Remove insta-kill headshots, or make body-shots insta-kill.

[Shepard]

Headshots should be insta death, Snipers aim for the T junction on the head, or the area above the base of the skull on the back for assured death. I want to make sure my targets dead when i snipe him in the head, IRL hes not just going to be stabbed with an epi pen and carry on

[Alselius]

I agree with all the points you had in the other thread but none of your suggestions are feasible. I don't know for sure how to change this either, the only thing I'd change is the deviation. It doesn't take 3 seconds for a trained soldier to hit someone in the body at less than 100m. I think that the current deviation system is the main reason why people go for headshots. The time it takes to fully stabilize your gun is good atm (actually it could be even longer) but at such a distance you should still be able to hit center mass in not much more than one second I think.

[Spec]

if hes going to be childish about that then thats his own problem

Aye, didn't meant you with the "no big deal", you were only posting a picture of a dragunov.

[TheOldBreed]

I think it's down to the person playing to be honest. I personally go for the body mass, and so do most of the guys I regularly play with (*sniggers*). As long as they're down and not shooting at you it's alright. Plus, when their buddy comes out to try and get them up - BOOM, more chips for the fryer.

Taking out the insta-kill headshot would detract away from the realism aspect of PR, as a hit the body can be survivable. Unfortunately BF2 can't allow a 'hit detection system' e.g. it can't differentiate a hit to the arm or the chest (as to my understanding).

Not sure if this is an urban legend, but on a side note: that guy being hit in that video was a medic. Just after, they shot and wounded the sniper, and after they found him, the same guy the sniper shot at was then treating him. "oops damn, my rifle went off, must knocked the safety off when you shot me"

[ledo1222]

Wow Realy 1 shot kill? is this your version of MW2 hardcore mode. or are you just trolling. if your serious update your first post because the things you state are complete idiotic. Im not trying to be an A-hole but the things you state make no sense in how to improve the game.

[BenHamish]

Just to clarify - By insta-kill I meant Insta-WOUND, i.e. currently you get a headshot it gives them 0% health, make it so for the torso.

Jeez.. I really didn't want to have to write a deifinition for everything, but there you go.


By 'kill' i meant Wounded, not dead-dead - obviously. As has been pointed out, there would be no fun in getting shot once, and then having to respawn.


I was really just getting some ideas off my chest after playing PR for a few months. My suggestions weren't supposed ot be set in stone, more just pointers for discussion.


Obviously in any game a headshot kill makes perfect sense and is like reality - My point was that in PR, because of the deviation per shot it makes more sense to go for one headshot than two at the centre of mass. Which arguably isn't like reality anyway - rock vs hard place.



Edit: Also, half the people are saying 'omg, no 1 shot kill headshots? SO UNREALISTIC' whereas others are saying 'omg, 1 shot kills to torso? How sad/realistic ARE YOU?'

Really argue amongst yourselves. Or better still come up with your own suggestions.

[Lugi]

Here, have my suggestion from another topic

So it would be good to have improved injuries system:
1. Headshot - you're dead dead
2. Bodyshot:
a)1 hit - you're bleeding badly but still have about 50% hp so you can find a medic
(also big deviation penalty when shot)
b)2 hits - you're black&white:
-if you get shot one more time within 3 sec you're dead dead
-otherwise you're going down and medic can revive you
3. Arm and leg shots - losing about 15-25% of hp per wound

[Nebsif]

Obviously in any game a headshot kill makes perfect sense and is like reality - My point was that in PR, because of the deviation per shot it makes more sense to go for one headshot than two at the centre of mass. Which arguably isn't like reality anyway - rock vs hard place.

Maybe long range when the enemy doesnt see you, yes, and it makes perfect sense, IRL too.
In normal fights its exactly the oposite, when the enemy saw u too, because of the deviation its better to aim for center mass, cuz unlike other games ur rifle isnt lazor accurate and ur most likely to miss headshots w/o the time to settle in.

[Imchicken1]

Head shots should remain instakill, and body shots should stay the way they are. Reason being, its alot harder to hit someones head than it is to hit their body. Unless someone is standing still then most people will go for the body shot. Plus, gameplay>reality. Instakill body shots would just involve alot of raging from players, and none insta kill head shots would be a little to unrealistic imo

[BenHamish]

Thanks. Mine would be like this:

(For the sake of this post, 'Wounded' = 0% health)

1. Headshot - You're 'Wounded'.
2. Bodyshot:
a)1 hit - Black and White. Find a medic NOW.
b)2 hits - You're Wounded.
3. Arm and leg shots - 50% health taken off.

Reason for such harsh damages, it would encourage people to be careful, rather than have the 'oh it's ok .. Get me in a minute, medic' attitude. Or the self-patching that you can do if you're SL.

[BenHamish]

Maybe long range when the enemy doesnt see you, yes, and it makes perfect sense, IRL too.
In normal fights its exactly the oposite, when the enemy saw u too, because of the deviation its better to aim for center mass, cuz unlike other games ur rifle isnt lazor accurate and ur most likely to miss headshots w/o the time to settle in.

I understand what you mean, and I think you're right. But the rifle is lazor accurate to the head at 100m as explained here.

[SGT.MARCO]

I believe that there should be a 50 50 chance of a person dieing when shot, that will help people to always take shots, move from cover to cover and avoid, walking in the open, take less chances.

[Smiddey723]

I believe that there should be a 50 50 chance of a person dieing when shot, that will help people to always take shots, move from cover to cover and avoid, walking in the open, take less chances.

can you please explain how making it 50/50 would help people move from cover to cover and help people take shots?

and if its 50/50 for all standard issue kits, what would be the point in taking a higher caliber weapon if its got the same chance of killing someone with a weapon half as powerrful as yours

[Brainlaag]

Thanks. Mine would be like this:

(For the sake of this post, 'Wounded' = 0% health)

1. Headshot - You're 'Wounded'.
2. Bodyshot:
a)1 hit - Black and White. Find a medic NOW.
b)2 hits - You're Wounded.
3. Arm and leg shots - 50% health taken off.

Reason for such harsh damages, it would encourage people to be careful, rather than have the 'oh it's ok .. Get me in a minute, medic' attitude. Or the self-patching that you can do if you're SL.

The problem is, we already had all of this, back in 0.6 or 0.5 IIRC. This may sound interesting to you and in your opinion probably would increase teamwork and overall gameplay, but its not true. There was no fun at all getting killed by freaking lazor weapons (just referring to the whiners about deviation/accuracy), nor did people use cover more frequently, they just kept dying. As already stated a thousand times, PR players are just willing to change till a specific grade, and your idea is above it. They are hardcoded, most or some (still enough to ruin the whole team) of them would rather keep charging in, then doing lame *** "I'm scared" teamwork. Plain simple, it would kill the gameplay we have now.

[Kain888]

They are hardcoded[...]

Although I agree with your post I wonder why people use this good (but old) joke about hardcoded players as true fact? It's joke! It's not true that they are hardcoded. And yes I know it's metaphor. ;]

Moving back to suggestion.

I still think that having the same dmg for head and body would be more realistic, because people will then behave like soldiers and do not wait to shot in head few seconds, because they know they will win firefight. I know I would stop shooting into head if mechanics would support this. I don't want to change damage to the body though, I do not think it's really needed.

As Fuzzhead stated in topic about headshot, we should move forward and leave headshot era behind us. This will encourage players to behave realistic and if they not, they will fail like with prone jumping. It's the same case about changing environment for players to shape their reactions.

[Brainlaag]

I still think that having the same dmg for head and body would be more realistic, because people will then behave like soldiers and do not wait to shot in head few seconds, because they know they will win firefight.

The point of headshots is to promote sneaking and flaking maneuvers. If you manage to flank an enemy, you should have a possibility to one-hit him, thus having enough time to settle. As PRT player I can only say, that equal damage to the head and the torso is just not fair in terms of firefights.
P.S. About the "people will start aiming for the torso" thing, I bet, as someone already stated above, you would already have three bullets in your chest, before you even manage to settle.

To make everything clear -->longer firefight = cooler PR

[Kain888]

The point of headshots is to promote sneaking and flaking maneuvers. If you manage to flank an enemy, you should have a possibility to one-hit him, thus having enough time to settle. As PRT player I can only say, that equal damage to the head and the torso is just not fair in terms of firefights.

To make everything clear -->longer firefight = cooler PR

So main point you wrote except one hit when sneaked supports my idea actually. And not sure if sneaking point is so valid, when someone one is not facing you can place well aimed shots in his body and wounded him before he will react anyway. I don't think that headhots promote flanking and sneaking maneuvers tbh. I doubt I will do them less.

Removing more damage to the head would make firefights last longer as you can see. ;]

P.S. About the "people will start aiming for the torso" thing, I bet, as someone already stated above, you would already have three bullets in your chest, before you even manage to settle.

Well, when I fight with someone i prefer to have 100% sure one hit and wounded enemy than not reliable body shots. This applies only to 50+ or more meters OFC! Although I'm not entirely sure about that distance, will check on next play when i go for headshot instead of shooting like it should be in game.

[mat552]

As PRT player I can only say, that equal damage to the head and the torso is just not fair in terms of firefights.
To make everything clear -->longer firefight = cooler PR

First up, PRT gameplay is drastically different than your average pub match, and the game shouldn't be balanced around tournament or scrim play. Games that capitulate to the demands of the "elite" few don't do very well for very long, because the changes are great for whatever percentage of the population participate, but that's always below 50%, usually below 15%. Even Valve were smart enough to realize this and pull back some of the changes aimed specifically at league play in TF2 that made the game for the public player worse.

Second, longer firefights encourage stupid behavior. In that first few seconds of contact, both parties tend to think with a level head. The longer the firefight lasts, the more and more the adrenaline is going to affect them as is the mounting pressure of "it's me or him". I think it was .85 when firefights lasted 30-45 seconds because deviation was so horribly bad, and those where just terrible. That didn't encourage any realistic behavior, just tactics that could do anything to bring the advantage in to you, such as bringing crewman kits for the smg in cqb.

I feel really bad for the DEVs here. Every other patch we have headshots that insta-kill, and people always, always, always complain loudly that it's not fair and it's not realistic (funny how those go together). The explanations are there for both systems. Yea, you got hit in the head with some 7.62x39. You're dead, and that's realistic. Omg you got totally sniped, but it's ok, you can still be revived because it's a game and it simulates something else.

The sky isn't falling here. Pick a system and stick with it, and players will adapt around it. I'm preferential to headshots killing for the realism factor, because it rewards patient players more than it does pronespammers and dolphin divers. It also rewards players who are competent with their weapon, which is probably a good thing in this game.

[Brainlaag]

First up, PRT gameplay is drastically different than your average pub match, and the game shouldn't be balanced around tournament or scrim play. Games that capitulate to the demands of the "elite" few don't do very well for very long, because the changes are great for whatever percentage of the population participate, but that's always below 50%, usually below 15%. Even Valve were smart enough to realize this and pull back some of the changes aimed specifically at league play in TF2 that made the game for the public player worse.

Second, longer firefights encourage stupid behavior. In that first few seconds of contact, both parties tend to think with a level head. The longer the firefight lasts, the more and more the adrenaline is going to affect them as is the mounting pressure of "it's me or him". I think it was .85 when firefights lasted 30-45 seconds because deviation was so horribly bad, and those where just terrible. That didn't encourage any realistic behavior, just tactics that could do anything to bring the advantage in to you, such as bringing crewman kits for the smg in cqb.

I feel really bad for the DEVs here. Every other patch we have headshots that insta-kill, and people always, always, always complain loudly that it's not fair and it's not realistic (funny how those go together). The explanations are there for both systems. Yea, you got hit in the head with some 7.62x39. You're dead, and that's realistic. Omg you got totally sniped, but it's ok, you can still be revived because it's a game and it simulates something else.

The sky isn't falling here. Pick a system and stick with it, and players will adapt around it. I'm preferential to headshots killing for the realism factor, because it rewards patient players more than it does pronespammers and dolphin divers. It also rewards players who are competent with their weapon, which is probably a good thing in this game.

Uhm you do know that I'm for headshots = insta kill/wounded? And for the concern of being a PRT, its even better, mistakes are only really visible during a proper game.

[karambaitos]

The sky isn't falling here. Pick a system and stick with it, and players will adapt around it. I'm preferential to headshots killing for the realism factor, because it rewards patient players more than it does pronespammers and dolphin divers. It also rewards players who are competent with their weapon, which is probably a good thing in this game.

only the BF2 engine registers headshots like spastic cow, so going for headshots is a bad idea, hence you sometimes see a guy with a dust cloud around his head and he didnt even take damage (most notable from SAW and M4, m16 bursts to the head).

if i had a dollar every time i survived a headshot without taking any damage i would have a lambo sitting in my garage.
a bit off topic that was.

I dont like this idea especially since irons sights and reddots would become too powerful, with their reduced recoil, faster movement when crouched and looking through sights it would be more like insurgency mod and getting one shot out of nowhere repeatedly gets boring pretty fast (well when the BF engine would decide to register it anyway).

People always seem to forget the hitreg in BF2 where a bullet doesnt register every 3rd shot on average. so the bullet that was suppose to kill the guy doesnt even scratch him since the engine doesnt think it actually hit a player.