# More damage effects dependent on where you're hit/type of weapon used. Medics being more important. **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [May 18, 2016, 1:57am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388 "2016-05-18T01:57:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 1:57am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/1 "2016-05-18T01:57:00Z")
I see a lot of talking about having one shot kills and things being arcadey or realistic, what about having more varied damage TYPES? For example, you get hit in the arm, it affects your aiming or reloading. You get hit in the foot if affects your sprinting speed, etc. Then you can go further and have different effects dependent on what happens. A small arms having a different affect on you vs getting your bell rung by close artillery landing (IE make the sound dampen and make it harder to hear enemies, etc) or large calibur hits having a greater affect, etc. This would be a way to allow for more variety without having to just absolutely make it all about direct-damage. It would make where you are hit more important and also just make for (imo) all around more suspenseful gameplay. Imagine coming up to an enemy bunker, having a nade or something go off near you and then ringing going off with the sound dampened while you go through the enemy trench unable to really hear what might be around the next corner. This could also make playing a medic type class more fun. Allowing medics to be able to treat specific damage types giving them more vareity then simply syring’ing someone back to life but actually having to look at the person and seeing where they are hit and then having to apply the right “fix” to help them. Then you could even tie supplies to it, where the medic has a limited # of supplies and has to resupply every so often, which could be tied into another class so it all works together to create a greater sense of depth to the gameplay. ---
**Author:** ![Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/sir-xer21/32/103487_2.png) [@Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Sir-xer21)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 2:14am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/2 "2016-05-18T02:14:00Z")
> [@Stil3r](#): > > I see a lot of talking about having one shot kills and things being arcadey or realistic, what about having more varied damage TYPES? > > For example, you get hit in the arm, it affects your aiming or reloading. You get hit in the foot if affects your sprinting speed, etc. let me stop you right there. NO ---
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 3:58am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/3 "2016-05-18T03:58:00Z")
Why would that be a no to you? I’m not talking GAME STOPPING I’m talking simply having an affect applied that would reduce your sprint speed, you still can move and everything. Aiming would simply have a little more sway to it . All o fthese affects could be “patched up” by a medic and it would give them something to actually do instead of just revive revive revive. ---
**Author:** ![dragonassasin98](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dragonassasin98](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/dragonassasin98)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 4:29am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/4 "2016-05-18T04:29:00Z")
The ringing is possible and larger bullets already do more damage. Yes round placement should matter for damage, but maybe aside from less sprinting the other affects are a definite no. It would be to much monitoring and strain when combined with all the chaos. Plus if it happened everyone would hate it, some random grenade or mortar hits and u need to run across that field but now your hurt and just get picked off. Cool idea but in practice not to good ---
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 4:41am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/5 "2016-05-18T04:41:00Z")
I don’t think you guys are understanding at all what I’m saying. You can still Play when you’re injured IT would simply have some slight affects to things depending on WHERE you get hit (if it’s not fatal). You could still “run” you could still use your weapons, do EVERYTHING you need to but with just some slight differences that would make taking dmg more than simply “Am I dead or not dead?” and allow for medics to have something more to do then be revive bots. ---
**Author:** ![dragonassasin98](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dragonassasin98](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/dragonassasin98)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 4:49am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/6 "2016-05-18T04:49:00Z")
Also for the medic would u bandage his foot or set his bone individually or would there be one cure all action. And we get it, we just understand its not gonna happen and is impractical. So u get defensive and whiney. ---
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 5:15am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/7 "2016-05-18T05:15:00Z")
Whiny? I was just trying to explain that it wasn’t a freaking game stopper or some overly-complicated thing like you are saying it is. The entire point is to spice up the damage model and not having it be simply about getting someone’s hp to zero and being live vs dead with nothing in between. Too much monitoring? too much strain? All I am talking about is a simple system where you get hit in the arm, it applies a simple affect to reflect “hey, I just got bloody shot in the arm” like having more sway when you try to hold your aim. Or getting shot in the leg makes your sprint not as fast as normal, have artillery/nade damage you (but not kill you) and you get some ringing and sound dampen. Nothing major or anything that wouldn’t allow you to actually still PLAY and enjoy the game. Visually they just apply a simple wound decal on the player model to reflect this and then ANY medic could quickly and easily look at you and know “this guys been shot in the arm/leg, etc” and then they could fix it up for you, just like they do with reviving people. Nothing complicated, nothing overly-realistic, just something that’s easy to undrestand, simple, and that makes the damage model more varied and less about dead/alive and gives medics more things to do then revive people and that’s that. This is already done in some games like Red Orchestra and ARMA (but I’m not talking about going that far with it, IE making your crawl if you’re leg is wounded, that’d be way too much for BF). ---
**Author:** ![Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/sir-xer21/32/103487_2.png) [@Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Sir-xer21)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 6:55am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/8 "2016-05-18T06:55:00Z")
> [@Stil3r](#): > > Why would that be a no to you? I’m not talking GAME STOPPING I’m talking simply having an affect applied that would reduce your sprint speed, you still can move and everything. > > Aiming would simply have a little more sway to it . > > All o fthese affects could be “patched up” by a medic and it would give them something to actually do instead of just revive revive revive. you’re basically saying that someone getting shot should be FURTHER handicapped than already being damaged and that shooting someone gives you a right to a kill even if you cant finish the job because you essentially gimped the player. i dont think that’s fair. ITs like a bleedout mechanic. it sounds interesting on paper but it NEVER works in reality. furthermore, what you’re suggesting would severely slow down the pace of the game and completely change the identity of battlefield which has always been a fast paced game. > [@Stil3r](#): > > This is already done in some games like Red Orchestra and ARMA (but I’m not talking about going that far with it, IE making your crawl if you’re leg is wounded, that’d be way too much for BF). and it should stay in those game. the fact that you’re pointing to two of the most hardcore milsims on the market for inspiration should clue you in on the fact that game where people have been pulling off loopzooks for 15 years is fundamentally opposed in principal. i know you think it sounds like minor changes, but its going to matter a lot more than you think. ---
**Author:** ![visegrip117](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/visegrip117/32/104005_2.png) [@visegrip117](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/visegrip117)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 8:09am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/9 "2016-05-18T08:09:00Z")
Yeah, I’m gonna have to agree with the others a go with a a No. ---
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 9:16am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/10 "2016-05-18T09:16:00Z")
I just find it funny you’re lambasting me for the suggestion yet ignor ethe fact that BF3/4 are way more hardcore then BF1942 was, where you could bloody wing-walk on airplanes and things. Yet no one bats an eyelash at not being able to do that in BF3/4/hardline. > [@Sir-xer21](#): > > > [@Stil3r](#): > > > > Why would that be a no to you? I’m not talking GAME STOPPING I’m talking simply having an affect applied that would reduce your sprint speed, you still can move and everything. > > > > Aiming would simply have a little more sway to it . > > > > All o fthese affects could be “patched up” by a medic and it would give them something to actually do instead of just revive revive revive. > > you’re basically saying that someone getting shot should be FURTHER handicapped than already being damaged and that shooting someone gives you a right to a kill even if you cant finish the job because you essentially gimped the player. i dont think that’s fair. ITs like a bleedout mechanic. it sounds interesting on paper but it NEVER works in reality. > > furthermore, what you’re suggesting would severely slow down the pace of the game and completely change the identity of battlefield which has always been a fast paced game. > > > [@Stil3r](#): > > > > This is already done in some games like Red Orchestra and ARMA (but I’m not talking about going that far with it, IE making your crawl if you’re leg is wounded, that’d be way too much for BF). > > and it should stay in those game. the fact that you’re pointing to two of the most hardcore milsims on the market for inspiration should clue you in on the fact that game where people have been pulling off loopzooks for 15 years is fundamentally opposed in principal. > > i know you think it sounds like minor changes, but its going to matter a lot more than you think. Older Battlefield games you didn’t even regen health, you had to find medkits, is that too “hardcore” for people in this day and age too? Then they added things like supression mechanics to also further enhance the impact that firing near you would do. This affects your vision, is this too much as well? On top of this they took out some more arcadey elements, such as wingwalking. They made Parachuting talk longer to deploy and actually have a height requirement. Yet having a damage that has some very MINOR and slight affects to things that wouldn’t impact you being able to play the game is going “too far” and would somehow magically slow the game down? How? You could still move, aim, do every-single thing you need to do to play and enjoy the game just with some slight differences in your audio/visuals. It’s like some people just hear mention of ANYTHING that leans toward something even a tiny bit less arcadey and they just can’t handle it at all. ---
**Author:** ![Brentlostak](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/brentlostak/32/101414_2.png) [@Brentlostak](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Brentlostak)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 9:20am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/11 "2016-05-18T09:20:00Z")
why always the need for realism. its a game! ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Stil3r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stil3r)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 9:31am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/12 "2016-05-18T09:31:00Z")
> [@Brentlostak](#): > > why always the need for realism. its a game! ☹ Believe it or not some of us like more depth and variety to a game. It can still be fun if it has actual depth to it. Less people want everything to be as simple as BAttlefront was. There’s also a huge difference between having slight realism in regards to things like I suggestion and overly realistic things that you find in ARMA type games. I mean I am not suggestion you get hit and that’s it, a medic can magically “patch” you up and fix anything, I am not trying to suggestion you take the BF series and make it a hardcore super-realistic game, just something with more variation and depth to provide different classes with more varied choices on what they can do. ---
**Author:** ![SgtBreastCannon](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/sgtbreastcannon/32/103433_2.png) [@SgtBreastCannon](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/SgtBreastCannon)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 10:10am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/13 "2016-05-18T10:10:00Z")
> [@Stil3r](#): > > I don’t think you guys are understanding at all what I’m saying. We understand perfectly well what you want to suggest being added. The answer is still no. Battlefield is hardly a realistic game, there’s no need to throw it into Arma/Red Orchestra territory. ---
**Author:** ![Brentlostak](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/brentlostak/32/101414_2.png) [@Brentlostak](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Brentlostak)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 10:16am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/14 "2016-05-18T10:16:00Z")
> [@Stil3r](#): > > > [@Brentlostak](#): > > > > why always the need for realism. its a game! ☹ > > Believe it or not some of us like more depth and variety to a game. It can still be fun if it has actual depth to it. > > Less people want everything to be as simple as BAttlefront was. There’s also a huge difference between having slight realism in regards to things like I suggestion and overly realistic things that you find in ARMA type games. > > I mean I am not suggestion you get hit and that’s it, a medic can magically “patch” you up and fix anything, I am not trying to suggestion you take the BF series and make it a hardcore super-realistic game, just something with more variation and depth to provide different classes with more varied choices on what they can do. the pace of the game is the same as with bf4. So if you have the shot in the arm problem or leg, your screen goes al wonky and lets say aiming is more difficult! at the time that happend you’ve been for a second time. so there is no reason for that more in depth option cause you’ve been shot again and again ---
**Author:** ![Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/sir-xer21/32/103487_2.png) [@Sir-xer21](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Sir-xer21)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 10:20am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/15 "2016-05-18T10:20:00Z")
> [@Stil3r](#): > > I just find it funny you’re lambasting me for the suggestion yet ignor ethe fact that BF3/4 are way more hardcore then BF1942 was, where you could bloody wing-walk on airplanes and things. > > Yet no one bats an eyelash at not being able to do that in BF3/4/hardline. > > . that’s probably because its more a property of the engine than anything else. you slide off tanks and stuff too so they probably just didnt treat them the same way in BF1942. but if wingwalking is less “hardcore” (nevermind the fact that you could actually do that in biplanes) what are loopzooks? either way it trumps it on the unrealistic scale. besides, you have to measure them in the context of the era. > [@Stil3r](#): > > Older Battlefield games you didn’t even regen health, you had to find medkits, is that too “hardcore” for people in this day and age too? yeah, it is. what answer were you expecting? > [@Stil3r](#): > > Then they added things like supression mechanics to also further enhance the impact that firing near you would do. This affects your vision, is this too much as well? > . uhhh, yeah, it is. there’s a reason they reduced it on BF4, because they realized they dun goofed. > [@Stil3r](#): > > On top of this they took out some more arcadey elements, such as wingwalking. how you can even justify that as arcade or not is beyond me. its more of an engine conceit than anything. it probably wasnt a planned function. > [@Stil3r](#): > > They made Parachuting talk longer to deploy and actually have a height requirement. why are you assuming i support every decision DICE makes? > [@Stil3r](#): > > Yet having a damage that has some very MINOR and slight affects to things that wouldn’t impact you being able to play the game is going “too far” and would somehow magically slow the game down? How? A) you explicitly said it would make you worse at aiming, slow your sprint, and make a medic have to visually search your body to treat you, in the heat of combat, instead of tossing a medpack and being done with it. If you cnat see how this affects your ability to play the game OR how it inherently slows down the game, you’re stupid. B) It’s too far. > [@Stil3r](#): > > You could still move, aim, do every-single thing you need to do to play and enjoy the game just with some slight differences in your audio/visuals. yeah, you’d just do it slower, and worse. that is affecting your ability to play the game at its very core. > [@Stil3r](#): > > It’s like some people just hear mention of ANYTHING that leans toward something even a tiny bit less arcadey and they just can’t handle it at all. no, i just hear a stupid idea and i point it out. I can handle people suggesting more realistic elements, even if i dont agree. I cant handle abject . ---
**Author:** ![FuT-DJ\_Cas](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/87869e/32.png) [@FuT-DJ\_Cas](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/FuT-DJ_Cas)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2016, 10:26am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/more-damage-effects-dependent-on-where-youre-hit-type-of-weapon-used-medics-being-more-important/101388/16 "2016-05-18T10:26:00Z")
1 shot kill should be only for 1. Bolt sniper rifles - in chest at very close range 2. Bolt sniper rifles - in head at any range 3. Shotguns - at close range 4. Very powerfull pistols with 6 bullets - in head. But I think there were no powerful magnum pistols in WW1 era All other stuff\suggestions with 1 hit kill is a gamebreaking thing and feels like suggestions from stinky casuals