does it still take too many shots to kill someone?

General discussion of the Project Reality: BF2 modification.

Does it still take too many bullets to kill someone?

yes
43
45%
no
52
55%
 
Total votes: 95

charliegrs
Posts: 2027
Joined: 2007-01-17 02:19

does it still take too many shots to kill someone?

Post by charliegrs »

obviously PR is better than bf2 when it comes to how many bullets it takes to kill someone. in vanilla, you had to practically unload a clip into someone to kill them. but i still feel like you can take a little too much abuse in PR, i mean i really feel like if you get shot even once, you should go down and if its not a fatal blow to the head, you should atleast not be able to walk. infact it would be awesome if you could only crawl after being shot in the leg or something, it would make medics a much more valuable asset. but i think if you get shot most anyplace else, like torso, head ect. you should die. right now it seems like you still take too many bullets and keep running.

and yes i know alot of this has to do with the crappy hitbox detection.
known in-game as BOOMSNAPP
'
torenico
Posts: 2594
Joined: 2007-06-30 04:00

Post by torenico »

Y.E.S

i think it take some shots, i shooted 10 bullets of M4 on a little chinese and he killed me whit 2 :/
daranz
Posts: 1622
Joined: 2007-04-16 10:53

Post by daranz »

torenico wrote:Y.E.S

i think it take some shots, i shooted 10 bullets of M4 on a little chinese and he killed me whit 2 :/
The trick is to make sure the bullets actually hit them, as opposed to just shooting the bullets at them.
Image
Xander[nl]
Posts: 2056
Joined: 2007-05-24 13:27

Post by Xander[nl] »

Hmm, now that's too bad; I thought this was yet another topic where I could shout ITZ T3H FACKIN' HITBOXEZ ADN HITREGZ once more. Ahw..

But erm, yeah, realistic damage system for infantry would be cool.
Image
X1 Spriggan
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 427
Joined: 2007-08-31 04:24

Post by X1 Spriggan »

I always blame hit boxes when the guy i shot 3 times didnt go down.
daranz
Posts: 1622
Joined: 2007-04-16 10:53

Post by daranz »

'Xander[nl wrote:;580764']Hmm, now that's too bad; I thought this was yet another topic where I could shout ITZ T3H FACKIN' HITBOXEZ ADN HITREGZ once more. Ahw..

But erm, yeah, realistic damage system for infantry would be cool.
I think the current damage system is as good as it's gonna get with the current engine. You can make people bleed, even if you can't have body part-specific damage.

Also, the fact that people can take a couple of rounds to kill someone is attributed to body armor. Again, you can't have a perfect ballistic model for simulating bullets hitting characters' body armor, so you have to make do with the current system.
Image
Deadfast
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 4611
Joined: 2007-07-16 16:25

Post by Deadfast »

The intend is, obviously, good.
Unfortunately, the BF2 engine has its own brain when it comes to hit detection.
Spec
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 8439
Joined: 2007-09-01 22:42

Post by Spec »

Surviving 2 hits with body armor and probably start bleeding - okay
Surviving 1 hit without body armor and probably start bleeding - okay
Surviving 0 hits in the head at all - okay

I guess the system we have atm is okay. Of course not 100% realistic, but... okay.
ConscriptVirus
Posts: 489
Joined: 2006-12-18 04:02

Post by ConscriptVirus »

yeah i think its pretty good. and if u do get hit and start bleeding, usually your field dressing wont stop the bleeding, but just give u a longer time to find a medic.
Image
"These things we do that others may live"
Jagger
Posts: 193
Joined: 2007-09-20 15:52

Post by Jagger »

It's the same for both sides.

The end.

:D
"and pray that there's itelligent life somewhere out in space because there's bugger all down here on Earth" :camper:
BloodBane611
Posts: 6576
Joined: 2007-11-14 23:31

Post by BloodBane611 »

The trick is to make sure the bullets actually hit them
Oh you have to HIT them too? Who knew....

I do think that bullet damage from some of the weapons is a bit low, mainly the SKS and AKs. Other than that I think its pretty good.
[R-CON]creepin - "because on the internet 0=1"
Zybon
Posts: 201
Joined: 2007-07-01 07:37

Post by Zybon »

Yes it takes too many, but it's partly due to the shitty hit detection in BF2. I don't know how many times I've been under fire and seen the blood from my face exploding in front of me without actually taking any damage.

A few days ago I nailed a guy in the upper back twice with an AK from 10 meters while he was manning the 50 cal on a jeep. He turned around and killed me.
<insert funny comment that has military relevance>
Death_dx
Posts: 379
Joined: 2007-11-09 21:37

Post by Death_dx »

Zybon wrote:Yes it takes too many, but it's partly due to the shitty hit detection in BF2. I don't know how many times I've been under fire and seen the blood from my face exploding in front of me without actually taking any damage.

A few days ago I nailed a guy in the upper back twice with an AK from 10 meters while he was manning the 50 cal on a jeep. He turned around and killed me.
Tell me about it, I was about 7 meters away from a enemy standing with his back turned and I manage to fire two 3 round burst (at least 2 hits) and he prones and sprays me with L85 to death.

BloodBane611 wrote:Oh you have to HIT them too? Who knew....

I do think that bullet damage from some of the weapons is a bit low, mainly the SKS and AKs. Other than that I think its pretty good.
SKS is so very useless, it's more effective to lure enemies into your IEDS and then blow them sky high, also a lot more hilarious too :lol: .

It would be so much better to have all weapons kill in one or two hits.
Clypp
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2006-07-17 18:36

Post by Clypp »

It is good as it is. Since the BF2 engine does not allow locational damage on character models the current values is a setup we can all live with.

In real life taking a bullet in the foot is not instant death, neither should it be in PR.
MACDRE
Posts: 48
Joined: 2008-01-06 12:27

Post by MACDRE »

Clypp wrote:In real life taking a bullet in the foot is not instant death, neither should it be in PR.
If only we could make it slow down a person's movements... ;)

The other day on Qwai River, I scoped in on a Chinese soldier, shot him in the head (his head jerked back in a cloud of blood), and he got up and ran away.

Damn Chinese and their super soldiers.
VipersGhost
Posts: 1171
Joined: 2007-03-27 18:34

Post by VipersGhost »

Yeah we need a bullet-hit effect.
All you twats starting said threads "WTFBBQSAUCE 0.7 BLOWS" - R-Dev Jaymz
CKneisel
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-03-13 03:06

Post by CKneisel »

I'd like some equivalent of "stopping power." If a big fat round from a G3 hits you while you're sprinting down the street, maybe they should force you prone or at least have you slow down a bunch or something.

Of course this may be impossible with the engine, no clue. Someone suggested a stamina loss of some kind... I bet that could be implemented.
Freelance_Commando
Posts: 130
Joined: 2007-06-05 08:03

Post by Freelance_Commando »

In real life taking a bullet in the foot is not instant death, neither should it be in PR.
Now that would be funny.

Anyway, I guess instead of BEING KILLED you could say that you have lost BATTLEFIELD EFFECTIVENESS. Say if your arm got shot up you aint gonna be on the front lines long 'cos you can't hold a gun....

Loss of stamina sounds good, stops guys running away from my bullets!!!! :mrgreen:

But we've got to remember that BF2 was never ment to be reality ("I'II save you from your bullet wounds with my difibulators / 'magic' medic bag"), if it was really reality we would need 'under fire' surgery.

OR even badages!!!! Get fixed up so much and you get some bandages on your face / arm / leg. So some guy who gets shot up alot but survives alot would be covered in them!!!
Then we could get a walking mummy soldier or something.... but that's just stupid.
Last edited by Freelance_Commando on 2008-01-14 08:39, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: spelling
Time to rise to the occasion.
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 General Discussion”