the point is why be like every other game ? a gun and bullet game should have appropriate physics for fire arms and a bow and arrow game should have similarly appropriate mechanics.
And doing more damage on a headshot is indeed appropriate. Being like every other game and thus more intuitive is just one small reason of multiple why removing critical headshots would be a bad idea.
The most important, of course, is that your one gameplay reason you've given for doing it (nerfing archers) would be accomplished anyway by just buffing armour, so it's pointless.
I've played shooters such as borderlands. where every type of enemy has a different critical spot. just adds some variety and fun to the game instead of the same run of the mill humanoid headshots.
Borderlands is a cuhrayzee game set on an alien planet full of non humanoids, it isn't trying to be a grounded very-low-fantasy-no-magic setting strongly based on the real life 1000s time period on planet Earth. You can always install a mod that makes headshots have no damage multiplier and neckshots have critical damage if you want, might even be pretty easy to make.
why not have it's own neck hit box being the critical spot? the human neck is arguably the most easily cut, pierced and bludgeoned area on the entire body. and a well placed arrow or cut will meet no resistance in the form of metal or bone plating. someone can bleed to death in 15 seconds with a proper cut across the neck.
I would not be opposed to
both being critical damage areas. In fact this may even be the case already, not sure.
now you are just arguing semantics. whether it's appropriate to have a hitbox sized "X" versus a hitbox sized "2X"? if you can't hit the critical spot maybe aim for center mass? or why not make everyone's head have a magical magnet giant hit box so players get very satisfying headshot experience?
I don't think you get what "semantics" means. Ironically, it means in this context "arguing the definition of words," which you are now making me do. However it does not mean "the difference between 1x and 2x numerical size".
It won't just be me who can't hit the criticals, nobody will be able to do it consistently on any target that isn't stationary if the target is halved in size. And that part about magnets is called a straw man argument, pretending I said something I never said, which just wastes both our time.
while i too think it's very important to change projectile calculations so they don't do that much damage through armor.
I'm glad we agree.
funny you should mention the bleeding aspect. even during cases of direct impact, arrows most often entering but not even exiting out the other end. in any case, it's extremely rare that they can make it clean through. and as long as the shaft is still inside the cavity. it will fill the gap and prevent excessive bleeding.
The blood doesn't even necessarily need to make it to the outside, bleeding inside the brain itself is extremely dangerous- this is called a haemorrhagic stroke! The large, triangular arrowhead can sever blood vessels inside the brain and suddenly you have internal bleeding. It could also hit your spinal cord and suddenly you are paralyzed.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7808282/#:~:text=Brain and spinal cord injury,difficulty in breathing or dysphagia. "Brain and spinal cord injury (from arrows) may cause paraplegia, quadriplegia, ventricular hemorrhage, corning, or immediate death."
It is incredibly unlikely that someone is just going to continue to run around and fight with an arrow sticking out of their eye socket or forehead and cutting up things around inside their brain while they move. Therefore,
at the very least it would be a KO if you take a couple of arrows to the face which is not protected by a helmet. Do you actually disagree with this statement? If you do not disagree, then damage bonus for headshots is justified.
go watch some slowmo footage of arrows going into ballistic gel vs bullets. they don't have the same mechanics.
that is assuming the arrow made a deadcenter direct impact because once again, the dommed shape of the helmets will ensure that vast majority of shots glance off. and even in bannerlord where armor is made of paper. most troops still have head armor with higher armor values compared to the rest of their kit. and start to have full metal helms at tier 2.
Yes, armour is better for heads, but despite this the head is still more vulnerable to injury than the body. Therefore, the damage bonus is justified, since the armour is still taken into account and reduces the damage bonus.
If you have something more vulnerable which you give more protection, and something less vulnerable which you give less protection, it balances out.
if modern archers aiming for efficient kills isn't applicable than what is? your experience in halo or counter strike??
Kind of feel like I'm being trolled here, if not and you are arguing in good faith then please stop getting worked up and reply to my actual arguments instead of making a straw man. I already explained to you that deer anatomy and human anatomy are hugely different and this is why hunting deer and shooting humans is so different as to not be an applicable example.
Something else I forgot to mention is deer are faster than humans too making headshots even more comparatively viable on a person than a deer, in addition to everything else
if you are fighting armored opponent, it's simply futile to go for heavily armored areas. such as the head, chest and shoulders.
It isn't futile at all - the vast majority of Bannerlord helmets leave most of the face exposed.
And while attacking heavily armoured areas is a bad idea, it becomes a better idea if it is a more vulnerable part of the body in the first place, which heads are.
A medieval archer would be aiming for the gaps in the faceplates. the neck, under the arms, gaps around the waist area and the legs.
True, but irrelevant to the following facts:
(A) if that archer hit someone who was wearing no armour, he would cause more rapid death/incapacitation hitting them in the face than almost anywhere else in the body.
(B) if that archer hit someone who was wearing full mail all over their body, he would cause more injury/incapacitation hitting them in the face than almost anywhere else in the body.
Therefore the damage bonus for critical headshot is justified.
