Damage Models Stepping Backwards

[maliceubx 73]

For those who played DayZ mod prior to v1.62 you might remember the situation PVP found itself in. Every gun had realistic damage values and it made for quick and almost one-sided combat. The common Lee Enfield and M1911 were the kings of player killing, dealing 12000 and 4000 damage respectively when players only had 12000 blood. Those among a long list of other weapons received massive damage decreases which allowed for the PVP we are familiar with today in the DayZmod. 

 

As it stands weapons just do too much damage in the SA. The M4 two(three)-shots, and the Mosin one-shots. With the addition of scope customizability you can basically make these weapons better or equal to the best weapons DayZ mod had to offer at a fraction of the rarity. The FN Fal was the only assault rifle to offer two-shot potential and most players who didn't put their lives into the game probably never got to fire one, and 1 shot snipers like the AS50 were almost unheard of post private hives if not banned completely due to its one-shot capabilities.

 

Once more weapons come out and loot tiers are introduced it will almost seem like a moot point with current damage models as with the proper equipment everything you need can be found on the coast. This needs to change. With the introduction of the SKS which is basically a semi-auto Mosin we can also assume this weapon will have one-shot potential. It's just too much!

 

Either increase health to it's original values or nerf weapon damage dramatically - we need to be able to react to aggression. I'm all for realism but dying immediately even at long ranges just losses its fun factor after the umpteenth time.

 

M4's damage should be set at 1000-1500 depending on the closeness.. and the Mosin be reduced to 2500 damage and needs to be have its effective range reduced to 600-700 with a scope to give breathing room to higher-tier sniper rifles.

 

What do you think?

[franzuu 211]

Turn up the short term survivability from bullet wounds and other stuff but make it so that you can get fucked up in a lot more ways, bad ways. This way you can escape/retaliate but will likely die anyway.

[ratiasu@hotmail.co.jp 122]

No thank you. I disagree. I like realistic damage portraits.

[Mutonizer 78]

No thank you. I disagree. I like realistic damage portraits.

 

Hmm, the human body can take quite a beating actually and "realistically", it takes a really perfect bullet to instantly kill someone. Personally I wouldn't mind non head wounds to just cause variations in blood loss depending on the weapon.

For example, Fire Axe would cause extreme blood loss, small caliber would cause lower blood loss, torso wound would be major blood loss, leg/arm much less so, etc.

Then you just need a "shock & pain" system that handles falling unconscious, and a longer duration wounding system (leg wounds make you run/walk slower, torso wounds make you more exhausted, arm wounds scrambles your aim, etc).

Edited December 30, 2013 by Mutonizer

[Frell 80]

DO NOT reduce weapon damage

 

Any shot to the torso should pretty much kill you, end of. When guns kill easily they feel more powerful and like they offer more protection

[ratiasu@hotmail.co.jp 122]

Hmm, the human body can take quite a beating actually and "realistically", it takes a really perfect bullet to instantly kill someone. Personally I wouldn't mind non head wounds to just cause variations in blood loss depending on the weapon.

For example, Fire Axe would cause extreme blood loss, small caliber would cause lower blood loss, etc.

Then you just need a "shock & pain" system that handles falling unconscious, and a longer duration wounding system (leg wounds make you run/walk slower, torso wounds make you more exhausted, arm wounds scrambles your aim, etc).

Sadly though, DayZ doesn't simulate internal bleeding. Take a 5.56 to the intestines, and you're dead, just not instantly. In DayZ you simply bandage up. 9mm pistol rounds to the chest? yea, ok. Maybe. But those are not the weapons you'd like to see nerfed anyway.

[maliceubx 73]

DO NOT reduce weapon damage

 

Any shot to the torso should pretty much kill you, end of. When guns kill easily they feel more powerful and like they offer more protection

 

Weapon damage aside armed with a high powered scoped Mosin  what incentive would you have for persuing a higher tier sniper (or weapon) once they become available?

 

simply flavor?

[Mutonizer 78]

Sadly though, DayZ doesn't simulate internal bleeding. Take a 5.56 to the intestines, and you're dead, just not instantly. In DayZ you simply bandage up. 9mm pistol rounds to the chest? yea, ok. Maybe. But those are not the weapons you'd like to see nerfed anyway.

 

Oh, don't get me wrong, any bullet hitting you should be a catastrophic situation. Just think would be interesting to have more wounding options than "die instantly" and "just bandage it".

Arma engine does track hit location though to some extend. After that, can be handled with a weighted location table depending on the body part hit, and apply various effects as well as require various treatments.

 

Just rambling of course, never gonna happen :)

[excitable1 156]

and the nerf the gun's threads start..

[excitable1 156]

 

 

 I'm all for realism but dying immediately even at long ranges just losses its fun factor after the umpteenth time.

 

 

maybe stop running down the middle of the road holding a sparkler and you wont get killed so easily.

 

I have yet to be sniped.. been sniped at.. but not hit.

[maliceubx 73]

maybe stop running down the middle of the road holding a sparkler and you wont get killed so easily.

 

I have yet to be sniped.. been sniped at.. but not hit.

 

This thread isn't about positioning, or your personal experience. I made this thread as a comparative between DayZ mod and DayZ SA and how I feel damage has been over-buffed / health has been under-nerfed. I don't think your slights against my assumed playstyle has any light here since no matter how 'Sam Fisher' you assume you are you're always going to get shot and killed at some point, which leads right back to my original point.

Edited December 30, 2013 by CDriVe1335

[jaginun 87]

Instead of reducing gun damage, reduce the damage factor for body parts. So we could have the body take 100% damage, head would take something high like 300% , Arms 50% and then legs 75%. Ofcourse, if it's possible to complicate it further, then hands and feet should take something like 25%. This would lead to tactical shot placement, while still making PvP that realistic, dangerous battle that it is.

 

Of course, this would not take into account bone shattering etc, as getting shot in the hand is gonna fuck you over.

 

And in addition, I don't think those STK numbers you posted in the OP were correct, I've been able to take 2, perhaps 3 Mosin shots before going down.

[Valdenburg 200]

I see you dont have any clue what youre talking about.

The M4 got reduced damage over distance.

The M4 can effectively be used at 100 meters without any adjustments and standard attachments.

With MP attachments bipod and acog you see a effective range of about 400+ meters.

When you get instantly shot by almost every bullet from a m4 that is over 250 meters away you most likely encounter hacker that use no-spread no-recoil insta-hit etc.

 

The mosin is effective at about 600 meters, you can still hit over 800 but its not reliable.

 

 

 

With the addition of scope customizability you can basically make these weapons better or equal to the best weapons DayZ mod had to offer at a fraction of the rarity.

That is not true atall. A SA M4 is still not as accurate as a M4 in the mod even with all MP attachments and bipod. The weapons deal more damage compared to the mod but are way less accurate on certain distances.

 

This ensures that you got a advantage with your character that survived days over days obtaining the best attachements. I like this more MMO type system where your gear depends if you can hit 150 meters/250/350/450 - normal/oneMP/twoMP/MP+bipod (M4).

[DevilDog (DayZ) 455]

I don't mind lesser damage on limbs or outer torso, but head/neck/face/chest should all be kills with 1-2 max shots from any gun. Shotguns will hopefully have higher damage, with the slug at least.

 

As for the SKS vs Mosion comment its not right. The SKS is more of an AK in terms of damage. It fires a 7.62x 39 vs the 7.62x54 of the Mosin. The longer barrel and larger cartridge lead to the velocity of 2,838 ft/s for the Mosin and 2411 ft/s for the SKS. This equals more damage and I hope the game reflects this. (Take either to the chest and you are likely gone haha).

[Intactus 128]

Simply... No.

 

IMHO the nerfing they did with the mod was certainly wrong.
(If there are) Any military medics reading this i think that they'd agree.

Rifle calibers will fuck you up hard. Period.
Torso hit from any large caliber round should end the fight right there, for example Mosin 7.62x53 is a definite death penalty unless you get shot next to a field hospital. No way a person is gonna take another step after that, or return accurate fire etc. No. Anything above 7.62... Even less so.

5.56mm is very, VERY humane round. That and the light weight (troops able to carry more ammo) are main reasons it has become so popular but never the less it is still lethal, not just as devastatingly brutal as 7.62. There's a little difference in number but a big difference in the kinetic force and the injuries inflicted.

During officer training they pretty much went in detail with this stuff, actual cases and lots of gory pictures etc. and that's some scary shit i tell you. Really puts the things you see in movies to a perspective.

And to the op, feeling no need to look for a "better" weapon than the mosin... That is totally correct. A mosin is as good as weapon as any. It still kills you very much the same as the latest Hi-Tech bells and whistles spec-ops shit. The difference is in usability, accuracy and other aspects.

I will continue carrying high calibers for that simple reason that if i need to engage another player, a one solid hit is all i need. If i need 5 bullets to disable my target, the gun is useless for the task.

What's the take on this in general, good people? i'd be happy to know.

Do you want to fire one good hit and be done with it or do you wanna dance around endlessly pumping round after round to a guy who then simply returns fire after your well thought ambush and a clean hit?

Ps. I'd love the option that you dont instantly die, but just recveive shit ton of critical injuries and pass out and THEN die in the next few minutes if left without profound medical attention. (As long as you go ground and are out of the fight when hit.)

edit: Grammar

 

Edited December 30, 2013 by Intactus

[gibonez 3633]

not sure what version of day this was but I always felt it was the best.

 

In this version weapons such as the m24 would not kill with one chest shot but would knock out players out to a max of 800 m.

 

The makarov took approximately 7 shots to kill with chest shots but always 1 head shot.

 

Enfield took 2 shots and the m4 took approximately 4 to 5 shots from medium range.

[DevilDog (DayZ) 455]

Nice post Intactus.

 

I think one thing this game does not take into account, that real life does is weight. The Mosin weighs almost 10 pounds on it's own. Then add in ammo and you start to see why you go another route. Game wise there is no need. Start getting into better optics and changeable butts and magazines and flashlights and the M4 starts looking good, even in the game.

 

People get hung up on things being "old guns". When I was in the USMC my main weapon was the M2 .50 cal. which was designed in 1918. My grandfather shot the same gun from a B-17 in WW2. Good guns don't need to change. Modern society is what drives changes in fire arms. The M16 has barely changed through the years, but we drive little changes, it functions the same though.

Edited December 30, 2013 by DevilDog

[maliceubx 73]

Nice post Intactus.

 

I think one thing this game does not take into account, that real life does is weight. The Mosin weighs almost 10 pounds on it's own. Then add in ammo and you start to see why you go another route. Game wise there is no need. Start getting into better optics and changeable butts and magazines and flashlights and the M4 starts looking good, even in the game.

 

People get hung up on things being "old guns". When I was in the USMC my main weapon was the M2 .50 cal. which was designed in 1918. My grandfather shot the same gun from a B-17 in WW2. Good guns don't need to change. Modern society is what drives changes in fire arms. The M16 has barely changed through the years, but we drive little changes, it functions the same though.

 

I think what concerns me most is people's interest in authenticity, and while (like I said in the OP) I do understand the need for some sort of realistic ballistics, gun mechanics as well as human damage we do have to take into consideration that this is a game. When I say 'this is a game' what I mean is it is important to not only support a little bit of realism but at the same time provide a well tiered gear driven system because that is what the game judges to be progress, and if a person is not pushed to want to pursue better, faster, rarer, more accurate weapons then progression tends to stagnate and we become a bunch of coastal dwellers fighting with our Winchesters, Mosins, lee's and other low-tier spawns.

 

I feel that the way the system is now it does not support such a system. Also I am a big fan of the gun-game. While I can understand that getting the jump on someone can obviously spell death no matter the circumstance I think it's important to build the weapons/health system well enough to promote skill. By skill I mean movement tactics in and out of battle, knowing your weapon and ultimately outplaying your opponent to take home the victory. I do not want the game to end up being a series of instant deaths caused by whoever sees the other first, but I don't want it to end up like human sandbags eating round after round and still fighting back. There is a happy medium and I don't think we're there right now.

[Intactus 128]

Thx for the beans Devil.

I have the impression that there is gonna be some kind of weight system implemented.
I'd be suprised if not cause it's really something that should affect players choices and gear and everything.
The difference between lugging around 4kg assault rifle and 7kg gun, or 13kg LMG is a major one after a few days. Been there. =D
Not even taking into accout that 7.62 ammo does weight pretty much double the 5.56.. =)
That should provide some incentive to strive for more efficient setup with lighter modern rifle and ammo vs. old cumbersome boomstick of bigger caliber.

I don't see that the gear (or anything in the game for that matter) has to be artificially "balanced" for any reason.
I see the benefits of the more modern gear being the lesser weight, better maneuverability which translates faster aiming, reloading, lesser recoil and more fluid weapon handling in general etc. THAT should provide the incentive to go for something better or then, be like me and love the Enfield.

In the mod there's only a select few guns (DMR, FAL or M24) i take over my trusty Enfield and i love it.

THAT imho provides the setting where skill is the deciding factor, not the gear.
I feel safe enough when i know that whatever i hit with my trusty rifle, stops shooting back. If i miss my first shot, then i deserve to die. =)
Love the severity.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Intactus

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Hmm, the human body can take quite a beating actually

 

Yes. It can. It can take quite a beating.

 

What it can't take is multiple fucking assault rifle rounds center mass. That's not a "beating." That's just death.

[Zogvarn 118]

I think the damage currently is good. What needs to be addresses is hit location damage profiles on target. Which seems to be what some of you are talking about. Let me explain a bit.

 

I think most of us can agree that a hit to center chest, center upper chest, and head (all without ballistic protection) should be a kill. But if you hit someone say left/right of center chest, left/right of upper chest, or abdomen area then the target suffers from secondary effects. Left/right of upper chest is a broken shoulder. Left/right of center chest is a punctured lung and target goes unconscious with minimum time to live. Abdomen shot equals bleeding, low crawl movement only, and extreme shaking with short time to live. Things of that nature also pertaining to arm and leg hits.

 

This assumes of course the medical system will become more robust. If so, it then allows friendlies time, even if it is short, to save their friend, and prolongs battles without removing the current damage done by weapons. It also means having a dedicated medic in the group carrying all known medical supplies a plus adding even more depth to the game.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Valdenburg 200]

I would love to see that a better medical system will affect the whole gameplay not only the firefights. I totally agree there with Zogvarn that we need more differentiation and i think when we start seperating the whole body in smaller parts with more "functions" it could create a awsomely indepth survival system. Like the feet getting sore when you walk long ways without good shoes. That needs to be reflected in different movements not only in taking damage after time, there needs to be different animations when having the right arm disabled and the left, same with legs. I know the medical system we see atm is not even implemented to the point it was in the mod... 

 

 

.....but i think this is way more important then getting vehicles or more guns into the game.

[-Gews- 7443]

No.

 

If anything it needs to be increased, my character got shot 2-3 times by some sniper with an M4 and he was totally fine. He shouldn't be totally fine.

[jaginun 87]

No.

 

If anything it needs to be increased, my character got shot 2-3 times by some sniper with an M4 and he was totally fine. He shouldn't be totally fine.

 

Someone talking about being shot by a sniper, telling people that they should have been killed? Am I in the twilight zone?!

[Zogvarn 118]

No.

 

If anything it needs to be increased, my character got shot 2-3 times by some sniper with an M4 and he was totally fine. He shouldn't be totally fine.

Gews, you know the damage degrades over distance. If you're saying "sniper" due to the distance he was at then it must have been long range shots. Thus lowered damage. With all the knowledge you have about weapons in this and Arma did you forget or something? Either that or they were just glancing shots to legs/arms thus lowered damage. Or it was desynch.

 

I'm really confused.