Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

  • "leptis" started this thread

Posts: 282

Date of registration
: Mar 17th 2015

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

1

Sunday, October 16th 2016, 1:10am

Hitbox BF1

The challenge is to design a synthetic hitbox adapted to BF1 data to apply in calculators.

Data are in BF1_3_Origin_Access / Gameplay / Characters / Soldiers / DefaultSoldierPhysics.dice and BF1_3_Origin_Access / Gameplay / Characters / Soldiers / DefaultSoldierBoneCollision.dice

From the firts file we know the soldier (or rather, their appearance) will be 1.70 m high because it takes a stooped posture, and the eyes will be at y=1.60 m.

In the second file we have the following data(eliminating nonsignificant rows) :

Spoiler Spoiler



Partial hitbox are defined as "capsules". The geometry of the capsule is as follows with the names of the file:

Spoiler Spoiler



There is one capsulle for " head", two for "spine", two for each leg and two for each arm.

It is difficult to know the position of each capsule in space, at least I have not been able to find a logic in data, but distributing capsules with anatomical sense should be something like this:

Spoiler Spoiler



I use a Bf4 soldier image because I haven't images of BF1. ;(

Since the sum of capsule lengths is much greater than the height of soldier must be overlapping (the file has priority criteria, surely to apply bigger damage).

An important issue is the capsule defined as member(1): "spine" must be included in the member (2): "spine". If membre(1) represents the chest that means is much larger than we thought, because it is almost a sphere of radius 0.25 m. It is the area that would cover a bulletproof vest, leaving only the small exposed underbelly.

WE transform the capsules into rectangles to easily compute the impacts with the following criteria:

1.Each partial hitbox height will be the same height of the equivalent capsule discounting overlapping because that is important in relation to recoil and the probability of moving from a low damage hitbox to a high damage hitbox.

2. The area of each partial hitbox will be the same as the equivalent capsule discounting overlapping. So the probability of impact with uniform distributions (spread) will be the same.

What we do is this:

Spoiler Spoiler



The calculations are here, introducing a hitbox "belly" to represent excess membre (2) on membre (1):

Spoiler Spoiler



And the proposed hitbox is (the red dot is the intuitive center of mass, which is located 0.33 m above the crotch. Remember that I used 0.35 m in BF4):

Spoiler Spoiler



1.70 m high, almost same area for head, chest and belly partial hitboxes, and legs forced to have the same width than belly, so we can compute belly and legs together as a single rectangle, if they have the same multiplier. Thighs are properly evaluated and only the lower part of the legs is overrated, but that's not important if we aim to head, chest or waist. In fact the hitbox would work properly cut at the knees. Arms are not included because they have a large overlap with the body and never are aligned with it.

This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "leptis" (Oct 20th 2016, 10:40am)


  • "leptis" started this thread

Posts: 282

Date of registration
: Mar 17th 2015

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

2

Thursday, October 20th 2016, 11:21am

Bumping that.

Before firing million shots in the simulator we must solve two issues:

- Multipliers

- Hitbox

Multipliers will be soon (Miffyli has promised :) ). It only remains to solve the hitbox.

The problem described in the previous post is that the distribution of the capsules suggests that the entity "chest" (multiplier 1) is much larger than assumed in BF4, where normally we called "upper chest" (30 cm or so ). In fact it seems that "chest" is a sphere about diameter 50 cm and it is to the area covered by a bulletproof vest.

This would change the results aiming to the intuitive center of masses (usually all shots multiplier would be 1 and only accidentally shot would have multiplier 0.93, or appropriate in BF1).

Here is the comparison of capsules and BF1 BF4. The position is assumed.

Spoiler Spoiler



What do you think? (No replies.... hard question :) )

Miffyli

Symthic Developer

(6,088)

Posts: 3,650

Date of registration
: Mar 21st 2013

Platform: PC

Location: __main__, Finland

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

3

Thursday, October 20th 2016, 1:36pm

What do you think? (No replies.... hard question :) )

<Self centered> I would pay more attention to this but quite busy with rest of Symthic stuff and school, but I try to come up with comments later ^^' </self centered>

Edit: Alright time for comments:
  • I think one needs to remember to take into account the third dimension here too when capsules can overlap in the third dimension. I.e. Upper body has smaller "hitting probability" in 3D compared to 2D representation.
  • One new problem with BF1 is that arms are now in two parts (upper arm and forearm), and ADSing soldiers have hands in front their torso/chest. The "2D hitbox" from shooter's perspective will thus have less upper-chest hitbox visible, because these hands are in front of them.
  • The "trans" vector specifies bone's location relative to soldier's position. Soldier's (0,0,0) position appears to be between feet when soldier is standing (see the red box in attached image). "forward" vector probably shows the direction of bone, so if one of the capsule's points is at "trans" then endpoint is at "trans + forward*length".


index.php?page=Attachment&attachmentID=896

Also will provide multipliers quite soon!

Edit: I quickly tried visualizing bones in three.js's editor. You can try it by downloading this scene file, going to three.js / editor and importing downloaded file. You need to scroll in a bunch though. Also I didn't include arms etc.
Links to users' thread list who have made analytical/statistical/mathematical/cool posts on Symthic:
  • 3VerstsNorth - Analysis of game mechanics in BF4 (tickrates, effects of tickrate, etc)
  • leptis - Analysis of shotguns, recoil, recoil control and air drag.
  • Veritable - Scoring of BF4/BF1 firearms in terms of usability, firing and other mechanics.
  • Miffyli - Random statistical analysis of BF4 battlereports/players and kill-distances. (list is cluttered with other threads).
Sorry if your name wasn't on the list, I honestly can't recall all names : ( . Nudge me if you want to be included

  • "leptis" started this thread

Posts: 282

Date of registration
: Mar 17th 2015

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

4

Thursday, October 20th 2016, 9:13pm

@Miffyli

Forget for the moment the third dimension. It is confusing enough in 2D. :)

Only XY coordinates.

1. I do not think that the position of hands and arms invalidates a hit in the chest. There are priority rules (which I do not understand) in

Point_Priorities_BoneUnderReticle :: AimAssistCollisionBonePrioritiesData

They are indicating that there is a system of priorities in case of coincidence.

My hypothesis (just hypothesis) is the most damage is attributed (as if the bullet pass through the minor priority). The head has the highest priority.


2. I spent a few hours trying to understand the file structure without success.

Here is the representation of the XY coordinates of the vector "trans":

Spoiler Spoiler



The top two points make sense: the center of the head and chest. Each one in its capsule.

But not the following points.

One seems to be centered on the lower abdomen. The capsule is member (2) "spine" and is 65 cm high. That point can not be the center of the capsule.

The lower points clearly correspond to the knees (not the center of the capsule of upper leg). In this case they would be the base line (or better pivot point).

Lower leg has not vector "trans". So...always (0,0)...that is base line.

Adding or subtracting CapsuleOffset ::vec3 or forward :: vec3 adds more confusion. The translation you propose ( "trans + forward*length") doesn't affect to head and both "spines" in XY plane.

I can not find a homogeneous criterion for "trans" (center, base, top...???).

In any case this does not solve the main question. In BF1 there is a capsule "spine" 65 cm high covering from crotch to the shoulders (there is no other possibility) and a smaller 0.50 m capsule, "spine" too, that have to be included in the bigger one, leaving only 15 cm of margin, above (upper chest) or down ( belly).

My hypothesis is the smaller capsule (0.50 cm) is "chest" and must have priority or never would be hitted because is included inside of bigger one (0.65 cm).

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "leptis" (Oct 20th 2016, 9:19pm)


Miffyli

Symthic Developer

(6,088)

Posts: 3,650

Date of registration
: Mar 21st 2013

Platform: PC

Location: __main__, Finland

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

5

Thursday, October 20th 2016, 9:29pm

@leptis

It would make sense to have prioritization in hitboxes, however the object you linked seems to be used for aimassist instead of hitboxes. You can't really use "under reticle" either since we're talking about flying projectiles, not aiming vector.

And about the points:
The smaller ones look weird, so they are probably attached to other bone (ie. location is relative to that bone).

I drew the head and spine capsules in three.js editor using the 'instructions' I wrote in last one (other endpoint is 'trans', second endpoint is 'trans' + 'forward' * 'length' ):



These seem quite correct and similar to what BF4 had. I didn't even try adding legs for now because of rotations, but the start looks good.
Links to users' thread list who have made analytical/statistical/mathematical/cool posts on Symthic:
  • 3VerstsNorth - Analysis of game mechanics in BF4 (tickrates, effects of tickrate, etc)
  • leptis - Analysis of shotguns, recoil, recoil control and air drag.
  • Veritable - Scoring of BF4/BF1 firearms in terms of usability, firing and other mechanics.
  • Miffyli - Random statistical analysis of BF4 battlereports/players and kill-distances. (list is cluttered with other threads).
Sorry if your name wasn't on the list, I honestly can't recall all names : ( . Nudge me if you want to be included

  • "leptis" started this thread

Posts: 282

Date of registration
: Mar 17th 2015

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

6

Thursday, October 20th 2016, 10:09pm

I didn't even try adding legs for now because of rotations, but the start looks good.


lol

It looks good because you dont paint legs. The base of your red capsule is 1.26-(0.65/2)=0.575. Very little space to place the legs (two capsules = 0.47 m (thigh) and 0.59 m (lower leg)). Curious anatomy: femur is shorter than the tibia :) .

What you do is this:



Strange, no?

In my language there is a fun way to call this look with such "powerful" crotch. :) :) :)

Curiously it refers to the character of lazy or slow person not to any sexual aspect. :)

P.S.: I agree with your AimAssist clarification. I I forgot consoles!!!.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "leptis" (Oct 20th 2016, 10:18pm)


VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,586

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

7

Friday, October 21st 2016, 12:56am

So do we indeed have that many differenthitzones with different multipliers? Personally I think they ar overcomplicating their gun mechanics with all the new relevant weapon stats, the slower TTK and the different multipliers. Simple is better in my opinion because it is easy to understand for the player without needing to look up the stats, the multipliers and whatnot.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,530

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

8

Friday, October 21st 2016, 12:15pm

So do we indeed have that many differenthitzones with different multipliers? Personally I think they ar overcomplicating their gun mechanics with all the new relevant weapon stats, the slower TTK and the different multipliers. Simple is better in my opinion because it is easy to understand for the player without needing to look up the stats, the multipliers and whatnot.

BF4 had the same number of hitboxes as BF1.

There's no real major difference here.
something something Model 8 bestgun


How to ice an A-91

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:




Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.


  • "leptis" started this thread

Posts: 282

Date of registration
: Mar 17th 2015

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

9

Friday, October 21st 2016, 1:56pm

BF4 had the same number of hitboxes as BF1.

There's no real major difference here.


There are two "entities" more: forearms, which did not exist in BF4.

So the discussion of whether they are capable of stopping a shot to chest or not (the question of priorities).

And the multipliers are applied to four categories instead of three as in BF4.

For instance, :

BF4 - Bolt Sniper Bullets

Headshot 2.35x
Chest and Arms 1.0x
Chest and Arms (Defensive spec) 0.93x
Stomach and Legs 0.93x

BF1 - Scout's primary weapons:

Headshot 1.8x
Upper body 1.0x
Lower body and upper arms 0.9x
Legs and forearms 0.75x

Yes, it is a little more complicated now.

Beside the discussion in progress on the position of the hitboxes.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,530

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

10

Friday, October 21st 2016, 2:28pm

There are two "entities" more: forearms, which did not exist in BF4.

Ah yes, I see now. I missed those when I was earlier looking through the files.

The reign of the magical ghost forearms is over!

So the discussion of whether they are capable of stopping a shot to chest or not (the question of priorities).

Well, bullets can certainly pass through hitboxes. IIRC in BF4, if the bullet passed through multiple hitboxes, it applied the highest damage multiplier to the damage of the bullet. I see no reason why it wouldn't work the same in BF1.

In any case, this can easily be manually tested in-game.
something something Model 8 bestgun


How to ice an A-91

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:




Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.