Armor is nearly useless (for protection)

[Youkneed Swag]

I will be using four weapons to explain how armor is useless, the E11, AK, Vector, and Revolver. The metric used will be shots to the head. The most common armor you will find is combat armor, so this will be the armor that I use. The damage for AP ammunition will be used. The extended barrel or equivalent will be used as well.

The E11 takes 3 shots to kill with combat armor (3 shots with heavy armor, with FMJ it's still 3 shots) The AK takes 2 shots to kill (2 with heavy armor). The Vector takes 4 shots to kill (4 shots for heavy armor) The Revolver takes 1 shot (1 with heavy armor)

Taking combat armor is nearly not worth it, because instead of being a 2 shot kill, it makes you a 3 shot kill (E11 to the head) or a 7 shot kill instead of a 5 shot kill (Vector to the body) That sounds all fine and dandy, until you realize that the Vector shoots 12.5 bullets a second and the E11 shoots 9.5 bullets a second.

"What about the body? It must have some use there!" You may be screaming, but it's not. E11, 5 shots to heavy, 4 to combat. Revolver, 2. Vector, 8 to heavy, 7 to combat. AK, 4.

Did armor actually change much about the game? Unsurprisingly, no. Before 11.0, higher ranks were given more health to simulate armor (Cadets had 100, Lieutenants were given 120, Commander 150, and Chaos had 120.) I am generous, so I will be using the Lieutenants health pool. I will be using the E11 (570 RPM, 9.5 RPS), Logicer (660, 11 RPS), P90 (660 RPM, 11 RPS), and MP7 (600 RPM, 10 RPS). No attachments.

E11 took 2 shots to the head and 7 shots to the body. Logicer took 2 shots to the head and 6 to the body. P90 took 2 shots to the head and 9 to the body. MP7 took 3 shots to the head and 10 to the body.

All the armor addition did was increase time to kill (mostly to the body) add the illusion of choice between FMJ, AP, and JHP, take away an inventory slot, and constrict how much ammo you could take. The only reason to actually grab armor is to carry more ammo and grenades, and that's a bad incentive to grab armor.

Now that I have given the hard factors, lets look at the soft factors. Pre-parabellum did not have movement inaccuracy, so players could jump and run around shooting their weapons with some accuracy, now they have implemented movement inaccuracy, so you can no longer do that. On paper, time to kill was lower in older versions due to weapons dealing super high headshot damage, but if you take into account the bunny hopping and running (with no penalty) you will see that the time to kill was different in practice, presumably higher.

In conclusion, don't take heavy armor because it only weighs you down (stamina penalty) and shoot people in the head to negate heavy armor advantage. Any armor is only useful against the Vector and MP7. The addition of armor is simply appearing to have depth.

[76561198225075744]

armour increases survival against bullets by a little bit, which still has a game play change

[Youkneed Swag]

Originally posted by lmao its just a game:

armour increases survival against bullets by a little bit, which still has a game play change

I'm sure the one bullet will change so much! It's almost as if I addressed that...

Originally posted by Rabbitude:

Taking combat armor is nearly not worth it, because instead of being a 2 shot kill, it makes you a 3 shot kill (E11 to the head) or a 7 shot kill instead of a 5 shot kill (Vector to the body) That sounds all fine and dandy, until you realize that the Vector shoots 12.5 bullets a second and the E11 shoots 9.5 bullets a second.

That one bullet of survivability will not make that much of a difference. I have been saved by armor maybe once or twice.

[RocketPillow]

It's like the devs were remaking CS:GO instead of designing a unique gunplay and armor system that's designed specifically to work for SL.

[Topfighter101]

Originally posted by Rabbitude:

Originally posted by lmao its just a game:

armour increases survival against bullets by a little bit, which still has a game play change

I'm sure the one bullet will change so much! It's almost as if I addressed that...

Originally posted by Rabbitude:

Taking combat armor is nearly not worth it, because instead of being a 2 shot kill, it makes you a 3 shot kill (E11 to the head) or a 7 shot kill instead of a 5 shot kill (Vector to the body) That sounds all fine and dandy, until you realize that the Vector shoots 12.5 bullets a second and the E11 shoots 9.5 bullets a second.

That one bullet of survivability will not make that much of a difference. I have been saved by armor maybe once or twice.

Just because the fire rate of a gun is something doesn’t mean you will hit all of those shots. Imo armor does make a noticeable difference in survivability, although I don’t think the stamina trade off is worth it most of the time.

[Youkneed Swag]

Originally posted by Topfighter101:

Just because the fire rate of a gun is something doesn’t mean you will hit all of those shots.

Yes, but that means you have more shots per second. It's more forgiving to have a high fire rate, because you can miss some shots with little consequence. Also, the spray patterns are pretty easy and how close ranged fights usually are, hitting shots shouldn't be a problem. Not to mention how gunfights are usually one sided as hell (people aren't paying attention or there's multiple vs. one guy)

I actually used to take the Vector over every other gun because of the fire rate, and then it got nerfed (they added JHP and AP to it). Fire rate is an important hard factor of a gun, and just because you can miss doesn't mean that it is without a purpose. Just because you have a gun does not mean you will hit any or all of your shots. What is the argument here lol? Of course you won't kill someone if you're missing all of your shots.

[Otávio,o avestruz radical]

Daaaamm, I mean, I did sometimes look into the specific cases (Like I recently looked into the JHP v AP bodyshots on the Crossvec. The difference on the TTK was like less than half a second btw), but I never looked into the bigger picture like this and I specially never looked into the old guns' stats for comparison.

I guess the only applicable case of different penetration stats making a difference is the 173 armor? But still, the more time passes, the more it feels like the gun rework was released too early and we definetly could've survived a few more updates without it.

[Youkneed Swag]

Originally posted by Otávio,o avestruz radical:

Daaaamm, I mean, I did sometimes look into the specific cases (Like I recently looked into the JHP v AP bodyshots on the Crossvec. The difference on the TTK was like less than half a second btw).

Looked at that stuff too, and was really disappointed. Such a pointless addition.

Originally posted by Otávio,o avestruz radical:

But still, the more time passes, the more it feels like the gun rework was released too early and we definetly could've survived a few more updates without it.

I think it should have rolled out with the human rework/remodels, because guns kind of pertain to human roles and because there'd be more time to have doubt about it.