F1 Grenade - "Defensive"

[Masaq]

Expendable Grunt asked in another thread elsewhere why he'd seen the F1 grenade used in-game by the Militia and Insurgents called a "defensive grenade".

Did some research on this; apparently it's because the F1 (and the "Mills Bomb" also) had a damage radius in the area of about 30-45m, which was pretty much further than anyone could reasonably throw it in combat. This forced the user to immediately take cover behind something substantial after hurling it.

It'd be nice to see this little touch of added realisim in-game, I think. It'd give the Mil/Ins guys an advantage over conventional forces whilst defending and attacking substantial positions, but make them more vulnerable and unable to 'nade spam in open areas where the risk of getting hit by your own grenade would be too great.

I'm not saying make it lethal to everyone within a 30m radius, but certainly the vision blur radius could be increased to represent fragments flying further, along with a slightly upped damage blast and damage radius- making it much more dangerous within a 10-15m radius - so that throwing it with the default left-click at least damages the user slightly.

If someone talks me through how to tinker with weapon's settings I'm more than happy to do some tinkering and testing of it on a local server.

[BetterDeadThanRed]

Not a bad idea, just 30m is a VERY large area. I'd suggest just a blurry dazed effect for all but 10 or so meters where it would be lethal. Just for balance reasons, the throw range should be a lot less as well as accuracy giving the other armies an advantage in at least one respect.

[nedlands1]

Throwable C4... I like!

[Gyberg]

Just to ask.... what is the damage radius of a standard US grenade?

[nedlands1]

Just to ask.... what is the damage radius of a standard US grenade?

Looking at the M67 ingame files the "damage radius" is 13m. The damage is set at 140. Assuming that 100 damage or more is death then the "lethal radius" is 3.71 metres (13m x 40/140). The in-game radius probably would be a little larger due to bleed damage. Apparently the killing radius of the grenade, in real life, is 5 metres with a casualty radius of 13 metres.

[Masaq]

Ned - what're the stats for the F1?

[fludblud]

but does the 30m damage radius account for blast damage or flying shrapnel?

if its the latter you could be standing much closer to the nade and not get hurt if shrapnel misses. although i did notice STALKER solved this by having actual shrapnel fly in random directions from the nade that would kill you

[nedlands1]

Ned - what're the stats for the F1?

The same as the M67 in terms of explosion radius and explosion damage. I'm making the assumption that explosion damage is the same as conventional damage in terms of its effects on infantry.

[Irichanu]

But it has fragments flying all over the place, so it has little more damage radius i think.

[Masaq]

but does the 30m damage radius account for blast damage or flying shrapnel?

if its the latter you could be standing much closer to the nade and not get hurt if shrapnel misses. although i did notice STALKER solved this by having actual shrapnel fly in random directions from the nade that would kill you

No, the 30-40m is the casualty radius - the distance in which somebody standing is *likely* to get injured. The shrapnel radius (which is what you're talking about) extends to around 150-200m with both the F1 and Mills Bomb.

AFAIK, accurately modeling shrapnel is difficult in BF2, and would cause all kinds of lag and hitbox issues.

The same as the M67 in terms of explosion radius and explosion damage. I'm making the assumption that explosion damage is the same as conventional damage in terms of its effects on infantry.

So if the damage radius were extended - so it'd damage you out at 26m away from the exploding device (in the open) - you'd need damage set at 280, right?

Don't suppose you know how far the left-click throw hurls things, do you?

[nedlands1]

Nah, I'm fairly sure that at the centre of the blast is maximum damage (ie 140 in the case of the M67 and F1) and the edge radius is 0 (ie none). The damage would probably linearly decrease from the centre to the edge too.

[Masaq]

Kk.

So, keeping the maximum damage the same or only slightly higher would be fine - because the more gentle gradient on the damage/distance line means that proportionately, damage remains higher at a greater distance, yeah?

150 over 25m would work out okay then, depending how far the thing can actually be thrown. That ups the lethal radius to about 8m, and extends the bleed area out to about 15m. (Compared to a bleed area of 9m currently). It'd knock you down to 50% health at around 17m (if I've done my maths right).

How does 150/25 compare to say, the C4?

Guess the real test is to sling it onto a local server and try it.

[nedlands1]

Kk.

So, keeping the maximum damage the same or only slightly higher would be fine - because the more gentle gradient on the damage/distance line means that proportionately, damage remains higher at a greater distance, yeah?

Maybe 150 over 25m would work out okay then, depending how far the thing can actually be thrown. How does 150/25 compare to say, the C4?

Guess the real test is to sling it onto a local server and try it.

By increasing the maximum damage the gradient of the line would decrease (but get steeper) meaning that the lethal range (not the explosion range btw) would be greater and the damage to vehicles would be a lot greater at the point of explosion, greater a bit further away, a little bit bigger even further away and almost identical at the extremities.

Checking the C4 stats now.

UPDATE: C4 blast radius is 20m and its explosive damage is 3000.

[Masaq]

Good grief, the Devs don't go in for overkill much, ey?

Hrmm, don't suppose you're in the market for copying your PR folder, renaming the copy to PR_F1 or something and then jacking the F1 up to 150 damage over 20-25m, then testing it offline by hurling a few around and seeing if they damage you when thrown a reasonable distance away?

[nedlands1]

150 over 25m would work out okay then, depending how far the thing can actually be thrown. That ups the lethal radius to about 8m, and extends the bleed area out to about 15m. (Compared to a bleed area of 9m currently). It'd knock you down to 50% health at around 17m (if I've done my maths right).

Strictly speaking when you get shot enough (but not in the head) you become critically wounded in-game, as you should be if you were in the "casualty radius" of a grenade. Shouldn't you be unreviveable if in the inner, "killing radius"?

[Masaq]

Well, true, but all grenades are currently maiming/critically wounding (i.e.: causing you to bleed out) at about 9m from impact - you start bleeding at 60 health removed, I believe. 9.2 = (13 x (40+60)/140).

To put the bleed-out area to the "casualty" radius size of the F1 (about 30m), but keeping damage static at 140:

30 = ( 42 x (40+60)/140). So the damage radius of the grenade would have to be 42m. This would increase the kill area to 12m = (42 x (40/140) which is bloody large.


Or have I got it wrong, and it should be 13 x ((40+40)/140) for the critically wound radius, which would put it at 7.4m currently?

That would mean to get the critically wounding radius of 30m for the F1 using damage of 140, you'd need the following:

30 = 52.5 x ((40+40)/140).

THAT would put the kill radius of the F1 up to:

15 m = 52.5 x (40/140) which is even larger.


Would make it pretty damn effective though somewhat overpowered I'm guessing. EVERYBODY who wasn't behind cover in an 706m^2 area would be killed. That's like, two thirds of a square kilometer would be killed, and everybody within TWO square kilometers would either be killed or bleeding out.

Unacceptably huge - a 20m critically-wounded circle would be more feasible, but still somewhat massive.

[nedlands1]

So to make this easier, the formula should be: D = R x (E-P)/E, where D is the distance, R is the explosive radius, E is the explosive damage and P is the damage needed.

If we want to have a certain value of D for killing and also maiming then we will have to adjust both E and R. If we just want to change a single value of D then we can keep E where it is and the damage the grenade does should stay the same at the centre of the blast for vehicles when we change R.

Assuming that we want to adjust both the killing and maiming to 30m and 5m respectively then the known values are as follows: D=5 then P=100 and D=30 then P=0. Rearranging the formula to solve for R we have, R = D/(E-P)/E. If we equate the two equations we find E to be 120. Plugging E back in we get R as being 30m. After all that I hope I've used the right values .

EDIT: Bugger, I set it to not hurt at 30m instead of "casualty bleed"

EDIT: New values: 46 2/3 m radius and 112 explosive damage.

[Gyberg]

Looking at the M67 ingame files the "damage radius" is 13m. The damage is set at 140. Assuming that 100 damage or more is death then the "lethal radius" is 3.71 metres (13m x 40/140). The in-game radius probably would be a little larger due to bleed damage. Apparently the killing radius of the grenade, in real life, is 5 metres with a casualty radius of 13 metres.

Ok nice, does anyone now the real life figures for the M67? Because I believe that 13 meters damage radius is a bit low conpared to real life.

[Masaq]

Effectively a 15m casualty radius and 5m radius kill zone.

It's precisely because larger grenades can injure their users that the M67 has a small casualty radius.

So to make this easier, the formula should be: D = R x (E-P)/E, where D is the distance, R is the explosive radius, E is the explosive damage and P is the damage needed.

If we want to have a certain value of D for killing and also maiming then we will have to adjust both E and R. If we just want to change a single value of D then we can keep E where it is and the damage the grenade does should stay the same at the centre of the blast for vehicles when we change R.

Assuming that we want to adjust both the killing and maiming to 30m and 5m respectively then the known values are as follows: D=5 then P=100 and D=30 then P=0. Rearranging the formula to solve for R we have, R = D/(E-P)/E. If we equate the two equations we find E to be 120. Plugging E back in we get R as being 30m. After all that I hope I've used the right values .

EDIT: Bugger, I set it to not hurt at 30m instead of "casualty bleed"

EDIT: New values: 46 2/3 m radius and 112 explosive damage.

~46 and 112 damage were the figures I came up with on paper a few minutes ago too. Still think we're going to find that the kill zone for that thing is a beast - only way to tell is to plumb them into the game and test!

[nedlands1]

Yeah it actually is 15m according to this source: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m67.htm