A Path Beyond APB 3.0.8.8 Changelog

[Pushwall]

50 minutes ago, Ice said:

It's all in knowing how to separate the literal from the representative.  Personally I've always chalked up the Shocky and Volkov's uncrushability to anti-tank training and simply having the knowledge/reflexes to avoid being run over. 

Or in the shocky's case, rolling over a charged shock rifle would probably be akin to rolling over an anti-tank mine, except that it's not hidden like a mine so Allies are just careful to not do that.

In Volkov's case, who knows, maybe he can be run over but it wouldn't slow his rampage down much because he's a mechanical man. Trouble is, in both RA and the W3D engine, infantry contact with a vehicle moving at crushing speed is instant death (unless they have the "can't be crushed" flag), there's no damage value for it anywhere here that can be modified as far as I can tell - and even if it can be modified, the "damage" probably gets delivered every frame (so ~60 hits per second) so it'd be pretty hard to find a fine balance in how much crushing attempts should hurt, judging from how the hitbeeps/hitmarks freak out if you appear to run someone over on your end but on the server they're not getting crushed.

[Raap]

7 hours ago, Pushwall said:

Or in the shocky's case, rolling over a charged shock rifle would probably be akin to rolling over an anti-tank mine, except that it's not hidden like a mine so Allies are just careful to not do that.

In Volkov's case, who knows, maybe he can be run over but it wouldn't slow his rampage down much because he's a mechanical man. Trouble is, in both RA and the W3D engine, infantry contact with a vehicle moving at crushing speed is instant death (unless they have the "can't be crushed" flag), there's no damage value for it anywhere here that can be modified as far as I can tell - and even if it can be modified, the "damage" probably gets delivered every frame (so ~60 hits per second) so it'd be pretty hard to find a fine balance in how much crushing attempts should hurt, judging from how the hitbeeps/hitmarks freak out if you appear to run someone over on your end but on the server they're not getting crushed.

Crazypersonthoughts: Attach a mesh to the front of vehicles that has damage-on-touch material applied to it, perhaps one that is designed specifically to damage non-crushable infantry. You might be able to hide this mesh in the animation state for stationary vehicles so it only 'comes out to play' in a moving state. Untested and purely theoretical of course.

[Pushwall]

38 minutes ago, Raap said:

Untested and purely theoretical of course.

And also never going to happen because that's an awful lot of development time just to make a small balance change that nobody called for.

Also there are so many reasons this wouldn't work:

• Surface damage only works if your feet/wheels are touching the surface. Hence why I mentioned before that the "LSTs have anti-vehicle-boarding shields" idea would not be very likely to cause problems if a vehicle/LST collide.
• Surface damage doesn't belong to a player. "Crush" a Volkov in this way and you get no kill and no points.
• What about vehicles that already have an animation? How are they going to run multiple animations simultaneously?

Now helmets were also uncalled for but the difference is that they were much easier to do since every infantry uses the exact same hitboxes so easy copy/paste, and they didn't have to be a balance change (and they aren't), and they don't have to be added/removed under arbitrary circumstances that require arduous script work when the scripters would much rather work on important things. And they work.  

[SirJustin90]

On 04/26/2017 at 0:35 AM, Ice said:

Indeed, steel helmets generally only protect against light shrapnel and sometimes pistol rounds, although glancing blows from rifle rounds can potentially be deflected at the right angle. Still, doesn't really justify an in-game mechanic around helmets (especially since that would put a lot of Soviet infantry at a disadvantage compared to their Allied counterparts, as well as complicate balance). Heck, even modern Kevlar helmets aren't guaranteed protection and it still largely seems to be a matter of luck; Some have stopped multiple direct hits from 7.62x39mm rounds while others were penetrated by a single stray bullet. There are a lot of factors that affect it.

 

It's all in knowing how to separate the literal from the representative.  Personally I've always chalked up the Shocky and Volkov's uncrushability to anti-tank training and simply having the knowledge/reflexes to avoid being run over. 

Too true. Helmets unless specialized rarely do great again much more than 9 mm and usually at 100m or more so that's fair. Too bad we couldn't have a 10% engine of deflection but that would be nit picking haha.

 

The same with dodging could be said with Tanya and why she can take so many hit considering her characters worn armor. I would assume realistically she'd be avoiding far more bullets if she was truly mobile.

Edited April 28, 2017 by SirJustin90
autocorrect woes

[thedisclaimitory]

  if there was an abandon train that worked that leads to another part of the map thaT YOUC ANT GO TO THEN yeah that would be funny

[devilslayersbane]

On the topics of helmets and armor, it'd be kind of cool to see locational damage take armor a step further, where say if you get shot in the vitals (where armor would be on most modern infantry) the armor would reduce the damage dealt to you. Shooting helmets off is cool and all, but most of the time they're strapped on and harder to get off. As far as ballistic protection of the M1 infantry helmet, it is able to stop a 9mm at 100ft and IIRC, it could stop 5.56 and 5.45 at about 300m if the shot hit the helmet at a bit of an angle (around 30 degrees or so). However, both shots left a large dent in the helmet. Helmets also add resistance to fragmentation and (very moderate) resistance to high explosive, but that's mostly with modern helmets. Not the M1 featured in game.

[Pushwall]

Unfortunately we can't control how much of an effect armour has based on where you get shot. If we could I'd just make headshots ignore armour entirely (but have a lower damage multiplier).

It might be doable by a nexus of attached objects? Maybe? But I weep for the netcode if every soldier is walking around with a dozen or so attached objects for hitboxes with different armour types. It's not worth it.

[Raap]

3 hours ago, Pushwall said:

Unfortunately we can't control how much of an effect armour has based on where you get shot. If we could I'd just make headshots ignore armour entirely (but have a lower damage multiplier).

It might be doable by a nexus of attached objects? Maybe? But I weep for the netcode if every soldier is walking around with a dozen or so attached objects for hitboxes with different armour types. It's not worth it.

Not to mention more performance drain. As it stands, vehicles are a key factor in the diminishing performance as a match progresses and more are used on the field, and that is because of their complexity in regards to the model and rigging. Apply similar heavy-duty logic to infantry as well and you'll have very significant risks.

Why over-complicate the game anyway? Or why make it more latency dependent? I'm a strong believer of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Body shots do normal damage, headshots do more damage. This is a tried and true concept that worked for countless years of FPS gaming. If you want to innovate on gameplay, do it in areas that W3D actually excels at, rather than attempting to emulate modern competitive shooters. It's all about the overal gameplay, not just the gunplay.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Raap

[devilslayersbane]

Trust me, I didn't honestly believe that a true 1 to 1 lifelike simulation of armor in W3D was possible. I just know that vehicles take more damage in certain locations and was wondering if the same concept could be applied to soldiers as well. (i.e. face shots do 2x, headshots 1.5x, body 1.0x, limbs .75x, etc.) but i digress. This is one of the few shooters that doesn't skimp out on vehicle gameplay complexity for infantry gameplay complexity. I love the vehicle play. Honestly, the biggest improvement I'd see the engine getting would be having switchable weapons for vehicles. That feature would probably make life a ton easier (and harder at the same time).

[Pushwall]

6 hours ago, devilslayersbane said:

Trust me, I didn't honestly believe that a true 1 to 1 lifelike simulation of armor in W3D was possible. I just know that vehicles take more damage in certain locations and was wondering if the same concept could be applied to soldiers as well. (i.e. face shots do 2x, headshots 1.5x, body 1.0x, limbs .75x, etc.) but i digress.

We already have that - 3x head/helmet/neck, 2x Ant thorax, 1x chest/abdomen/pelvis, 1.5x Flamethrower's fuel tanks, 0.75x limbs/hands/Shock Trooper's battery pack, 0.375x feet. We just can't make armour affect these multipliers separately which is what you asked.

[devilslayersbane]

True enough. It was 1 am when I posted my reply. My comment about the vehicle weapons still stands, however.