+1, I've noticed this as well. Being hit should cause more than greyed screen and aim being thrown off slightly - especially in the torso area.
Upvote
0
Things that make you go hmmm - Bayonet kills
- Thread starter ROII4Me
- Start date
+1, I've noticed this as well. Being hit should cause more than greyed screen and aim being thrown off slightly - especially in the torso area.
Stabbing someone with a bayo should stop the attacker for a moment. There is no way you could kill several persons in a row while sprinting with a bayonet, piercing through each one like you are making a giant shikabab. Right now its not a bayonet, its a freaking insta-gib cattle prod. And i agree witht he OP that the stabbed person should not be insta killed. I do belive that being pierced with a ~~5 inch blade with a 90kg soldier running momentum is very deadly and might be deadlier than being shot actually, but unless its the head or critical torso parts it should not result with an instant death - bleed out fading should be much more appropriate.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
What drives me insane is when someone can mantle an object, start sprinting whilst sidestepping constantly, not lose momentum, and somehow avoid every bullet shot at him while he plunges into you and keeps going.
Upvote
0
That too.
And that there would be a longer delay between pulling the bayonet out of the victim.
Upvote
0
^This
bugged close range hit detection + lack of momentum + unrealistic strafing + every soldier sprints and accelerates like an Olympic athlete give player ability to abuse game and do such zig-zag charges. It is neither tactical nor realistic, but arcadish.
Upvote
0
It does make you go hmmm. It's an interesting thing to think about. I can understand your frustration of not getting a satisfactory kill with your bullets and then getting stabbed from behind, but...
With all respect to the spirit of your complaint (on one point I can agree with you), I have a lot of pointed nitpicks: you described how you slowly died, able to watch your enemy kill two more people after he killed you. But then you described the bayonet kill as "instant," "less than a fraction of a second". This is a flat out contradiction. In all fairness, he could've hit your heart for an instant kill, but he didn't and that's beside the point because you obviously hadn't hit your target's heart, either.
Now, your four shot shots did wind up killing the enemy you shot at before you got stabbed from behind. Assuming all four bullets hit, some of them might have been redundant to a "slow death" or even a bleedout type death while still missing the actual instant kill shot locations such as the heart or brain, or some or all of them added up to hit point depletion. If he was near enough to see you, he might have watched you get bayo'ed as his screen blacked out. You didn't say if or at what point the enemy finally died (did you see your kill before or after your own slow death?), so that's all speculation on our part. If you didn't kill you must have been missing (whether latency, hit registration or just plain miss) or hitting non-vital hitboxes.
And, this may seem like a nitpick, but it requires saying: bandaging does not heal the wounds. Not 100%, not 50%, not .0001%. It stops a bleedout from depleting any more hitpoints after you have bandaged it, but no hitpoints are recovered, so, even though unimpaired, the soldier is still wounded and more likely to die for the rest of his time; he is not healed. (Unfortunately, I saw the video where it also appears to --I don't know if this is occasional or all the time, haven't taken the time to test it...-- stop the bandaged hitbox from taking any more subsequent damage at all. If this is persistent, it's a bad problem that needs to be fixed yesterday).
You go on to speak about how bayonet kills should slow the attacker down more and how long it should take to finish a kill with a bayonet. These points might be debatable, but that shifts your original point of comparison based on you having shot a guy four times: namely how long it takes for someone shot or stabbed to go down. Two different issues so to compare one to the other is to confuse the discussion.
A lot of exaggeration. Soldiers were trained to be relaxed when using a bayonet so they could preserve energy and use speed to their advantage. A single bayonet thrust would not deplete a significant amount of energy, and a proper thrust delivers kinetic energy from the whole body in as efficient a way as possible, and I need not say that a sharp bayonet is by design able to pierce a human body without very much force required (this allowed a pre-wwI tactic of extending the bayonet with one arm to gain the advantage of reach to be formidable until everyone was using it --or expecting it). Force is required more for speed and to go through parry attempts than for the knife to pierce vital areas. Also, the "sprint" in the game nowhere near approaches a "jesse owens" quality, also noting that the stamina bar doesn't last forever... if they've expended the stamina bar already in the lead-up to their first attack, then "sprinting" is a casual jog at best.
Soldiers with adrenaline pumping might not be stopped as easily as you imagine or as is shown in the movies. Rifle rounds penetrate the body and kill if the right organs are hit, and this is what they will do best. If you want pure stopping power you want something that isn't going to penetrate the body at all, such as a bean bag. Thus rounds that are designed to stop and kill are quite a bit larger than regular rifle rounds because you need a balance between penetration and energy transfer. Which means the more a round penetrates the body, the less actual physical "knockback" it will produce because the flesh is being separated and giving way rather than resisting intact and being pushed back. If the bullet goes through the body as it often does in the game, it's hardly going to knock the victim back at all. But that's a debate for ballistics and physiology experts because it really is obviously quite complicated will depend heavily on hit location and other factors, and not fully understood owing to lack of willing test subjects how it happens that one is or is not knocked back by a bullet. It's beyond my knowledge. I do know that in the game I can see people that I've shot noticeably slow down. And if they do happen to stop to bandage while I'm aiming at them? They're dead, period.
Here is where I can agree with you. Running into another person for a hand-to-hand kill and extricating your blade from them should probably take a little bit more time than it does currently. But it really should not be that long. A single thrust and removal from a trained soldier should not take much more than a second.
With all respect to the spirit of your complaint (on one point I can agree with you), I have a lot of pointed nitpicks: you described how you slowly died, able to watch your enemy kill two more people after he killed you. But then you described the bayonet kill as "instant," "less than a fraction of a second". This is a flat out contradiction. In all fairness, he could've hit your heart for an instant kill, but he didn't and that's beside the point because you obviously hadn't hit your target's heart, either.
Now, your four shot shots did wind up killing the enemy you shot at before you got stabbed from behind. Assuming all four bullets hit, some of them might have been redundant to a "slow death" or even a bleedout type death while still missing the actual instant kill shot locations such as the heart or brain, or some or all of them added up to hit point depletion. If he was near enough to see you, he might have watched you get bayo'ed as his screen blacked out. You didn't say if or at what point the enemy finally died (did you see your kill before or after your own slow death?), so that's all speculation on our part. If you didn't kill you must have been missing (whether latency, hit registration or just plain miss) or hitting non-vital hitboxes.
And, this may seem like a nitpick, but it requires saying: bandaging does not heal the wounds. Not 100%, not 50%, not .0001%. It stops a bleedout from depleting any more hitpoints after you have bandaged it, but no hitpoints are recovered, so, even though unimpaired, the soldier is still wounded and more likely to die for the rest of his time; he is not healed. (Unfortunately, I saw the video where it also appears to --I don't know if this is occasional or all the time, haven't taken the time to test it...-- stop the bandaged hitbox from taking any more subsequent damage at all. If this is persistent, it's a bad problem that needs to be fixed yesterday).
You go on to speak about how bayonet kills should slow the attacker down more and how long it should take to finish a kill with a bayonet. These points might be debatable, but that shifts your original point of comparison based on you having shot a guy four times: namely how long it takes for someone shot or stabbed to go down. Two different issues so to compare one to the other is to confuse the discussion.
A lot of exaggeration. Soldiers were trained to be relaxed when using a bayonet so they could preserve energy and use speed to their advantage. A single bayonet thrust would not deplete a significant amount of energy, and a proper thrust delivers kinetic energy from the whole body in as efficient a way as possible, and I need not say that a sharp bayonet is by design able to pierce a human body without very much force required (this allowed a pre-wwI tactic of extending the bayonet with one arm to gain the advantage of reach to be formidable until everyone was using it --or expecting it). Force is required more for speed and to go through parry attempts than for the knife to pierce vital areas. Also, the "sprint" in the game nowhere near approaches a "jesse owens" quality, also noting that the stamina bar doesn't last forever... if they've expended the stamina bar already in the lead-up to their first attack, then "sprinting" is a casual jog at best.
Soldiers with adrenaline pumping might not be stopped as easily as you imagine or as is shown in the movies. Rifle rounds penetrate the body and kill if the right organs are hit, and this is what they will do best. If you want pure stopping power you want something that isn't going to penetrate the body at all, such as a bean bag. Thus rounds that are designed to stop and kill are quite a bit larger than regular rifle rounds because you need a balance between penetration and energy transfer. Which means the more a round penetrates the body, the less actual physical "knockback" it will produce because the flesh is being separated and giving way rather than resisting intact and being pushed back. If the bullet goes through the body as it often does in the game, it's hardly going to knock the victim back at all. But that's a debate for ballistics and physiology experts because it really is obviously quite complicated will depend heavily on hit location and other factors, and not fully understood owing to lack of willing test subjects how it happens that one is or is not knocked back by a bullet. It's beyond my knowledge. I do know that in the game I can see people that I've shot noticeably slow down. And if they do happen to stop to bandage while I'm aiming at them? They're dead, period.
Here is where I can agree with you. Running into another person for a hand-to-hand kill and extricating your blade from them should probably take a little bit more time than it does currently. But it really should not be that long. A single thrust and removal from a trained soldier should not take much more than a second.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
fabulous post, MARIO! TOO BAD MOST PEOPLE EITHER WONT READ IT, OR WONT BELIEVE IT. YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD WETHER THEY WANT TO ADMIT IT OR NOT.
sorry for the caps. too lazy to re-type it.
sorry for the caps. too lazy to re-type it.
Upvote
0
This may be technically true, but in all my time in game, I've only seen or experienced 3 states of health after sustaining a wound.
Wound = instant death
Wound = slow death
Wound + bandage = no discernible effect on aim or player movement. Maybe your hitboxes don't recover, but your combat effectiveness seems unchanged.
I don't think that whether you die instantly or slowly is the issue, it's the fact that the game mechanics allow players to zoom around like they're on rails *stabby stabby stabby* in an unbalanced way. Yes, you should be more aware and if someone sneaks up and either bashes or bayos me, then good for them. But the fact that they are ninjas and the act of stabbing someone makes little to no noise to alert his teammate in the next window, is a little ridiculous. Add some inertia, footsteps and a death scream and it'd even things up.
Upvote
0
All pretty good ideas. I guess my main point that I took waaay too long to say as usual is that there is no comparison as in the OP between how easy it is to run around and get bayonet kills and how well bullets stop and kill an enemy. It's not the same issue.
Upvote
0
The wound system is simple and plain bad implementing. As said above, to been hurt just means to be instakilled, to be slow-killed or to have the oportunity to keep playing without any kind of side effect for that wound.
Its hilarious to see which part of your body is wounded (even with different colors to show how awfull the wound is), with really good detail (like, your femurae, or your stomach) and that if you can bandange it (i wonder how you can "bandage" a broken bone) you are as good as new.
Some just argue that hits in non vital parts are part of this non-sense of people getting shot without any aparent effect, but i wonder... with a broken arm... how do you keep shoting with that awesome aiming? How do you run like nothing happened with a twice shot leg?
They just didnt have enough time to put it to work, is a broken feature, like a lot more of them.
Starting with that, there are several gameplay issues that are kind of lame, like suicidal charging bayoneteers that fear no damage as long as they can bandage after their 4 rifle shots (in non letal parts!) didnt instakill them.
Its hilarious to see which part of your body is wounded (even with different colors to show how awfull the wound is), with really good detail (like, your femurae, or your stomach) and that if you can bandange it (i wonder how you can "bandage" a broken bone) you are as good as new.
Some just argue that hits in non vital parts are part of this non-sense of people getting shot without any aparent effect, but i wonder... with a broken arm... how do you keep shoting with that awesome aiming? How do you run like nothing happened with a twice shot leg?
They just didnt have enough time to put it to work, is a broken feature, like a lot more of them.
Starting with that, there are several gameplay issues that are kind of lame, like suicidal charging bayoneteers that fear no damage as long as they can bandage after their 4 rifle shots (in non letal parts!) didnt instakill them.
Upvote
0
Slowing down the animations, and increasing recovery time from a successful bayonet kill would alleviate this.
But you know, I think people shouldn't complain about the melee system too much, especially since it's largely similar to RO1's system, though feels much better to use.
It might seem arcadey, but at least melee system doesn't lock on. Be thankful for that!
But you know, I think people shouldn't complain about the melee system too much, especially since it's largely similar to RO1's system, though feels much better to use.
It might seem arcadey, but at least melee system doesn't lock on. Be thankful for that!
Upvote
0
Slowing down the animations, and increasing recovery time from a successful bayonet kill would alleviate this.
But you know, I think people shouldn't complain about the melee system too much, especially since it's largely similar to RO1's system, though feels much better to use.
It might seem arcadey, but at least melee system doesn't lock on. Be thankful for that!
Indeed... I like it better than the RO1 or the Mod's system.... and if they heavily handicapped bayonet attacks, then you'd have riflemen players complain that they have almost no ability to properly defend themselves at close range, especially on Realism servers where they don't get a pistol..... thus more would stay back from fighting and camp more.
Seems riflemen end up being one extreme or the other.... either people are complaining they're running around and stabbing people all the time without a care in the world & almost as bad as MKB run'gunners, or people are complaining that they're spending an entire round in a window halfway across the map camping.
You just can't win it seems
Upvote
0
Just want to clarify one thing here--you CANNOT hit someone four times in the chest with a rifle bullet and have them keep going. I know it's just rhetorical, but let's not blow things out of proportion--that's rediculous. You can't even survive four torso hits from a rifle-caliber weapon in World at War, much less Red Orchestra.
If you test it out, even two in-game 7.62 x 25mm pistol rounds from the PPSh will either put an enemy into slow death or kill him outright if they hit the torso--and that's if they DON'T hit a vital area. With a G41, you almost always kill with a single torso shot.
As for complaining about the bayonet's stopping power... really? Think about it, people. Sure, a stab in real life may not kill you, but RO2 can't realistically model real-life melee combat. If you have a knife in your chest in real life, you're already at a huge disadvantage.
I'm going to reiterate this: RO2, along with any and all current-gen FPSs, can't realistically model hand-to-hand combat.
On a basic level, you can't keep (or even accurately judge) distance, parry-riposte, counterattack, disengage, transfer your enemy's blade, beat, or evade.
On a more grandiose, dramatic level, the enemy player in RO2 can't pull the trigger of his rifle and blow you away at point-blank range while the bayonet is already stuck in your belly. He can't yank the blade sideways, spilling your entrails onto the floorboards. He can't use his force and momentum to knock you over with the stab before finishing you off. He can't drop his weapon and start hammering you with Babushka Marinov's pot from the stove next to you as you writhe in agony. He can't knock your weapon out of the way (though to be fair neither can you). Add in the pain, your terror, and really, once you've been hit, only a miracle would let you not only survive but overcome your attacker.
If you're not prepared for a melee fight at all (i.e. you've just been impaled), you've already lost.
The bayonet doesn't need to be 'fixed' or 'balanced'--it's the gameplay around it that is at fault. Increase sway and slow down iron sights, improve the wounding system, and add louder footsteps/death cries when killed by a bayonet, and catching people unawares and unprepared will be far easier.
Adding a minimum engagement range for the bayonet would just be icing on the cake, and would let bayonet-less weapon-wielding soldiers have the advantage when inches from an enemy's face.:IS2:
As for gameplay allowing stabbing sprees, anyone who has ever played in an Ostfront TWB server with {Core-NA} can attest to the fact that players were stab-happy in Ostfront too--perhaps more so because of the prestigious Up Close and Personal Gold Achievement (500 melee kills).
If you test it out, even two in-game 7.62 x 25mm pistol rounds from the PPSh will either put an enemy into slow death or kill him outright if they hit the torso--and that's if they DON'T hit a vital area.
With a G41, you almost always kill with a single torso shot.As for complaining about the bayonet's stopping power... really? Think about it, people. Sure, a stab in real life may not kill you, but RO2 can't realistically model real-life melee combat. If you have a knife in your chest in real life, you're already at a huge disadvantage.
I'm going to reiterate this: RO2, along with any and all current-gen FPSs, can't realistically model hand-to-hand combat.
On a basic level, you can't keep (or even accurately judge) distance, parry-riposte, counterattack, disengage, transfer your enemy's blade, beat, or evade.
On a more grandiose, dramatic level, the enemy player in RO2 can't pull the trigger of his rifle and blow you away at point-blank range while the bayonet is already stuck in your belly. He can't yank the blade sideways, spilling your entrails onto the floorboards. He can't use his force and momentum to knock you over with the stab before finishing you off. He can't drop his weapon and start hammering you with Babushka Marinov's pot from the stove next to you as you writhe in agony. He can't knock your weapon out of the way (though to be fair neither can you). Add in the pain, your terror, and really, once you've been hit, only a miracle would let you not only survive but overcome your attacker.
If you're not prepared for a melee fight at all (i.e. you've just been impaled), you've already lost.
The bayonet doesn't need to be 'fixed' or 'balanced'--it's the gameplay around it that is at fault. Increase sway and slow down iron sights, improve the wounding system, and add louder footsteps/death cries when killed by a bayonet, and catching people unawares and unprepared will be far easier.
Adding a minimum engagement range for the bayonet would just be icing on the cake, and would let bayonet-less weapon-wielding soldiers have the advantage when inches from an enemy's face.:IS2:
As for gameplay allowing stabbing sprees, anyone who has ever played in an Ostfront TWB server with {Core-NA} can attest to the fact that players were stab-happy in Ostfront too--perhaps more so because of the prestigious Up Close and Personal Gold Achievement (500 melee kills).
Upvote
0
Alright, they've finally done it: Every weapon in the game is OP now. SMG's too accurate, MG's can be hipfired, and bolt-action rifles have those bayonets. How are people who are wielding pistols supposed to compete?
Upvote
0
Played with a guy last night ChooChooBayoTrain, pretty fun to spec the guy, way over half his kills were by bayonet and he was top of the leader board by a mile. Silly? Yes. Realistic? Good God no.
Upvote
0
lol i agree.
i find it hilarious when i get blasted buy half a clip as i'm sprinting, i keep going without missing a step, bandage myself in .5 nanoseconds and turn the corner to bayonet/shoot my assailant.
I can imagine their rage. mmm..your tears are sooo yummy.
No but seriously the bandaging is the lamest feature in this game; which is saying a lot since this game is choke full of lame features. As you said, 5 rounds with my mp40 and they can shrug it off, but one little poke with my bayonet and they drop dead instantly
i find it hilarious when i get blasted buy half a clip as i'm sprinting, i keep going without missing a step, bandage myself in .5 nanoseconds and turn the corner to bayonet/shoot my assailant.
I can imagine their rage. mmm..your tears are sooo yummy.
No but seriously the bandaging is the lamest feature in this game; which is saying a lot since this game is choke full of lame features. As you said, 5 rounds with my mp40 and they can shrug it off, but one little poke with my bayonet and they drop dead instantly
Upvote
0
To 1/2 of the above posts: Again, it's been established that the problem is hit detection, it's not a feature to have 5 rounds to the chest be survivable, try have a friend shooting you in the chest (in-game, please) standing still you'll never survive to the fifth round. Besides, it's a damn foot-long blade to the chest that's being thrust into you by an understandably spiteful and probably very strong Russian farmer, why shouldn't it drop you in one hit?. The problem isn't that it drops enemies in one hit, it's that you can immediately stab the 3 guys next to him. But in all honesty, if you can't stop a guy charging at you from 50 feet away with a machine-gun (by failed hit detection notwithstanding), he deserves to kill you, and if he sneaks up on you, he deserves to kill you.
But I do agree that bandaging should take a lot longer, and bleed out time to be longer too so it doesn't feel like you're hemoraging like you have a basketball-sized hole in the city water tower.
Still, you have to agree it's quite humorous that there are people saying that now the rifles are overpowered, delicious irony.
But I do agree that bandaging should take a lot longer, and bleed out time to be longer too so it doesn't feel like you're hemoraging like you have a basketball-sized hole in the city water tower.
Still, you have to agree it's quite humorous that there are people saying that now the rifles are overpowered, delicious irony.
Upvote
0
Nice post, it's true. There's so much exaggeration just to make a point. The only point where I disagree with you is longer bleed out time. With a shorter bleedout time it is more of a risk/reward decision whether to bandage now or risk later. And to get to cover to do so because it will leave you momentarily helpless is an urgent matter (I've shot a LOT of poor players who tap that bandage key either too soon or without realizing they're seen doing it--they are sitting ducks) because the cover needs to be nearby.
Lengthening bleed times eliminates the risk/reward factor which to me would be a step backwards. Wounds will be a matter of "Meh, I'll bandage when this firefight is over. I gotta kill this jerk who shot me first." rather than "Oh ****! get to cover so I don't die!" As it is, people are already screaming and pulling out their beard hairs over other players surviving wounds long enough to shoot back then bandage (though probably often enough this is actually a fatal mistake).
Upvote
0