Headshots actually do 250% damage

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Zoopshab, Apr 22, 2020.

  1. Demigan

    Obviously its not fine. If it was fine there wouldnt be so many people who like the simple statement of "how much should it be rewarded?".

    Lets ignore most of your crap and non-existant proof (seriously? 4 profiles that dont even prove your point?) And get right to the core of things:

    You want to keep the current HS %.
    I want to change it.

    You act like just because I want to change it, 100% of the effort needs to come from me. This is a twisted version of the scientific method: the accepted premise (say relativity versus quantum theory/string theory) does not need to be proven, the new theory needs to be proven.
    The problem here is: It hasnt been proven that the current HS % is good. Even when the new HS% was created by removing nanoweave protection it wasnt sure by the players why and the explanation of the devs was iffy at best. Remember this was during the same time that the devs would overbuff or overnerf everything they touched and never go back on a decision once made.

    The next problem is: I have shown how theoretically the HS% can work and favor one weapon or another depending on the HS%. Suspiciously those weapons are used more often by people who go more for headshots. I also advocate increasing the skill requirements for other skills so the infantry game becomes more varied than "headshot headshot headshot".

    The last problem is: if the HS% isnt as important as you say, why are you so adamant that it should stay? And why would every post on high-skill since the change to the HS multiplier be almost exclusively about headshots? Shouldnt the other skills be more important there? No ofcourse not because headshots are so dominant that other skills are secondary, if not tertiary.
  2. weska

    i dont care what they do to headshots as long as my maximum range for 1shot kills isnt affected for my 50 cal
  3. Somentine

    So many people? lul where?

    -Consistent, lower overall acc/hsr, relatively same kdr/kpm as me

    -Ns11 incredibly acc weapon, despite that Tar acc is just as high and, oh what is this, HSR is quite a bit lower but KDR is also higher.

    -Consistent acc/hsr

    I can go on and on and on with this. Your theory about low acc weapons is wrong.

    You've made NO effort to prove it. All you've done is post theories that don't hold up in this game.

    That's your opinion.
    And I even asked you how I would go about proving that it is fine to you.

    What? WHERE? Where do you see these people who go for more headshots use weapons like the bishop?

    Because it is important, just as i'd say the same thing if people wanted to somehow nerf skilled positioning or movement.
    Posts by who? High skilled players, or bad-mediocre players? Positioning and movement is just as fundamentally important as aim and aim tendency. The more the skill gap, the less of one or the other you need, but these players have no real idea why they were so outplayed.
  4. Demigan

    As always, the people who dont have to do anything to keep it as it is will just spew madness everywhere to get their way.

    At best you've shown that people can play differently, not that overall a particular weapon set dominates or not. You need the average scores of everyone to prove that.

    On top of that you keep missing the point over and over again. Most people wont go for headshots with the same vigour as some players, but those that do will proclaim the same thing: it is the only thing worth doing because the reward is so great.

    As for the amount of people: look at this thread, look at the one that Tha_Kane_Guy posted and all others that went before: the "HS% defend" crowd is outnumbered (as long as the requests are clear and not punishing). What do you think that indicates? What do you think it means that about 15 unique people across just 2 threads like a simple question of "how much should it be rewarded?" While less than a handful of players will defend the current HS%?

    Last chance for you to come up with something tangible, stop being a hypocrite for 5 minutes and prove that the current HS% is as it should be. And dont try to deflect again with "but here's someone on fisu!" Yes there's people on fisu but it doesnt prove that the current HS% is where it should be.
  5. Somentine

    Sure, buddy.

    But you're so sure that other weapons dominate, so prove it?

    I'm not missing the point. You believe HSR is so strong that it invalidates or worsens other weapons (less accurate weapons, for a number of reasons) and other skills/styles of play. The first point is factually incorrect, and the second is an opinion, which is backed up by zero proof.

    Are you for real? The community is in up-roar about the HS%! All 15 people, in two threads, have decided so! Where do you ever see people in-game go, "Oh man, HS% needs to be nerfed?" Yet you can always find people saying things like: "Shotguns are stupid", "Infils are this/that", "Snipers are this/that", "A2G is this/that".

    You're actually delusional.

    Last chance for you to come up with something tangible, stop being a hypocrite for 5 minutes and prove that the current HS% isn't as it should be. And don't try to deflect again with "but here's some theories/posts from the forums" Yes there's theories/posts on the forums but it doesn't prove that the current HS% isn't where it should be.
  6. strove

    There is an interesting middle ground for the head-shot multiplier vs player experience question. Weapons have a headshot multiplier per gun. Weapons that are less accurate have higher base damages but lower HS multipliers but longer range, accuracy based weapons have lower base damage but higher multipliers. In the experienced players hands, a low base, high multiplier gun will work wonders while those who struggle to land those headshots and arent as used to PS2 gun play would have access to weapons that have a more consistent damage profile. The higher HS mutli weapons would still have a higher damage output if youre landing headshots, as they should do, you need to reward skilled play. But they wouldnt be leaps and bounds ahead of players that simply cant reguarly land those headshots.

    Though this likely wont happen in PS2 as you would need to rebalance every weapon in the game. Having said that though, they did make that one VS smg have a lower HS multiplier since it was a little busted with the big projectile mod.
    • Up x 1
  7. Werkitten

    The 50 cal is the Archer . It can't kill an infantryman with one shot ^^
  8. Demigan

    Thanks for proving how much you lie. It is hard to find a G2A/A2G discussion where I'm not spewing my idea's for modified ESF noseguns on ground units, G2A autocanons, modified flak mechanics, different ways for lock-ons to work, new ammo types, changing existing weapons to perform a G2A role next to their ordinary role and gadgets that deal with aircraft in one way or another.
    From an unreliable source I've heard that if you go up against the status-quo the burden of proof is entirely on you, so you have to prove that A: I haven't posted about balanced G2A weapons and B: That the weapons I proposed aren't balanced. Good luck!

    But Imagine for a moment that I provided more proof that the current HS% isn't right, what would happen? Well we've seen Somentines reaction: Even the fact that there's more people voting for a good look at the current HS% than there's people who try to protect the current HS% he tries to ignore by saying that it's but a tiny portion of the total playerbase. Well there's even less players of the playerbase currently on the forums in favor for keeping the current HS%. Weird how that works eh?
    And let's take it further: Proof has already been given by me and others that the Magrider is the best performing MBT after years of lies that it was supposed to be the worst performing. The fact that CQC weapons don't dominate the game has been proven. 0.75ADS modifier was proven to be almost useless for the weapons that were supposed to be OP because of it... I could go on but the general reaction to all of this proof? Ignorance! Oh what a surprise! So would it be worth it going deeper into this "discussion" where the most literal ignorant people proclaim that the burden of proof is always on the others and any proof given is swept aside with more ignorance?
  9. Somentine

    - You haven't provided a shred of proof, literally anything will be 'more' than you've given.
    - Where are these people 'voting'?
    - I'm not saying the burden of proof is on you, i'm asking you for ANY proof to back up your claims. Jesus, I even asked what kind of proof you want to either prove/disprove... and you completely ignored it, twice.
    - I've already given some that runs counter to your low acc weapons being weak compared to high acc weps.

    You're a troll.
  10. Towie

    Yes i'm with this.

    The big letdown with PS2 is when someone thinks "that wasn't fair". So when you spend time to sneak into a great position, get the jump on a player only to have them do the 180 and win with the dreaded plink sound - it's not rewarding the strategy element of play at all. Who needs strategy (or caution for that matter) when you can pull off the auto-headshot.

    Surely it wouldn't be hard to just put it into 'production' for a day or two and gauge the reaction ?
    • Up x 3
  11. Somentine


    Some of this may be outdated, but the weapons I looked at are still the same stats.

    Add in latency (ping is round-trip, so 50 is actually 25, but remember that it's both from the flanking player to the server, then from the server to the player being shot), player reaction time (the average gamer is actually faster than the overall average), and then (even ignoring the time it takes for that player to figure out where they are being shot from and aim, which is significant but I have no base-line to work from for this) add the 100% acc and hsr TTK.

    I gotta be honest with you dude, if you are losing 1v1s to a player in this situation, it's not the game.
    • Up x 1
  12. TheShrapnelKing

    Here's a compromise:

    Make shields ignore damage multipliers. After all, the shield isn't your body, it shouldn't be weaker around your head. So keep the headshot multiplier, but only for health damage.
    • Up x 3
  13. Werkitten

    It,s good idea. But this will significantly shift the balance of the entire game towards shields. A carapace implant will no longer be desirable, and first aid kits will no longer be the best choice. It's probably a good thing, though.
    • Up x 1
  14. TRspy007

    I like that idea, but people running bionics would be at a significant advantage. Tweak/remove the implants that play around with health, or as someone earlier proposed, remove a bit of shields and add a third layer of health that would block headshots.
  15. Johannes Kaiser

    For medics still. Also, to add it might be possible to give Carapace the resistance from Nanoweave, freeing up a slot. So you might survive a little bit less, but have more options.
  16. Demigan

    Since someone revived this I'll respond to this:

    I'm asking you to provide any proof, then you ask me how I want it to be proven. I repeat a few times for any viable proof and you have to ask me to basically tell you how to do that? If you can't even think of a way to provide that proof, how can you claim anything?

    Now you haven't given me any proof that low acc weapons are weak compared to high acc weapons. All you have given me is proof that low acc weapons can be used with great effect. The difference is: it takes less skill to be just as good with headshot-oriented weapons. Because going for headshots is a singular skill that severely reduces the need to learn the other skills especially with an accurate weapon.

    Which has been my point since the beginning, not that you would notice.
  17. The Shady Engineer

    Easiest solution that for some reason always gets push back is to remove nanoweave.

    I can drop a new player with 4 headshots from a TAR, same new player needs 9 bodyshots to drop me with his HV 45. That's more than double the time to kill and it is not factoring in things like accuracy and lovely game mechanics like HA overshields.

    Without nanoweave the math will be 4 headshots vs 7 bodyshots. Still a significant difference but a lot more fair considering the skill required to chain headshots.

    I honestly believe nanoweave is the biggest reason (not the only one mind you) for the common new player "I got the drop and shot first but he turned around and killed me anyway" complaint.
  18. The Shady Engineer

    This guy, while in crude language, summed it up rather nicely.

    Nanoweave is a trap. New players thinks it helps them by making them more survivable when in reality they drop to headshots just as quickly while the guy they are bodyshotting IS getting the survivability bonus. Widens the skill gap unnecessarily.
    • Up x 1
  19. Somentine

    First, headshots are not a 'singular' skill.

    Second, what weapons, specifically? I've asked this two or three times now. You keep repeating these high acc, headshot weapons, but which? You've mentioned BRs/SRs, kind of - are these the high acc weapons? Or are you talking more about weapons like the Reaper DMR? Guass Saw? NS-15? Tanto?
  20. Trebb

    He outright dismisses changing the headshot multiplier.

    How much is too much? Would he be ok with 600% damage to keep the 'skill gap' a thing? No that would be too much, so what IS a good number?

    Because of the lag and how EASY it is to mod hit boxes (STILL), it always feels like cheese when someone lands nothing but headshots on you. Was it skill? Clientside? Is my head the size of a galaxy on his modded client?