@cyoce said in Dmg values are broken - Needs fixing ASAP:
....Until then, body shots are the standard.
Yep, bodyshots are Sandstorms "headshots". And they are in the range of 1-2, with few exceptions of 3. Like you said, in CS headshots aren't even OHK and that is the standard.
@whitby said in Dmg values are broken - Needs fixing ASAP:
The MP7 is 8 hits to kill if you're shooting ankles. Yes, this was tested, it just wasn't published on the table as it wasn't really related to the core point. The MP7 according to my stats is 4+ hits to kill but 1 in 4 kills is a headshot. Adjust the statistics for deaths which don't include headshots and it becomes a 5+ hit kill weapon in practice. There's nothing wrong with my numbers here.
So we can exclude headshots? Why? But we can include ankles?
If we include and exclude hit areas however we want, we will get a lot of different numbers.
If we exclude all other areas but include only headshots, it's an average of 1.0 hits to kill. Extreme example to show, that it will mess the numbers if we do that.
Your 4.04 stat includes all hit areas. That's how that weapon has killed in practice.
"Human variation" like the fact that you use yours in semi auto compared to somebody who doesn't. 2 hits to kill certainly doesn't mean you're killing any sooner than somebody using it in burst and firing more rounds off. Remember, we established this in the other thread?
I use semi/auto for accuracy and full auto on close range to get bullets faster at a target. Semiauto being slower than fullauto is no news. 2 hits in chest to kill is still 2 hits in chest to kill regardless of the fire mode. Player who gets enough shots on target faster wins.
Where is the "human variation" in this shots to kill and how that has an effect on how many hits a gun takes to kill on a certain hit area? I can't see any.
"Human variation" is just a random parameter of inaccuracy you have thrown into your number and you get an arbitrary number as a result. It doesn't make sense. It can be anything.
The statistics you produced, are these at point blank range? If so, you need to realise the damage falls off with range so it takes additional shots. You need to account for this. If you redo your statistics and see how many shots it takes in each location at 150 metres, then compare as a range, you'll see why the numbers average around 3.2.
Yes they are close range.
I think I see what you mean by this. We would also have to take account what exactly is the most common engagement ranges in Sandstorm and how that effects the actual average number. What is the engagement range that gives 3.2 average?
You are correct that I should also try out the longer ranges. I'll do some testing with them so I'll see the damage fall off in action better.
I haven't actually thought about reducing the damage falloff. Maybe that could be a good setting to tweak if it's too harsh. But I don't currently have an opinion on that.
Nice to see you got all offended about me asking you to categorise your opinion.
This is all in your imagination, because text doesn't have tone of voice.
You've then proceeded to attack my character with emotional falsehoods and not attack the point made.
I called out something you have already done, so it's not false. You said that I have to spesify some game that reflects my opinion and you even named one. I have told my opinion, if you just would read the posts properly:
"Shots to kill seem to be between 1-3 and that's what I consider to be a low TTK, and I'm happy with that."
Now you can categorize that yourself how ever you want.
I attacked your exact point and called it out. You played the victim-card as your defense. If that wasn't the point, then that part of your post was pointless. Unless you care to elaborate on, what exactly the point was?
Because you want SS to do it your way, not CoD's way.
The fact that the TTK is the same (or maybe even a little higher on the M16) is coincidence, not something you "want".
It's not me, who is comparing Sandstorm to another game, br0.
Are you now "categorizing" me as "COD casual"? I think I hit the nail in the head in my last post.
BTW: you completely ignored my questions. Not surprised.
Then you tell me I want CoD TTK of 3-4 hit kills when I've posted a full itemised explanation on the page before of exactly what I want to see, which is 1-2 hit kills for the most part. Oh damn, your wit, your intellect, how can I compete with that.
It seems you can't unfortunately, since you did not get that part. I was talking about hits to kill and weapon damage all the time, then you mix in weapon recoil/controllability as a last resort, when you see your claim about weapon damage is not holding up.
Congratulations, most of the guns on the list you guys provided (16 out of 22) already kill in 2 shots. I personally think 1-3 is good range. But that's COD right?
You can gun down an enemy in CoD without him reacting to it too. It doesn't make it high lethality. Ins2014, DoI, they were high lethality. Bullets were lethal.
Thank you for your opinion about lethality.