Pistol damage, good or not enough?

[Gunfighter34ID]

Based on those results I think damage should be increased maybe 15-20%. 9x19mm isn't a very powerful cartridge but 2-4 hits to kill seems reasonable (1 to the head, obviously).

[Cerberus]

I went up to an afk player and it took me three or four shots to the face to kill him

[Gunfighter34ID]

When I was making weapons mods for MoH I think I had the damage for 9mmP in the high 50s/low 60s (with 100 pts. of damage equalling death to the target). Then the player damage model takes over depending on where you got hit. A hit to the head would kill, but generally 2-3 hits would finish someone off. Armor wasn't a factor in that game, though, and armor would be a serious obstacle for 9mm (or most any pistol cartridge) using military ball ammunition.

I always tried to base the damage on the cartridge, not the weapon itself or the weapon type. For example, a Thompson would do the same damage as an M1911, since they both fired the same ammunition. In reality, the longer barrel caused the Thompson to have a little more muzzle velocity, but such differences are pretty much negligible.

When I did my own little weapon mod for the BF2 demo I was shocked at the disparity in damage values between weapons firing the exact same ammunition. I can't remember the numbers off the top of my head but it seems to me there were different damage values (I think at least one of them was radically different) for the M16, L85, and M4, all of which fire exactly the same ammunition. I was also shocked at how piddling they were.

I'd like to see the suppressed pistols done away with entirely except maybe on SF-specific maps.

[dawdler]

I think they should bring back the decreased effect over range. Its not realistic, but its the only way to accuratly portray accuracy/damage over range for pistols.

For example, a pistol should be accurate and have fairly high damage at close range. But with just plain deviance, you'd overpower it immensly. It would handle like an assault rifle, having both the accuracy and damage of them. The solution to make it handle like a pistol is simply to still have that accuracy and damage, but make it near worthless beyond your average effective pistol range (25m? 50? 100m?), cause only 10% of the original damage.

So at close range you'd only have to hit like 3 times to the chest for a kill and have good accuracy while doing so: It rivals any rifle. But at medium to long range, you have to hit like 30 times to kill someone.

As I said, not realistic but a compromise to make it a pistol without making it a rifle.

[USAF-Marshall]

Based on those results I think damage should be increased maybe 15-20%. 9x19mm isn't a very powerful cartridge but 2-4 hits to kill seems reasonable (1 to the head, obviously).

^^^ agree

[GRB]

Hey I remember testing this with ya Blu.

[billclo]

ok ive done a little research in game with another member who not sure they want to be mentioned but results are as follows...

*It takes 4 shots to chest of any kit that doesnt have body armor to kill, not counting any bleeding effects.
*It takes 6 shots to chest of any kit that does have body armor to kill, not counting any bleeding effects.
*It takes 4 shots to the legs of any kit to kill, not counting any bleeding effects
*It takes 1 shot to the head of any kit to kill
*Silenced or Unsilenced guns have no difference in damage ability

I think silenced guns should take a bit more than unsilenced but i think damage in general should be a bit more. If you was wearing a flak vest, would you let me shoot you at point blank 2 times to see if it left you undamaged? Besides I didnt think Flak Vests stopped small arms fire, only fragmentation, but i guess the armor kits would be useless if they didnt help against bullets in game huh?

So what do you all think of this?

And no, just for those that will flame, i dont mean it must be implented before any fixes, relax

While the older PASGT vests were not reliable 9mm ball ammo stoppers, the new Interceptor vest are. They're basically a Level 3-A vest, which will stop 9mm subguns, let alone a 9mm pistol.

If we wanted to be "realistic", anyone who was wearing body armor would basically be immune to chest hits from pistols; it'd take alot of close together impacts to break the armor down. Leg/arm/head hits would be still dangerous (does the BF2 engine allow for helmets?) A helmet hit with 9mm ought to stagger one, but it does stop 9mm rounds).

If anything, the suppressed weapons ought to be a bit weaker. In order to retain their subsonic qualities, they either use heavier slower bullets, or bleed off gas. I don't know exactly how much weaker they'd need to be, but significantly.

[Stu007]

Increase non silenced
Keep silenced the same

Me thinks

[Armand61685]

Ya but if ur gonna get hit 3 times in the chest with a 9mm, ur going down and ur going to be in a LOT of pain. There should be an feature in pr that when u get hit in the chest a certain amount of times with the pistol, u fall to the ground, look at the sky, vision gets blurry or tunneled, then u get back up.

[billclo]

Ya but if ur gonna get hit 3 times in the chest with a 9mm, ur going down and ur going to be in a LOT of pain. There should be an feature in pr that when u get hit in the chest a certain amount of times with the pistol, u fall to the ground, look at the sky, vision gets blurry or tunneled, then u get back up.

Unfortunately, that isn't really true, if you're wearing body armor. It's been proven numerous times that cops have been able to effectively fire back even after being hit multiple times with pistol fire. The impacts just aren't stunning enough to knock one down, Hollywood notwithstanding.