Damage according to distance, why ?

blaqqardo · Post by **blaqqardo** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 3:33 am

Christa wrote:

Sometimes its 10 hp damage which you receive by a Headshot and sometimes its up to 40 hp, according to the distance you are shooting from.

That is really lame imo.

I am asking myself the same question for over a year.

=FF=im2good4u · Post by **=FF=im2good4u** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 3:37 am

the speed of the bullet reduces over distance caz of the resistence of the air

also belive me you not wana get killed by only a few bullets fired so far away you dont even know where hes shoting from

fretn · Post by **fretn** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 3:59 am

et is about realism

KalleGuld · Post by **KalleGuld** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:30 am

afaik, damage is only reduces by a factor 2 for long distance, which is fair imo. correct me if i'm wrong.

also belive me you not wana get killed by only a few bullets fired so far away you dont even know where hes shoting from

correct and fair

Spark2 · Post by **Spark2** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:42 am

=FF=im2weak4u wrote:also belive me you not wana get killed by only a few bullets fired so far away you dont even know where hes shoting from

Agree. Of course it can be pretty frustrating not being able to take out some defender on a distance, but the other way around it gives you more chances to come near the objective. On Radar for example, it can sometimes be pretty frustrating to get shot from across the map, I don't want to imagine how it would be with full damage.

squadjot · Post by **squadjot** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 5:32 am

=FF=im2weak4u wrote:the speed of the bullet reduces over distance caz of the resistence of the air

pfff.thats not realistic..NO et map is that big..that a bullet impact would make differnce a human skull...

a normal hunting rifle caliber 6.35mm can shoot 5.4 kilometer and still penetrate and a 3mm aluminium plate..

fanity · Post by **fanity** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 5:34 am

yeah but take a look at oasis or goldrush. especially on oasis it is very hard for allies to taking out the axis. axis have about 30secs or more to get in position and full ammo. it all depends on some luck to take them out.

but it is hard to say if increasing headshot damage (distance only) would be better to play.

Spark2 · Post by **Spark2** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 5:56 am

Crossfire would become stronger, too, and that serves mostly the defense. I don't think it would be fun. Lower damage at least gives you the chance to jump in, take a bit of damage, heal yourself and then take out the defense from the inside.

gotenks · Post by **gotenks** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:27 am

remember:

someone on these forums wrote:Gameplay > Realism

removing the damage/distance would make it really easy to defend

Spoofeh · Post by **Spoofeh** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 7:09 am

KalleGuld wrote:afaik, damage is only reduces by a factor 2 for long distance, which is fair imo. correct me if i'm wrong.

Afaik it's actually reduced to 20%...

Ragnarok|GER · Post by **Ragnarok|GER** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 7:12 am

but sometimes, it's pretty ridiculous. i can expect a man to drop down when catching 3 bullets with his head, don't i?
this "feature" may help the defenders out, but it really depends on the personal skills of each player how difficult it is to defend and how dificult it is to attack. see, there are guys who are pretty good distance aimers and there are guys who like close-combats. (of course, most players are pretty good at both, but every player has its preferences!)
and sometimes, it's quite usefull to have an distance-aimer on allied side to break the defense. he can take an camping axis guy out with three headshots from far away and go on.
the main difference between short and long range-combats are that most axis guys are camping when the enemy is far away and start moving when he comes nearby. so it can be very good for the attacking side to have a guy whos good on long distance, because he will be able to do much more headshots than in close-combat.
but at the moment its a bit senseless.. three headshots.. nothing happens. you doesnt have to care about long distance. let's all use a >20.00 sensitivity and a 130 fov, guys!

Spark2 · Post by **Spark2** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 7:58 am

And the drama goes on...

Fade2Black · Post by **Fade2Black** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:57 am

People will be asking for damage reduction due to striking objects other than the target (eg plants / water - a good reduction) or for richochets of hot metal hitting you.

Hey, If you want to play wilth ultra realism theres always that other free game, AAO.

You'll be asking for skill-loss per head shot due to memory loss next!

Actually, come to think of it that would train a lot of people to go for the head!

next_ghost · Post by **next_ghost** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 9:39 am

gotenks wrote:remember:
someone on these forums wrote:Gameplay > Realism

Don't bring up this stupid argument that screwed whole Day of Defeat.

Every reasonable bit of realism is good.

Spark2 · Post by **Spark2** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:36 am

If you see gaming as a sport, like most ETPro players probably do, then realism only gets in the way. Gameplay is all that matters to me and I seriously wouldn't mind if we'd all run around as pink elefants, shooting soap bubbles. Though that might hurt the spectator appeal a little bit.

banimod / etpro / ettv forums

Damage according to distance, why ?

remove damagealteration to distance

Damage according to distance, why ?