Sniper. 2 hits is good, but we need more damage.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

In my opinion, the industry standard of requiring 2 hits to kill or 1 headshot hit for snipers is a good balance for non-hardcore gameplay. It feels just right.

However, in this game, I've noticed that the first sniper shot doesn't have the desired impact. Ideally, it should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100. Currently, it doesn't quite achieve that effect. I believe increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot) would enhance the gameplay experience.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Andrew ꑭ | #StandWithUkraine:

Battlefield has HC game modes in Portal , also you can play there Bf3 games

Cool, I can play and enjoy these old games and at the same time make a post on the forum of a new Early Access title that has balance issues as a roadmap plan.

You don't need to feel as offended and act like a fanboy kid just because someone believes that this new Early Access and very charming new game can be better and do better. Right? Let's grow up a bit, shall we?

Next...

[☥ 𝔄𝔫𝔡𝔯𝔢𝔦 ☥]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by Andrew ꑭ | #StandWithUkraine:

Battlefield has HC game modes in Portal , also you can play there Bf3 games

Cool, I can play and enjoy these old games and at the same time make a post on the forum of a new Early Access title that has balance issues as a roadmap plan.

You don't need to feel as offended and act like a fanboy kid just because someone believes that this new Early Access and very charming new game can be better and do better. Right? Let's grow up a bit, shall we?

Next...

DId u not read ?

[Auth]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Jeez you guys have reading problems. Seriously... LMAO

I'm ok with 2 hits to kill, it's on my title and text. Can't you guys at least read what is being said?

I mean, it's ok to disagree, but try at least to READ what was said? LMAO this community...

It's a starter weapon that 2-hit kills on body shots point blank with Ranger Barrel againsnt light and normal armor, and can 2-hit heavy armor in the body at longer ranges.

The gun literally does what you say you're okay with. If it dealt more damage, it'd be unreasonable as a *starting* sniper rifle and make switching to subsequent rifles less appealing by making them even less-distinctive than they already are.

In many instances, a single hit from any sniper rifle at longer ranges puts enemies in 1-hit range for lots of weapon platforms (the SSG 69 unmodded, for example, can send up to 90 damage downrange on a body shot, which brings unarmored, light, and normal armored targets down to 1-hit range for many other weapon platforms, even if the actual remaining health of the target isn't 1-5), but up close *none* of the rifles can perform like that into thicker armors (the highest bodyshot damage available is 77 on the M200 with a Ranger Barrel, which *barely* makes it 2-shot body on heavy, and prevents body 2-shots on exo armor without shooting an enemy from longer ranges). This sort of balance prevents CS-esque awp damage and makes them more akin to scouts, which for the more arcadey gameplay of BB:R makes sense, IMO.

It feels like you're basically saying "this gun should perform as well as the Rank 100 rifle" without considering how little time it takes in the grand scheme of things to get to Rank 30 and start using the SV-98 (which 2-hit body shots light and normal *without* the Ranger Barrel), and then to the L96 at Rank 65 (which gains the ability to 2-hit heavy armor to the body with the Ranger Barrel).

The progression system is meant to offer better options as you rank up (ideally making the starting weapons for each class maybe not *unviable* but definitely outclassed by the later offerings), and while it isn't perfect (the MSR, again, is trash, as is the REM700), buffing the SSG 69 the way you seemingly want it adjusted would make said progression system objectively worse. If you're trying to say something else, it's not coming across to anyone in here.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Auth:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Jeez you guys have reading problems. Seriously... LMAO

I'm ok with 2 hits to kill, it's on my title and text. Can't you guys at least read what is being said?

I mean, it's ok to disagree, but try at least to READ what was said? LMAO this community...

It's a starter weapon that 2-hit kills on body shots point blank with Ranger Barrel againsnt light and normal armor, and can 2-hit heavy armor in the body at longer ranges.

The gun literally does what you say you're okay with. If it dealt more damage, it'd be unreasonable as a *starting* sniper rifle and make switching to subsequent rifles less appealing by making them even less-distinctive than they already are.

It feels like you're basically saying "this gun should perform as well as the Rank 100 rifle" without considering how little time it takes in the grand scheme of things to get to Rank 30 and start using the SV-98 (which 2-hit body shots light and normal *without* the Ranger Barrel), and then to the L96 at Rank 65 (which gains the ability to 2-hit heavy armor to the body with the Ranger Barrel). If you're trying to say something else, it's not coming across to anyone in here.

The progression system is meant to offer better options as you rank up (ideally making the starting weapons for each class maybe not *unviable* but definitely outclassed by the later offerings), and while it isn't perfect (the MSR, again, is trash, as is the REM700), buffing the SSG 69 the way you seemingly want it adjusted would make said progression system objectively worse.

In many instances, a single hit from any sniper rifle at longer ranges puts enemies in 1-hit range for lots of weapon platforms (the SSG 69 unmodded, for example, can send up to 90 damage downrange on a body shot, which brings unarmored, light, and normal armored targets down to 1-hit range for many other weapon platforms, even if the actual remaining health of the target isn't 1-5), but up close *none* of the rifles can perform like that into thicker armors (the highest bodyshot damage available is 77 on the M200 with a Ranger Barrel, which *barely* makes it 2-shot body on heavy, and prevents body 2-shots on exo armor without shooting an enemy from longer ranges). This sort of balance prevents CS-esque awp damage and makes them more akin to scouts, which for the more arcadey gameplay of BB:R makes sense, IMO.

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

However, in this game, I've noticed that the first sniper shot doesn't have the desired impact. Ideally, it should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100. Currently, it doesn't quite achieve that effect. I believe increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot) would enhance the gameplay experience.

" increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot)"

" the first sniper shot (...) should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100."

These are my points that I would like to discuss. People are replying to me like I want "0 shots to kill" and stupid things like that, hence what I said and you quoted.

While english is not my first language, I do believe that my text and title was quite simple and plain. I'm ok with people disagreeing with me, really. But saying that my text imply that I want "0 shots to kill" is just stupid and a lie, objectively lie.

[Taz3rrrFac3]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by Auth:

It's a starter weapon that 2-hit kills on body shots point blank with Ranger Barrel againsnt light and normal armor, and can 2-hit heavy armor in the body at longer ranges.

The gun literally does what you say you're okay with. If it dealt more damage, it'd be unreasonable as a *starting* sniper rifle and make switching to subsequent rifles less appealing by making them even less-distinctive than they already are.

It feels like you're basically saying "this gun should perform as well as the Rank 100 rifle" without considering how little time it takes in the grand scheme of things to get to Rank 30 and start using the SV-98 (which 2-hit body shots light and normal *without* the Ranger Barrel), and then to the L96 at Rank 65 (which gains the ability to 2-hit heavy armor to the body with the Ranger Barrel). If you're trying to say something else, it's not coming across to anyone in here.

The progression system is meant to offer better options as you rank up (ideally making the starting weapons for each class maybe not *unviable* but definitely outclassed by the later offerings), and while it isn't perfect (the MSR, again, is trash, as is the REM700), buffing the SSG 69 the way you seemingly want it adjusted would make said progression system objectively worse.

In many instances, a single hit from any sniper rifle at longer ranges puts enemies in 1-hit range for lots of weapon platforms (the SSG 69 unmodded, for example, can send up to 90 damage downrange on a body shot, which brings unarmored, light, and normal armored targets down to 1-hit range for many other weapon platforms, even if the actual remaining health of the target isn't 1-5), but up close *none* of the rifles can perform like that into thicker armors (the highest bodyshot damage available is 77 on the M200 with a Ranger Barrel, which *barely* makes it 2-shot body on heavy, and prevents body 2-shots on exo armor without shooting an enemy from longer ranges). This sort of balance prevents CS-esque awp damage and makes them more akin to scouts, which for the more arcadey gameplay of BB:R makes sense, IMO.

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

However, in this game, I've noticed that the first sniper shot doesn't have the desired impact. Ideally, it should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100. Currently, it doesn't quite achieve that effect. I believe increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot) would enhance the gameplay experience.

" increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot)"

" the first sniper shot (...) should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100."

These are my points that I would like to discuss. People are replying to me like I want "0 shots to kill" and stupid things like that, hence what I said and you quoted.

While english is not my first language, I do believe that my text and title was quite simple and plain. I'm ok with people disagreeing with me, really. But saying that my text imply that I want "0 shots to kill" is just stupid and a lie, objectively lie.

Let me break this down for you and tell you WHY this is not possible..
Exo armor Provides 62 Damage mitigation on the body (Best in the game).. This is a total of 162 total health points you have to shoot through the body as a Sniper. You want to leave a player between 1-5HP.. This means you have to hit a body shot with a Sniper for 157 damage MINIMUM.

Medic Normal armor has 25 HP.. (125 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Medic with Normal armor.
Medic Light armor has 12 HP.. (112 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Medic with Light armor.

Sniper Light/Normal both have 12 HP.. (112 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Sniper.

Engineer Normal Armor 25 HP.. (125 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Engineer with Normal armor.
Engineer Heavy armor 43 HP.. (143 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Engineer with Heavy armor.

Assault Light armor has 12 HP.. (112 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Assault with Light armor.
Assault Normal Armor 25 HP.. (125 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Assault with Normal armor.
Assault Heavy armor 43 HP.. (143 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Assault with Heavy armor.

Leader Light armor has 12 HP.. (112 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Leader with Light armor.
Leader Normal Armor 25 HP.. (125 total HP) You WOULD 1 shot to the body any Leader with Normal armor.

This DOES NOT factor in the INVERSE sniper damage where any shot PAST 700m slowly adds damage to the shot. NOR the headshot multipliers. NOR additional damage modifiers that can be attached (Heavy/Long/Ranger Barrels)

The devs are not going to make separate data tables to calculate damage based on the class of armor you are wearing. Nor should they have to. The system is absolutely fine the way it is.. And with a little time in the shooting range, and doing the calculations yourself you could have figured this out like I did.

Does this answer your question(s) or are you going to find another point to argue just for the sake of arguing?

TL;DR: 157 Minimum damage to the body required to bring a target with Exo armor to 5 HP. 157-143 = Dead. 157-125 = Dead. 157-112 = Dead. Not possible to buff damage. Does not include headshot multipliers, or damage adding attachments.

[Chaos]

Finally someone bring a nice data table to show how stu...I mean unreasonable his argument are.

[Auth]

Originally posted by Chaos:

Finally someone bring a nice data table to show how stu...I mean unreasonable his argument are.

Numbers have been brought out previously, as has the point that 1-5 hp is just a number range and if targets are left within 1 bullet of death to most weapon platforms (which they already are, in many cases), there's no reason the health has to be 1-5 as it's effectively the same thing: 1 bullet kills. I don't understand the obsession OP has with such a finite, irrelevant number range.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

" increasing the Sniper damage but still maintaining the requirement of 2 hits to kill (unless headshot)"

" the first sniper shot (...) should leave the target with very little health remaining, like just 1 to 5 hit points out of a full 100."

These are my points that I would like to discuss. People are replying to me like I want "0 shots to kill" and stupid things like that, hence what I said and you quoted.

While english is not my first language, I do believe that my text and title was quite simple and plain. I'm ok with people disagreeing with me, really. But saying that my text imply that I want "0 shots to kill" is just stupid and a lie, objectively lie.

Let me break this down for you and tell you WHY this is not possible..
Exo armor Provides 62 Damage mitigation on the body (Best in the game).. This is a total of 162 total health points you have to shoot through the body as a Sniper. You want to leave a player between 1-5HP.. This means you have to hit a body shot with a Sniper for 157 damage MINIMUM.

My point remains unchanged.

Within the range of less than 900-1000m, the sniper shot typically deals around 72 damage (with unlocked stuff), while beyond 900m, the damage increases. This means that in less than 900m away it will be reequires 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot, even if the target is not wearing any armor. And beyond around 900m it is required 1 hit to kill. Normal.

Now let's consider a scenario where a sniper shot hits for 95 damage against targets within less than 900m away. it would still require 2 hits or 1 headshot to eliminate the target. For targets beyond 900m, a single hit would suffice, just as it does currently.

The key distinction is that with a sniper shot dealing 95 damage, the first shot would leave the target significantly wounded (but not dead), allowing for an "assist count as kill" if another player finishes them off. We would still need 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot.

Your response has not effectively countered these points.

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

Does this answer your question(s) or are you going to find another point to argue just for the sake of arguing?

If you're not a fan of debates, forums might not be your cup of tea. But if you're going to dive into the world of debating and want to come across as a superior debater, it wouldn't hurt to brush up on the basics of traditional logic and how to use predicables properly xD

[Taz3rrrFac3]

Originally posted by Auth:

Originally posted by Chaos:

Finally someone bring a nice data table to show how stu...I mean unreasonable his argument are.

Numbers have been brought out previously, as has the point that 1-5 hp is just a number range and if targets are left within 1 bullet of death to most weapon platforms (which they already are, in many cases), there's no reason the health has to be 1-5 as it's effectively the same thing (*especially* on the SSG 69, which is the weapon being discussed: the Rank 0 starting sniper rifle); I don't understand the obsession OP has with such a finite, irrelevant number range.

As many of us have already stated it isn't feasible, and just fine the way it is. But OP wanted to continue pushing his points.. So I provided data as to why it isn't possible. As many of us have. Hopefully OP can now finally understand why all of us are saying it cannot be done, nor does it need to be.

Also.. Take an award just because I have too many points to spend. You know what.. Everyone gets an award.

[Above]

for sure !

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

As many of us have already stated it isn't feasible, and just fine the way it is.

Snipers and DMRs are not fine at all. Some people love sniping and will play this role no matter what, but snipers and DMRs are not fine.

[Taz3rrrFac3]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

Let me break this down for you and tell you WHY this is not possible..
Exo armor Provides 62 Damage mitigation on the body (Best in the game).. This is a total of 162 total health points you have to shoot through the body as a Sniper. You want to leave a player between 1-5HP.. This means you have to hit a body shot with a Sniper for 157 damage MINIMUM.

My point remains unchanged.

Within the range of less than 900-1000m, the sniper shot typically deals around 72 damage (with unlocked stuff), while beyond 900m, the damage increases. This means that in less than 900m away it will be reequires 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot, even if the target is not wearing any armor. And beyond around 900m it is required 1 hit to kill. Normal.

Now let's consider a scenario where a sniper shot hits for 95 damage against targets within less than 900m away. it would still require 2 hits or 1 headshot to eliminate the target. For targets beyond 900m, a single hit would suffice, just as it does currently.

The key distinction is that with a sniper shot dealing 95 damage, the first shot would leave the target significantly wounded (but not dead), allowing for an "assist count as kill" if another player finishes them off. We would still need 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot.

Your response has not effectively countered these points.

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

Does this answer your question(s) or are you going to find another point to argue just for the sake of arguing?

If you're not a fan of debates, forums might not be your cup of tea. But if you're going to dive into the world of debating and want to come across as a superior debater, it wouldn't hurt to brush up on the basics of traditional logic and how to use predicables properly xD

Jesus.. You really are insufferable at this point.. With the ADDITION OF ARMOR.. YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE RATIO YOU ARE WANTING BETWEEN 1-5HP. NOT POSSIBLE..

If you are going to try to come up with a possible solution at least include some math, and use logic..

If you want a damage buff fine, They don't need one but you can have one in your fantasy world.. WHAT CANNOT BE DONE IS HAVING WHAT YOU WANT A BETWEEN 1-5HP TARGET (INCLUDING ARMOR) Which you have to assume the player is WEARING.

These are the conditions:
- 1-5 HP after 1 shot (2 shot body shot kill total)
- 1 shot headshot

The condition of "assist counts as kill" was NEVER DETERMINED. Not in your OP.

This thread is dead.

[Chaos]

True that, I just hope that with such an easy to understand table from Taz OP "might" be able to see it to.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

My point remains unchanged.

Within the range of less than 900-1000m, the sniper shot typically deals around 72 damage (with unlocked stuff), while beyond 900m, the damage increases. This means that in less than 900m away it will be reequires 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot, even if the target is not wearing any armor. And beyond around 900m it is required 1 hit to kill. Normal.

Now let's consider a scenario where a sniper shot hits for 95 damage against targets within less than 900m away. it would still require 2 hits or 1 headshot to eliminate the target. For targets beyond 900m, a single hit would suffice, just as it does currently.

The key distinction is that with a sniper shot dealing 95 damage, the first shot would leave the target significantly wounded (but not dead), allowing for an "assist count as kill" if another player finishes them off. We would still need 2 hits to kill, or 1 headshot.

Your response has not effectively countered these points.



If you're not a fan of debates, forums might not be your cup of tea. But if you're going to dive into the world of debating and want to come across as a superior debater, it wouldn't hurt to brush up on the basics of traditional logic and how to use predicables properly xD

Jesus.. You really are insufferable at this point.. With the ADDITION OF ARMOR.. YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE RATIO YOU ARE WANTING BETWEEN 1-5HP. NOT POSSIBLE..

If you are going to try to come up with a possible solution at least include some math, and use logic..

If you want a damage buff fine, They don't need one but you can have one in your fantasy world.. WHAT CANNOT BE DONE IS HAVING WHAT YOU WANT A BETWEEN 1-5HP TARGET (INCLUDING ARMOR) Which you have to assume the player is WEARING.

These are the conditions:
- 1-5 HP after 1 shot
- 1 shot headshot

The condition of "assist counts as kill" was NEVER DETERMINED. Not in your OP.

This thread is dead.

Regarding my example of 1 - 5 HP, it was simply meant as an illustration and not to be taken as a strict requirement (I never said it was). I fully grasp the presence of different armor types and how they can affect the amount of health remaining. However, the specific HP values are not the crucial aspect of my argument.

The main point I'm trying to convey is that even if the base damage for snipers were increased to as much as 95 for targets within 900m, it would likely result in more frequent "assist count as kill" scenarios (obviously), while still necessitating 2 hits, 1 headshot, or 1 hit for targets beyond 900m. My intention is to highlight that sniper damage can be increased keeping the 2 hits, 1 headshot, or 1 hit for targets beyond 900m.

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

]

The condition of "assist counts as kill" was NEVER DETERMINED. Not in your OP.

This thread is dead.

LOL... That behavior tho... LOL

Anyway, the "assist count as kill" was said in the #5 and you are quoted LMAO, here:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by CarlosAndreas:

i think it mainly has to do that everyone is wearing armor and well it negates damage, also tbh i think that current damage is fine, if a sniper hits you you are left with aprox 30% hp or so, unless you get hit in the bodyarmor that is, it leaves the enemy allot weaker for teammates to mop up.

Originally posted by Taz3rrrFac3:

You're right, but what iut does do.. Is make you bleedout. Which means if the person doesnt choose to find cover and bandage they will die anyway. Unless you are shooting a support with Exo armor then it just breaks. Otherwise you will cause the bleed effect.

Honestly, I'd really love it if the "kill assist counts as kill" happened more often. Currently, I find myself holding back from taking shots unless I'm sure I can make a headshot, because it doesn't feel worthwhile otherwise.

It's quite surprising to see how little damage a sniper shot actually does. It's kind of weird, you know? I mean, I'm totally fine with it taking two hits to kill, but I think the damage could definitely be better.

You love to be wrong, don't you?

[Taz3rrrFac3]

You missed the point where I said "The condition of "assist counts as kill" was NEVER DETERMINED. Not in your OP." Didn't you?

You love to be wrong more than I do, as many people have proved to you.

Bait harder, I am not replying to your nonsense anymore.