"Blunt / Sharp" melee damage properties

[Rags! 1966]

Hopefully, as the game is further developed, we will see ammunition become more scarce and firearms in general becoming more of a valuable resource rather than something everybody expects to have in fifteen minutes. Ideally, I want to have bullets be so valuable that players may decide to save their ammunition in favor of risking melee combat against victims they see as targets.

 

The result, again...hopefully, is that melee combat will play a larger role in combat and offer a high risk/reward type of fighting. I don't think that DayZ is small and simple enough to warrant a simple melee damage system. It deserves something more complex and intuitive. 

 

Here's my suggestion. 

 

Melee weapons should deal different types of damage. Not just in numerical values, but in the method in which that damage is transferred. I'm talking:

 

1) Sharp - Which would obviously be knives and other pointy things with blades, as well as piercing stabby stabbies. 

 

2) Blunt - Which would be hammers, clubs, and instruments that rely on sheer force of a swing to deal damage. 

 

These types of damage are very inherently different in the way they affect the human body and materials. As such, I think that DayZ should involve a system that recognizes that a hit from a blunt shovel head is far different than a hit from a short knife. Similarly, different types of clothing should offer different resistances to these attacks. Some clothing would be better defense against stabs based on what material they are made of, and some clothing that is more padded could offer more resistance against blunt attacks. 

 

Both sharp and blunt attacks have uses, as the history of human warfare has shown us. A metal plate might deflect sharp objects...but bones beneath could be broken by the sheer force of a heavy blunt club or mace. In the same way, a player wearing a ballistic helmet could be knocked out by a blow from a hammer, where as slashes from a knife would bounce harmlessly off his noggin. Where as a padded shirt might help mitigate some blunt damage, a stab of a pitchfork would injure him severely.

 

The effects of receiving damage from these types could vary as well:

Sharp objects cause lacerations and bleeding at a much higher frequency.

Blunt objects cause fractures and stumble opponents. 

 

I think this would add an interesting difference to many melee weapons, because so many of them just seem like clones of one another with different skins, and make us think about what we use to hit what we will. 

 

 

[Parazight 1599]

I would love a detailed/advanced melee combat system.  At least, something that's not gimmicky.   

 

I wonder how balanced an advanced melee system would be though.  If getting struck by a weapon is to be authentic, as with firearms, it would probably one or two shot you.  How much focus will the team put on complex combat for interactions that realistically, only last a few swings?  This is a mmo, but hardly wow arenas.

[Evil Minion 943]

Melee weapons (and also firearms) killing in one or two hits is leass authentic than you think. Sure it can happen but then the attacker got lucky.

 

There is no need to create discrete damage types though as you can use the different properties

• shock damage for knocking out people and maybe also knocking them down/away (if the amount from a single attack is big enough)
• health damage might mainly handle tissue damage from all kinds but mainly sharp/piercing attacks
• what is called "bone condition" by some might handle some internal blunt damage effects and fractures
• bleeding chance should depend on penetration power (values over 100% for penetrating protective gear)
• there should be a separate bleeding amount value (maybe replacing the flat blood damage)

The advantage is the possibility of many different intermediate damage types and protective gear that works differently. Melee weapons should offer different approaches and tradeoffs. There shouldn't be one "ultimate weapon".

 

As examples:

• a knife cut might have a bleeding chance of 100% and may cause notable health and blood loss, however it is very unlikely to cause knockout or fracture -> counter with clothing that reduces bleeding chance and health lost
• a hammer strike might have a bleeding chance of ~20% and a low bleeding amount but high shock damage, high bone damage and okay health damage -> protective clothing still offers some protection but does not save you from it's raw impact force

Of cause the knife should be far quicker to attack than the hammer potentially causing multiple bleeding cuts in quick succession. The tradeoff between axes and sword might be that axes cause higher shock and bone damage and maybe got a greater bleeding chance (penetration) while swords should deal more health damage, cause heavier bleeding and are much quicker to attack with. Here the sword would be a big "pure blade" while the axe would mix sharp and blunt damage.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Evil Minion

[Keck 12]

I agree with, even though I'd take it even deeper, look at this thread I've created a while ago

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/223644-buff-melee-weapons/

[rybec 339]

Melee weapons (and also firearms) killing in one or two hits is leass authentic than you think. Sure it can happen but then the attacker got lucky..

Are we talking out of game?

 

Dying by being stabbed is a slow process. Someone stabbed many times ends up incapacitated on the ground while their body shuts down, there is no dying quickly from a knife (other than having an artery severed).

It's easy enough to die in a single hit by being whacked on the head by anything, of course a torso hit with a blunt weapon like a hammer or anything larger would be about as effective as a knife.

[Whyherro123 2283]

Are we talking out of game?

 

Dying by being stabbed is a slow process. Someone stabbed many times ends up incapacitated on the ground while their body shuts down, there is no dying quickly from a knife (other than having an artery severed).

It's easy enough to die in a single hit by being whacked on the head by anything, of course a torso hit with a blunt weapon like a hammer or anything larger would be about as effective as a knife.

 Ah, not really.  A carpenters hammer to the ribs will result in broken ribs (can't run, hurts to breathe) at the least, and a perforated lung and internal bleeding at worst. This is why a carpenters hammer would be my "go-to melee weapon": easy to find, easy to use, multipurpose, and HIGHLY lethal. I'd rather get stabbed in the stomach with a knife than take a hammer to the gut. The knife would leave a "cleaner" wound, as well as not turn my intestines into paste through shockwaves

 

Don't fuck around with blunt weapons, children.

[Evil Minion 943]

It somewhat depends on where you get hit. Soft tissue can absorb quite some impact force while a blade goes through it like butter dealing a lot of damage (especially when slicing as opposed to hacking). Bones on the other side can stop a blade as it is usually fairly light (even sword blades are) but take the full impact of a hammer strike. Also because of the weight distribution blades tend to be quicker to wield.

 

So in the end a knife is more effective against "soft" targets while a hammer is more effective against "hard" targets.

[Whyherro123 2283]

It somewhat depends on where you get hit. Soft tissue can absorb quite some impact force while a blade goes through it like butter dealing a lot of damage (especially when slicing as opposed to hacking). Bones on the other side can stop a blade as it is usually fairly light (even sword blades are) but take the full impact of a hammer strike. Also because of the weight distribution blades tend to be quicker to wield.

 

So in the end a knife is more effective against "soft" targets while a hammer is more effective against "hard" targets.

Yes, soft tissue will absorb quite a it of the impact force of a hammer blow. But that is what makes them so deadly.

 

When the force gets absorbed, what do you think happens? It doesn't just disappear. It destroys the tissue.

 

And while a light knife won't cut through bone, a sword or axe definately will. Hell, a spear will as well, and the edges don't even have to be sharp!

 

 

Melee weapons should be far more dangerous in general.

[Evil Minion 943]

The point with soft tissue is that it moves out of the way and thus can withstand more impact force than less flexible tissue.

 

The video shows how much damage dedicated melee weapons should do. However, keep in mind that even a devastating wound to a limb or even to the torso does not mean instant death. That head hit would have been fatal though.

[Whyherro123 2283]

The point with soft tissue is that it moves out of the way and thus can withstand more impact force than less flexible tissue.

 

The video shows how much damage dedicated melee weapons should do. However, keep in mind that even a devastating wound to a limb or even to the torso does not mean instant death. That head hit would have been fatal though.

And the shockwaves from said impact destroy the tissues as they pass through. They just don't "move out of the way".

 

A devastating would to the limb or the torso might not mean instant death, but in a world without advanced medical care, getting your stomach lining punctured, or bone fragments in the bloodstream is all but a delayed death sentence. Not even considering organ failures and loss of consciousness due to rapid blood pressure decrease, organ failure due to shock, or primary and secondary infections (especially in deep tissues, or inside the bone)

 

A hammer blow to the torso is a good way to rupture all those organs you've got in there. Not to say that a stab wound to the torso isn't deadly, or even "not as deadly", but getting your intestines ruptured, and the corresponding SUPER-infection from all the micro-organisms going wild, is not a pleasant way to die. I would rather get stabbed and bleed out, than take days/weeks of agony to die.

[8bit_Survivor 93]

Could you imagine the rage from players dropping dead a week after surviving a melee battle against someone with a sledge hammer? I myself would find this to be a great mechanic. To have your survivor slowly deteriorate as the bludgeoning you took in melee takes its toll. Perhaps spending downtime in/near medical facilities could help survive from this?

Long term injury care is a survival element that seems seriously lacking in the current builds. Even leg breaks should reduce your speed for a set amount of time while the splint allows your leg to heal.

Sorry for getting a bit off track. So bludgeoning would be deadlier in the long term and piercing/slashing in the short term? Ofcourse I suppose impact location would need to be taken into account.

Edited June 1, 2015 by 8bit_Survivor

[rybec 339]

Sorry for getting a bit off track. So bludgeoning would be deadlier in the long term and piercing/slashing in the short term?

Depends how short term we're talking.

Attacking with a knife or short sharp object isn't represented well ingame for how they're usually used out of game.

The average knife attack isn't a couple slashes, they're often a number of stabs once the attacker gets an opening. The victim collapses and bleeds out in a few minutes.

I could link a couple Liveleak videos as examples but I'm sure the mods would be a little opposed to that.

It usually plays out the same way.

 

Taking a shot to the chest from a blunt object and having damage to your ribs putting pressure (or puncturing) your lungs wouldn't be much better though, or getting hit below the rib cage in the kidneys would be awful too.

 

Really no hits are okay to receive.