Helmets usability

Suggestions
1

Sometime ago there was discussion about helmets and their implementation so finaly they earned their own post.
Currently helmets are purely visual and are equipped randomly.
Let’s start big, POLL!
[poll type=regular chartType=bar]

    • leave helmets as they are now
    • leave helmets as visuals but let the players equip them
    • give them utility and allow players to equip them
    • oher
      [/poll]

Some ideas for utility of helmets.

  • Firstly, they would have to have weight as ballance factor.
  • The most obvious usage of helmets is ballistic protection. Helmets may provide protection from pistol bullets from some distance.
    Other option is that helmets would provide some protection against explosions, although to make it more realistic it would protect only when soldier is crawling, which is very situational so I don’t think it’s a good idea.
  • Helmets would reduce effect of suppression (when it gets implemented), with weight feature it could work that way:
    When you wear helmet you are less mobile (because of additional weight) thus prone to supression, but you are less affected by it.
    When you don’t have helmet you are faster so you can try to run away from suppressed area, but if you didn’t manage you would be affected more by suppression.
2

When I was a grunt (late 70’s, early 80’s) vietnam experience was still a thing (some of my instructors wore the campaign ribbon) - helmets were use only in defensive static situations.

Any time we moved you took them off - they were prone to falling off, or over your face, etc., and the % of your body protected was suddenly not worth the effort - in a trench or emplacement your head is the most exposed part, and a helmet covers a good portion of it - in the open your head is a small part of your body - everything else is more likely to be hit.

At least that’s how I remember it being explained.

so IMO allow them to be equipped as a cosmetic effect. the rest isn’t worth the effort of coding - many more important things further up the priority chain.

1 Like
3

I doubt a steel helmet would stop anything more than shrapnel or a shot that’s at the edge of its effective range.

I’m also of the mind that it wouldn’t be worth the effort to code.

4

Yes that’s been the raison d’etre since WW1 - they were originally designed for exactly that purpose in trenches when serious head injuries from shrapnel became a major source of casualties for all sides.

AFAIK the “best” design has always been along the German lines with the lowered rim along the back half giving better protection to the neck - and I recall controversy in the 1980’s (?) when the US adopted it’s new design that strongly resembled it.

2 Likes
5

Incredibly stupid but typical.
“you know who else liked safety features? The nazis.”

6

just looked at wiki - it was termed “the Fritz helmet”! :rofl:

7

It can stop shrapnel for sure and (probably) pistol/SMG rounds at very high angle

8

I would love being able to customize my soldiers but it could all wait till the game if fully formed.

9

We were in a gunfight in Helmand province and one of our SAW gunners got shot in the head by a kalash. The kevlar deviated the shot trajectory enough to where it missed his skulll and exited the back of his helmet. This was a relatively close quarters shot as this team was assaulting a compound filled with enemy combatants.

Helmets are effective yes, helmets are effective, no. It would be an interesting money/equipment sink to create for players to invest in helmets. Not necessarily against or for.

1 Like
10

SSh-40s were known for bouncing 9mm rounds surprisingly well.

11

Power of Stalinium.

12

yes and Russian winter coats would stop MP40 rounds as well. Also a single Russian sniper killed 30 trillion germans and no Russian tanks were actually lost in combat, that’s western propaganda. :roll_eyes:

13

Very funny. If you actually look it up the SSh-40 doesn’t do terribly in ballistic test.