5 years ago

Health and Body armour

I've seen comment on the next BF as modern setting, and customization of body armour different level and impact on players.

This is more a reharshing an order topic of past BF.

What if we had 2 levels of health?

We are talking about modern armies, roughly every soldier has the same level of protection as others. Helmet and vest.

You would have a bar for health and one for armour. For you to die your health needs to go to 0%

Bullets or direct explosive damage would damage armour first when it reach 0% you health starts getting reduced.

Explosive blast or melee reduces health first not armour.

This means if you at the centre of explosion you would get both armour and health damage. If near you only get health.

If you have 100% armour and health. It could take 7 bullets to kill.

- 50% armour and 100% health, 6 bullets

- 10% and 100%, 5 bullets

- 0% and 100%, 4 bullets

So high calibre bullets could be 5 with a 2/3 break down.

What this can do for the game is allow for different bullet types not just calibre.

Copper tip 7 bullets 3/4

Steel tip 7 bullets 2/5

Soft tip 7 bullets 4/3

Other examples shotguns

Slug 0.5/1.5

Ball bearings 1/1

Frag 0/2

Dragon Breath 1.5/0.5

Pistol

G18 5/3

G17 4/3

This could be done with grenades and other explosives. Frag grenade does 0/1, while impact does 1/0 meaning you need to kill with bullets or something else but armour is destroyed.

To restore health time or pouch, and health crates and stations to restore health and armour.

Revives restore health to 100%

Armour you need to interact with the crate or station to get 100% (like gadget ammo)

discussion

21 Replies

Teal_Pipo_Fredo
5 years ago
I would have given armour regeneration feature to support. Pouches partial armour regeneration and box full regeneration. Incentive to play support since that class usually is bit underwhelming. But I understand the straightforwardness in health-armour axis.
tempo_rarity
5 years ago
Here's a nice thought to go along with your nice thought :
Not only do you get the option of stealing your Kills Kit - there might be Armor there too !
They won't be needing it anymore so-o . . .
UP_Hawxxeye
Legend
5 years ago
I would had been more excited about such a concept if we could trust DICE to balance a game.
Adding more factors to the balance would just confuse them even more
Just take some time to think about how bad would armor be for low RoF guns like shotguns
DingoKillr
5 years ago
@Teal_Pipo_Fredoproblem is Support get dump on with a lot of things/role.

BF ends up looking like
Assault - I get the best toys.
Medic - I am a careful player.
Recon - I want to play at slower pace
Support - ? So I help others, Engineer Tool and crappy toys because that is not my main role, I am just to give ammo!

What that was BFV.
The other need to be better team player roles.
DingoKillr
5 years ago
@tempo_rarity yes that is an option.
DingoKillr
5 years ago
@UP_Hawxxeye technical part of the reason why so many bullets are needed to kill in BF3/4 is because you meant to be wearing armour.

Balance is an issue with slow ROF and low damage but that could be part of the solution you could have 6, 7 or 8 bullets for the same calibre. It not balance you are talking about that is viability of a weapon. Yes, DICE get this wrong at time because they over estimate the community concerns. A classic is the BF1 AA rocket gun where pilot and streamers complained that it was OP before it hit MP. A similar thing happened in BFV. DICE tries to make it fun for both sides but when a single player goes 100/0 something is seriously wrong. I expect some OP and UP weapons to happen as inherit bias has been shown.

As for shotgun most current require 2 shots unless close. I am talking body shots only atm, headshot is still prime target. Shotgun have pellet spread too. You could increase range if you have lower starting damage.
TTZ_Dipsy
Hero+
5 years ago
While I like the idea behind armor and enjoyed managing scrap metal plates in Firestorm, I can't but help but think it'd just be a headache in-game with people complaining they should have killed someone and didn't - might we worth it to just tweak regular TTK/TTD
DingoKillr
5 years ago
@TTZ_Dipsy complaints are 1 of the reason why it was not implemented in BF1.
I was talking with DEVs in CTE when something like this was suggested it was even talked about being implemented in intrusion.

The idea was to create a defence system instead 0 to 100% health it was meant to be a direct comparison to ammo where bullets(pouch) to 100% and gadgets slower to restock from a crate(like BFV).

Here an example of BF1 where is was talked about Elite would have 200% armour and 100% health compared with 100/100 infantry. Instead we got elite with 200% health which is stronger than 200/100.

Yes, it would allow greater flexibility with the TTK/TTD.
0ld_yell0w
5 years ago
I dont like the idea of putting even more into the game as it is. If you compare to RL (you have to do it like that at some point) a shotgun would only deal damage when you headshoot someone bevasue moderne bodyarmour would protect wearer from harm- most of the modern wests can take hits from 762x51 mm so a shotgun is no go)
But that aside I think they should go for "keep it simple" - its not a RPG game but a FPS which I think you should be able to join in without much thought than "what perk do my squad need me to grab" and then get going.
ragnarok013
Hero+
5 years ago
@DingoKillr I'm not a fan as it changes the established formula and adds another layer for DICE to balance and let's face it, their track record on balancing things doesn't inspire confidence since things go from OP to useless in one patch. It also