Headshot bonus damage should decrease

Why should the headshot hunter always win?

Ease of Use is important to determine how well a weapon should function, however that does not mean that a headshot hunter of the same skill should always win from a CQC weapon. CQC weapons are not automatically easier to use, and their skill ceiling with COF+recoil control, weapon knowledge (mainly at what range it becomes effective and how much you need to choose between ADS or hipfire), knowledge of terrain and situational awareness is far higher than that of a pure headshot weapon. Additionally a pure headshot weapon is often less punished for being used in CQC than a CQC weapon at range, so the ease of use argument can go both ways in that respect.

From my point of view, someone who does not specialize in skills but learns all skills equally should be the winner almost 100% of the time, almost. If someone goes almost all headshots headshots headshots then he should have a disadvantage against someone who has a much broader and varied skillset. Same with someone who specializes in any other skill versus someone who learns lots of skills.
The goal is to get so many skills together that it is nigh impossible to master them all, allowing players to become masters at different aspects of the game without any one of them dominating, where even being mediocre at everything rather than specializing is a solid option. This increases variety and allows players to constantly try to evolve new tactics and strategies to try and win a battle.

All of our close quarters weapons are easy to aim if we're considering body shots, which we are because that's the entire point if this argument. Without headshots we also wouldn't have to burst fire nearly as much. And I didn't say "same skill" on purpose, I said equal and high skill. The guy landing all headshots should always win against a guy landing all body shots, shotguns aside. Performance has to be tied to ease of use. And yeah, I'm with you that other skills such as positioning and awareness need to be more competitive in comparison to aim, but body shots being viable makes that so. More stealth and less life spam would help even more.

We're not too far off from each other, maybe except for life spam, I just have a problem with your theory that noob weapons should be just as effective as headshot hunters. The gap should close, but there needs to he a gap.

I'm entirely opposed to the rock-paper-scissors approach of CAI. I don't want to see that in the infantry world too. My point is that if all things are equal, two guys meet face to face and start shooting at the same time, the guy landing headshots should win. With everything I've proposed, a predetermined outcome would be much less so than currently.

What many people are advocating is reducing the head-shot bonus, not removing it entirely.

If trading blows shot for shot, with equal damage weapons, of course the guy who lands more head-shots should ultimately prevail - but that would still be the case even if the head-shot bonus was reduced.

It should still convey an advantage, but shouldn't be so OP that even if you get the drop on a head-shot vet, they can turn 180 and just ping you in the head - which is the situation we currently have. Head-shots convey too much of an advantage.

Turning Battle-Eye back up/on would solve a lot of the problems associated with the HS multiplier.

'Course, then the boot-lickers would be raging on here about how their "innocent friends" can't play anymore.

That is related to the relatively long TTK and existing damage model. Headshots are just too easy to achieve.

If you engage (and land hits on) an unsuspecting enemy then he should be wounded and therefore less prone to headshot you with millimetric precision.

You can fix that by adding a CoF penalty if wounded, so players could still defend themselves with bodyshots but achieving an headshot would be rather harder.

Whats prevents ones who vote for headshot bonus decrease to do headshots by themselves ? Get infiltrator with NSX Tomtoe for example and headshot 5 enemies in a row. What prevents to do that ? Why this thread is about how to compensate the low skills ? Get more skills and "you better play better".

Maybe the will to use the 50%+ arsenal of other weapons than the Tomoe or similar high accuracy weapons that prevents them to use them.

Maybe they want to play differently than purely headshots, and dont want to be punished even though they might have sinilar or better skill than their opponent.

Maybe because the pro-headshot crowd and you is using the exact same self-serving fallacies as used to protect things like old ZOE, ancient Anchor mode, old ESF rocketpods and noseguns, the NC Phoenix at its release and other such atrocities that the game went through. There shouldnt be many "low skills" to begin with and to do that we need proper rewards.

Just the fact that you cant come up with the first two points probably means your chances on a Darwin Award have gone up a magnitude.

So yeah nanoeve does not protect from headshots I'll say. I kind of wish it did, but then that would be a too big advantage over other options. Headshots should still grant some bonus, but I agree it is detrimental to new players.

Solution? Lower headshot damage a bit or add more health/shields to players or both. Then again there's the problem that snipers will no longer be 1-2 shot kills but hey, I'm not against that, snipers r annoying

Nothing of course.

Point is, The vast majority of the players have average accuracy and sub-one KDR.

Without that vast majority of players, the servers will be empty and empty servers are usually shut down.

The game experience has to be pleasant otherwise people will leave. You can't afford to make a game working well only for an elite.

I know you are going to say "I have eaten **** for years to get good at landing headshots and now I want to reap what I sow by killing others at near impunity. They in turn will suffer and learn how to survive by being more precise."

But this Pyramid Schema does not seem to work anymore.

OK, lets nerf headshots, Magrider, С4 and so on. And high text typing skills players (like demigan and his ~5 messages in a day every day for years ) will be happy.

To others who want to improve themselves not by claim to nerf something: just raise your aim a little bit when you see the enemy. And you will see HUGE k/d ratio grow despite what weapon you use.

P.S. now I'll wait for another wall of text with quotes from forum's scientists.

What does any of that have to do with anything? What does the amount of messages I send have to do with all the other players in this thread against headshots? And why should "just raise your aim a little bit" be rewarded this much compared to anything else? Why arent players allowed to be rewarded as much for getting similarily good with othrr skills? Why arent players allowed to be rewarded for using the 50÷% of weapons in the game rhat dont have the accuracy stats to be headshot machines unless you are incredibly close?

I know why, because you benefit from the current situation and dont want people of similar skill in other skills to defeat you. But I want to hear one solid argument to keep headshots... and after 5 pages and almost as mamy walls of text from the "keep headshot" crowdyou still have basically nothing.

Think you forgot a link mate.

I don't know what 3 suit slots you have in mind that would be equal to the the abilities of other classes considering every other class can already have 2.

Oops..

https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/czfv00/thoughts_on_nanoweave/

Maybe my terminology is off. Instead of picking just nanoweave, if the HA shield is removed they could pick nanoweave, flak armor, and advanced shield capacitor all at the same time instead of picking just one.

I'd absutely take that option. When fighting good players they're not hitting my shield anyway, and the last thing I want to do is slow down. I think vets would be happy with this change, and new players would be happy their body shots would deal decent damage.

I think that laboring under the delusion that you have been reading any of what I write before committing face-keyboard is part of the reason we are as far down this rabbit hole as we are.

No, you're just delusional in that you think the rules only apply to other people.

I have made an actual argument. I am not however required to spoon-feed it to you if it goes over your head or you fail to read it.

Don't hesitate to take your own advice.

Aside from the aforementioned standard for most popular shooters being 2x, the fact that changes would be unlikely to significantly affect the new player experience or bring in new players, the fact that positional play is already rewarding in game right now as long as the ambusher hits their shots?

These are things I brought up pages ago. Perhaps if you spent more time responding to what I wrote instead of flippantly snipping away trying to be clever you would have already seen them.

I guess I could add to this the likelihood of negative repercussions amongst vets which for a small community like this could be fatal. It would be SS but you know, we've already set the tone for the quality of this discussion.

Maaaaybe if they had that and assault rifles, but I still think it's not enough considering how powerful the movement is for the LA or how tanky the Carapace Medic is. The cloak in particular is easily the equal of the HA shield right now, and would almost certainly have to take a hit if this change was implemented.

It's important to consider who benefits from these abilities. The HA shield is unique in that it's largely irrelevant when considering two top tier players going head to head, but it's essentially an "I win" button for two noobs going at it. And it really stacks the cards when you have a HA vet against any noob. Vets are already at such an insane advantage, I just don't see the need to increase that advantage with nanoweave and the HA shield. But you're right, with the shield gone, that might call for HAs being able to equip ARs, or even better, LMGs could warrant a buff at that point, as the shield is the only reason they're lesser weapons than ARs.

... I have delusions about having read everything you wrote in a post? So when I've read every word and reached the end I've somehow missed a part of your post? Who's delusional here, the one who claims to know that someone else does not read based on the fact that the other person had arguments against it *gasp* or the person who is claimed to be delusional...

When I remark something and someone says that they meant something else, then I dont argue semantics but react to what they meant. So no I dont think rules only apply to other people, you just didnt think your insult through.

I have responded to those arguments. Just because you didnt like them does not mean it goes over my head. Funny how you try to defend yourself mostly by attacking me personally eh?

I have, you seem to be failing though.

Oh yeah and what people have been doing standard for years has NEVER been wrong, especially when no one really investigated the standard itself...
Also since those games have wildly different mechanics, TTK's, hitbox sizes and thus different rewards for headshots than PS2, how is this an argument at all? This is basically what my argument was then and still is.

Not my point, it would make it more enjoyable for ALL players except for the people who use this skill almost exclusively. That means that new players find fewer instant-dings against them and as they roll into their mid-game such as it is they'll be able to diversify rather than having to train and use for accuracy weapons&skill almost exclusively.

How hard is it to understand? Yes it is rewarding, but put into contrast with headshots it is much less rewarding than it should. Now we could increase the reward for all other skills to equalize it or pull the one odd duck down to the appropriate level, or something inbetween. But keepong headshots as is just punishes players who use the 50+% weapons that arent headshot machines and also punishes learning other skills in favor of headshots.

Perhaps if you actually read anything you would have noticed I've adressed your points in half the posts I made.

As I already mentioned, there is more likely a netto gain from completely removing it even if the vets who use it leave. Now removing it completely would be a bad move, but the fact that such a bad move is likely to be a net positive for the game is a good indicator how bad it is. The intermediary action, pulling headshots back to an appropriate level where it is sufficiently rewarded but does not make other skills redundant, is the way to go. Any real vets worth their salt will be able to cope, the chaff will leave, the average player and new players have a longer enjoyment. Its a win tiny lose win situation.

Yes you did set the tone and quality. Just look at your fellow supporters and their behaviour. Just look at the barely existing arguments you have that boil down to "but it is like this now so it must be good", which has been used to protect 99% of the OP weapons and systems in the game already.

Don't cha know that headshots are the be-all-to-end-all skill? Without them then where would skill come into play? Highly competitive games have to have precise clicking as its determining factor to who the superior player is. This is why games like MOBAs, RTS, and fighting games are seen as low skilled and have no real competitive scene. They don't really require you to aim.

Also the thing about headshots is that how it isn't dependent on hardware, A person using a high precision gaming mouse at 120 fps is on equal footing to someone using an old analog mouse (the one with the ball) or a controller on a system that runs the game at 15 fps. This is why hardware companies hate FPS games and avoid promoting them as it doesn't encourage a hardware based pay-to-win aspect.

I seriously hope to god that you people realize that this is satire.

https://dota2.prizetrac.kr/international2019


tbh I was gonna rail on you but then checked the suspicious blank space in your quote XD