New damage models are horrendously broken

All guns should one shot against no armor.

Pistols/SMGs should two shot against light armor.

Smaller caliber rifles (5.56, 5.45) should two shot against heavy armor, while pistols/SMGs three shot.

There you go. Balanced while keeping the essence of Insurgency.

Also please make weight (and thus, armor) have a much larger impact on move speed.

I dont think armor does anything except 1 extra bullet. Should be at least 2

Quote from a comp ins2 vet (link). Quode also said heavy armor should tank more (but also get more slow).

I'm glad to see vet ins players actually are fine with a slightly higher TTK 🙂

@benz About time a vet player thinks TTK is actually too low lmao.

NWI just has to fix these hitreg problems and then players will see how low the TTK really is.

From the patch notes today:

Major Fixes
Fixed an issue with bullets where damage dealt could fluctuate from intended values, improving reliability of bullet damage calculation.

After playing a game it seems like this was only targeted at bolt actions. Armor still has no noticeable effect (besides slowing you down a lot). Shotguns still devastate anyone within 100 yards.

@doghead yeah, i don't even run armor. It's pointless ... it's only useful against bad players that can't aim anyways. Now with the slightly increased slow there's even less reasons to use it.

SVD is also still getting 2-shot kills.

@jensiii said in New damage models are horrendously broken:

If you think run and gun gameplay that places emphasis on twitch reflexes is a good time insurgency isn't the franchise for you

1-hit kills put a HUGE emphasis on reflexes.

As I've said in a different post:

From the way it looks in game, light armor seems to reflect Type II or Type IIA body armor. This armor stops 9mm, .40, .45 ACP, .357 Magnum rounds (i.e. most sidearms, UZI, knife stabs).
The heavy armor seems to reflect Type III or Type IIIA armor. This armor stops .45 Magnum and 7.62 rounds (i.e. every sidearm, a lot of rifles).

If we were to reflect realism, shots to the chest of an armored target with the above-mentioned calibers would not penetrate. They may stagger the target, cause bruising, or even break ribs, but repeated shots would generally not kill them. Furthermore, shots to targets armored with a lower tier armor than the caliber your firearm is using would go right through the armor. So irl a 5.56 would virtually ignore both of the above-mentioned armors.
AP rounds would also go right through. Some of the weapons in game are specifically designed for special AP rounds (such as the MP7) and would shred through most armors.

Overall, I think armor should actually enhance the survivability of the user against torso shots and that the points price of weapons should reflect their caliber's increased lethality vs armor.

last edited by thehappybub

@slazenger said in New damage models are horrendously broken:

NWI, go all the way and remove armor entirely.

Then make the guns 1 shot 1 kill.

You don't want everyone using AP like stopping power, so you remove it, but you DON'T remove what it exists to counter in the first place - Armor (hence the name "armor piercing" rounds.).

I agree with slaz, the whole point in AP rounds in insurg2 was to counter armor, I don't mind removing AP, but we need to remove at least heavy armor so that it doesn't become OP.