PDA

View Full Version : 1 Shot Headshots



BUTTAURBREAD
02-10-2016, 05:55 AM
Alright guys, i would like to start off by saying that i think Ubisoft did a fantastic job with this game, i find the game very entertaining, and its unique, like nothing i have ever played before. My 1 and ONLY problem, 1 shot head shots. I think its unfair that, no matter what gun, how far, what ever armor level you have, and how ever much health you have, it will kill you. I think this should be modified. Now i understand that its "realistic" because yes I'm sure if you get shot in the head, even if it doesn't kill you, it will surely disable you. But this is also a video game, and realistic features are cool, but not in this type of game. For one i think it takes gun skill out of the game 100%. Because I'm sure a lot of you who play this know that, if you startle an enemy, chances are he is going to hip fire at you. Now, in any other game, hip firing is a bad decision, because the chances are very few to none of the bullets will hit the enemy, therefore, he will most likely kill you, BUT there is that small chance that you will kill the enemy, i would say from 0 to 100, you have about a 20/80 chance of killing an enemy while hip firing. Now lets look at Rainbow Six Siege, a game all about tactical advantages, where having the slightly better advantage can result in your win, lets use the same situation, you startle an enemy, and he hip fires back at you. With the 1 shot head shot mechanic, it gives him about a 50/50 chance of killing you, and if he had a fast firing weapon, his chances are probably even higher. Now lets take another situation, where you and the enemy engage each other as if you were expecting it. I'm playing as Smoke, I'm using the FMG-9, now you are playing as Fuze, you are using the AK-12. You breach the objective room and see me standing there, now statistics say, with both of us on full health, you have the better advantage, i mean, you have heavy armor, and a higher damaging, decent fire rating gun, shooting at a lighter armored target that has a weaker gun then you, my advantage is my fire rate is higher than yours. Now with the 1 shot head shot mechanic, we are even, and i might have the overall better advantage because of my fire rate. All i have to do is connect one bullet to your head, and i win, and because of my fast fire rate, i can do that, and now you lay there probably upset because you "should have killed me". So now, lets take my last and final situation, you are on the defending team. You decide you want to catch the enemies by suprise, so you become a roamer, for those of you who don't know, a roamer is a player who goes off by themselves away from the objective to either catch the enemy off guard by killing them once entering the residence, or who plans to hide and flank during the attackers assault. You decide to run and hide. Midway through the match, and the enemy is mid attack, you come up behind one of the enemies who has no idea you are there. You begin to fire at a heavily armored target, because of that you do not kill him, and after putting a good solid amount of shots into him, he turn around and begins to return fire. Out of luck, he strikes you in the head, killing you and putting you out of the game. Now you're sitting there asking "how did he not die?" Or "how did he kill me before i killed him?" The answer is simple, 1 shot head shot. Its unfair to all players no matter what happens, no matter where you are, it will kill you. So i propose a change, now most people probably say "take it out completly, its no fun" well i say we reduce it. What do i mean by this? Make it to where only a certain amount of weapons can 1 shot head shot a full health player. Some of the weapons i had in mind were: Glaz sniper rifle, 44 magnum, Twitches 417, Bucks FAL (not actual name but that's what it is) and all shotguns at depending on the range of each one. If this could be done, i would say this is the best game out there, but until then its what i said earlier. If you are still reading this, after this much, i thank you for taking the time to read and hopefully consider these changes.

RSQ_kraekinn
02-10-2016, 12:21 PM
I totally disagree. Every competive fps game i've played since 1998 has had 1-shot-headshots. And it should stay that way. If something needs to be changed it's the spread pattern of bullets in hip-fire mode. They should spread out way more than now. And also when using hip-fire the recoil should be way more uncontrollable. This way the spray'n'pray ideology would be much more inaffective. I do agree that pistols should require 2 shots in the head so that people can't use it as a sniper in long ranges.
Your example of getting behind a guy and dying by not being able to kill him from behind is just an example of lack of skill or that occasional bug where you need to unload a full mag to kill someone. But yea if you don't manage to kill an enemy from behind the game shouldn't be changed to allow you to succeed. Just practice more.

When in 1v1 situation i myself die against a spray'n'pray lucky shot maybe 1/50 times. So i don't see it being game changing fact. As in all fps games and with my experience the one with steady aim and faster reflexes take the win at least 95% of the time.

BUTTAURBREAD
02-10-2016, 02:27 PM
I totally disagree. Every competive fps game i've played since 1998 has had 1-shot-headshots. And it should stay that way. If something needs to be changed it's the spread pattern of bullets in hip-fire mode. They should spread out way more than now. And also when using hip-fire the recoil should be way more uncontrollable. This way the spray'n'pray ideology would be much more inaffective. I do agree that pistols should require 2 shots in the head so that people can't use it as a sniper in long ranges.
Your example of getting behind a guy and dying by not being able to kill him from behind is just an example of lack of skill or that occasional bug where you need to unload a full mag to kill someone. But yea if you don't manage to kill an enemy from behind the game shouldn't be changed to allow you to succeed. Just practice more.

When in 1v1 situation i myself die against a spray'n'pray lucky shot maybe 1/50 times. So i don't see it being game changing fact. As in all fps games and with my experience the one with steady aim and faster reflexes take the win at least 95% of the time.

Yes its ineffective to spray at an enemy, but i think its unfair of how much of a disadvantage you are at if you use a slower firing gun. Because i like to use the UMP45, but i can't bring myself to do it a lot because of the fact that using a faster shooting weapon can result in my death because of the fact the fact that it has more bullets being pumped out and having the overall higher chance to head shot. I think they should balance it out and make everyone happy. Because there is 1 half saying it should be taken out, and the other half that it should stay

Coy_Serpent77
02-10-2016, 07:40 PM
I've been reading, and watching videos, on the topic of one shot kills and I gotta tell ya, it's fine the way it is. Why? Because guns kill people, that's why. Rainbow 6 Seige is a game based on real world operations and physics, and if anything, the changes should be in the area of harsher, more effective, headshot kills. For example, when you know you've shot an enemy in the face or head and instead of dying they one shot you to the dome, and you die instead of them. Netcode, lag, cheaters, whatever the cause, it should be addressed, and in favor of one shot head kill continuity. -Thanks for reading.

BUTTAURBREAD
02-10-2016, 11:17 PM
I've been reading, and watching videos, on the topic of one shot kills and I gotta tell ya, it's fine the way it is. Why? Because guns kill people, that's why. Rainbow 6 Seige is a game based on real world operations and physics, and if anything, the changes should be in the area of harsher, more effective, headshot kills. For example, when you know you've shot an enemy in the face or head and instead of dying they one shot you to the dome, and you die instead of them. Netcode, lag, cheaters, whatever the cause, it should be addressed, and in favor of one shot head kill continuity. -Thanks for reading.

Yes there are moments when you shoot someone and it doesn't kill them, i understand that as well, but i just want something done about this, anything, i think that the ear cups on all the German characters shouldn't count as part of their head, because it isn't. I think the head shots also wouldn't be so bad, if the hit box wasn't as big as the window you are peaking through.

Shadow_0410
02-11-2016, 02:50 AM
I agree with you on the "reduce headshot being one hitter quitters" idea. Let's book at ballistics as the science. A 9mm para., 5.7mm or 4.7 mm (MP7s are sometimes this round) or .45 ACP round is essentially a pistol cartridge. The rounds may sound larger that a 7.62 mm, but they aren't. They are fired with far less force than a rifle cartridge, despite the larger size. This is simply because of one thing... most uses for these pistol sized rounds are either self defense, law enforcement, or CQC military oriented. They are meant to strike the target with enough force to damage or kill, but not enough to penetrate (depending on range from target... close shots will go through flesh, but will deflect or lodge into bone). Ergo, a pistol round will NOT go through a double wood wall or plaster wall with support beams, but will either get lodged into the support beams or deflect away from the target on the other side. In both cases, the smaller rounds will slow down immensely, making it less damaging to its living target. This will hold true for some 5.56 mm rounds from rifles, depending on the range again.
Now lets take this into game... the fact that EVERY gun at ANY range against ANY armor as an instant headshot is nowhere near "realistic". Bulletproof helmets and ballistic shields are meant to deflect almost any incoming rounds, besides a high velocity 7.62mm sniper round or .50 BMG. So when a one shot headshot kills a guy 50m away wearing a helmet with a 9mm or even .45, it will bounce or deflect. It might knock one down or send the helmet flying, but it won't make it through. It's better than Kevlar, which can easily stop up to a .357 or even .44 round from beyond 25 ft. Same for shields. They can stop shotgun rounds from almost point blank range in real life, but this game seems to allow rounds to curve around the shield (shields in real life are wider than in this game, so whoever designed the shield didn't do much research. This game exposes way more body than a real shield would anyway.) So I would maintain that only certain weapons should be one shot headshots against anyone without a huge ballistic helmet, which Defenders in this game don't have (except the GIGN guys): G36, Sig 552 and 556xi, Glaz's sniper, 417 DMR, and maybe the FN FAL at short ranges.
These changes are what would truly be "realistic"... apparently Ubisoft needs better ballistics research.

DesertDog1178
02-11-2016, 04:48 AM
Just reduce the size of headshots from anything above the belly button. And Ear Muffs, like the guns, should not count.

BUTTAURBREAD
02-11-2016, 05:21 AM
I agree with you on the "reduce headshot being one hitter quitters" idea. Let's book at ballistics as the science. A 9mm para., 5.7mm or 4.7 mm (MP7s are sometimes this round) or .45 ACP round is essentially a pistol cartridge. The rounds may sound larger that a 7.62 mm, but they aren't. They are fired with far less force than a rifle cartridge, despite the larger size. This is simply because of one thing... most uses for these pistol sized rounds are either self defense, law enforcement, or CQC military oriented. They are meant to strike the target with enough force to damage or kill, but not enough to penetrate (depending on range from target... close shots will go through flesh, but will deflect or lodge into bone). Ergo, a pistol round will NOT go through a double wood wall or plaster wall with support beams, but will either get lodged into the support beams or deflect away from the target on the other side. In both cases, the smaller rounds will slow down immensely, making it less damaging to its living target. This will hold true for some 5.56 mm rounds from rifles, depending on the range again.
Now lets take this into game... the fact that EVERY gun at ANY range against ANY armor as an instant headshot is nowhere near "realistic". Bulletproof helmets and ballistic shields are meant to deflect almost any incoming rounds, besides a high velocity 7.62mm sniper round or .50 BMG. So when a one shot headshot kills a guy 50m away wearing a helmet with a 9mm or even .45, it will bounce or deflect. It might knock one down or send the helmet flying, but it won't make it through. It's better than Kevlar, which can easily stop up to a .357 or even .44 round from beyond 25 ft. Same for shields. They can stop shotgun rounds from almost point blank range in real life, but this game seems to allow rounds to curve around the shield (shields in real life are wider than in this game, so whoever designed the shield didn't do much research. This game exposes way more body than a real shield would anyway.) So I would maintain that only certain weapons should be one shot headshots against anyone without a huge ballistic helmet, which Defenders in this game don't have (except the GIGN guys): G36, Sig 552 and 556xi, Glaz's sniper, 417 DMR, and maybe the FN FAL at short ranges.
These changes are what would truly be "realistic"... apparently Ubisoft needs better ballistics research.

Thank you, someone who agrees with me, i thought for a second that everyone was going to say "Oh its a realistic thing that getting shot in the head will always kill you" but going back to what you said, this isn't always the case. Those riot helmets may not be able to stop many bullets, but the fact that in this game it stops nothing makes me kind of question what kind of logic goes into that. I also agree that shooting through a wall and still being able to 1 shot head shot with a pistol is unbalanced as well. Because referring to what you are saying, it would knock the bullet of course, or slow its velocity way down, so the bullet should do less damage, and that's saying that it is even going to hit what you are firing at.

DesertDog1178
02-11-2016, 08:22 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci3yWBIVESU

This is a very accurate video on why 1 shot headshots are bad, even the title of the video.

hc1OO1
02-11-2016, 11:05 PM
While i agree with your reasoning and i get frustrated when i put 6 bullets into someones chest but they 1 shot me to the head and i die. There is skill in aiming for the head and getting that headshot. The head is smaller and harder to hit than the chest part. There is something wrong with the games hitbox registration. Headshots are way too common than they should.

It goes both ways. You can BS headshot someone and they can do the same back. i did it yesterday, someone shot me up good to my right as i was looking straight ahead. i got hit a couple of times and on reaction jerked my mouse to the right, and fired the gun while i wasnt aiming. I only got 1 shot off and i headshot the poor guy as he was still shooting me up. i went down into revive mode but i headshot and killed him.

I wanted to type "Sry for the BS headshot" but got into another fire fight before i could.

DesertDog1178
02-13-2016, 12:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci3yWBIVESU

This is a very accurate video on why 1 shot headshots are bad, even the title of the video.

I wish more people would watch this video, including the developers.

SteezNJ
02-15-2016, 12:25 PM
I totally disagree. Every competive fps game i've played since 1998 has had 1-shot-headshots. And it should stay that way. If something needs to be changed it's the spread pattern of bullets in hip-fire mode. They should spread out way more than now. And also when using hip-fire the recoil should be way more uncontrollable. This way the spray'n'pray ideology would be much more inaffective. I do agree that pistols should require 2 shots in the head so that people can't use it as a sniper in long ranges.
Your example of getting behind a guy and dying by not being able to kill him from behind is just an example of lack of skill or that occasional bug where you need to unload a full mag to kill someone. But yea if you don't manage to kill an enemy from behind the game shouldn't be changed to allow you to succeed. Just practice more.

When in 1v1 situation i myself die against a spray'n'pray lucky shot maybe 1/50 times. So i don't see it being game changing fact. As in all fps games and with my experience the one with steady aim and faster reflexes take the win at least 95% of the time.

I agree with this guy^^^. You can snipe someone in the head with an MP7 up close even if they get first shot and kill them. So the UMP issue is probably just someone has better gunskill. Gunskill includes accuracy too. Yeah sometimes people do get lucky but you're mentioning the whole armor and full health issue but you forgot there's really no armor on the operators heads for the most part. I don't see them changing it. Everybody loves the game and it's 100 times better than call of duty because of how realistic it is. Sorry dude. Keep playing and you'll get better 👌🏻

RSQ_kraekinn
02-15-2016, 12:36 PM
I agree with you on the "reduce headshot being one hitter quitters" idea. Let's book at ballistics as the science. A 9mm para., 5.7mm or 4.7 mm (MP7s are sometimes this round) or .45 ACP round is essentially a pistol cartridge. The rounds may sound larger that a 7.62 mm, but they aren't. They are fired with far less force than a rifle cartridge, despite the larger size. This is simply because of one thing... most uses for these pistol sized rounds are either self defense, law enforcement, or CQC military oriented. They are meant to strike the target with enough force to damage or kill, but not enough to penetrate (depending on range from target... close shots will go through flesh, but will deflect or lodge into bone). Ergo, a pistol round will NOT go through a double wood wall or plaster wall with support beams, but will either get lodged into the support beams or deflect away from the target on the other side. In both cases, the smaller rounds will slow down immensely, making it less damaging to its living target. This will hold true for some 5.56 mm rounds from rifles, depending on the range again.
Now lets take this into game... the fact that EVERY gun at ANY range against ANY armor as an instant headshot is nowhere near "realistic". Bulletproof helmets and ballistic shields are meant to deflect almost any incoming rounds, besides a high velocity 7.62mm sniper round or .50 BMG. So when a one shot headshot kills a guy 50m away wearing a helmet with a 9mm or even .45, it will bounce or deflect. It might knock one down or send the helmet flying, but it won't make it through. It's better than Kevlar, which can easily stop up to a .357 or even .44 round from beyond 25 ft. Same for shields. They can stop shotgun rounds from almost point blank range in real life, but this game seems to allow rounds to curve around the shield (shields in real life are wider than in this game, so whoever designed the shield didn't do much research. This game exposes way more body than a real shield would anyway.) So I would maintain that only certain weapons should be one shot headshots against anyone without a huge ballistic helmet, which Defenders in this game don't have (except the GIGN guys): G36, Sig 552 and 556xi, Glaz's sniper, 417 DMR, and maybe the FN FAL at short ranges.
These changes are what would truly be "realistic"... apparently Ubisoft needs better ballistics research.

Let's think about the ballistics a little more. I've been to the army and can say due to the job description i had i got some knowledge of the modern day protection values.

First off the helmets that are wear by modern day tactical squads are NOT bulletproof. Helmets are designed to protect the wearer from shrapnel, ricochets and bullet grazes. Direct hit with a standard 9mm pistol round will go through like a hot knife through butter. In a show called Future Weapons they tested standard army issue PASGT helmet by shooting it with MP7 4.6x30mm (used by bandit in this game). The single 4.6x30mm bullet went right through the helmet by even penetrating the back wall. Bulletproof helmet would be much more heavier than the ones being used today. This would restrict the head movement of the wearer drastically and only adding a little protection. Heavier helmet would limit the wearers breathing and removal of heat through head. And as an former soldier i know this would be a far worse than the little added protection (you will still have your face exposed). Also soldiers are mainly trained to double-tap chest to stop the enemy. In real-life soldiers do not primarily aim for the head except snipers. So adding more protection to the head by making it much harder for the wearer to be able to operate is not rational. By testing it's been determined that modern day helmets can be penetrated by 9mm pistol round from over 50meters range.

Standard bullets used by FBI (and most of the modern day tactical squads) will penetrate 30-45centimeters of ballistic gel. So penetrating through wooden or plaster walls is a breeze. Overall the penetration in this game is pretty much done right.

Ask me if you want something to be more clarified. Im happy to answer.

SGTsimoUK
02-15-2016, 10:22 PM
Let's think about the ballistics a little more. I've been to the army and can say due to the job description i had i got some knowledge of the modern day protection values.

First off the helmets that are wear by modern day tactical squads are NOT bulletproof. Helmets are designed to protect the wearer from shrapnel, ricochets and bullet grazes. Direct hit with a standard 9mm pistol round will go through like a hot knife through butter. In a show called Future Weapons they tested standard army issue PASGT helmet by shooting it with MP7 4.6x30mm (used by bandit in this game). The single 4.6x30mm bullet went right through the helmet by even penetrating the back wall. Bulletproof helmet would be much more heavier than the ones being used today. This would restrict the head movement of the wearer drastically and only adding a little protection. Heavier helmet would limit the wearers breathing and removal of heat through head. And as an former soldier i know this would be a far worse than the little added protection (you will still have your face exposed). Also soldiers are mainly trained to double-tap chest to stop the enemy. In real-life soldiers do not primarily aim for the head except snipers. So adding more protection to the head by making it much harder for the wearer to be able to operate is not rational. By testing it's been determined that modern day helmets can be penetrated by 9mm pistol round from over 50meters range.

Standard bullets used by FBI (and most of the modern day tactical squads) will penetrate 30-45centimeters of ballistic gel. So penetrating through wooden or plaster walls is a breeze. Overall the penetration in this game is pretty much done right.

Ask me if you want something to be more clarified. Im happy to answer.

I agree with this 100% (at last, someone who is talking sense).
Not only the above, but just the force of the hit can knock you off your feet, wind you or break a rib or 2 through bullet proof vests.
Even hitting a shield could knock you over (not to mention the weight if the thing causing severe movement issues).

Zhonohz
02-16-2016, 01:16 PM
I agree with you on the "reduce headshot being one hitter quitters" idea. Let's book at ballistics as the science. A 9mm para., 5.7mm or 4.7 mm (MP7s are sometimes this round) or .45 ACP round is essentially a pistol cartridge. The rounds may sound larger that a 7.62 mm, but they aren't. They are fired with far less force than a rifle cartridge, despite the larger size. This is simply because of one thing... most uses for these pistol sized rounds are either self defense, law enforcement, or CQC military oriented. They are meant to strike the target with enough force to damage or kill, but not enough to penetrate (depending on range from target... close shots will go through flesh, but will deflect or lodge into bone). Ergo, a pistol round will NOT go through a double wood wall or plaster wall with support beams, but will either get lodged into the support beams or deflect away from the target on the other side. In both cases, the smaller rounds will slow down immensely, making it less damaging to its living target. This will hold true for some 5.56 mm rounds from rifles, depending on the range again.
Now lets take this into game... the fact that EVERY gun at ANY range against ANY armor as an instant headshot is nowhere near "realistic". Bulletproof helmets and ballistic shields are meant to deflect almost any incoming rounds, besides a high velocity 7.62mm sniper round or .50 BMG. So when a one shot headshot kills a guy 50m away wearing a helmet with a 9mm or even .45, it will bounce or deflect. It might knock one down or send the helmet flying, but it won't make it through. It's better than Kevlar, which can easily stop up to a .357 or even .44 round from beyond 25 ft. Same for shields. They can stop shotgun rounds from almost point blank range in real life, but this game seems to allow rounds to curve around the shield (shields in real life are wider than in this game, so whoever designed the shield didn't do much research. This game exposes way more body than a real shield would anyway.) So I would maintain that only certain weapons should be one shot headshots against anyone without a huge ballistic helmet, which Defenders in this game don't have (except the GIGN guys): G36, Sig 552 and 556xi, Glaz's sniper, 417 DMR, and maybe the FN FAL at short ranges.
These changes are what would truly be "realistic"... apparently Ubisoft needs better ballistics research.


Let's think about the ballistics a little more. I've been to the army and can say due to the job description i had i got some knowledge of the modern day protection values.

First off the helmets that are wear by modern day tactical squads are NOT bulletproof. Helmets are designed to protect the wearer from shrapnel, ricochets and bullet grazes. Direct hit with a standard 9mm pistol round will go through like a hot knife through butter. In a show called Future Weapons they tested standard army issue PASGT helmet by shooting it with MP7 4.6x30mm (used by bandit in this game). The single 4.6x30mm bullet went right through the helmet by even penetrating the back wall. Bulletproof helmet would be much more heavier than the ones being used today. This would restrict the head movement of the wearer drastically and only adding a little protection. Heavier helmet would limit the wearers breathing and removal of heat through head. And as an former soldier i know this would be a far worse than the little added protection (you will still have your face exposed). Also soldiers are mainly trained to double-tap chest to stop the enemy. In real-life soldiers do not primarily aim for the head except snipers. So adding more protection to the head by making it much harder for the wearer to be able to operate is not rational. By testing it's been determined that modern day helmets can be penetrated by 9mm pistol round from over 50meters range.

Standard bullets used by FBI (and most of the modern day tactical squads) will penetrate 30-45centimeters of ballistic gel. So penetrating through wooden or plaster walls is a breeze. Overall the penetration in this game is pretty much done right.

Ask me if you want something to be more clarified. Im happy to answer.


Now THIS is a good argument.

Also, the lack of helmet consideration is disturbing. The headshot' hitbox on german "earcups" is... lame.

Khaylius
02-16-2016, 11:05 PM
I agree with this 100% (at last, someone who is talking sense).
Not only the above, but just the force of the hit can knock you off your feet, wind you or break a rib or 2 through bullet proof vests.
Even hitting a shield could knock you over (not to mention the weight if the thing causing severe movement issues).

Actually if we have to add some realism to the game (I am not in the military nor having any specific knowledge on this so any better back up is welcomed):
1. Shots that hit your armor but do not penetrate it should either get you off balance, or at least reduce (maybe temporary) your speed (mostly confusion and concussion pain), but no health loss;
2. Shots that hit and damage you should slow your movement/reaction speed (maybe also make you bleed until you bandage them to remove the health loss?)
3. No ankle kills....this is ridiculous. I can fall unconscious if I get multiple shots at my feet/ankles, probably bleed to death, lose a foot, but you can't kill me.... (not a medic, but if anyone with more knowledge than me, can tell if I am completely off)

The above because I highly doubt that if I start shooting you first you can keep the weapon up and still aim at me after that I hit you....
Other suggestions?

SGTsimoUK
02-17-2016, 01:19 PM
Actually if we have to add some realism to the game (I am not in the military nor having any specific knowledge on this so any better back up is welcomed):
1. Shots that hit your armor but do not penetrate it should either get you off balance, or at least reduce (maybe temporary) your speed (mostly confusion and concussion pain), but no health loss;
2. Shots that hit and damage you should slow your movement/reaction speed (maybe also make you bleed until you bandage them to remove the health loss?)
3. No ankle kills....this is ridiculous. I can fall unconscious if I get multiple shots at my feet/ankles, probably bleed to death, lose a foot, but you can't kill me.... (not a medic, but if anyone with more knowledge than me, can tell if I am completely off)

The above because I highly doubt that if I start shooting you first you can keep the weapon up and still aim at me after that I hit you....
Other suggestions?

Again I agree.

I have not been in the military but have sent THOUSANDS of rounds down a firing range (and learnt tactics first hand) using a MP5, carbine, glock, AK47, shotgun, electronic stun gun (taser), rubber bullets, flash bangs, etc.

A hit to any part of your body WILL be felt and WILL severely effect the way you perform. A shot to the arm will drastically reduce your accuracy, a shot to the leg/foot will drastically remove your mobility, a shot to the abdomen with a vest on will wind you, break a few ribs, knock you off your feet, even kill you still, or at the very least will frighten/disorientate you, the same as one to the head (with or without a helmet).

Ok, I don't expect all this to be in a game, regardless how realistic it may be, but for those who complain regarding this being part of the game should question if this game is for them or not, or if they should play the easier casual rather than realistic.
At the moment there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the 2.

jesu911
02-17-2016, 03:53 PM
One shot headshots add an element to the game that defines RB6 Siege. The only thing they need to do is tighten up the hitbox around the head. The headshot hitbox should be a consistent size for every player. Earmuffs and helmets make headshot hitbox unreasonably larger for certain characters.

BUTTAURBREAD
02-18-2016, 02:10 AM
Let's think about the ballistics a little more. I've been to the army and can say due to the job description i had i got some knowledge of the modern day protection values.

First off the helmets that are wear by modern day tactical squads are NOT bulletproof. Helmets are designed to protect the wearer from shrapnel, ricochets and bullet grazes. Direct hit with a standard 9mm pistol round will go through like a hot knife through butter. In a show called Future Weapons they tested standard army issue PASGT helmet by shooting it with MP7 4.6x30mm (used by bandit in this game). The single 4.6x30mm bullet went right through the helmet by even penetrating the back wall. Bulletproof helmet would be much more heavier than the ones being used today. This would restrict the head movement of the wearer drastically and only adding a little protection. Heavier helmet would limit the wearers breathing and removal of heat through head. And as an former soldier i know this would be a far worse than the little added protection (you will still have your face exposed). Also soldiers are mainly trained to double-tap chest to stop the enemy. In real-life soldiers do not primarily aim for the head except snipers. So adding more protection to the head by making it much harder for the wearer to be able to operate is not rational. By testing it's been determined that modern day helmets can be penetrated by 9mm pistol round from over 50meters range.

Standard bullets used by FBI (and most of the modern day tactical squads) will penetrate 30-45centimeters of ballistic gel. So penetrating through wooden or plaster walls is a breeze. Overall the penetration in this game is pretty much done right.

Ask me if you want something to be more clarified. Im happy to answer.

Ok but does a shot that skins a helmets barely on the side penetrate? I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that, it would bounce off because it wasn't a direct hit. So they should put that into consideration

N4VYS34L
02-21-2016, 03:04 AM
I think they need to make it so chest shots kill faster. No operator should be able to turn and shoot at you after getting lit up from the side or from behind. I have been the victim and culprit of this several times and it's ********. If you get the first shot on someone you would win that gun fight in real life. They need to add bullet flinch as well.

N4VYS34L
02-21-2016, 03:13 AM
Snipers aren't trained to aim for the head most of the time. Yes when aiming for the head they are told to go between the eyes and they only every take head shots on stationary targets. Most of the time they go for center mass as it's still a one shot kill and it's an easier target. You take a 7.62 to your upper chest you're done. If you aren't killed instantly you would bleed out in seconds. Hell even a 5.56 to the chest will kill you with one round. Especially since they are designed to tumble inside the body to cause more damage.