Headshots on MAXes

[Erendil]

Originally Posted by FastAndFree

I don't like this idea at all.

If shooting a MAX in the head with a couple of shots from a pistol would be a viable choice to dispose of them what would be the point of carrying AV indoors?

Or if it worked like this, would a missile to the face would instagib them? That would be so much fun for MAX operators

We have locational damage for all other types of units (softies, ground vehicles, aircraft) so it stands to reason that they'd be there for MAXes too. Why should they get special treatment? My suggestions wouldn't defeat the purpose of having MAXes if it's done right. Allowing a pistol to kill an undamaged MAX in a few shots would not be doing it right. I just thought the killspam would be funny to see...

For starters, I'm hoping that headshot multipliers in general will only be applied to the health damage that gets past the armour. It makes sense to me that a headshot wouldn't damage the armour any more than a shot to the body would. It's the head itself that's more susceptible to damage from trauma, not the helmet that protects it.

And remember, headshot multipliers are determined on a per weapon basis. Higby said on reddit that vehicle weapons probably won't have any headshot multiplier at all, so it's quite possible that Decimators for example won't have one either, so a missile to the face may not be any different than one to the body..

But like I said in my OP, I'd like the Devs to design AP weapons so that when used against MAXes, instead of having to eat through a MAX's entire armour before you do any health damage at all, you apply a small amount of the damage done by each shot to health instead. Say, 1 pt of damage goes to health for every 10 pts of base damage dealt. Then if they applied the standard headshot damage multiplier for the weapon in question to the health that got through, even headshots would only do a handful of health damage per shot.


Here's a completely arbitrary example: Let's say in PS2 that MAXes have 100 health and 1000 armour pts, and that a Cycler has a 1.5x headshot multiplier and its AP bullets do 20 base damage to MAXes. Using the 1:10 health:armour ratio, Here's what we'd have:

• All Shots to the Body: 18 armour & 2 health per shot. Death in 50 shots.
  
• All Shots to the Head: 18 armour & (2 x 1.5) = 3 health per shot. Death in 34 shots.
  
• STK reduction for AP headshots vs bodyshots w/ a weapon that has a 1.5x multiplier: 33%

See what I'm getting at? Doing something like this will still make MAXes a force to be reckoned with, but would also reward accuracy to softies using weapons that have accuracy in mind. Remember many classes will not be allowed to use AV weaponry at all, so this is designed to help them out a little as well.

[Graywolves]

I could see MAX's having spots that are weakly armored, I also see MAX operators able to train themselves to cover that armor.

[Draep]

Maybe it should be that the back armor is slightly weaker. The nutsack part would be especially protected.

[Infektion]

All those ideas are retarded... it's not a damn tank guys... really? "Shoot him in the back"?

I especially don't agree on max headshots, however, I do agree with a sniper spec "round" that will cause major damage to MAX's. Consider a sniper tree with a branch leading to ANTI-material as opposed to an ANTI-personnel... HOLY SHIT! That's a fucking GREAT idea.

[DviddLeff]

While I do agree that MAXs should take more damage from a head shot, the hit box should be smaller than on a regular grunt.

I dont want PS2s devs to even bother with AP rounds; just make the standard guns to the same damage as AP to armoured targets if you think that infantry need that ability; AP rounds are a hassle that many dont bother with, and confuses new players.

[Infektion]

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

While I do agree that MAXs should take more damage from a head shot, the hit box should be smaller than on a regular grunt.

I dont want PS2s devs to even bother with AP rounds; just make the standard guns to the same damage as AP to armoured targets if you think that infantry need that ability; AP rounds are a hassle that many dont bother with, and confuses new players.

How will it confuse? It's part of warfare... but, I must admit, I never agree'd in AP doing less damage to softies, but in a way I do understand, if their logic was to use the "tumble" effect of a soft round as opposed to AP, but I don't think they thought of it that way, it's just my dissection of the subject.

For example. Take either my 1938 8mm mauser and my tokarev vs 9mm Glock (of any kind would do) .

Mauser uses surplus FMJ (7.92x57) ammo [Will go through you, even with body armor]
Mauser uses softball ammo [will penetrate and spread ie: JACK YOU UP]

Tokarev --- Uses 7.62x25 FMJ -- will go through body armor, leave a nice wound, possibly die, depending on shot placement.
9mm pistol -- Uses 9mm Hollowpoint -- will not go through body armor, but soft clothes will penetrate and spread.


so for whichever, i'd rather use FMJ, e.g. we'll use FMJ for AP in this comparison.

[Malorn]

No, bad.

[Sirisian]

I agree with the shooting them in the back part. Having a place on their back that's weak would be nice for sneaking up on them. Like 30% more damage. Not a fan of headshots for the MAX though.

[Scow2]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

I agree with the shooting them in the back part. Having a place on their back that's weak would be nice for sneaking up on them. Like 30% more damage. Not a fan of headshots for the MAX though.

I agree with this as well... Make MAX suits nigh-invulnerable from the front, vulnerable to Direct Rocklet/AV and Sniper rounds to the visor (Not head... you have to shoot them in the face), and extra vulnerable to AP rounds in the back.

It makes them better for head-on assaults or hold-the-line defense, especially with the higher lethality, but vulnerable to surprise attacks and outmaneuvering.

Not weak against the entire 180 degree back arc, though... just 60-90 degree window of vulnerability.

MAX Units fighting back-to back would be scary and awesome at the same time.

[Talek Krell]

I wonder if weak points will be specific to the Empire the MAX is a part of. Like the TR MAX has an obvious weak point in the head. The VS MAX has the face well armored but might be more vulnerable around the joints and back...

[Raka Maru]

What kind of weapon/armor designer would make a Max suit with a weak back side? Helmets should be the strongest part of any soldier armor.

How about face plate is vulnerable with special bullets and very small hitbox, but rest of helmet has extra protection?

[Furret]

I'm all for weak spots on MAX's, but also jacking up their health if you don't hit them in a weak point (ie. visor or joint).

I don't think weakening back armor is a good idea though, no sane engineer would put less armor on a spot that doesn't move anyway.

[Talek Krell]

I admit it doesn't necessarily make it a good idea, but on tanks they tend to load more armor on the front than the back. A tank can only carry so much armor total, so by shifting it to the front the tank can increase it's defenses by simply facing the enemy.

Ultimately it's the gameplay that's most important.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Raka Maru

What kind of weapon/armor designer would make a Max suit with a weak back side?

Open vents for cooling and power and such. It can be explained away fairly easily. Or not. I mean it's more of a gameplay feature I'd prefer. I love the idea of component based damage on vehicles and adding them to a max would be nice since it gives them a weakness that can be exploited by skill.

I'd also like boomers to do very little on a max from the front. If you plant on on it though in the back it would take down like 75% of the armor.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Scow2

I agree with this as well... Make MAX suits nigh-invulnerable from the front, vulnerable to Direct Rocklet/AV and Sniper rounds to the visor (Not head... you have to shoot them in the face), and extra vulnerable to AP rounds in the back.

It makes them better for head-on assaults or hold-the-line defense, especially with the higher lethality, but vulnerable to surprise attacks and outmaneuvering.

Not weak against the entire 180 degree back arc, though... just 60-90 degree window of vulnerability.

MAX Units fighting back-to back would be scary and awesome at the same time.

I endorse this whole post.

Originally Posted by Raka Maru

What kind of weapon/armor designer would make a Max suit with a weak back side? Helmets should be the strongest part of any soldier armor.

The kind of weapon/armor designer who knows that MAXes are built for engaging to the forward arc, and also that armor is heavy and bulky. Given that the more armor you put on, the slower your available power source can power movement and maneuverability for the suit, I think there's plenty of justification to say "I have a limit in the amount of armor I can mount to this exoskeleton. Given that I can mount 1,200 pounds of armor to this suit, how should I distribute it? What do my specs say its role is?" and then choosing the distribution of armor to balance maximizing protection when in its primary role (frontal assault/defense, so all armor to the forward arc) with providing some protection from ricochets and flanking attacks.

I'd say having the front 225-270 degrees provide, say, twice the protection isn't an outrageous design decision at all.