Vista's Improved Balance and Ballistics System

[Vista]

Vista's Improved Balance and Ballistics System

Hello everyone,


After the controversial update to the Ballistics and Weapon Damage in general, and due to the overall dissatisfaction from a substancial portion of the community in regards to the update, I've decided to take matters into my own hands and release a ballistics update myself.


Now, to understand what I changed, it's important to be in the loop about the past weapon damage balance and 'meta'. In the previous versions, fast firing rifles (like the Dutch, Canadian and French standard issue rifles) had an undeniable advantage in most engagements, especially in CQB encounters. Why?

Due to PR's gameplay nature, most engagements are going to be close-by-ish. I'd say no more than 250M. Majority of them you can call it 'CQB' - this due to the lack of scopes on some maps (lack of binoculars aswell) and the high recoil of some weapons. It's obviously better to get as close as you can before engaging the enemy. The problem is that the aformentioned rifles shine in these situations - they all have high RPM and a decent-ish ammount of base damage, this deadly combo when put against the low RPM rifles (like the AK-74) is very successful. The low RPM rifles just aren't really able to comepete at times, this is reinforced by the fact that the engine's hit detection is trash - while the AK-74 shoots 4 rounds and maybe 2 are hits (high recoil also doesn't help), the C8 just vomits 17 rounds in the same time, ensuring the kill.



So, how do you balance this? I did it in 3 different ways. The first, is through base damage. The majority of the fast firing 'NATO' factions' weapons saw a reduction in their base damage, while at the same time the glorious motherland weapons saw their base damage (slightly) increased. Secondly, I introduced a harsher damage droppoff on the NATO rifles, 7.62 rifles also had their damage droppoff increased, but not nearly as much as the NATO rifles - this way while the NATO rifles are still good at CQB, glorious motherland will be all up in that medium range buisness.

Finally, I re-enabled the 'backOnRecoil' setting on everything again. This was a setting that was enabled before 1.0 was released, which punished spraying by the fast RPM rifles. M42_Zwilling explained the technicalities, but TLDR it makes the fast firing rifles' base recoil a bit higher.

I also changed the damage modifier against non-armored targets. Reduced it to make INS maps a bit more fair, this way OpFor has a bit more survivability.

I also gave an individual buff to the british L85A2, it's supposed to use the NATO 5.56x45 round, but since that weapon's recoil is shitty and the RPM isn't all that great, I gave it the same round as the chinese QBZ-95, this way the L85A2 won't be as shitty and will have a bit more damage.

Also remember these changes are based on the PREVIOUS damage model, NOT Zwilling's 1.4.8 changes.

VERSION 2.5

Changed Bullet properties

Weapons affected: FAMAS, C8, C7, TAR-21

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 556_45_r (and all its variants)
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 39
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModmifier 0.3
include projectiles_comon.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_r.tweak 5

After:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 556_45_r (and all its variants)
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 34
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModmifier 0.3
include projectiles_comon.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_r.tweak 5

Weapons affected: QBZ-95

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 580_42_g 
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 39
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

After:
******NO CHANGE********

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 580_42_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 39
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

Weapons affected: L85A2, G36, M16

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 556_45_r
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 39
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

After:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 556_45_600
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 36
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

Decided to buff G36. 600RPM bullets added.

Weapons affected: G3, MG3, M14


Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_51_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3762
ObjectTemplate.damage 50
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

After:
***********NO CHANGE****************

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_51_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3762
ObjectTemplate.damage 50
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

Weapons affected: AK-47, AKM


Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_39
ObjectTemplate.material 3762
ObjectTemplate.damage 45
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 200
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak

After:
***************NO CHANGE****************

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_39
ObjectTemplate.material 3762
ObjectTemplate.damage 45
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak

Weapons affected: AK-74M, RPK-74M

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 545_39_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 36
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

After:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 545_39_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 37
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

Slight buff.

Weapons affected: Simonov

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_39_g
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 36
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

After:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_39_semi
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 50
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 0.3
include projectiles_common.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_g.tweak 5

Made semi automatic version of 762x39. Massive buff to damage to make it 2 shot kill as a semi automatic weapon.




Changed multipliers

Before:

Code: Select all

MaterialManager.createCell 3556 24 (Unarmored)
MaterialManager.damageMod 1.7

After:

Code: Select all

MaterialManager.createCell 3556 24 (Unarmored)
MaterialManager.damageMod 1.4

Before:

Code: Select all

MaterialManager.createCell 3762 24
MaterialManager.damageMod 1.7
MaterialManager.setEffectTemplate 0 e_bhit_s_sold_limb
MaterialManager.setDecalTemplate 0 decal_l_blood
MaterialManager.setSoundTemplate 0 S_Impact_Flesh

After:

Code: Select all

MaterialManager.createCell 3762 24
MaterialManager.damageMod 1.4
MaterialManager.setEffectTemplate 0 e_bhit_s_sold_limb
MaterialManager.setDecalTemplate 0 decal_l_blood
MaterialManager.setSoundTemplate 0 S_Impact_Flesh

Changed recoil property

Before:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.recoil.goBackOnRecoil 0

After:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.recoil.goBackOnRecoil 1

I know this might not be perfect, but it makes sense from a gameplay standpoint, and IMO it's better than Zwilling's changes.

I know some of you are like 'B-B-B-BUT VISTA MUH REALISM BROO', well PR is already a realistic game, but in the odd occasion when we have to chose between realism and gameplay, gameplay should suffice. This is a GAME that we PLAY afterall.

I also know that I didn't cover every weapon, and there's probably more stuff to balance, but if the DEVs implement these changes, I'll probably make more later on

If you've read this all the way, thanks for reading

[mectus11]

ha gayyyy

[Outlawz7]

Also changed L85A2 to use QBZ-95's damage model

Uh why?

[Kingy]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me what was wrong with the old model. The only glaring issue in my view was the god-awful backup sights the Russians had to endure. Which, admittedly, isn't a problem concerning ballistics.

[Vista]

Uh why?

I also gave an individual buff to the british L85A2, it's supposed to use the NATO 5.56x45 round, but since that weapon's recoil is shitty and the RPM isn't all that great, I gave it the same round as the chinese QBZ-95, this way the L85A2 won't be as shitty and will have a bit more damage.

It's in the post

[Kingy]

I always thought the L85 was pretty good, especially with those juicy backup sights.

[Allahu Akbar]

This is even worse.

If automatic mode cut off recoil animation then you should tweak the recoil, not the damage.

What is wrong with the current system is that a lot of it simply didn't make sense(wrong calculation on 7.62x39 kinetic energy beyond 200m, for example, resulted in 5.56 doing MORE damage than it) and the fact that it does not account for flesh damage(generally represented by temporary/permanent cavity) - only kinetic energy.

L85 is actually great because of the back up red dot.

[Vista]

This is even worse.

If automatic mode cut off recoil animation then recoil animation for 900rpm weapons should be made "sharper"(takes less time).

L85 is actually great because of the back up red dot.

No, it's not worse. And it doesn't make it 'sharper', it simply makes recoil more noticeable.

[Allahu Akbar]

No, it's not worse. And it doesn't make it 'sharper', it simply makes recoil more noticeable.

It's worse because you are also doing it wrong, just going the other direction. (magical L85 damage buff, for example; even BF4 didn't magically buff lower-rpm but same round weapons but instead gave them better handling/accuracy)

You intended to move away from realism for gameplay balance while Zwilling intended to move toward realism but fucked up both gameplay AND realism.
With proper modifiers for flesh damage and damage drop range tweaked to better fit real (or calculated) data, Zwilling's system can be fixed to improve both gameplay AND realism, but your system simply has nothing to do with realism anymore.

[Vista]

It's worse because you are also doing it wrong, just going the other direction. (magical L85 damage buff, for example; even BF4 didn't magically buff lower-rpm but same round weapons but instead gave them better handling/accuracy)

You intended to move away from realism for gameplay balance while Zwilling intended to move toward realism but fucked up both gameplay AND realism.

Balancing weapons is not something that's new to PR, how are you supposed to portray recoil? Is there some study some PhD Physician did that you want to use as a reference?

I remember that in 0.973 or something they reduced the AK-74's recoil because it was even worse than it is now.

Plus I know that giving the L85 a different ammo type isn't 'realistic' but it was likely one of the 'few' things I could've done to give it a buff. Stuff like changing the recoil animations etc is a bit of out my skill league.

Also you're making it seem like giving the L85 a buff is the same thing as giving everyone the ability to 360 quickscope around the map - it's a needed compromise to make the game more enjoyable.

But if you still think this is shit (which I heavily disagree) call it a lesser of 2 evils. I stated and honestly know that these changes aren't perfect, but I think they sure as hell beat Zwilling's.

I grabbed the previous damage model and changed what I felt needed to change. In a nuttshell, nerf high RPM rifles and buff low RPM ones. Take dovre for example.

[inb4banned]

It seems better than before but we need a proper damage chart to see how stuff is actually affected. I also think that AK74 was perfectly fine, no need to buff it.

[Frontliner]

And why doesn't the G36 also use QBZ ammo?

[Allahu Akbar]

Balancing weapons is not something that's new to PR, how are you supposed to portray recoil? Is there some study some PhD Physician did that you want to use as a reference?

I remember that in 0.973 or something they reduced the AK-74's recoil because it was even worse than it is now.

Plus I know that giving the L85 a different ammo type isn't 'realistic' but it was likely one of the 'few' things I could've done to give it a buff. Stuff like changing the recoil animations etc is a bit of out my skill league.

Also you're making it seem like giving the L85 a buff is the same thing as giving everyone the ability to 360 quickscope around the map - it's a needed compromise to make the game more enjoyable.

But if you still think this is shit (which I heavily disagree) call it a lesser of 2 evils. I stated and honestly know that these changes aren't perfect, but I think they sure as hell beat Zwilling's.

I grabbed the previous damage model and changed what I felt needed to change. In a nuttshell, nerf high RPM rifles and buff low RPM ones. Take dovre for example.

Balancing isn't new.

Full damage overhaul is, at least it has been for a long time.

AK-74 reduction should have been after v1.0.

Again, L85 isn't that bad because it has the best backup red dot(better than a lot of pure reddot sights because of the thin frame). It doesn't need increased damage especially when G36 didn't get it.


You're also forgetting one very very important thing: QBZ-95B(that fires at 900rpm)

[fecht_niko]

Looks good.

They only thing I wouldnt change is AK47 and G36.

[Vista]

Sorry but L85 is bad, and BUIS isn't an argument due to how laggy it was/is. With it's low RPM and shit recoil, it needed some love.

And AK-47 and AK-74 got buffed by 2 damage, that's a slight buff, you probably won't notice the difference.

And while indeed I didn't feel like changing the G36, since all NATO rifles use the same bullet, and the only way to change the damage is to change bullet properties, my hands were a bit tied.

But on maps like dovre, both the G36 and AK74 will still be a 3 shot kill center body at anything less than 210M, thats why I gave NATO 33 damage, it wasn't random.

[LimitJK]

hmmm, im far from convinced by this proposal.

first of im a supporter of a unified damage model, so i dislike too much tweaking around with the different damage of same caliber rifles.

while we agree that the current damage model is bad, i dont see the necessity to push towards the other direction, as we had a relatively balanced damage model before the change.
mashing everthing together like that is not the only way to achieve balance (e.g. negev became unscoped).

Secondly, I introduced a harsher damage droppoff on the NATO rifles, 7.62 rifles also had their damage droppoff increased, but not nearly as much as the NATO rifles - this way while the NATO rifles are still good at CQB, glorious motherland will be all up in that medium range buisness.

thats the point im most sceptical about. we have the problem since the update about highly ineffective long range fire, making cqb the only viable option of effectively killing your opponent. bullet sponge soldiers, rifles and coax being useless at range and resulting gamey bevior of crossing open ground with the knowledge that even if they get hit a few times they will make it to the other side safely to be healed up...
thats isnt good gameplay (nor is it realistic on a sidenote).


what really is needed though is more recoil for high rpm rifles.

[inb4banned]

Agreed with Limit about the damage dropoff, just remove it all together and it's better.

[Allahu Akbar]

Sorry but L85 is bad, and BUIS isn't an argument due to how laggy it was/is. With it's low RPM and shit recoil, it needed some love.

And AK-47 and AK-74 got buffed by 2 damage, that's a slight buff, you probably won't notice the difference.

And while indeed I didn't feel like changing the G36, since all NATO rifles use the same bullet, and the only way to change the damage is to change bullet properties, my hands were a bit tied.

But on maps like dovre, both the G36 and AK74 will still be a 3 shot kill center body at anything less than 210M, thats why I gave NATO 33 damage, it wasn't random.

You could just make L85 recoil not "shit."

Also, barrel length.

[Fracsid]

I am strongly against arbitrary damage values based on balance. There are just better ways to increase realism AND balance at the same time.

Going to repeat myself here again and say that the answer is having a random damage range. For example, the 7.62 NATO battle rifle unarmored torso to 50m would be a range from 80 to 110, causing some shots to instantly kill and others not. This mitigates the chief current complaint about balance, and leans towards a better representation of the uncertainty of terminal ballistics. The damage ranges would apply to every weapon and caliber, and could be played with for balance reasons without breaking realism by assigning arbitrary damage values to weapons.

Depending on the method of implementation of these damage ranges, there could be a representation of the small chance of an armor plate catastrophically failing, or hitting an area not covered by the plate. The damage range for 5.56mm on an armored torso to 50m, for example, could be 20-40, but heavily weighted on the lower end so that only a very small percentage of shots make the max damage.

Weighted damage ranges would also allow balance tweaking without stepping outside a reasonable realm of realism.

5.56mm M855 with its fragmentation velocity threshold could be represented as well, with the damage range expanding in the lower end past 200m, where the fragmentation is generally no longer certain. It could look, for example, as 100-200m on an unarmored torso 30-50, then past 200 it could be 20-50 somewhat weighted on the lower end. Once it hits 300 it could drop steeply to match 5.45, since its wounding mechanisms beyond there are most likely yawing and cavitation like 5.45.

Someone else can decide on specific numbers for these ranges (I'm happy to provide input as a student of terminal ballistics), but the base idea is really the best way forward here to enhance the gameplay if it's possible to implement.

Edit:

Also, +1 for adjusting damage values based on barrel length and velocity.

[Vista]

[quote=""LimitJK"]hmmm, im far from convinced by this proposal.

first of im a supporter of a unified damage model, so i dislike too much tweaking around with the different damage of same caliber rifles.

while we agree that the current damage model is bad, i dont see the necessity to push towards the other direction, as we had a relatively balanced damage model before the change.
mashing everthing together like that is not the only way to achieve balance (e.g. negev became unscoped). [/quote]


I've kept damage unified, as I explained, the L85 is a special case since if It kept the 5.56 after these changes it would honestly become the worst rifle in the game. Instead I'd prefer to reduce its recoil, but I don't know how to do that, so that was the solution I came up with.

thats the point im most sceptical about. we have the problem since the update about highly ineffective long range fire, making cqb the only viable option of effectively killing your opponent. bullet sponge soldiers, rifles and coax being useless at range and resulting gamey bevior of crossing open ground with the knowledge that even if they get hit a few times they will make it to the other side safely to be healed up...
thats isnt good gameplay (nor is it realistic on a sidenote).

[quote="inb4banned""]Agreed with Limit about the damage dropoff, just remove it all together and it's better.[/quote]

One of the main reasons why I chose the damage dropoff as a balancing measure is because on Zwilling's feedback thread some people said they enjoyed this mechanic, apparently not so much anymore Granted, my dropoff is much more 'tame' than his.

But after some discussion with someone, and if the 3 shot kill at 300m is so important, I have absolutely no problem making it happen.

I can give the NATO rifles 34 damage and dropoff at 400m like it was before. (The 400m would also be applied to the other rifles)

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 556_45_r (and all its variants)
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 34
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.4
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 400
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 1000
ObjectTemplate.gravityModmifier 0.3
include projectiles_comon.tweak
include projectiles_tracer_r.tweak 5

[quote=""LimitJK"]what really is needed though is more recoil for high rpm rifles.[/quote]

That was already implemented with the recoil property change. Please read the whole post.

This damage system is by no means a 'complete' overhaul, it simply grabs the previous system and adds slight (yes, very slight) changes to damage, where it was needed. I mostly enjoyed the previous system, hence why I made only slight changes.

I've said multiple times before that these changes are not perfect , and tbh I would love to keep gathering feedback in order to make the perfect infantry balance patch, however if the devs are just going to pretend that this thread doesn't exist and will keep using Zwilling's changes, I'm not going to waste my time. I'd prefer if they gave a little hint on weather they're interested in these changes/will implement a substancial amount of them for me to keep working on this.

[quote="Allahu Akbar""]You could just make L85 recoil not "shit."[/quote]
As I've said before, I don't know how to change the recoil on a specific gun.

I am strongly against arbitrary damage values based on balance. There are just better ways to increase realism AND balance at the same time.

Dude it's a code variable change in a make believe war setting, is it really going to keep you awake at night? Chill pls