by realism standarts, reasonable power.

[obpmgmua]

I feel like the AK caliber weapons are wonky. Sometimes they kill in 1 o 2 shots. Other times it takes up to a whole mag to kill. I'm playing on local and my targets are bots. Speaking of which you need to adjust the bot's aim or something because it feels like If they're facing my general direction I drop dead in an instant.

[Allahu Akbar]

But that works against hitreg issues. If before you needed 2 hits to register and now only 1, frustrating situations where the enemy refuses to die should be less. That is also what i heard from some oceanic players as an argument to go for even higher damage.

That's a poor reason to increase damage for automatic full caliber rifle rounds because what's expected to be one-shot could be turned into 2-3 by hitreg failure.

Also, despite sniper nerf being good; ironsighted bolt action rifles shouldn't have been nerfed(if I recall correctly, it used to one hit on legs and black/white on armored torso).

[Heavy Death]

Also, despite sniper nerf being good; ironsighted bolt action rifles shouldn't have been nerfed(if I recall correctly, it used to one hit on legs and black/white on armored torso).

You don't get it, right? Nerfing something is making it deliberately weaker in order to achieve "balance". The point of the weapons update is to make damage based on ballistics, to make everything relate in between in realistic proportions. Nerfing or buffing does absolutely the opposite.

[LimitJK]

You don't get it, right? Nerfing something is making it deliberately weaker in order to achieve "balance". The point of the weapons update is to make damage based on ballistics, to make everything relate in between in realistic proportions. Nerfing or buffing does absolutely the opposite.

well thats not at all what the update did.

in a desperate push to make different calibers more distinguishable some calibers were made one shot (buffed) while others got degraded to pellet guns (excessive nerf).

furthermore there is an exaggerated damage dropoff on range leading to ridiculous bulletsponge soldiers, WHICH LEADS TO UNREALISTIC BEHAVIOUR by the players.

this is justified by a 1:1 equalization of kinetic energy and damage which
1. is neither realistic
2. nor explains the scaling of damage done.

(explanation of the second point: the damage done shouldnt scale in direct correlation, as there is a treshold under which no damage is done [e.g. football bouncing off your chest]. this means that the lower and upper damage extrema [by low velocity low mass, high velocity high mass bullets] should be closer together)

all these points are only regarding realism.


the negative effects on gameplay are in my opinion even more important and got outlined already by other posters. this is after all a game revolving around tactics and teamwork and not a simulation.

while i really enjoyed one life events for their change of pace and those changes may work in such controlled environment, i dont think changes like this should be forced on the rest of the game by the realism crowd, only to create some discount arma.

[Heavy Death]

But you need to understand they need to fine tune the base stuff first, i.e. get the ballistics as close to RL as possible and only then start to take in barrel lenght and then flight characteristics and so on. Doing it behind closed dors is just impossible as you need fluid gameplay not just 10v10 testing sessions.

[viirusiiseli]

But you need to understand they need to fine tune the base stuff first, i.e. get the ballistics as close to RL as possible and only then start to take in barrel lenght and then flight characteristics and so on. Doing it behind closed dors is just impossible as you need fluid gameplay not just 10v10 testing sessions.

That will take forever and will still not work. They "fixed" several years of balance and will not revert the changes because pride.

And seriously, some common sense and thinking things through rather than "testing behind closed doors" would have told anyone that making this change to bullet damage is not fine.

Make do with what you have now, it wont change soon...