Jump to content
Lightly_Salted

M110 - Awfully weak

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DerGepard said:

The reason why we should a bit carefully to offer what we may like to see in the game is, that at the moment in squad there is not realy any system with the apearrance of body armor or similar mechanics. At the moment we have only health and damage that directly remove a certain amount of healthpoints.

 

As far as I know we have at the moment not a detailed hitbox that makes a difference about helmet or not, or body armor or not and and and. So in thise case its also a bit difficult to bring up weapons in some roles they would fit in real and also in the game itself. 

Yeah, I continue to be shocked by the number of realistic shooters that flat out pretend armor doesn't exist. This was understandable in the late 90s and early 00s when realism was new and real world information was limited... but by now there's no excuse. The NIJ testing standards are published online, and there's tons of vids on youtube showing both improvised armor tests and actual combat footage of body armor stopping rifle bullets. Body armor has become an elephant in the room that developers and gamers don't want to address, and it's gotten downright silly.

 

In terms of hit detection, I don't think separating helmets from the rest of the head is that important. In odd instances, rifle bullets can ricochet off helmets from oblique angles, but for the most part, helmets don't really stop bullets. What is important for armor IMO is simply detection around the chest where the rifle plates are. In reality there are areas around and between the plates which would let bullets through, but having SOME representation of armor in this area is better than none at all.

 

Also I'm pretty modern engines have no trouble getting down to per-poly hit detection when deemed necessary. Quake Champions just had to downgrade their hit detection because their detailed hit meshes were too realistic and players were not hitting often enough compared to the primitive oversized boxes and cylinders they were used to in prior games.

 

3 hours ago, DerGepard said:

What I mean especialy in this case are the sweet-spot-mechanik at Battlefield 1 for bolt-action-rifles. this mechanic allowed people to get a one-shot on certain distances even if they do not hit the head. Like the Russian 1895 deals full 100 Damage to the upper body from 60m up to 100m.

Absolutely, this kind of distanced-based damage variation is essential to realistic damage, because advanced terminal effects are entirely velocity dependent.

 

For example for 5.56mm ammo, there are well-known range brackets for where M193 and M855 will and won't fragment, depending on barrel length. Bullets from an M4A1 should fragment within 50 meters, causing large permanent cavities in torso hits, but beyond 50 meters they won't even tumble and will simply make clean .22 cal holes. An M16A4 can reproduce these effects out to 150 meters, but beyond that distance, it's just as bad as an M4... and long distances aren't that uncommon in Squad.

 

Even loads like Mk262 and Mk318 which were designed to be less velocity dependent have their limits. Beyond 200-300 meters nothing is going to tumble or fragment, and lethality returns to being a function of bullet diameter, weight, and velocity. This isn't such a bad thing, as it makes for a pretty clean gameplay balance where damage becomes proportional to recoil, and easy-to-shoot calibers like 5.56 and 5.45 are less damaging than the higher-skill 7.62 calibers.

Edited by Gnalvl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are games have replicated plate armor but it isn't fun. SMGs being worthless in Insurgency wasn't fun. Aiming for the crotch in PR was dumb. Center mass is the most reliable target, so armoring it up makes the game feel random.

 

So yeah realistic bullet wounds... it's interesting (in a morbid way) but probably not worth painstakingly reproducing in a video game. Bullets tend to be pretty random. They may bounce, change direction, yaw, or fragment making it look like a bomb went off. Or they may do none of those things and put a neat, small hole. This is a flaw not just with m855, but also m193 and .30 cal FMJ bullets as well.

 

Also It's a myth that the M855 was intentionally neutered to comply with international law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gnalvl said:

Absolutely, this kind of distanced-based damage variation is essential to realistic damage, because advanced terminal effects are entirely velocity dependent.

It was mentioned about the "one-shot" possibility on body hits, not about distance based damage.

4 hours ago, Gnalvl said:

Yeah, I continue to be shocked by the number of realistic shooters that flat out pretend armor doesn't exist. This was understandable in the late 90s and early 00s when realism was new and real world information was limited... but by now there's no excuse.

And thats some point I realy hope for squad we receive some armors. One way would be a simple but maybe good enougth system:

Like the player have its health, he have also a pool for.... do not know how would it in english, lets say, kinetic resistance?, so if a player receives enougth hits they are not able to penetrat/wound him, the damage goes over the second pool, is the pool empty, the palyer is knocked out. But the second pool is able to to regenerat, while there is a cool down from the last hit like one or two seconds, it starts up from there to regenerate at a quite fast rate.

 

The Idea is, an enemy have to deal enougth damage in short time to knockout a player, even like the marksman rifles or an SMG, even it is not able to penetrat on every range or with every ammo, its able to knockout someone if the shooter is able to land enougth hits in certain time. If not the other player have just time to get cover and recover himself.

 

A palyer who is knocked out can unlike a wounded player just "revived" from everybody, not just a medic. maybe with a second medic tool like a epipen beside the bandage. At least its maybe a start to try it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Lightly_Salted said:

EDIT: I want to comment on the round the SVD uses, but I don't know a huge amount about it. I'll have to do some research. I know it's rimfire, which is surprising. I didn't think rimfire rounds were still used apart from small calibres like .22

7.62x54r. the "R" stands for rimmed, not rimfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DerGepard said:

It was mentioned about the "one-shot" possibility on body hits, not about distance based damage.

That's what I mean though. For example, M855 fragmention could be defined as the possibility one-shot on torso hits from 0 to 50 meters for the M4A1, and 0 to 150 meters for M16A4. Likewise, bullet tumbling for 5.45, 7.62x54 and 7.62x51 could be simulated as higher damage for torso shots within a given distance (though not necessarily a one-shot).

 

8 hours ago, Good-Try Greg said:

There are games have replicated plate armor but it isn't fun. SMGs being worthless in Insurgency wasn't fun. Aiming for the crotch in PR was dumb. Center mass is the most reliable target, so armoring it up makes the game feel random.

 

So yeah realistic bullet wounds... it's interesting (in a morbid way) but probably not worth painstakingly reproducing in a video game. Bullets tend to be pretty random. They may bounce, change direction, yaw, or fragment making it look like a bomb went off. Or they may do none of those things and put a neat, small hole. This is a flaw not just with m855, but also m193 and .30 cal FMJ bullets as well.

 

Also It's a myth that the M855 was intentionally neutered to comply with international law

1) SMG balance is hinged entirely on correct (low) recoil. The whole idea is you intentionally choose a weaker cartridge to get weaker recoil and thus spray into a small area more effectively. Thus against body armor you have a better chance to put multiple rounds of a burst into the enemy's arm, leg, or head compared to a rifle. 
 
Recoil for SMG's in Insurgency was almost as much as rifles, so there wasn't enough advantage to weight out their poor penetration. I pointed this out to NWI repeatedly for years, but they chose to keep their poor recoil values.
 
2) M855 is objectively more random than other loads, and this has been demonstrated in clinical tests. The chance for a conventional .30 FMJ to "randomly" fragment is tiny, and performance is relatively consistent compared to the virtual 50/50 coin toss you get from M855 between a massive frag wound and a tiny .22 hole.
 
3) I never said M855 was intentionally "neutered" to comply with international law; in fact I said the EXACT OPPOSITE; the U.S. has continued to produce fragmenting rounds regardless, and isn't bound by the Hague since they never signed on. This doesn't change the fact that M855 fragments less reliably than M193 as a result of its construction (the intention of which was to improve steel plate penetration).
 
You're probably confusing what I said about the British SS109 load, which WAS intentionally changed to comply with the Hague. First they had the 5.56 L1 ball (55 gr) which fragments the same as M193, then when adopting 62 gr, they thickened the jacket so that it doesn't fragment and instead just tumbles like an M995 or 5.45mm. This trend is being continued with Britain's new EP/HP rounds, as mentioned here. 
 
4) As for the general claim that armor and realistic ballistics "aren't fun", that's simply a wild subjective assertion.
 
For one, armor is the OPPOSITE of random. Many realistic shooters try to prevent players from becoming too unrealistically effective at killing over long range through objectively random elements like exaggerated spread, sway and recoil. Armor makes the enemy harder to hit simply by limiting the vulnerable body parts to smaller targets in a non-random way.
 
Moreover, realistic wounds easily fit into a smooth gameplay balance. All bullet damage is subject to Newton's 3rd law, which ensures that a bullet's power is proportional to its recoil and how difficult it is to shoot. Beyond that, details like 5.56 fragmention do introduce unexpected effects, but they balance out in their own way. A non-fragmenting round like 5.45mm FMJ will give consistently decent results, while 5.56mm will be erratically both amazing and terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Gnalvl said:

That's what I mean though. For example, M855 fragmention could be defined as the possibility one-shot on torso hits from 0 to 50 meters for the M4A1, and 0 to 150 meters for M16A4. Likewise, bullet tumbling for 5.45, 7.62x54 and 7.62x51 could be simulated as higher damage for torso shots within a given distance (though not necessarily a one-shot).

Even its may be realistic and maybe even a intresting game-mechanic (and besides this, its also intresting even without a connection to squad ^_^), I'm not sure if a one shot mechanic beside headshots would be a good idea and I'm at least not sure if we are gonna go trougth a border to a to much realistic wounding system. I'm honest, it scares me a bit, like playing as insurgents feels a bit... uncomfortable (I prefer at games szenarios of regular forces against each other ;P)

 

For the game I wouldnt say, an overall one-shot mechanic that leads to instant death is something that makes Squad to a better game, also if it combined with a RNG-based event triggering for something like this. a random spread to get as near as possible to the different accuracy of different rifles and cartridges (there was something like a measurement in "moa"?) is in my eyes completly good for shooter, burt besides this, just a random mechanic?

 

And yeah, I dislike RNG systems out of number based rpgs like Divinity or Pillars of Eternety, and even there.... I'm everytime that guy "oh, 90% to stun somebody!" RNG: No 1, No 2, No 3, No 4.... Enemy dice role RNG: Hit hit hit hit >_< Luck stays away from me so I prefer games without RNG systems. I want a reason for something that happens, or a reason that something doesnt happens. Around Squad, I realy would like to see first steps about bodyarmor-mechanics.

 

Maybe creating a thread in "Suggestions" about it to show several options and directly discussion them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly , receiving a 7.62x51 to

the chest would ****ing one shot me. Maybe that's right, 762x 51 should be about the same as the SVD round. The damage in my opinion should a 1 shot to chest with these rifles. 

 

Remember that body armor mechanics haven't  been implemented yet  .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, maze2 said:

Honestly , receiving a 7.62x51 to

the chest would ****ing one shot me. Maybe that's right, 762x 51 should be about the same as the SVD round. The damage in my opinion should a 1 shot to chest with these rifles. 

 

Remember that body armor mechanics haven't  been implemented yet  .

I call this timing! xD

 

OK okay, back to topic, I think as long we do not have a Body-Armor-mechanic, its maybe better to avoid a entire one-shot beside a headshot. The whole gameplay with it would maybe more frustrating than rewarding compared to now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, maze2 said:

762x51 should be about the same as the SVD round.

Absolutely. 7.62x51 and 7.62x54 are equivalent cartridges with extremely similar capabilities. The standard HPBT round typically used in the M110 even has a 175gr bullet which makes it even closer to Russian loads. 4 extra millimeters of ejected brass doesn't magically make the difference between a bullet that one-shots every time, and one which never kills on the first hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jiggerlube said:

people think they want one hit kills, till the're on the other end of the rifle.  

But why are there one hit kills for one gun, and not another shooting an equivalent caliber? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gnalvl said:

But why are there one hit kills for one gun, and not another shooting an equivalent caliber? 

The SVD doesn't one hit apart from headshots or if the target is already wounded. The only difference, as Dubs pointed out, is you have less time to bandage before bleeding out after being shot in the chest by an SVD versus the M110.

 

I think making either caliber one hit would be bad for gameplay and boosting the M110's damage to match the SVD is boring.

 

The difference between the two weapons should be asymmetric. The M110 already has a more magnified scope and larger magazines, in the future it could receive a bi-pod and perhaps the SVD become more commonly available, like what has happened with the Automatic Rifleman kit, to enforce the difference between the weapons and factions.

 

As for the body armour discussion, I don't think it's inherently bad for gameplay to simulate it in some form but some of the games I've played that have tried just become frustrating, like CSAT in Arma 3. In any case, the irregular factions don't yet have anywhere near enough unique equipment to offset the advantage body armour would give to conventional factions. Down the track when the game is more content complete perhaps body armour fits, but until then I wouldn't even consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont actually know about the siper you are talking about.But as far as i can see the effective range are the same but the barrel lenght and the cassing is bigger on the SVD there for bigger muzzle velocity and there fore more powerful punch when hitting a target thous are some reasons why the SVD is a little powerful then its American counterpart. 

But SVD  Снайперская Винтовка Драгунова was made to be in every squad in the Red Army as a recon and precise firing support there for it was made to be an automatic sniper rifle with effective range up to 1 km there for higher magnification scope was not needed at that time.

I am glad that in this game of hours the SVD is powerful unlike other games that are making it poor to play with.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Stom said:

As for the body armour discussion, I don't think it's inherently bad for gameplay to simulate it in some form but some of the games I've played that have tried just become frustrating, like CSAT in Arma 3. In any case, the irregular factions don't yet have anywhere near enough unique equipment to offset the advantage body armour would give to conventional factions. Down the track when the game is more content complete perhaps body armour fits, but until then I wouldn't even consider it.

 

At this point, I want to say that its maybe not a good deal to denied a may feature just because it would be unrealistic that a certain faction doesnt have it in real or it wouldnt fit. Things like that are at some point "gameplay over reality". At least, we are in the Alpha state, maybe we havent now a good way to bring it in a good balance around the asymetric balance "regular forces against iregular forces". We are still testing not just playing in some kind :D

 

Around the "regular forces against regular forces", I think there should be at least some first steps to introduce a bodyarmor-mechanic, because its also maybe need to point out advantages and disadvantages for some guns and also some gunplay. Beside this, there is also the way, as long we are at the alpha state to bring it up even to the insurgents and militia up to the point where both get something in place for a working armor. Would be better than just having nothing all over the time.

 

But we also shouldnt forget, that IRL, regular forces are nearly always better equipped than there iregular enemys, that just the state like it is, and it sounds a bitt odd if we cant play with gadgets and features just because the other side havent it in IRL so even the real life based faction the have this equipment and feature have it at least not in the game. Its like saying "no because yes". And maybe we should ask ourself: Do we want a 1to1 copy of real conflicts or do we want a game we nice gameplay and features to play based on a conflict situation that we can play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we want "realistic simulation", M110 should do the same damage as SVD, US forces should get body armor, also every insurgent should get unlimited IEDs and mines and each American death would cost them 25 tickets

 

Gameplay >> "realism"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the game, but I miss the one shot kill (chest) like in Red Orchestra. At least in close encounters ... it still seems strange and unrealistic to shoot a three-meter shot at the back of the enemy and not to see him die.

Edited by Tmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stom said:

In any case, the irregular factions don't yet have anywhere near enough unique equipment to offset the advantage body armour would give to conventional factions.

Not sure about that:

 

- Regular forces typically only have two 40mm grenadiers per squad, while insurgents are typically seen with 4 or more RPG gunners. Sometimes almost every rifleman will be seen with an RPG-7 on his back. Said RPG's have much less travel-time and arc than 40mm grenades, and neither is stopped by body armor.

 

- Insurgents almost exclusively use 7.62x54mm LMG's as a squad level SAW, which have much deeper barrier penetration and flatter long range trajectory, and higher long range damage than the 5.56mm and 5.45mm LMG's regular forces use at the squad level. Regular forces will only be using corresponding MMG's at the platoon level.

 

- 7.62x39 used by insurgents flat out deals more damage than 5.56mm and 5.45mm in situations where the smaller can't tumble; i.e. in limb shots and ranges past 150 meters. In other words, insurgents can't shoot the regulars in the chest, but the regulars will go down in few limb hits than insurgents.

 

- Insurgents could also simply be given more respawn tickets to balance the higher mortality rate of lacking armor

 

- There are various ways IED's could be implemented in an advantageous manner to regular forces

 

- With ISIS resources, there are now many more insurgent forces with rifle plates and other regular army luxuries compared to the 00's.

 

You said yourself the balance should be asymmetrical. It's quite easy to sort this out once you think outside the symmetrical box.

 

Moreover, the differing factions allow people to set the level of symmetry they want to play:

 

- regular forces vs. regular forces: mostly symmetrical balance with body armor
- regular vs. irregular: asymmetrical balance
- irregular vs. irregular forces: total symmetry with NO body armor

 

If you don't want things to be too asymmetrical, don't play the famously asymmetric matchups.

 

7 hours ago, Bahrein said:

the effective range are the same but the barrel lenght and the cassing is bigger on the SVD there for bigger muzzle velocity and there fore more powerful punch when hitting a target thous are some reasons why the SVD is a little powerful then its American counterpart.

SVD: 174 gr HPBT bullet, 2610 fps
M110: 175 gr HPBT bullet, 2570 fps
 
Literally the SVD travels only 40 fps faster, but the bullet is 1gr lighter. It's a laughably small difference. Basically they are both shooting 175gr at 2600 fps.
 
2 hours ago, tatzhit said:

If we want "realistic simulation", M110 should do the same damage as SVD, US forces should get body armor, also every insurgent should get unlimited IEDs and mines and each American death would cost them 25 tickets

 

Gameplay >> "realism"

The gameplay > realism assertion only works when you successfully argue how the realism would hurt gameplay. Pulling an arbitrary exaggerated number of extra tickets out of your ass doesn't prove anything, and turns "gameplay > realism" into a strawman.

Edited by Gnalvl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Gnalvl said:

The gameplay > realism assertion only works when you successfully argue how the realism would hurt gameplay. Pulling an arbitrary exaggerated number of extra tickets out of your ass doesn't prove anything, and turns "gameplay > realism" into a strawman.

 

I'm arguing that giving US realistic equipment advantages without realistic constraints is... wait for it... unrealistic.

 

Yeah IRL US soldiers are equipped 10x better than an average insurgent. Their lives are also worth 100x more.

 

In Squad, their lives are worth about 1.1x that of an average insurgent, so to maintain parity, we either have to decrease US equipment capabilities (such as no airstrikes, no body armor, and slightly lower damage for M110), or cut their tickets tenfold. Capisce?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tatzhit said:

In Squad, their lives are worth about 1.1x that of an average insurgent, so to maintain parity, we either have to decrease US equipment capabilities (such as no airstrikes, no body armor, and slightly lower damage for M110), or cut their tickets tenfold. Capisce?

An other question here: Because there is a Insurgents vs Regular Forces Map Scenario, we should also do not implent any features thats suit up with RU vs US or regular forces against regular forces just because of some maps they are intend to be asymetrical?

 

I think this is not a good way... if Offworld realy decide to skip some further mechanics just because there are some maps not fitting it... well than I want that the Ins vs Forces should be removed >:( ( ^_^ )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yeah. That's why DShK damages a Stryker for example, or why .50 can kill at BTR82 from the front. Game balance >> "realism".

 

I'm not sure what you had in mind for regular vs regular forces, I assume heavy armor, advanced optics, air power and arty strikes. I'm gonna guess there are two reasons these are not included:
- Aforementioned issues with balance vs irregulars

- A lot of the cool toys being too rare/valuable to realistically be present in a squad-level skirmish

 

I like it that way tbh. No desire to play a poorly modeled sitzkrieg / techno gimmick standoff, instead of a fun shooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, tatzhit said:

Their lives are also worth 100x more.

Citation needed, lol. If you're saying that they cost 100x to their governing body 100x more to outfit, you also have to account for the fact that their governing body has a much larger budget.

 

I think it's much more likely that the tickets are meant to represent boots-on-the-ground manpower rather than government budgets. In this respect, numbers of combatants available fluctuates a lot based on the situation... if one regular unit is doing recon in a hot area, it may turn out that almost every man in town is bringing a rifle against them. In other situations, you may have a minority of insurgents hiding amongst a majority of peaceful locals, in an area with heavy presence of occupying regular forces.

 

Thus there is no specific "realistic" answer on the appropriate number of tickets for each team, and the best answer is whatever works best for gameplay. If there are no other balancing factors to address equipment disaprities, then yes, it may be best for gameplay that insurgents always get more respawn tickets than regular forces (representing a situations specifically where the regular forces are outnumbered).

 

Bear in mind, you still haven't actually argued why fewer respawns for regular forces would actually be bad for gameplay. In fact, you pretty much waffled your argument from "gameplay > realism" to "realism > unrealism".

Edited by Gnalvl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tatzhit said:

Well yeah. That's why DShK damages a Stryker for example, or why .50 can kill at BTR82 from the front. Game balance >> "realism".


Oh boy, you're in for a rough waking when they add localised damage for vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gnalvl said:

 

 

SVD: 174 gr HPBT bullet, 2610 fps
M110: 175 gr HPBT bullet, 2570 fps
 
Literally the SVD travels only 40 fps faster, but the bullet is 1gr lighter. It's a laughably small difference. Basically they are both shooting 175gr at 2600 fps.
 

No basicly thay are not the same.Becouse you wrote the wrong fps specs 830 m/s (2,723 ft/s) (SVD) Now those are the specs for the real SVD the SSSR one not to be mistaken with other modernized versions that Russian army has today or shorter version.

 

And you need to take in the acount that US forces feel more powerful in this game and have better equipment than the Militia so this puny little difirence you are all crying about is really puny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2018 at 5:20 AM, Lightly_Salted said:

Nope. I'm not saying it's bad.

 

Finally got hold of the Marksmen kit for myself yesterday, the US one. Now, I could be wrong, but it seems to take two hits to kill someone unless it's a headshot, obviously, but let's be real, hitting headshots on moving targets at 200+ meters isn't particularly easy if we take into account drop and weapon sway. The round the M110 fires is a 7.62x51mm NATO, doing a bit of research that round is travelling at almost 800 m/s, and it is a 175gr round. The M4, which also takes two rounds to kill someone in-game, fires a 5.56x45mm NATO round, of which is travelling at 910 m/s due to it being a much smaller and lighter round, indicated by the fact that it is only a mere 62gr. That's 113gr lighter than the 7.62 round the M110 fires, i'm not going to do the maths but you can imagine the difference in energy those rounds will have, the 7.62 clearly being much, much higher. And yet it still takes two hits to down someone, even when hitting them square in the chest... Don't forget the fact that some of the targets you fight don't even wear body armour, and those that do, the 7.62x51 would just punch straight through.

 

My point is, you want a game to be realistic in it's gunplay. You make muzzle control more player dependant, but you don't adjust the fact that if someone gets hit with a round as powerful as the one the M110 fires (Or any marksmen rifle for that matter), it's gonna put you on the floor no matter what. There is little punishment for taking a hit from any rifle in this game apart from a little screen blur, sure if you don't bandage you're pretty much dead, but there's no reduction to movement speed, or any kind of stumbling if you get hit in certain areas.

 

I don't want to stray too far from my main topic; Why does it take a Marksmen rifle (The m110 in particular) more than one round to the chest to drop a target? And for a game hailing realism in gunplay, why have we seen no major downsides to taking a hit? 

 

I can't seem to comprehend how I slam a round from my M110 into the chest of a man for him to scurry away like someone just stepped on his toe. Or are they all using space-age level 5 ballistic kevlar robes now? 

 

UPDATE: Okay. Seems that my original opinion was quite an unpopular one. Though I guess I can compromise. As I mentioned in my last comment, due to the M110 and SVD being very similar, why not bring them up to each other? So the M110 does the same or close to the same damage as the SVD, or bump the bleed-out time to 5 seconds so the enemy does have a chance to survive, while still having the weapons as quite effective tools. 

 

 

P.S; Went on a bit of a tangent so i've probably missed something important. Apologies.

Thanks for this topic! I hope the devs read it. Many others also complain that the one issue that has plagued this game in terms of ballistics is how larger rounds cause no sway changes, no slow down... nothing like that. I hoped the new animation system would make that possible but no. Honestly, I agree with you fully that those larger rounds should actually drop a target after one chest shot. It would truly show how lethal these weapons are in comparison to the smaller firearms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×