Comments on: New damage model

By: Tenshi

Tenshi — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:11:53 +0000

Yeah, that sounds more reasonable. So both a gun and a sniper can one-shot-kill you with a headshot, but hitting the upper body, a gun would need multiple shots to kill you, while a sniper would still have a 1-shot-kill.

By: Hacktank

Hacktank — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 03:46:25 +0000

I do not think this is a good idea. Guns shoot different sized bullets, a pistol shoots a very small(usually) bullet that does little damage unless it hits in a critical spot. Some sniper rifles can shoot a very large bullet that can sever a man in two, or at least blast a gaping hole. I think hit location should just apply a damage multiplier to how much damage is done. Like a head shot would be 7x, upper torso 3.5x, arms 0.8x, upper legs 1.2x, lower legs 0.8x, ect.

My two cents.

By: Tenshi

Tenshi — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:26:55 +0000

I sadly have to say that I really dont like the new changes. The new damage model has reduced the gameplay to “whoever shoots first wins”. Escaping from a fight is highly unprobable, so usually you just run around until you find an enemy, and then they both shoot until one of them is dead. Then you move on. This is opposed to the way it was before, where you could actually escape, recover and return if the situation permitted.

Also, the one-shot-kill makes head and body armor a must, so there’s not much flexibility left in the things you choose.
Bots are also incredibly boring because of the one/two-shot kills. They oppose no threat whatsoever.

The weight also feels strange now… have you dropped the easy-medium-heavy levels for percentages? It feels much less mobile than before.

Will you post a more elaborate post about the direction you are taking this?

By: Monsteri

Monsteri — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:59:33 +0000

How much do they refuse damage?

By: MM

MM — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:01:52 +0000

Sorry I didn’t write about armor. Armor stops bullets, even at head.

By: Monsteri

Monsteri — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:00:56 +0000

But still though, I think that at least HEAVY armor should stop bullet enough when hit to head, no kill. Maybe loose 80%.

By: MM

MM — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:53:06 +0000

illu: smaller weapons are easier to handle, meaning: their aim is as accurate as your mouse cursor movement. Also you can shoot pretty good while running with a pistol or smg.

Railgun can shoot 2 guys in 1 shot, if you need a reason to use it

Grenades and nade launchers can knock-off the entire armor in 1 shot.

Sniper is 100% accurate, so is good for long shots. Other guns are not that accurate (accuracy is a random deviation from were the gun is actually aiming at).

By: GFACE

GFACE — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:13:57 +0000

MM it is a brilliant idea to unify damage!)

By: fgg02

fgg02 — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 06:16:16 +0000

@illu:

MM recently said he was considering making movement speed dependent of the weapon you have in hand.

IMO gun wobbling is pretty high on all gun right now, making the pistol almost totaly accurate AND having Headshots would make it a weapon of choice.

I really like your fire rate suggestion. This kind of options usually add to the tactical feeling of a shooter!

@MM:
DAMAGE VS. ARMOR should be a gun stat.

By: illu

illu — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:19:04 +0000

Hm…interesting approach. Will make it definitely more realistic.
But talking about realism: Why should I choose a slow shooting pistole if I can some automatic weapon which shoots much faster and therefore also kills faster?
Yes, it would weight a bit more. But imo that’s the only real disadvantage.

bullet speed –> faster –> better
fire rate –> faster –> better
maneuverability –> a bit lower –> can’t be that much difference
weight –> higher –> I walk a bit slower
recoil –> higher/lower? –> doesn’t matter with 2-3 hits to kill
steadiness –> ??

With this damage model I would suggest to let us change the fire rate of the automatic weapons. So either 1-shot, 3-shot or automatic.