Damage Log for Outbound Damage

---

@Adamonic wrote:

Right now there is a damage log that can be enabled that shows inbound damage. I was wondering if there is one for outbound damage or if the current one could be modified to add that?

For TTK, I already know I am getting killed pretty quick, but with some of the high RoF weapons, it is close enough to be acceptable. However, my TTD seems to be awfully slow and I get multiple hit markers but the other player ends up with 80% health after 5-6 shots while I am insta-killed.  An outbound damage log would allow me to verify what I am seeing visually (hit markers, headshot indicator, etc) are accurate. 

---

I love this idea however, I'm betting we'll see it be more accurate than inbound and it's not going to skip packets like inbound seems to. If it says the enemy still has 80%, I'm betting we're going to see 20 on the outbound. Heck we've already seen that it doesn't add to 100 the other direction with zero response or acknowledgement from development. It'll either confirm what we already know or make us pull our hair harder and I think the hair is going to take a beating on this one 🙂

BF4 has an outbound damage log. A video by Chris at Battle(non)sense is interesting because it shows multiple outbound bullets getting bundled into a single network packet.

Even without the damage log you can tell when the server is rejecting your hits. It's called 'dusting', and you'll see the enemy flinch and blood splatter but you won't see any hit markers. The hit marker is the server accepting and acknowledging your hit. So if you see blood splatter but no hit marker, the server rejected your hit.

Watching all these Battle(non)sense videos reminds me how futile the feedback process is. Just look at how many feedback videos Chris made! He spoon-fed DICE easy to understand feedback in the form of YouTube videos but nothing really changed. DICE keeps repeating the same mistakes and reintroducing the same bugs over and over again.

Chris no longer makes any feedback videos and I don't blame him. Can you imagine creating a YouTube channel around providing feedback for your favorite game and being constantly ignored. Chris really went the extra mile with his feedback, going into great technical details and recording video proof to support his findings. But in the end it was all for naught and he ended up shutting down his YouTube channel. Which is the logical thing to do after it becomes clear you're being ignored and just wasting your time spoon-feeding DICE feedback.

@OskooI_007 yeah dusting has been a thing for a long time, but I've never had it this bad. I shot at an enemy the other day on Discarded. He must have been afk because he never moved. About 200m away, six shots hit, splashed and nothing, the seventh finally killed him. I mean WTF...

@OskooI_007Wow, a 10-year-old game has a better damage log too? Ugh.

I don't blame him either. Feels like history repeating itself on an even bigger scale. This would definitely clear up a lot.

What is amazing is BF4 had this back in 2013:
For servers up to 20 slots, tickrate can be maxed to 144Hz
For servers up to 48 slots, tickrate can be maxed to 120Hz
For servers up to 64 slots, tickrate can be maxed to 60Hz

It is 2022 with pretty much everyone on high-speed internet and we have 45Hz servers? Has to be because of 128 players.

@OskooI_007I was also a bit sad when Chris announced he was shutting down his channel. But totally understood why.

Another problem which more prevalent in BF2042 is invisible textures blocking the projectiles. Especially bad on the remastered Portal maps.

---

@Adamonic wrote:
@OskooI_007Wow, a 10-year-old game has a better damage log too? Ugh.

---

It's amazing all the things a decade old game did that 2042 is slowly, glacially limping towards despite improvements in tech over that time.