Should Headshot Bonuses be Reduced?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Slamz, Feb 11, 2015.

  1. VonStalin

    Should Headshot Bonuses be Reduced?
    No. Never.
    • Up x 1
  2. Jawarisin


    With your BR, if you actually focussed on aiming, you would have a godly aim by now. And even so, if you simply applied yourself 1-2 hours a day for a week, you'd have decent aim. The other thing that comes to mind of course is how you're set up. Some people are used to something and unwilling to change for the better, even if it doesn't cost a penny. But here again, it's your fault.

    Learning to aim is extremely easy, but most players don't bother. Also, a 20 death-streaks would imply meeting 20 good aiming player in a row, or 20 times the same one in a row while you're not scratching him. Which is basically an impossible scenario.

    If you want to learn to aim or get a few advices/how to, feel free to hit me up for that (PM me). I like how you admit your bias, one which I also have of course.
  3. Dragonold103

    The head shot bonuses shouldn't be reduced but increase for a little more realistic, Yes I know the human body can survive with missing brain fibers and 10% of people survive head-shots but getting shot 3, 4, 5 to the head isn't possible (I think) I believe the head shot bonuses should be increase to instead kill or have some effect the vision making seeing more of a blur or something then reducing head shot bonus.
    • Up x 1
  4. FateJH

    "Instead of lowering the viability of headshots, let's replace it with a mechanic that annoys everyone else" is the perfect way to get people to want to get rid of headshots.
  5. Lord_Avatar

    Leave the TTK alone; headshots included.
  6. SupaFlea

    Basically if there are no head shot bonuses it will increase the rookie Panic button HA's with their shields. better aiming and HS bonus is the only thing that gives other classes and actual chance in CQB against HA's. I should automatically lose everyone 1vs1 against a heavy because I'm not a heavy.

    I'm primary LA and being able to beats at least 50% of HA's in toe to toe fight because of HS dmg and my own accuracy and reflexes is the only thing that makes me and many other LA or CQ Infils accepted in to good squads.

    The aim of the game is to be adaptive, There was no bonus dmg in PS1 but the weapons themselves took a long time to master
  7. MajiinBuu

    I think headshot bonuses are fine the way they are. There are a few weapons which could use a headshot-multiplier tweaking, but no, they are good.
    I remember in PS1 there were no headshot bonuses :D
  8. Xind

    I'll admit the HA is it's own island in this sea of a question, but that stems from HA currenly being a little out of whack with the rest of the classes. And factoring them in against the other classes is much harder than looking at the other classes against each other.

    And while you can beat an HA with your LA when headshoting, it also implies the HA is not head shoting or not responding with fire at all.

    And yeah, this thread really illustrates that more people want a CS/BF/CoD styled game instead of Planetside. And I would argue that the weapons in PS1 were not harder to master than the weapons in PS2. The Jackhammer and MCG were extremely easy to use as were all three empires rifles.
  9. Xasapis

    Actually I want quite the opposite. Removal of directional damage will devolve Planetside 2 into CoD style of game, where twitch and spray and pray is sufficient and aiming your shots makes little to no difference.
  10. SupaFlea

    MCG was one of the hardest to master, you had to close the distance to 20-30 feet to stand a chance at killing some before they killed you with a pistol. and since all combat came indoors beating a corner humping triple shot JH's with MCG at 2-10 feet took a lot of skill. plus you had to lead your target by half foot at all times beyond point blank. try leading a strafing target lol. its easy to shoot a strafing target pin point but predicting when they will change direction so you can lead them was hell and all that only matter if you had enough fps to make the MCG effective lol.

    The game was made to attract BF and Cod players to broaden the community since both of those players communities would of hated PS1 and i hate PS2 at first since it lacked everything great about the original. 1 good squad of players could defend a base against an enemy almost twice their size since the TTK was a lot slower. The faster TTK in PS2 ruined that, just like COD they close the skill gap by introducing weapons or technology for squishies to be good from early on. Been TR for 13 years but i think after this game gradually dies like the first i dont think we will see another game like it again, the quick $/£ has taken priority over good game design.
    • Up x 1
  11. Robertooooo

    Of course the more skilled player should win in a 100% fair fight. No resonable players would quit a game because a better player kills them from time to time.

    How exactly would this lead to more teamwork? By having 2 players spray and pray on one single target at a time?
    It would be devastating towards smaller outfits that consists of skilled players, and easier for zergfits that wins trough superior numbers. And how would that be even remotely good for the game?
    • Up x 1
  12. nehylen

    It would've been a good idea at the start of the game, but 2 years in? It means nerfing guns, which are otherwise perfectly fine as is, in turn meaning months of balance instability to get the arsenal about right. And tons of rage of course.

    For instance i could perfectly see the logic for an auto scout rifle to have a 2.5x headshot bonus, or a standard lmg having 1.5x. But right now it's just inviting chaos.
    • Up x 1
  13. Kociboss


    Why not? If somebody is better than you, he/she should beat you... Otherwise...What would be the point of for example olympics or any other competition ?

    O_O

    Internet is truly an awkward, awkward place...
  14. Pfundi

    Well, f2p needs players. Players want fun. Fun comes with the dead of others. No chance against (the already really powerful) "elite" of PS2 means only you dead. So no fun. No reason to play. Noone to shoot at for ya.
    Seems legit?
  15. Vaphell

    What that has got to do with anything? Also it's not like one side predictably demolishing the other is interesting in the long run. Also it's not like in the competitive sports unexpected upsets never happen, nor do chess grandmasters win every match.

    yep, sarcasm coming from a thinly veiled superiority complex counts as a valid argument there...
  16. Kociboss

    Are you really getting demolished because of current headshot multiplier? What the hell...

    This is a PvP game based around PvP. My headshot % isn't even that high btw, but reducing the reward for good aim is just plain wrong.

    There are A LOT of PvE/lighthearted PvX games, designed around and for casual gamers. PS2 is actually semi-casual already. K/D does not matter, teritorry does not matter... Tbh I simply don't understand the point of this suggestion.



    Superiority complex? Immediately starting with personal attacks? I'm not even gonna bother to respond to that.
    • Up x 1
  17. Hosp

    My 2 Cents:

    TTK should be increased slightly. Abouts .25s. But wether HSx should be tweaked as a means to that end, not so sure. Lotta stuff affects TTK and would need quite a bit of testing to any aspect to check viability.
    • Up x 1
  18. z1967

    Headshot rewards exist so that low ROF guns like the Solstice and T5 AMC will be remotely competitive against CQC weapons like the GD-7F and Lynx. A reduction/removal of the headshot bonus (like you guys are suggesting) would pretty much make these weapons less than viable in any situation except very long ranges where the CQC weapons can't hit for crap.

    It also would remove PA slug shotguns as a reasonable playstyle, and would end up nerfing many other high accuracy/ high reward play styles similar to it.

    All in all, bad change, would never make that change.
  19. Vaphell

    So who started implying that the 'others' on the internet don't know what they are talking about unlike you, obviously?
  20. Kociboss


    All I said was that it is an awkward place.