How hard is it to get a headshot

OP im getting some weird vibes from this

what company do ya work for?

>>33362222
>physical number times harder
Are you also 7 years old?

>>33362222
>trying to a assign a discrete and narrow array of numbers to operations so variable and complex that they're nearly unquantifiable

Yeah 4chan is definitely the best place to look for that kind of data

>>33362222
I could put in percentage.

Probably 50% harder. The head moves very irradically for someone that is running.

>>33362269
You could just called it a non-linear function.

I could fit about 4 of my heads in the space my torso takes up. So I'd have to say at least 4x harder, let's round it up to 5x for posterity.

>>33362222

at what range? consider the size of a head compared to the size of a torso and how as a body part a head moves relatively little compared to a arm or leg. probably 4-5 times harder

>>33362290
You also have to add that the head has an extra ability of movement, making it 2x harder for movement. You get a 1000% increase in shot difficulty.

>ITT nobody realizes OP is either significantly underage or significantly underage and plotting an assassination

>>33362222
why dont you just look up military statistics of percentages of confirmed kills due to head shots vs other body hits?
Also hitting moving targets is hard. Especially at distance. Especially a target thats about a square foot in size. Especially a target thats mostly in cover. Especially when youre also being shot at
Especially when youre also trying to move from cover to cover

>>33362222
Not hard if you train
The whole "get good" thing comes to mind (originally that phrase was from Seal Team 6 BTW)
Headshots are easy if you have done them for long enough
I've Been in Spec Ops for 40 years. I know what I am talking about

>>33362222
do you even know what minute of angle means?

>>33362313
he's probably just making some kind of turn based or isometric game akin to fallout and is trying to work out how much harder it should be to get headshots over torso shots.

The picture he chose in the OP says a lot. But sure he could also be planning an assassination or some bullshit.

>>33362392
either that or it's a scoring system

>>33362222
bout tree fiddy

>>33362222

If you're aiming at someone then there's only like a 10% chance you hit your head if you hit them because you're aiming at all of them

If you aim for the heat it is almost a 100% of a headshot if you hit them because thats what you aimed for

>>33362476
this tbqh

Determine the volume and/or surface area of what you define as being "head" and what you define as being "torso" and find the difference.

>>33362222
Why would you even need to account for this? Just model the ballistics/physics of the bullet and proper damage area of the enemy, and the rest takes care of itself.


Either the bullet hits the head or it doesn't

>>33362222
just run a basic calculation of braincase surface area compared to chest surface area. then add a modifier based on speed and agi

>>33362222
Scale it range with 3x factor against torso target . Example character can hit torso target at 30m range with 50% probability. Therefore he can hit head at 10m with same 50% range probability. At 30 meters he can hit head with same probability he can hit torso at 90 meters. You game have range scaling, right?

If you don't have torso hit probability but have overall body hit (body+head+arms+legs) scale headshot at x5 factor against overall body hit. i.e. 50 meters for full body become 10 meters for head-shot.

This scaling approximately reflect relative size of target. It doesn't fully precise as doesn't accounting long range ballistics but i guessing you game have little ranges outside 200 meters where ballistics start to mater.

>basing your videogame stats off autistic realism and not balance
If you're actually going for muh reelism it shouldn't matter, 1-2 shots to the body should generally be a kill or stop for anything but small handgun calibres and nobody would ever explicitly aim for a headshot unless at point blank, much like reality.

>>33362222
Why don't video game designers ever try hunting before they go make these types of shooty games?

>>33362222
Head is size of tummy
Tummy is like 1/3rd the size of torso
x3

>>33362594
>balance
>I hate realism

Why are you on this board?

>>33362222
Well lets see..
>roughly 1/10th the size of an adult torso from any given angle
>moves significantly more erratically and drastically than the torso due to independent movement and being so far away from the center of gravity
I'd say it's 20-30x harder to hit.

>>33362594
>what is armor
>what is the mozambique/bill drill
>what is defilade and cover
There's a bunch of reasons to target the head of an opponent in combat at pretty much any range you can distinguish it from the rest of the body.

>>33362640
Realism does not generally make for good videogames unless it's very strictly applied a la ARMA, and even that has to make concessions for playability.

I love guns and autisming out over them, but as far as vidya I'd far rather play DOOM or Turok or classic Fallout than any shitty headache-inducing "reelism" clusterfuck.

>>33362733
Sounds like you're just bad at playing games

>>33362594
Realism rant, don't read text below.

There is plenty cases when people tanked 5-10 shots.
>but these are exceptions bla-bla
>exceptional mindset, drugs etc
Well as game progresses and scales its participants (characters and NPCs) become this exact case of exceptional performance way beyond of average human being. Shot guns as top 0.01% of population, should tank shots as 0.01% of population for consistency.

>>33362733
>ARMA
ARMA uses hitpoints system. Not realistic by design. Realistic design should be probabilistic.

>>33362779
Not to mention there's no wind drift, which is far more important in landing long-range hits than drop.

Also a fuckload harder to calculate.

And the hitpoints system works just fine when pretty much every weapon in the game can 1-hit kill (players) anywhere above the knees/elbows. Where it starts getting annoying is NPC's that are bullet sponges.
>arma3 is better about this than arma2
>tfw playing arma2/dayZ and merc baddies could soak 1-2 .50bmg headshots or a whole belt of 7.62x51 from a mk48 to the gut

>>33362723
>>what is armor
Irrelevant at battlefield range, you're still dumping rounds in the general area of your target. Nobody shoots at the head to defeat armor, you just shoot the body MORE
>>what is the mozambique/bill drill
Executed at extreme close range and involves a headshot only IF two body shots do not immediately stop the target.
>>what is defilade and cover
Anybody taking cover and sticking their head out is retarded. You'd still be firing in their general direction, not lining up siccc headshots BRO

Not even military snipers aim for headshots unless that's all they have to aim at, and that's an awful shot opportunity in the first place.

Point being, if you're going to make a game that differentiates headshots from body shots, and especially if it's differentiated based on CHANCE, that chance should be tweaked to game balance over "realism". Because realistically, you aren't going to aiming for headshots 99% of the time, and if the rest of the game doesn't adhere to that realism factor you end up with an awkward poorly balanced mechanic.

>>33362779
Yes, ARMA has to make concessions for playability. Like I said. Inherent realism does not make for good vidya.
Learn to read.

>>33362812
>And the hitpoints system works just fine
It is absolutely terrible for armor interaction, vehicles, fragmentation munitions and weak guns (pistols). IRL pistol can can straight up kill you one shoot to body and at the same time 5 shots can fail to stop. HP system can't simulate this. hand Grenade can kill you from 30 meters range (lucky fragment straight into face) but probability of such is minuscule but it exist, HP system can't simulate this. 155mm shell can do this from 300 meters range. HP system can't simulate this. Etc.

Pro tip: military simulators (MILES) operate with probability tables not hit-points.

>>33362830
>irrelevant at battlefield range
Bruh. 99% of all combat seen by any country over the last 50 years has been at or under 50 yards because it's all CQC.
>executed at extreme close range
Along with about 99.99999% of all other shots fired in anger. Also see the above point.
>anybody taking cover and sticking their head out is retarded
Yep. So shoot them in the fucking head. Also this happens a LOOOOOOOTTTT because middle-easterners do it fucking constantly. Because they're retarded and bad at war.

>not even military snipers aim for headshots
Good for them. Meanwhile every police marksman ever is trained to shoot exclusively for the head. And they kill a lot more people every year than military snipers do.

>>33362840
>Yes, ARMA has to make concessions for play-ability.
>implying probabilistic system would be unplayable
They are just lazy cunts who can't make grass in "infantry simulator" for 16 years.

>>33362275

>irradically

>>33362222

Kill
Yourself

File: 1238157980_scanners_-_head_explosion.gif (425KB, 400x295px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 400x295px

There is a reason professionals shoot center mass.
>1.Easiest target.
No matter how powerful your weapon is, it matters for jack shit if it misses.
>2.Grazing hits/Non-vitals.
There is grazing, or hitting something NOT needed to live in the torso, its why we put most armor on our torsos. If your shot is 6in off from the forehead, you just gave a dude a badass scar. If you were 6in off from center mass, you just fucked up someone's lung, trachea, stomach, ect. All of which WILL take a dude out of a fight.
>3.Multiple vulnerabilities.
As stated above, there is a LOT of stuff in the torso needed to keep one alive. The head ONLY has the brain/spinal cord. The rest? You can live without a ear, nose, jaw ect.
However it IS cool to watch a dudes head explode.

>>33362907
>it is absolutely terrible for armor interaction
Debatable, what with the nature of multihit plates and such. Just give it a separate hitpoint pool that has to be depleted before the torso takes any damage. Straight-up percent damage reduction is fucking dumb, especially in Arma where the larger caliber weapons would kill you 10-20x over with a torso hit to start with.

The rest of those scenarios are so ridiculously improbable that even a perfect implementation would be frowned upon in a video game.
>wtf that hit 300m away why did it kill me?
>must be a bug
Especially if the game has a competitive PVP mode.

Also hitpoints vs. no hitpoints is irrelevant to Arma vehicles because they *still* bounce themselves to death in a matter of minutes across all 3 titles 16 years after launch with some regularity. If the title can't even get basic physics right they're fucked on everything else.

And no, MILES does NOT use probability tables, it's
>you trigger a laser
>does that laser hit a sensor? If yes, you hit. If no, you missed. 1 hit=pull casualty card regardless of where it hit or what it hit, some dude with a MILES'd M16 can and routinely does 1-hit-kill MBT's
Where it starts fucking up is long range (>500m) because they use cheap lasers and the lenses are never perfectly clean so you get extensive beam dispersion. I have personally witnessed 1 dude 1-hit-kill an entire battalion of (parked) Strykers because he "took a shot" at 3600m on a clear day and the beam was like 200m wide due to shitty laser system.

>>33362392
Correct, you're a smart guy

>>33362994
Not if they're zombies m8

>>33362222
It's pretty hard but if you take your time it's easy.

>Make spine/neck/upper thigh shots cause critical damage
>Make pistols malfunction if the ammo is old/angle is off
>Make last stand and bleed out more interactive
>limbshots need to maime
>Adrenaline is real and amazing
>Drugs and roids should be included with REAL & ACCURATE side effects

There is more but that's it of the top of my head for now.

>>33362779
>probability
>realistic

Arma uses actual physics for the bullets, and where they hit, if they do at all, to the body, is taken into account. This is as realistic as you can get

File: 1458087003374.jpg (19KB, 307x491px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 307x491px

>>33362222
It increases exponentially with distance.
But if I had to, for some reason, put a number on it...10 yards: twice as hard, 50 yards: thrice as hard, 100 yards: four times as hard.
As for a moving target, fuck.
Pretty hard. Maybe double or triple that.
Pretty much no marksman is trained to go for "headshots", but the triangle that connects the shoulders and the eyes. Or just the torso.

Also, what game are you working on?

>>33362369
So do you just pretend to be that guy for fun?
>>33362615
Account for movement as well and this isn't (/won't be) terrible logic.

>OP is probably making an isometric Fallout/Wasteland 2 knockoff and wants to know what the chance to headshot is, proportional to the rest of the body
>Gets a bunch of spergs reeeeing hard about underageb& and arguing at length about the realism of hitpoints
Considering the GURPS origins of those old iso games, /tg/ would have been a better place to ask desu. For what its worth, Id cap the hit probability at about 15-20% at ranges outside of 30ft, unless the target is stationary.

File: 456745.jpg (145KB, 876x593px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 876x593px

>>33363007
>And no, MILES does NOT use probability tables

>>33362222
Is this an FPS? You don't need numbers, it's a problem that solves itself.

>>33363099
shut up retard
and quit spamming that racist old man everywhere

>>33362222

>This kid gets quads? wtf!

The context you have given us is difficult. In a real combat situation with competing small arms fire, there's always the probability that someone can get shot in the head. Notice, "Head" does not mean "Fatal T Brainshot". We may be fleshy weak humans, but there are plenty of cases of people getting shot in a region commonly regarded as lethal and then continuing the fight.

What does this mean for you?

Nothing. You're making a video game. You have whatever creative license you want. If you're presenting realistic small arm close quarter battle scenario's, I would make headshots extremely unlikey. Not neccisarily because they're difficult, but because in real life killing means center mass. No one is aimed at the hostile's head.

>>33363358
yeah that's never actually used. In fact I'm 99% sure it was never implemented.

I've set off MILES gear with a $3 amazon laser pointer. I've killed Abrams tanks with the laser on an M4. You can't use PEQ15's in conjunction with MILES because the IR laser sets your own shit off.

>>33363438
Also why would you have to carry your casualty card if the MILES system tells you whether you're killed/wounded/grazed?

File: Pong_6f1ee0_5501660.jpg (71KB, 669x535px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 669x535px

>>33363007
>I have personally witnessed 1 dude 1-hit-kill an entire battalion of (parked) Strykers because he "took a shot" at 3600m on a clear day and the beam was like 200m wide due to shitty laser system.
Amazing.

>>33363512
Yeah that's what happens when you have a 30-year-old system that's only ever been maintained by lower enlisted, employed by people who can't be fucked to read the manuals (assuming anyone still knows where the manuals are), and half the shit's broken all the time.

It don't work the way it's supposed to.

File: 1489553448555.jpg (12KB, 426x314px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 426x314px

>>33363585
>tfw my country doesn't use this system
I really want to try it.

>>33363609
It's hilarious, even if the "training" is worthless.
>in your cot at 3am? WELP, BETTER START FLASHING FOR NO REASON BECAUSE YOUR LIEUTENANT IS FUCKING AROUND ON HIS PHONE 50 FEET AWAY
>oh you just shot an entire belt of blanks from your 240b at that line of dudes 80m away? Too bad, had a leaf over the lens, you missed every shot.
>oh some smartass E4 climbed the tree 300m from the perimeter and just held down the trigger of his unloaded M4 and waved it at the camp like a wand? Heh, whole camp's dead.
>oshit, you're opfor and your 10-man team armed with AK's is supposed to "ambush" this convoy of MRAPs? No problem man! It's a laser, you can definitely kill all the MRAPs with SAF in 3 seconds!
>oh it's foggy/rainy? lel nobody hits anything ever
8/10 would recommend.

>>33362222

To much comes into play.
How far is the target?
How fast is it moving?
What type of gun am I using?
What type of sights am I using for said gun?
How is the weather, like do I got the sun shining right onto my face?
To much comes into play to be like "Yeah dude, it's 3x harder"

Also the person skill comes into play too.

>>33363634
alternatively,
>oh it's foggy/rainy? lel, ERRYONE IS NOW ARMED WITH A DAVY CROCKETT, ERRYONE DIES THE SECOND ANYBODY PULLS THE TRIGGER CUZ BEAM DISPERSION

>>33362222
>How much harder is it to get a headshot on a moving target compared to a shot to the torso? I need numbers

Difficulty increases exponentially with respect to angular diameter and relative angular velocity. Angular diameter encompasses distance and size of the target, relative angular velocity transforms the movement of the target at whatever distance it is into a simple parameter representing how you perceive the target's movement relative to you (ie: how much you have to "turn")

>>33362222
It's exactly 3.2659 times harder.

>>33362280
It isnt even a function though. That's what he's trying to say.

>>33364178
It's definitely a multi-variable function.
Good luck finding that function, though.

>>33362322
>why dont you just look up military statistics of percentages of confirmed kills due to head shots vs other body hits?
You realize that a soldier strives to be in cover so that only his head is exposed when he's shooting, right?

>>33362222
Most of these people don't own guns let alone shoot them in any meaningful way.

File: 1461794170351.jpg (6KB, 237x212px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 237x212px

>>33363634
>>33363648
Looks fun tbqh

>>33362222
Amature programmer here, it doesn't matter what those statistics look like in real life.

If your game is physics based, itll sort itself out on its own.

If not, just fiddle with the numbers until it feels balanced.

ALSO
You need to deal with only the perpendicular component of the motion, as in running sideways or jumping and falling. Running toward or away makes for a much easier target in comparison.

>>33362222
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_body_surface_area
Used mainly for burns, but still valid. Don't forget to regroup anterior and posterior.

>>33368800
Surface =/= orthographic projection.

>>33362222
Not that hard, you can see in this clip the guy also got a 2:1 with the driver.

>>33362222

Nearly impossible. Not only is it smaller but the head bobs as you run. If I had to put a number on it, which doesn't make a lot of sense with the question asked, at 100 yards I'd say it's 8X harder than the torso if the area of roughly 4 heads fit in the torso. To shoot someone in the torso running at 100 yards while you're standing is already hard as fuck and is more based on luck than skill

>>33368935
>implying people are facing you perfectly in every combat situation
Sure ^^
And let's be honest, if OP wants that level of detail, he'll either rip off some autistic rpg like phoenix command or make a physics engine.

>>33363634
>>33363648
MILES FPS with ridiculously abusable mechanics when?

>>33362222
It's easier if you spin around a full 360 degrees first, then don't bother looking down the scope.

>>33362261
could be his game is a turn based strategy ala original fallout and he wants something to make a semi accurate percentile table for the part of the body one is targeting.

>>33363634
>>33363648

Literally Imperial Guard- tier flashlight banter

>>33362222
Just a ratio of head proportion to body proportion. If the head is for example 10 times smaller than the torso it will be x10 time harder to hit.