Before I comment I want to preface with: A lot of comments in this thread have evolved since the placement, as we continually have been investigating issues to learn more.
I was sort of under the impression that everybody knew the player collision was just a simple box like other games from its era, though I guess it can be weird playing modern games and then switching back.
tl;dr: Hit registry hasn't changed and doesn't have RNG, the range was just brought in. Player hitbox is just a box. I don't see any bugs, just limitations of the tech.
We did not know this actually - however, we also did not have 144hz+ monitors and gaming computers + experience in other games. So, the comparison to other games naturally brought more understanding and knowledge (also growing up). Also, if you shoot at the very limit of a not-moving target's hitbox, center hand, you will not register 100% of your shots (can provide video/demo proof). I am not a dev, but that feels RNG - though I assume in movement it is incredibly unlikely to recreate and likely not a big deal whatsoever.
I acknowledge precision hitboxes may not be the best fit for a fast paced game.
This is NOT a big issue, this bothered some players for sure - and initial reaction was annoyance - but the specific hitbox itself only creates "irritation" in smaller maps, where someone can be hit while full body is behind a bunker/wall. I would personally recommend that visual update of models (if this does happen one day) to be slightly wider/bigger to better fit the hitbox. As changing the hitbox would change the game drastically, but changing the model to make more sense could be a viable future goal. What we COULD do if people think this is a big enough issue is try to address the hitting people standing behind the corners specifically without impacting the in-open gameplay. That would still likely be a lot of work, but at least wouldn't have the negative impacts. I think the effort would be better spent elsewhere, though.
GOOD SOLUTION - And this is a big enough issue as a game with roughly ~30 dedicated players (dedicated in the sense of daily play time) has seen 3 people fully quit, and over half in not happy about hitbox. I personally think this is a worthwhile thing to add to your list of planned DP2-Related improvements.
As maps evolved to adapt, they made the game lose its close combat charm. Again, subjective, but the things I really liked about Paintball2 were the projectile weapons, the fast paced movement, and the close combat. I'm not a fan of pixel hunting.
Again, the hit registration/bouncing logic has not changed in over 17 years. The range was just brought in.
Very subjective to the first part - as close range combat still occurs A LOT. The most balanced maps require a mix of jumping and aiming. The players took the mechanics of the game, and pushed it to the limits to be able to maximize the skill involved. This occurs in ALL games and the skill cap is no different - toss a new fortnite player vs a pro / new LoL player vs a pro. I've played league 10 years and a professional would still destroy me. Issue is we lack lower-skill players, but that's because it's a 20 year game and looks as such - which is a discussion for another day.
Can you explain how the range was brought in? I am still not clearly understanding what happened between 2013-2014. None of my comments/complaints are about the 2007 ballspeed changes or before. I understand why you brought the aiming in. Did you make a max range for bullets? In 2013 (and demos watching to verify it's not just my memory) show no bullets bouncing off people... 2020 - bullets bounce every match. The ACTIVE community (aka every single player that does not A) only play jump servers B) only play social saturdays) plays on servers that have "slowballsbounce 0" -- this is UNHEALTHY for the game to have to find side commands to make the game feel playable.
So now I have 2 questions:
1) If you play for a bit knowing how the behavior works, is the ball bouncing still a frustration or is it an interesting mechanic?
2) What do you feel is a reasonable size of the character on screen to still be in effective range? Like post a screenshot. I'm not talking about "this is an effective line on a map made 15 years ago, so it should stay effective", I'm talking about good, healthy engagement ranges for the sake of visibility, gameplay, and observers. We can adjust/make new maps.
1) Ball bouncing was a very cool mechanic in 2013 and earlier - as smaller maps (xbmap1 for example) you could bounce off walls, or certain lines would go further by bouncing on the ground. It was a skill. But, the mechanic of seeing it bounce off a player is just frustrating. I will try to recreate a demo but there are times where 2 stationary targets shoot with no adjustment to crosshair, and 2-3 balls will miss, 2-3 bounce off, and 1 registers. This is where it feels unhealthy. This has made people quit the game. Note: This mechanic on current map-preferences will make aiming less valuable (as it's the "aimers" who have quit as a result, not the jumpers - us jumpstars are still here). DP was actually very balanced when I played between 2007-2013. Aiming and jumping were equally valuable, with strategic play being of most value. Lower range = jumping is more powerful, creating a bigger gap.
2) This is a very subjective question, and it is difficult to say it without including new maps - because we CANNOT just make new maps. At the end of the day, no current mappers have a single map that has been liked. No - this is not because they are bad mappers. And No - it's not because the community refuses to adapt to new maps. It's because they are not FUN, they lack GAMEPLAY, the players making them often lack skill and cannot make good flow/jumps. People who have not ever played competitively do not even understand the strategy in this game... GOOD MAPS cannot be won without pressing space, and also cannot be won without clicking shoot. They require balance that current mappers do not know. A map like Pbcup_pforest (which I personally hate) - is balanced. If you look at the game, the most played maps since I started (2007) would be maps like: airtime / propaint1 / shazam22 / carpathian / pbcup_pforest / pbcup_renoir --- The game is mostly played in 2v2/3v3, and these maps were made before the 2007 ballspeed changes - but all were incredibly balanced. You have to realize GOOD MAPS are a big part of people still playing - so we cannot just make new maps / adjust existing to accommodate. The game is NOT realistic, and being able to just barely hit a shot like checkers to checkers on airtime is NOT pixel hunting - it feels the same or lower distance than you can shoot in almost any game (except bullet drop so you aim to the sky). -- So I would argue the ideal range should be based around the good maps, as they are popular for a reason and trying to balance around theoretical new maps made by people who have never had a popular map is not a reasonable idea.
-----
Notes without quotes:
Thank you for taking the time to provide numerical data - again, as we can not find any means of documented change in the 2013-2014 range from you, we are forced to use demos to argue our points, and therefore we are jumping around ideas as we cannot find the true reason. If changes were clearly documented, we would be able to properly discuss.
ID vs Bullet - This is something that people are re-learning in coming back. Sometimes it just feels odd as stationary targets appear to be the hardest to hit. But, this same thing allows for curving of bullets etc.. so it is probably more of an issue of people experiencing other games and creating rage in DP (personally, I think ID's should just be turned off so people do not let the text pop up get in their head).
The 4 points:
1) Acknowledged, inc ball-speed was trialed by us and reverted to 2660. People have increased before. We want to keep as consistent as possible with your ideals, as our goal is not to rebel from your settings, but find the most consistent. We are happy to keep 2660, this was not the problem, and increased speeds just made lines/sprays that should not be possible and we felt were unhealthy. No interest in increased ballspeed - was just our initial assumption of change. Tested and was poor. 2660 is the ideal speed.
2) Potentially an exaggeration, but on the same hand people with 10k hours played have a decent idea how the mechanics work - and there's something to be said for play-testing as just the code-side provides only a partial story. I would challenge you to take 2 weeks of your life, 1 week allowing people in comp scene to "teach you" maps/playstyle/gameplay/jumps, and 1 week actively matching/participating in tournaments. While not ample time, I think it would create a better understanding. Immerse yourself into the active competitive community for 2 weeks.
3) I was not making a point here - I was most stating that this is what people thought ballspeed would do. And noted that this could be very detrimental to change and difficult to get right. Was not requesting a change, so there is really "at what end do we stop" - the game used to be very balanced - we just want that back and are examining all options. Fire-Rate is not something that should be changed.
4) Grenades are a mess and from what I have been told, have been for a few years. This would imply a change was made that either intentionally or unintentionally changed grenades. But, until you actively play to see, or we send many videos, it wont be clear. You will not be able to find 1 person who thinks grenades are good - it has gotten to the point where we discussed removing grenades from the servers. This is a DEFINITE priority from the active playerbase opinion.
5) No real comment, you agree it would be good.
-----------------------------
Realistically, if we work together as community and developer, proper changes can happen and makes it so we have a good dedicated base to build off.
Show Posts
