Should the Head shots kill ? - Page 8

Axel · 03-03-2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gazzthompson

and power, if G3 and M16 both 1 shot 1 kill like you said, but m16 rightfully has less recoil then m16 would dominate all over the field in every situation.

The G3 still looks cool?, seriously speaking that would be the case yes, aren't there any ways to "assymetrically" balance it out?

Taking into consideration your last post gazz, maybe 1 hit by a 5.56mm round "only" severly wounds the one who is shot when 1 hit by a 7.62mm round critically wounds him.

gazzthompson · 03-03-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

The G3 still looks cool?, seriously speaking that would be the case yes, aren't there any ways to "asymmetrically" balance it out?

Taking into consideration your last post gazz, maybe 1 hit by a 5.56mm round "only" severly wounds the one who is shot when 1 hit by a 7.62mm round critically wounds him.

its already is asymmetrically balanced.

G3 - powerful, massive recoil and poor CQB
m16 - low recoil and better cqb with higher rate of fire.

Axel · 03-03-2009, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gazzthompson

its already is asymmetrically balanced.

G3 - powerful, massive recoil and poor CQB
m16 - low recoil and better cqb with higher rate of fire.

So my last proposal wouldn't be too bad then?

The G3 is not THAT bad in CQB with iron sights.

random pants · 03-03-2009, 12:32 PM

So is a DEV going to comment on this or what? I'm surprised one of you guys havn't come in to at least ACKNOWLEDGE that you all have made a mistake with the new headshot rules.

Because with this overwhelming distaste for the new headshot rules, how could you DEV's say that this is a change for the better?

Say it out loud..... HEADSHOTS DO NOT KILL YOU PERMANENTLY, AN EPIPEN CAN REBUILD YOUR SKULL IN ONE SECOND....

yea... that sounds just fine.....

Axel · 03-03-2009, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by random pants

So is a DEV going to comment on this or what? I'm surprised one of you guys havn't come in to at least ACKNOWLEDGE that you all have made a mistake with the new headshot rules.

Because with this overwhelming distaste for the new headshot rules, how could you DEV's say that this is a change for the better?

Say it out loud..... HEADSHOTS DO NOT KILL YOU PERMANENTLY, AN EPIPEN CAN REBUILD YOUR SKULL IN ONE SECOND....

yea... that sounds just fine.....

I would like to say "If you don't like it find another game and stop ranting/whining etc already and debate with some spine" but I won't.

gazzthompson · 03-03-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by random pants

So is a DEV going to comment on this or what? I'm surprised one of you guys havn't come in to at least ACKNOWLEDGE that you all have made a mistake with the new headshot rules.

Because with this overwhelming distaste for the new headshot rules, how could you DEV's say that this is a change for the better?

Say it out loud..... HEADSHOTS DO NOT KILL YOU PERMANENTLY, AN EPIPEN CAN REBUILD YOUR SKULL IN ONE SECOND....

yea... that sounds just fine.....

why are you so angry all the time ?

ralfidude · 03-03-2009, 01:40 PM

HAhahahaah^^

Well alex, the thing about that is that we have armor. People can take a few shots before permenately going down.

Another thing to consider is that the hit box for the BF2 engine sux.

So implementing getting shot in specific areas is not possible with the BF2 engine. So thats another thing to consider.

Well, id love to have an DEV come down here and say a word or two about this. Perhaps why they changed the headshot kill to nonlethal anymore.

Alex6714 · 03-03-2009, 01:49 PM

Well, for example, from the Ross kemp in Afghanistan series, one person gets a ricochet to the arm. Now thats not a big injury, he said he didn´t even notice it a first, but still he go mediced up and taken back to base, not mediced up in 5 seconds and back running into the fight.

The thing is, people already take a good amount of hits to kill, as you said yourself the netcode isn´t very good, and even after all that they can be revived infinite times (ammo depending) wherever and however much they are hit?

Either it weapons are deadly, forgetting about armour and people can be revived like I suggested earlier, or the same amount of shots to kill remain now, but you can never be revived imo.

Axel · 03-03-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ralfidude

HAhahahaah^^

Well alex, the thing about that is that we have armor. People can take a few shots before permenately going down.

Another thing to consider is that the hit box for the BF2 engine sux.

So implementing getting shot in specific areas is not possible with the BF2 engine. So thats another thing to consider.

Well, id love to have an DEV come down here and say a word or two about this. Perhaps why they changed the headshot kill to nonlethal anymore.

Take a few shots before going down? (how should I interpret "permanently") Might be true might not be true, but I would really like some sources, as far as I know/seen when a guy takes a direct hit in the torso area he goes down and it's not pleasant.

Viki · 03-03-2009, 04:21 PM

I wish it would only take one shot, almost anywhere on the body (finger and toe-shots not relative to my point now) and one would be dead/critically wounded.
That'd be both awesome and realistic, I hate the fact how it's in gameplay now; you hit a guy and he sprints/jumps behind a corner, or even worse, dives down the ground and shoot you.
So, 1 hit; 1 kill. Please!

All the best,
Viki

View Poll Results: Should the head shots kill
Yes	414	93.24%
No	30	6.76%
Voters: 444. You may not vote on this poll

03-03-2009, 12:32 PM	#74
random pants Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 210 United States of America Location: Northern VA, USA	Re: Should the Head shots kill ? So is a DEV going to comment on this or what? I'm surprised one of you guys havn't come in to at least ACKNOWLEDGE that you all have made a mistake with the new headshot rules. Because with this overwhelming distaste for the new headshot rules, how could you DEV's say that this is a change for the better? Say it out loud..... *HEADSHOTS DO NOT KILL YOU PERMANENTLY, AN EPIPEN CAN REBUILD YOUR SKULL IN ONE SECOND....* yea... that sounds just fine.....

03-03-2009, 01:40 PM	#77
ralfidude Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 2,181 Location: NYC	Re: Should the Head shots kill ? HAhahahaah^^ Well alex, the thing about that is that we have armor. People can take a few shots before permenately going down. Another thing to consider is that the hit box for the BF2 engine sux. So implementing getting shot in specific areas is not possible with the BF2 engine. So thats another thing to consider. Well, id love to have an DEV come down here and say a word or two about this. Perhaps why they changed the headshot kill to nonlethal anymore.
ralfidude Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 2,181 Location: NYC	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

03-03-2009, 01:49 PM	#78
Alex6714 Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,940 United Kingdom	Re: Should the Head shots kill ? Well, for example, from the Ross kemp in Afghanistan series, one person gets a ricochet to the arm. Now thats not a big injury, he said he didn´t even notice it a first, but still he go mediced up and taken back to base, not mediced up in 5 seconds and back running into the fight. The thing is, people already take a good amount of hits to kill, as you said yourself the netcode isn´t very good, and even after all that they can be revived infinite times (ammo depending) wherever and however much they are hit? Either it weapons are deadly, forgetting about armour and people can be revived like I suggested earlier, or the same amount of shots to kill remain now, but you can never be revived imo.
Alex6714 Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,940 United Kingdom	"Today's forecast calls for 30mm HE rain with a slight chance of hellfires" "oh, they're fire and forget all right...they're fired then they forget where the target is"

03-03-2009, 04:21 PM	#80
Viki Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 159 Finland Location: Pern	Re: Should the Head shots kill ? I wish it would only take one shot, almost anywhere on the body (finger and toe-shots not relative to my point now) and one would be dead/critically wounded. That'd be both awesome and realistic, I hate the fact how it's in gameplay now; you hit a guy and he sprints/jumps behind a corner, or even worse, dives down the ground and shoot you. So, 1 hit; 1 kill. Please! All the best, Viki
	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Men will fight and men will die Wars will be lost and won That's how it's been and still will be Long after I am gone.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Sponsored Links