Weapon Damage - Ideas

(TheGreatHoundini) #1

So, right now, DB weapons are configured such that they have one flat damage to the head and one flat damage to the body regardless of distance.

This means that for all tactical purposes, weapons are all the same except for ROF and recoil patterns.
That’s how you end up in a situation where the sniper rifles, assault rifles, and SMG’s all get used in the same ranges and secondaries get little action.

Even something like a Magnum Revolver shot to the head doesn’t finish anyone in less than 3 or 4 shots.

I was just thinking, would it be to the game’s improvement if there was a damage multiplier based on distance.

Say, just for example, something like:

Pistols and Shotguns = 1.75x damage under 3 meters
SMG’s = 1.5x damage under 6 meters
AR’s = 1.1x damage under 12 meters (note: 12 meters is actually the Pistol and Shotgun max damage before drop-off range in COD)
Sniper Rifles = 0.75 damage under 20 meters (to discourage Quick-Scoping in close range for Aimee, Vassilli, and Redeye and encourage use of the Secondary. The key words are “discourage” and “encourage”. It is not to nerf the sniper rifles!).

I’m suggesting this for a number of reasons:

  1. A number of the firefights end up in extremely close quarters where people are using high-powered weapons at ranges well below 3 meters. At this point, the flat damages start to feel weak for many of the guns. Basically the game boils down to fighting with your knives at distances of less than 3 to 5 meters. This is not really a problem - except it can get boring. And because you rarely see secondaries in action (and rarely use them yourself) there’s this large part of the game code that I rarely see anybody using. By making some of the weapons, particularly secondaries, very effective at close ranges, players can “stay active” and it can add to “a little extra dimension of play” for experienced players.

  2. It changes the effective use of each of the weapon classes so that there is some impetus for changing up things and it also gives Snipers in particular something to think about if the action is close, or if they are about to enter a building or engage in close quarters. Yes, it can result in chipping away some of the power of the long rifles inside the room in Underground for example, but remember, that’s why you have a secondary. Right now the only reason for Vassilli or Aimee players to switch to secondary is if they feel they need more ROF. This suggestion adds another layer to that decision.

  3. It enhances the “feel of relative power” for the guns. DB may claim almost direct ancestry to Golden Age shooters like Quake 3 in many aspects, but the Golden Age is really the past, and even now DB bases its weapons on analogs with real-world weapons just like modern shooters do (ie: Timik looks like AK-47, DE .50 is a Desert Eagle, etc.). These weapons, therefore carry certain expectations which DB also recognizes because the DE .50 for example does more damage than the M9 and the revolvers do higher damage still. However, like I mentioned before it can get really ridiculous sometimes in closer ranges. You blast someone with a revolver to the head, but it “doesn’t seem to work”. Adding weapon class damage modifiers will help give some of the weapons more viability, increase their usage at appropriate ranges, making players feel more active, and will ensure that DB has “one foot in the Modern Shooter door”.

  4. New players are more prone to engage at close distances against each other rather than sniping far away across a map. By doing something that can lower the TTK at really close distances (Remember: 12 meters is pistol distance in modern shooters), we can at least help bridge the gap for players new to shooters, and players coming in from other shooters since it “feels a bit familiar under 12 meters”. This will help DB attract and keep new players longer.

Again, I make these suggestions knowing that Splash Damage is really trying to build a high TTK skirmish and strafe kind of FPS game. And I love that gameplay in variety against something like COD. I just feel like there can be ways to increase the Intensity and Player Activity in certain situations particularly in close ranges.

(AnimeDude) #2

jesus christ what on earth are those multipliers? Less damage for being closer to your enemies? How is that not a nerf? Is this a troll in the making?

(TheGreatHoundini) #3

Ahem… LESS damage? I’m suggesting MORE damage at close range. Where it says Pistols do “1.75x” damage under 3 meters", it’s meant to read: “Pistols should do 75% MORE damage at under 3 meters”.

So the idea is that if a pistol like the M9 does 30 Damage to head shots at above 3 meters, I was suggesting that should jump up to 52 Damage once distances close to less than 3 meters. I think 3 meters is probably slightly a bit farther than Katana range though I could be wrong.

Also, again… 12 meters is the pistol MAX DAMAGE range in COD… why would I suggest LOWERING DAMAGE at CLOSER RANGES for small arms? You make me howl at the moon! Awooooooo! :stuck_out_tongue:

The only exception I was suggesting was for Sniper Rifles, but even at -25% Damage for Sniper Rifles below 20 meters, they would still be pretty powerful anyway as they still do the most damage at almost any range save for a pointblank Shotgun.

(MisterBadmin) #4

In a fast-paced game that requires split-second reads and execution, consistency is paramount. Knowing exactly what damage you and your enemy can put out lets you pick your engagements and duels carefully so that you know when to fight or take flight.

Having modifiers throws that knowledge out the window and becomes a case of charge the enemy to get your multiplier.

Also dear god, WHY would you ever want shotguns to be even MORE powerful?
(I’m assuming that you aren’t touching base damage values or ranges as you didn’t mention it, otherwise this is an entirely different discussion.)

Regarding your points:

  1. Secondaries are combat capable. They have enough damage output to drop enemies, but require more skill to be on the level of primaries. Secondaries are just that: secondary. They shouldn’t see a lot of use. In most cases, they are about finishing the last 1 or 2 enemies before disengaging.

  2. Snipers should almost always engage with their primaries. They have rifles that can drop anything and everything in a few well-placed shots. In close range, you don’t always have time to swap and win the duel with a secondary when the other guy is packing an AR or SMG. They still have the ability to counterplay that with a burst of damage from a single headshot with a secondary finish.
    Snipers are about risk-reward. Reducing the reward for skilled players (close range flicks on flanking enemies) while increasing risk (damage multiplier for the flanker) seems really strange. Not to mention that most Vaselines are already busy guarding spawn, so giving further disincentives to going offensive wouldn’t help with that at all.

  3. Screw modern shooters. The only time DB has ever pretended to be a serious modern shooter is an early gameplay trailer. Since then, it’s been the tongue-in-cheek style with lots of mechanical depth, the antithesis of modern shooters. DB is a niche fps, and is very clearly a passion project from SD. Taking mechanics and philosophies from the things you are trying to differentiate yourself from is probably not the best way to be different.

  4. Let’s ignore that everyone and their mother buys Vaseline first and proceeds to guard spawn.
    Lowering TTK is heresy.
    [center]HERESY.[/center]
    I play DB because it is a niche FPS with high TTK. I don’t play with shotguns and snipers because I don’t find low TTK fun. I like my duels. I want to play with other people who like duels and playing the uhb-jek-tiv, not CoD players that ADS and want TDM as a mode.
    (People who have found their FPS tend to not leave anyways, and they likely won’t even notice the attempt at bridging the gap in the ~1 hour where they try it out.)

Prolonged close-range duels are some of the most intense memories I have from DB, partially because you can outplay with movement. With BL41 Aura (was out of Blishlok bullets, thanks Skyhammer) I ran into a Grandeur Redeye near a corner. He could take me out in 1 headshot. I took out my pistol, started walljumping, and dumped rounds until I could kill him with my knife. I remember that duel because it lasted several seconds, and the salt he spread in chat afterwards.

Implementing damage multipliers would entirely change how that duel played out. The Redeye would have needed 3 bodyshots (or 2 headshots) [Grandeur counts as a sniper rifle because game reasons.] to kill me. Rather than dumping the 10 or so (I panic sprayed a bit, maybe 6 hit) and requiring the melee to finish, the Redeye would have been dead after 5 hits.

(TheGreatHoundini) #5

[quote=“MisterBadmin;191900”]
Prolonged close-range duels are some of the most intense memories I have from DB, partially because you can outplay with movement. With BL41 Aura (was out of Blishlok bullets, thanks Skyhammer) I ran into a Grandeur Redeye near a corner. He could take me out in 1 headshot. I took out my pistol, started walljumping, and dumped rounds until I could kill him with my knife. I remember that duel because it lasted several seconds, and the salt he spread in chat afterwards.

Implementing damage multipliers would entirely change how that duel played out. The Redeye would have needed 3 bodyshots (or 2 headshots) [Grandeur counts as a sniper rifle because game reasons.] to kill me. Rather than dumping the 10 or so (I panic sprayed a bit, maybe 6 hit) and requiring the melee to finish, the Redeye would have been dead after 5 hits. [/quote]

This is absolutely correct! And it is also true that some of the best moments in DB are the old-fashioned blood-drenched close range battles that end up more like paintball/nerf gun matches.

You are also correct that the multipliers would have made the “unlikely win” in your position (the one with the smaller gun) a little “more likely”. You are correct. Redeye Grandeur needing 2 shots instead of 1, you needing 5 instead of 6 plus a melee strike. +1 shot to kill here, -1 shot to kill there when things fall into extremely close ranges. That’s exactly what I was describing.

Again, I wasn’t recommending an actual imitation of COD (where the M9 Beretta can drop you in 3 shots up close, but needs 6 beyond 12 meters). In the example you described, indeed, the pistol would be a 5 shot, and the Grandeur would still kill you in 2. And that’s considering the Grandeur is a much “better” long range rifle than any of the marksman rifles in COD, so there is “some likelihood” you would have lost anyway.

It is fair for you not to like that idea, but you also understand that a Redeye that is “really damn good” would have nailed those 2 shots anyway. With my modifiers in place that Redeye might have switched to secondary and both of you would be duelling on equal terms. Who’s to say that won’t be more intense? But I respect your opinion. You are correct. The multipliers would change close range duels.

My feelings at the time were that: “It makes that close range skirmish bridge easier to cross for people using actual close-range weapons and helps new players but probably doesn’t change anything for really experienced players.”

However, you clearly understand what the suggestion would have done. It is perfectly fine that you do not like it for the exact reason that it alters weapon consistency ever so slightly.

I too play this game for the reason that I alternate between a “Modern Shooter” and DB. So we are in the same boat. I guess I’m just a fan of mixing things up here and there. :slight_smile:

The discussion is meant to just float the idea, certainly not bulldoze it. I can’t do that anyway as I don’t work for SD.

(MisterBadmin) #6

Minor points of order:
It’s -3 bodyshots from the M9 to kill a full-health Redeye. (8 as is, 5 with multiplier)
If the Redeye was good, he would have only needed one headshot and I’d never be in a position to stab his ass.

Floating ideas is always fine by me. I harbor no ill will, keep em coming. <3

Just expect more walls of text tearing them apart.

(TheGreatHoundini) #7

[quote=“MisterBadmin;191903”]

Floating ideas is always fine by me. I harbor no ill will, keep em coming. <3

Just expect more walls of text tearing them apart. [/quote]

That’s OK. Ideas are there to be challenged, not always to be supported.
I will admit that my suggestion boils down to creating “artificial intensity”.

(arcaneCanvas) #8

[quote=“TheGreatHoundini;31160”]So, right now, DB weapons are configured such that they have one flat damage to the head and one flat damage to the body regardless of distance.

This means that for all tactical purposes, weapons are all the same except for ROF and recoil patterns.
That’s how you end up in a situation where the sniper rifles, assault rifles, and SMG’s all get used in the same ranges and secondaries get little action.

Even something like a Magnum Revolver shot to the head doesn’t finish anyone in less than 3 or 4 shots.

I was just thinking, would it be to the game’s improvement if there was a damage multiplier based on distance.

Say, just for example, something like:

Pistols and Shotguns = 1.75x damage under 3 meters
SMG’s = 1.5x damage under 6 meters
AR’s = 1.1x damage under 12 meters (note: 12 meters is actually the Pistol and Shotgun max damage before drop-off range in COD)
Sniper Rifles = 0.75 damage under 20 meters (to discourage Quick-Scoping in close range for Aimee, Vassilli, and Redeye and encourage use of the Secondary. The key words are “discourage” and “encourage”. It is not to nerf the sniper rifles!).

I’m suggesting this for a number of reasons:

  1. A number of the firefights end up in extremely close quarters where people are using high-powered weapons at ranges well below 3 meters. At this point, the flat damages start to feel weak for many of the guns. Basically the game boils down to fighting with your knives at distances of less than 3 to 5 meters. This is not really a problem - except it can get boring. And because you rarely see secondaries in action (and rarely use them yourself) there’s this large part of the game code that I rarely see anybody using. By making some of the weapons, particularly secondaries, very effective at close ranges, players can “stay active” and it can add to “a little extra dimension of play” for experienced players.

  2. It changes the effective use of each of the weapon classes so that there is some impetus for changing up things and it also gives Snipers in particular something to think about if the action is close, or if they are about to enter a building or engage in close quarters. Yes, it can result in chipping away some of the power of the long rifles inside the room in Underground for example, but remember, that’s why you have a secondary. Right now the only reason for Vassilli or Aimee players to switch to secondary is if they feel they need more ROF. This suggestion adds another layer to that decision.

  3. It enhances the “feel of relative power” for the guns. DB may claim almost direct ancestry to Golden Age shooters like Quake 3 in many aspects, but the Golden Age is really the past, and even now DB bases its weapons on analogs with real-world weapons just like modern shooters do (ie: Timik looks like AK-47, DE .50 is a Desert Eagle, etc.). These weapons, therefore carry certain expectations which DB also recognizes because the DE .50 for example does more damage than the M9 and the revolvers do higher damage still. However, like I mentioned before it can get really ridiculous sometimes in closer ranges. You blast someone with a revolver to the head, but it “doesn’t seem to work”. Adding weapon class damage modifiers will help give some of the weapons more viability, increase their usage at appropriate ranges, making players feel more active, and will ensure that DB has “one foot in the Modern Shooter door”.

  4. New players are more prone to engage at close distances against each other rather than sniping far away across a map. By doing something that can lower the TTK at really close distances (Remember: 12 meters is pistol distance in modern shooters), we can at least help bridge the gap for players new to shooters, and players coming in from other shooters since it “feels a bit familiar under 12 meters”. This will help DB attract and keep new players longer.

Again, I make these suggestions knowing that Splash Damage is really trying to build a high TTK skirmish and strafe kind of FPS game. And I love that gameplay in variety against something like COD. I just feel like there can be ways to increase the Intensity and Player Activity in certain situations particularly in close ranges.[/quote]

creating set of rules to bind players on how to play is not good.

MLG vasilli and aimee are actually the one who flanks and quickscopes in the close range
pistoleros are already a thing in the game (i always use my caulden and m9 if enemies got too close)

SMG are already very deadly at close range, why would yo want hochfir to kill you under 1 sec?

(AnimeDude) #9

[quote=“TheGreatHoundini;191892”]
Ahem… LESS damage?[/quote]
Yes, less damage, I was referring to sniper rifles, doesn’t matter if they’ll still do high close range damage, at a .75% modifier you would only be able to kill light classes with headshots. As if hitting headshots with those weapons at close range isn’t enough to warrant a kill.

(Jostabeere) #10

[quote=“TheGreatHoundini;31160”]regardless of distance.

[/quote]

Well. Since when do we not have damage falloff?

(frostyvampire) #11

I agree with damage falloffs but I don’t think increasing damage in close range would be the best idea.
Sniper rifles should have a solid damage at all ranges (stay as it is now)
Shotguns should have a really tiny damage buff (~5%) and less spread but give them a huge damage falloff so at mid range they will be kinda meh and after like 15 meters the bullets completely disappear and do 0 damage
Revolvers and Dreiss should have a tiny damage falloff
Timik and M4 should have a small damage falloff
Burst guns should have a medium damage falloff
SMG’s and semi auto pistols should have a medium+ falloff
Machine pistols should have a big falloff

Also penetrations could be nice (e.g. shooting through a wooden plate will do 85% of damage if it hits and etc.)

Btw this should go to “weapon discussion” section

(Eox) #12

I’m against any of those changes. A few weapons and scenarios aside, the TTK in DB seems fair as it is and do not need to be sped up at close range in my opinion. Your changes are also hardly helping new players, because you are making shotguns even more frustrating with such a damage bonus (+75% damage up close for an already close ranged weapon, seriously ?). I have to remind that shotguns is the main balance complaint of a lot of newbie players (and some average players too), though they are absolutely worthless at high level play where the metagame is mid-long ranged.

What your changes will end up to is filling the pubs with even more Proxies and Auras, at the point where we will probably only see those among the newbies. The shotgun whine would also grow even more stronger. With a +75% damage increase, all shotguns would be able to down 120 hp mercs with single shot without aiming for the head, Remburg and Hollunds would also be able to take out Fragger in a single shot as well. This is downright insane.

I wish DB’s metagame was a little less long ranged too, but I don’t want to see it THAT close ranged either. Also, those changes makes a lot of mercs and weapons even more atrociously frustrating than they actually are.

(LifeupOmega) #13

[quote=“Jostabeere;191930”][quote=“TheGreatHoundini;31160”]regardless of distance.

[/quote]

Well. Since when do we not have damage falloff? [/quote]

Was just about to say this. There is fall off for all weapons aside from Sniper Rifles.

(Jostabeere) #14

[quote=“LifeupOmega;191968”][quote=“Jostabeere;191930”][quote=“TheGreatHoundini;31160”]regardless of distance.

[/quote]

Well. Since when do we not have damage falloff? [/quote]

Was just about to say this. There is fall off for all weapons aside from Sniper Rifles.[/quote]

I believe they have falloff aswell, but beyond range you can have on any map.

(LifeupOmega) #15

[quote=“Jostabeere;191972”][quote=“LifeupOmega;191968”][quote=“Jostabeere;191930”][quote=“TheGreatHoundini;31160”]regardless of distance.

[/quote]

Well. Since when do we not have damage falloff? [/quote]

Was just about to say this. There is fall off for all weapons aside from Sniper Rifles.[/quote]

I believe they have falloff aswell, but beyond range you can have on any map.[/quote]

Falloff for SRs is around 10,000m or something silly, easier to just say they don’t have it. :wink:

(Dysfnal) #16

Just no… The only problems with gun balance right now are burst rifles and shotguns, brs being too easy to use and too rewarding, and shotguns being too good in pubs and worthless in competitive

(Amerika) #17

Weapons already have falloff and are balanced around that pretty heavily. We definitely don’t need to make people die faster in CQC either IMO.

(TheGreatHoundini) #18

But… those are the only two weapon types I can actually use in this game! :smiley: