yes
shronk the big dome
I vote not to shrink the head.
And I don’t think it will be ‘easier’ to hit than 3.x player model.
Not the reason as to why I voted no, but;
If the head size is still the same, but the body is slightly reduced in width, doesn’t that mean the total mass of the 4.x player model is lower, aswell as hitbox mass, thus theoretically hit percentage would be lower compared to 3.x?
The whole point is that now that the body is smaller, it’s more likely people will go for the head, especially when attacking from the side.
1 Like
Except the counter-point for that is people always go for the head anyways, and that from the side people have arm and leg animations that make them bigger.
1 Like
I see your point but you have to consider movement/speed and animation/state (heal, gun drawn, consuming, stance, etc…).
Major factor is skill, minor factor is intensity.
In a situation wherein there is high skill, low intensity, I agree that players will aim at the head all the time.
Now in moderate skill and intensity, it is still at 75/25 theoretically, considering movement/speed and animation/state with player model mass.
(Do note these are opinions and not fact. I have no actual numbers for this, unfortunately.)
And the counter-point for THAT is that it’s an Unturned-specific PHENOMENON caused by the already large head. 3.0’s head is ALREADY easy to hit, to the point where you’ll rarely (if ever) see people aiming for anything BUT the head - this will just make the problem WORSE.
Again, in 3.0, people rarely aim for anything but the head if they have the option. You can’t say that ANY of what you said would be unique to 4.0 - it’s not. 3.0 has EVERYTHING that you described would supposedly factor into people not aiming for the head as much, but it DOESN’T HAPPEN.
There’s also ANOTHER thing to consider when talking about the head - if Nelson has shrunk pretty much every other body part (and the main body), why SHOULDN’T he shrink the head? There’s no reason not to if the player’s already harder to hit (in theory, since most people go for the head regardless).
Reading back, I admit there are faults in my replies making vague implications, sorry about that - let me fix it.
The point of my reply to tehsword was that little-to-nothing would change with the new player model.
In a theoretical environment of medium-range combat, the hit rate of a moderate-skilled/intensity player is 75% for head and 25% for body for both 3.x and 4.x player models, even though 4.x has a lower mass. While high-skilled/low-intensity players have a head hit rate of 100%. But if the environment were long range, that would be a different story.
I have no formula for this very rough (unreliable) estimation.
The reason I voted no is because the 4.x player model maintained the 3.x player model silhouette, and I doubt the slight slimming will bring the new meta of “aim for the head always”, stated in tehsword’s reply, because it already is.
We established that the head is actually marginally harder to hit than the previous 3.x one.
But our whole point is it isn’t hard enough.
That is why me and whistle vote for yes.
Either we choose to keep the model which we have recognized in the game for so long because the problem is pretty minuscule, or choose a smaller, strangely looking head so it will be harder to hit for the sake of ‘balancing’ combat
Hm there needs to be a poll.
I’m on it!
This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.