Vista's Improved Balance and Ballistics System

[YAK-R]

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

This sounds good in theory, but dice rolling has no place in online FPS. Adding randomness would only cause further frustration.

[inb4banned]

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.

RNG is the worst way to do this since it adds even more to inconsistency.

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)

Yes, that's better. It really shouldn't take more than 3 body shots to kill, at such distances you're likely to hit other body parts anyway. I'd remove the dropoff completely.

This 3h file editing would result in better gameplay than Zwilling's changes based on his research.

[Mostacho]

Sounds great, especially because it looks more like the old damage

I still recommend that the damage should be reversed to the old one....once it was fine, the gameplay was fun and overall balanced, so there is no need to change it

But if people want to try new things, this change proposed by vista is an option. Since it takes gameplay balance aspects into consideration, and not just reality

[sweedensniiperr]

Yeah, I really don't see why the l85a2 should have different damage. That rifle is and hs always been fine

[Vista]

For the third time, if I had let it stay like that after the 5.56 changes, it would become the worst rifle in the game due to bad recoil and laggy BUIS.

Just because you had fun killing the INS on al basrah last week, doesn't take much time untill you hop into AAS and realise the weapon's shortcomings.

[Allahu Akbar]

For the third time, if I had let it stay like that after the 5.56 changes, it would become the worst rifle in the game due to bad recoil and laggy BUIS.

Just because you had fun killing the INS on al basrah last week, doesn't take much time untill you hop into AAS and realise the weapon's shortcomings.

Explain "laggy BUIS."

Again, if recoil is bad then fix recoil; not magic bullet.

[InfantryGamer42]

Explain "laggy BUIS."

Again, if recoil is bad then fix recoil; not magic bullet.

He sad like 5 times that he doesnt know how to fix recoil...

[Mats391]

We really do appreciate someone spending time and actually suggest changes rather then just "revert plx"

If you really think weapon damage should be balanced based on rate of fire, I would suggest to do it properly and not just randomly assign different calibers to some weapons. Nothing stops you from making a "556_45_600rpm" or "556_45_900rpm" projectile. However I see tons of issues with that.
First off you have to be consequent in doing this. E.g. G36 getting the 900rpm damage and L85 makes this whole approach even more weird. Then it completely disregards semi auto fire which even 900rpm weapons have to use a lot. I feel the entire approach assumes you only shoot them full auto all the time.
And then there are so many other weapons that would have to get similar treatment.
MG3 is 900rpm so should have less damage than M240?
SKS is semi only so should have more damage than AKM?
L1A1 is semi only so should have more damage than FAL?

The goBackOnRecoil is something we are looking into as well, but you kind of have to adjust the recoil values along with it else every weapon becomes too easy to control.
Recoil code is not hard, you already know where the files are and that is 75% of the work
The values you set are Continuous Random Distribution (CRD) values and the commands do what they say. The only thing you have to pay attention to is that for recoil only CRD_NONE and CRD_UNIFORM work. Other types crash the battlerecorder.
That being said, I never had any issues with the L85 recoil.

[Allahu Akbar]

He sad like 5 times that he doesnt know how to fix recoil...

I think it's bullshit he can find damage for a weapon but can't find where recoil file is.

MG3 is 900rpm so should have less damage than M240?
SKS is semi only so should have more damage than AKM?
L1A1 is semi only so should have more damage than FAL?

This is easy.

Give MG3 worse recoil and accuracy, SKS better accuracy(it should already have better accuracy), and make any full auto 7.62x51 non-deployed weapon near uncontrollable on full auto.

Can you explain exactly what:

Code: Select all

			
ObjectTemplate.recoil.recoilGraphExponent 0.5
ObjectTemplate.recoil.recoilGraphFrameCount 4
ObjectTemplate.recoil.recoilGraphTotalMovement 1

do?

I only notice recoilGraphFrameCount affecting length of recoil animation but not actual movement of camera(which is what I need, to make camera move faster before next round); the other two did not seem to do anything.

[Mats391]

Those dont do anything from what I tested. The recoil length seems to be fixed. Can only reduce it by setting goBackOnRecoil as it then uses second half to undo the recoil. It does not undo 100% tho

[Vista]

We really do appreciate someone spending time and actually suggest changes rather then just "revert plx"

If you really think weapon damage should be balanced based on rate of fire, I would suggest to do it properly and not just randomly assign different calibers to some weapons. Nothing stops you from making a "556_45_600rpm" or "556_45_900rpm" projectile.

Yeah, I do think that after some of the changes I made, 5.56 600RPM rifles (more specifically the L85A2) need a bit of love. In the previous version I felt the L85 was lagging behind a bit (mostly due to its recoil and slow RPM), but as I said, changing the bullet type was the solution I found. Maybe making the 5.56 600RPM variations seems like a good idea. In this engine (due to the hit detection) shooting faster is a big advantage. I'm however a bit hesitant in adding it to the G36 since I feel its recoil is much more manageable than the L85, but we'll see. I'll look into the bullet type thing.

Then it completely disregards semi auto fire which even 900rpm weapons have to use a lot. I feel the entire approach assumes you only shoot them full auto all the time.

As long as I keep them a 3 shot kill center body mass untill 400M, it's fine. Please note that most of these changes are meant to be slight tweaks. Only way of balancing correctly is to do small ish changes (so it doesn't break gameplay wink wink) and collect feedback, adjust again rinse and repeat...

MG3 is 900rpm so should have less damage than M240?
SKS is semi only so should have more damage than AKM?
L1A1 is semi only so should have more damage than FAL?

Obviously this becomes a bit tricky since we have to respect the weapons' real life counter parts. MG3 has fuck tons of visual recoil when spraying so no.

SKS is more difficult, but one example is that I absolutely love the past model on vietnam maps in the way that there's actual variety. On NVA for example, I could chose the AK and go CQB with a bit of single fire for medium distance or mosin nagant to become a medium range god and to quick scope people CQB. There's trade offs, no gun is perfect for all encounters. But in this case, since they use the same bullet, and I already planned to buff 7.62 (it's already powerfull enough) I'd keep it the same. I guess people would pick the SKS over AKM because it's more fun and because they'd like a more medium range aproach to things. Also keep in mind that I only considered adding a different bullet type to the L85 as a special measure since I felt that weapon was UP. I'm most likely not going to do that for most other weapons. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

In regards to the L1A1, nah. I'd face it as a gun limitation, plus FAL has so much recoil that it's ok, I guess. Keep it as is.


But anyway thanks a lot for the post, I'll keep working on this and keep what you said in consideration. But yeah, again, I'll most likely only consider the 900/600 RPM version for the L85 and possibly the G36. The rest was fine as it was.

[Mats391]

If G36 is so easy to control that it does not warrant a damage buff, why does the Ak74 need one? The AK74 is one of the most controllable rifles in my opinion and even comparable to the OP 900rpm ones.

Just looking at how many shots to kill are needed also is not enough. In your current values the 556 is 33 damage and 580 is 41. Against body armor both are 3 shots to kill, but this changes when shooting unarmored targets. With you 1.4 modifier those values become 46.2 and 57.4, so 580 only needs 2 shots here. Even when using the 1.2 modifier on upper legs you get to 49.2 on the 580 which is pretty much 2 shot.
The amount of health you survive with also makes big difference. 2 hits from 556 leave you with comfy 33hp, 2 hits from 580 with only 18hp. Especially on longer ranges where you use single fire (no 900rpm bonus) and often only wound your targets this makes a big difference. Your changes might fix CQB 900rpm, but make those weapons terrible when having to switch to single fire.

[DogACTUAL]

EA/DICE called, they want their game designer back. They are having trouble assigning totally made up values to guns without you.

[Vista]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Mats391;2164705']If G36 is so easy to control that it does not warrant a damage buff, why does the Ak74 need one? The AK74 is one of the most controllable rifles in my opinion and even comparable to the OP 900rpm ones.[/quote]

Nah, heavily disagree. I remember loads of times on dovre for example playing against the dutch, I would shoot 0.4 seconds earlier and they would just turn around and vomit bullets all over me. Reminder that in the previous model, AK-74 had a less damaging bullet, less RPM and more recoil. I can't let that slide. Also I never said that G36 'is so easy' I said it was easier than the L85. Also I wasn't (and I'm still not) sure if it warrants a damage buff. Will have to think about it.

Just looking at how many shots to kill are needed also is not enough. In your current values the 556 is 33 damage and 580 is 41. Against body armor both are 3 shots to kill, but this changes when shooting unarmored targets. With you 1.4 modifier those values become 46.2 and 57.4, so 580 only needs 2 shots here. Even when using the 1.2 modifier on upper legs you get to 49.2 on the 580 which is pretty much 2 shot.
The amount of health you survive with also makes big difference. 2 hits from 556 leave you with comfy 33hp, 2 hits from 580 with only 18hp. Especially on longer ranges where you use single fire (no 900rpm bonus) and often only wound your targets this makes a big difference. Your changes might fix CQB 900rpm, but make those weapons terrible when having to switch to single fire.

The version (or rather 'changelog') in the OP is not updated, I'll have to do that soon, but I'm going to give 5.56 NATO 34 damage to ensure a 3 shot kill at 400M. I'll also need to rethink 7.62 damage values, you're right on that. It's just that theres like 3 7.62 variants (x39,x51,x54) that differentiating them is going to be tough, maybe 1 damage difference each? Same for the chinese bullet - I'll give it a revision.

I'll also make a damage chart after I rethink and push the next version of the model (with all the limb modifiers and such) so that people can better understand it.

[quote="DogACTUAL""]EA/DICE called, they want their game designer back. They are having trouble assigning totally made up values to guns without you.[/quote]

ok

[Frontliner]

It's just that theres like 3 7.62 variants (x39,x51,x54) that differentiating them is going to be tough, maybe 1 damage difference each? Same for the chinese bullet - I'll give it a revision.

Actually there's 6:

7.62 x25mm= PPSh,
7.62 x33mm= M1 Carbine
7.62 x39mm= AK47 and various others
7.62 x51mm= G3, FAL, M14
7.62 x54mm= SVD, PKP
7.62 x63mm= M1 Garand, Springfield

The core difference is that the x25 and x33 are pistol type calibers, x39 intermediate and the remaining three more or less full size catridges.
Suppose you'd differentiate between x25 and x63 with 5 point damage difference doesn't do the latter justice, that's more like the type of damage difference I'd put between x25 and x39, probably even more than that.

[Vista]

Version 2

Code: Select all

-Nerfed 5.56 to 34 damage, ensuring a 3 shot kill at 400M.
-QBZ-95, G3, MG3, M14, AK-47 and AKM kept their previous model damage.
-Added new 5.56 600RPM bullet to G36 and L85A2.
-Added Semi-Automatic 7.62x39 version for Simonov.
-Changed Damage Multiplier on un-armored soldiers to 1.4x.
-Slight buff to AK-74M and RPK-74M.

I know that I contradicted myself really hard in this version, but after arguing with a fellow PR player on TS, he managed to convince me to do these changes, while keeping some of what Mats said in mind.

OP updated. Feedback!

[obpmgmua]

Here's an Idea. How about changing the recoil values instead of damage so that slower firing weapons have less recoil per shot.

Last I checked the Intermediate caliber weapons have a recoil of about 3 degrees per shot in semi auto. Guns like the L85A2, AK74, Etc that have slower rates of fire should have a recoil of around 2.25-2.5 degrees per shot. It wont solve everything but will make guns like those much more bearable to use. Also the SKS buff is way too high. 3-4 shots is perfect.

[InfantryGamer42]

Also the SKS buff is way too high. 3-4 shots is perfect.

No,no,no. All semi-automatic rifle should be 2 shot kill. I think that best specially because they fight mostly 3 shot automatic rifles.

[Rabbit]

Imo, 5.56 should be more powerful against body armor than 5.45, but against soft targets 5.45 should be better.

[Vista]

Imo, 5.56 should be more powerful against body armor than 5.45, but against soft targets 5.45 should be better.

That's great and all, but I need a 'base' version of this damage model to be implemented before I start creating custom bullet damage modifiers and such.

So Mats, IMO this is approaching balancing perfection, maybe the Simonov is a bit too strong, but I really want to get this done and implented. What specific parts of this version are you not satisfied with? I tried to keep what you said in mind.

Some weapons weren't really changed, but this should cover quite a bit of what's played atm.