v1.4.8 Infantry weapon damage changes - Page 2

shifty454 · 2017-04-23, 23:34

really like the change nothing bad to say

~~viirusiiseli~~ · 2017-04-23, 23:40

I apperciate the push toward realism, and this change does bring some really good points into infantry combat and rifle damage. But it is too far on the realism side, leaving out gameplay from consideration.

The change should not only be based on reality, as you should know from previous experience it tips the scales too much in a game. Gameplay aspect is not considered in: shotguns, pistols, submachine guns and other lower caliber guns. Also not thought out is balance between unarmored and armored factions.

Guns with smaller rounds and shotguns are, gameplay wise, made quite useless. Indeed, they are probably not the best in actual combat either, but have their own positive aspects. Those aspects will not be sufficiently presented with this change unless you meet gameplay half way with realism.

I will assume the hasty change will more or less stay the same with minor tweaks, as has happened before. So to give possible fixes for some balance, insurgent factions with no requestable kits should be given much more support and marksman weapons. They lacked before, now the need will be highlighted more. SVDs or more PKMs should spawn to caches, a few more at main too. A single SVD every 5 minutes for fallujah for example, is not enough.

SMGs, shotguns and pistols damage should be buffed a bit for gameplays sake, no matter what reality may be.

7.62 MGs were already very effective before, they will be crazy good now if not nerfed a bit.

Overall more lethality against unarmored targets will shift insurgency balance so it is even easier for blufor to attack and be a bit untouchable to insurgents with the help of scopes.

Rabbit · 2017-04-23, 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vista

Well the meta shifted from one side to the other...

The M240 and MG3 are all one-shot-bullet-vomiting gods now.

How is it reasonable to give AUTOMATIC rifles one shot capability? If the MG3 was powerful now it's just fucking ridiculous

Because they are, hell they were a huge gameplay change when 1.0 dropped, and people adjusted to that new meta. ALSO its 2 shots to the chest, granted 2 shots with the mg3 might as well be one its a limited OP weapon with exception to mec and germans (and hopefully this pushes devs to remove mg 3 as lmg for mec finally.) 240 has plenty of fairly equal counter parts to it so I dont see it as gamebreaking.

Vista · 2017-04-23, 23:56

'Adjusting to the meta' is not an excuse to tolerate broken mechanics. Adjustments need to be made, more specifically 7.62 ARs.

Also +1 to what viirus said, INS (and Vietnam) are NOT going to be fun

X-Alt · 2017-04-24, 00:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rabbit

More reason for Mineral to finish SAF.

More reason for MEC to have an AK faction variant.

Rabbit · 2017-04-24, 00:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vista

'Adjusting to the meta' is not an excuse to tolerate broken mechanics. Adjustments need to be made, more specifically 7.62 ARs.

Also +1 to what viirus said, INS (and Vietnam) are NOT going to be fun

Its not a long term one, but a "hey lets just chill and see what happens over the next month" thought. See if the meta is capable of the change or if it will be an impossible shift.

DogACTUAL · 2017-04-24, 00:34

Very pleased overall, i always wanted to have cartridge based damage for weapons.
It always bothered me that weapons with the same cartridge had vastly different damage, like the G3 vs many sniper rifles, barrel length and ammo type can only account for so much.
Too gamey imo, that kind of system is better suited for AAA mainstream FPS.

However you shouldn't solely look at kinetic energy for assigning the dmg values for unarmored targets.

For example i heard that cartridges like the 5.56x45 or 5.45x39 actually wreak more havok on human tissue in a certain range window, when the actually already lost a fair amount of kinetic energy.

That's because point blank the round would go straight and clean through the tissue, but after losing a bit of kinetic energy it instead starts tumbling once inside, because of the unstable nature of those specific projectiles (center of mass of the bullet is shifted).

So the bullet basically turns vertically and ruptures a way bigger cavity through the tissue than it would have point blank with maximum kinetic energy.

Also, buckshot on unarmored center mass should be a one shot takedown at close range, no matter what overall kinetic energy compared to single projectiles it has.
Those pellets combined will have an overwhelming man stopping power and destroy so much blood vessels and hit vital areas that kinetic energy doesn't play any major role at all in its effectiveness.

People complaining about the pistol caliber weapons do have a point, but i would really like to see a solution that doesn't involve assigning unrealistic dmg values to those weapons, because that would defeat the whole purpose of this update if you ask me.

Mostacho · 2017-04-24, 00:35

Al basrah gameplay is broken

Asad khal gameplay is broken

bayam gameplay is broken

falluhja gameplay is broken

gaza gameplay is broken

fools road gameplay is broken

karbala gameplay is broken

Op archer gameplay is off chart broken

mestia gameplay is broken

Ramiel gameplay is broken

General maps gameplay is worst

i liked the change on silent eagle though, so i guess it is ok

Seriously now... i get that the name of the game is project reality, bud you cant just have the bullet damage changed to be more realistic and leave everything else unrealistic and expect that it will improve the game experience

I feel like this uptade removed the INS maps from the game and also made useless all pistol caliber guns and shotguns

For what? muh realism?

increase the dmg on the .308 guns, bud leave the rest as it was please

obpmgmua · 2017-04-24, 04:13

These changes are awful. It's almost as bad as .7 deviation system. G3, FAL, MG3, M240, PKM = OP. I was using the MG3 as an impromptu sniper rifle and it was good, way too good. If 7.62 weapons were so broken as you devs put it why not just give them that extra oomph for a 2 shot kill while letting 5.56 retain it's 3 shot kill?

DogACTUAL · 2017-04-24, 05:40

Okay the shotguns/pistols/SMGs are really ridiculous now. I can understand the values for body armour, but against unarmored? You can't tell me that is how ineffective they are IRL.
Otherwise why would any AF/SF even use them at all? Lower recoil/size? No.

I know that there have been quite a few instances IRL of people initially shrugging off several hits from pistols, even 5.56x45, but in the end they all succumbed to those same wounds rather quickly, so using that as an argument would be flawed.

So unless you also introduce a proper bleeding system, where the target will bleed out faster depending on the number of hits(and model spinal column, organs and major blood vessels) this is not realistic at all.

There is more to weapon effectiveness than just KE.

Still i really think having cartridges have the same DMG values on different weapons is the right call, just buff buckshot and pistol calibers to proper levels. Removing those weapons from the menu won't solve the problem.

2017-04-23, 23:34	#11
shifty454 Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 31 Canada	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes really like the change nothing bad to say
shifty454 Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 31 Canada

2017-04-23, 23:40	#12
~~viirusiiseli~~ Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 1,135 Finland	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes I apperciate the push toward realism, and this change does bring some really good points into infantry combat and rifle damage. But it is too far on the realism side, leaving out gameplay from consideration. The change should not only be based on reality, as you should know from previous experience it tips the scales too much in a game. Gameplay aspect is not considered in: shotguns, pistols, submachine guns and other lower caliber guns. Also not thought out is balance between unarmored and armored factions. Guns with smaller rounds and shotguns are, gameplay wise, made quite useless. Indeed, they are probably not the best in actual combat either, but have their own positive aspects. Those aspects will not be sufficiently presented with this change unless you meet gameplay half way with realism. I will assume the hasty change will more or less stay the same with minor tweaks, as has happened before. So to give possible fixes for some balance, insurgent factions with no requestable kits should be given much more support and marksman weapons. They lacked before, now the need will be highlighted more. SVDs or more PKMs should spawn to caches, a few more at main too. A single SVD every 5 minutes for fallujah for example, is not enough. SMGs, shotguns and pistols damage should be buffed a bit for gameplays sake, no matter what reality may be. 7.62 MGs were already very effective before, they will be crazy good now if not nerfed a bit. Overall more lethality against unarmored targets will shift insurgency balance so it is even easier for blufor to attack and be a bit untouchable to insurgents with the help of scopes.

2017-04-23, 23:56	#14
Vista Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 1,262 Europe	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes 'Adjusting to the meta' is not an excuse to tolerate broken mechanics. Adjustments need to be made, more specifically 7.62 ARs. Also +1 to what viirus said, INS (and Vietnam) are NOT going to be fun
Vista Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 1,262 Europe

2017-04-24, 00:34	#17
DogACTUAL Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 876 Germany	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes Very pleased overall, i always wanted to have cartridge based damage for weapons. It always bothered me that weapons with the same cartridge had vastly different damage, like the G3 vs many sniper rifles, barrel length and ammo type can only account for so much. Too gamey imo, that kind of system is better suited for AAA mainstream FPS. However you shouldn't solely look at kinetic energy for assigning the dmg values for unarmored targets. For example i heard that cartridges like the 5.56x45 or 5.45x39 actually wreak more havok on human tissue in a certain range window, when the actually already lost a fair amount of kinetic energy. That's because point blank the round would go straight and clean through the tissue, but after losing a bit of kinetic energy it instead starts tumbling once inside, because of the unstable nature of those specific projectiles (center of mass of the bullet is shifted). So the bullet basically turns vertically and ruptures a way bigger cavity through the tissue than it would have point blank with maximum kinetic energy. Also, buckshot on unarmored center mass should be a one shot takedown at close range, no matter what overall kinetic energy compared to single projectiles it has. Those pellets combined will have an overwhelming man stopping power and destroy so much blood vessels and hit vital areas that kinetic energy doesn't play any major role at all in its effectiveness. People complaining about the pistol caliber weapons do have a point, but i would really like to see a solution that doesn't involve assigning unrealistic dmg values to those weapons, because that would defeat the whole purpose of this update if you ask me.
DogACTUAL Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 876 Germany
	Last edited by DogACTUAL; 2017-04-24 at 04:53..

2017-04-24, 00:35	#18
Mostacho Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 47 Brazil Location: The gopnik state of Paraná	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes Al basrah gameplay is broken Asad khal gameplay is broken bayam gameplay is broken falluhja gameplay is broken gaza gameplay is broken fools road gameplay is broken karbala gameplay is broken Op archer gameplay is off chart broken mestia gameplay is broken Ramiel gameplay is broken General maps gameplay is worst i liked the change on silent eagle though, so i guess it is ok Seriously now... i get that the name of the game is project reality, bud you cant just have the bullet damage changed to be more realistic and leave everything else unrealistic and expect that it will improve the game experience I feel like this uptade removed the INS maps from the game and also made useless all pistol caliber guns and shotguns For what? muh realism? increase the dmg on the .308 guns, bud leave the rest as it was please

	Last edited by Mostacho; 2017-04-24 at 00:52..

2017-04-24, 04:13	#19
obpmgmua Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 390 Afghanistan	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes These changes are awful. It's almost as bad as .7 deviation system. G3, FAL, MG3, M240, PKM = OP. I was using the MG3 as an impromptu sniper rifle and it was good, way too good. If 7.62 weapons were so broken as you devs put it why not just give them that extra oomph for a 2 shot kill while letting 5.56 retain it's 3 shot kill?
obpmgmua Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 390 Afghanistan

2017-04-24, 05:40	#20
DogACTUAL Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 876 Germany	Re: Infantry weapon damage changes Okay the shotguns/pistols/SMGs are really ridiculous now. I can understand the values for body armour, but against unarmored? You can't tell me that is how ineffective they are IRL. Otherwise why would any AF/SF even use them at all? Lower recoil/size? No. I know that there have been quite a few instances IRL of people initially shrugging off several hits from pistols, even 5.56x45, but in the end they all succumbed to those same wounds rather quickly, so using that as an argument would be flawed. So unless you also introduce a proper bleeding system, where the target will bleed out faster depending on the number of hits(and model spinal column, organs and major blood vessels) this is not realistic at all. There is more to weapon effectiveness than just KE. Still i really think having cartridges have the same DMG values on different weapons is the right call, just buff buckshot and pistol calibers to proper levels. Removing those weapons from the menu won't solve the problem.
DogACTUAL Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 876 Germany
	Last edited by DogACTUAL; 2017-04-24 at 05:48..