Another balance thread

[termidor]

So I want to comment on three aspect (for now hehe) relating to weapon balance:

-First of all consitency or rather the lack of it on some instances. Why for example some melee weapons like the machete operate on a 0-200 scale? Why does the hunter rifle gets a 50-200 spread while the bolt action, a weapon fillng the same role (and with a sniper variant) doesn't ? What are the basis of weapon fire rates and why for example the Pkm and the Minimi get 1 shot snap while the M 60 gets a two shot snap? It is really neccesary for the 7,62x51 or the G11 round (best rifle !) to get power bonus ?

- Accuracy modifiers. Maybe is bc I got better in the game and I'm getting more experience agents but there are two accuracy formulas I think need to be review:Thorwn sharp weapons being guarantee hit with not that impressive stats (seriously ninja stars are probably one of the best close range weapons) and the 0,5+x^2 formula which I simply don't get. Why do you need to be brave to fire a sniper rifle outside of enemy range ?

- I will latter go iinto much detail about rambling about weapon balance, but one item I find completly outclassed is the ligth cannon. Why would you want to use it when the OICW is much better as an direct explosive weapon, and other roles will be much more effectivily be cover by other weapons? It's bigger brothers have some niches but even with flexibity ( which isn't that big of a plus due to how heavy & bulky ammo is) it seem like an always wrong choice to try to use it .

[Juku121]

The short answer is that Solarius doesn't particularly care about weapon balance or 'realism'. So he outsources most of the design work to Dioxine, and that means you get Piratez-style weapon stats in XCF. Including mind bullets for the G11 and medieval weapons cracking power armour. It is what it is.

People, including myself, have pointed out issues on a number of occasions. The answer so far has invariably been something along the lines "If you don't like this weapon, don't use it. For me, it's fine." It took years to get rid of pistol 'sniping'.

Edit: To Solarius' credit, he sometimes does listen to minor individual complaints. But the end result is still the same, and I doubt anyone has the endurance to try going for a full rebalance. /edit

So if you want balance and/or somewhat consistent weapons, your options are to do it yourself or look into submods. I always have to spend a day or two reimplementing some basic changes whenever I update.

Eddie made a partial balance mod in '21. Arsenal Additions built on that. Neither is perfect, but they're the best we have.


All that having been said, the Light Cannon actually does have a few advantages over the OICW. The main one is ammo variety (especially incendiaries are tactically very useful). The second one is that unlike either munitions for the OICW, LC AP rounds have significant armour penetration. The third is that LC HE rounds have a slightly bigger AoE. And, most importantly, Light Cannons are likely to show up much earlier than an OICW, unless you beeline for the latter. Of course, there are drawbacks as well. Against some unarmoured schmucks, the OICW is probably always the better choice. But some if some big bad enemy shows up, your OICW dude will be running to the Light Cannoneer, begging for help.

[Solarius Scorch]

Topic split from https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php/topic,10781.0.html.

Why for example some melee weapons like the machete operate on a 0-200 scale?

Because it's not a martial weapon.

Why does the hunter rifle gets a 50-200 spread while the bolt action, a weapon fillng the same role (and with a sniper variant) doesn't ?

Because sharp borders between weapon classes only exist in your imagination, and in a game we need to classify border cases somehow.

What are the basis of weapon fire rates and why for example the Pkm and the Minimi get 1 shot snap while the M 60 gets a two shot snap? It is really neccesary for the 7,62x51 or the G11 round (best rifle !) to get power bonus ?

What, shoulds all weapons work exactly the same? What's the point in that?

- Accuracy modifiers. Maybe is bc I got better in the game and I'm getting more experience agents but there are two accuracy formulas I think need to be review:Thorwn sharp weapons being guarantee hit with not that impressive stats (seriously ninja stars are probably one of the best close range weapons) and the 0,5+x^2 formula which I simply don't get. Why do you need to be brave to fire a sniper rifle outside of enemy range ?

Maybe make some actual arguments first, since I can only guess what you are getting at. What does Bravery have to do with sniper rifles? What's wrong with the stars, which you can throw at people but need good stats to actually kill with them?

- I will latter go iinto much detail about rambling about weapon balance, but one item I find completly outclassed is the ligth cannon. Why would you want to use it when the OICW is much better as an direct explosive weapon, and other roles will be much more effectivily be cover by other weapons? It's bigger brothers have some niches but even with flexibity ( which isn't that big of a plus due to how heavy & bulky ammo is) it seem like an always wrong choice to try to use it .

Lol. The Light Cannon is the most OP weapon in the first part of the game. Juku has already addressed it, but didn't mention my favourite buckshot ammo which is just pornographic (and I consider it broken).

The short answer is that Solarius doesn't particularly care about weapon balance or 'realism'.

Bullshit. My life would be so easy if it was true.

So he outsources most of the design work to Dioxine, and that means you get Piratez-style weapon stats in XCF.

Heh, I wish that was the case. Dioxine has his own big project and doesn't have the time to balance mine. I did consult with him a few times and I borrowed some ideas from Piratez, because why reinvent the wheel? Also, making this from scratch is boring and would require a ton of engineering research which I'm not willing to do and would probably take years.

Including mind bullets for the G11

These are not fucking mind bu- you know, whatever, fine. They're mind bullets. Standard German tech.

and medieval weapons cracking power armour.

It's not because of Piratez...

People, including myself, have pointed out issues on a number of occasions. The answer so far has invariably been something along the lines "If you don't like this weapon, don't use it. For me, it's fine." It took years to get rid of pistol 'sniping'.

Now you're just twisting my words, pistol sniping has nothing to do with the line you quote (which obviously applies to complaints like "gun X is useless"). Not cool.

Although I admit that dumb shit people do to game the system tend to surprise me regularly. Sniping with pistols being one of them.

Edit: To Solarius' credit, he sometimes does listen to minor individual complaints. But the end result is still the same, and I doubt anyone has the endurance to try going for a full rebalance. /edit

Like I'll let anyone "rebalance" my mod, lol.

[Juku121]

Eh, if you want to have a discussion, sure, I'll play along. I'm a sucker for a good argument.

We both know nothing will change, neither the mod's balancing nor my opinion of it.

Because it's not a martial weapon.

This would be an argument in D&D, perhaps.

IRL, all sword-like edged weapons are difficult to use, especially for beginners (because edge alignment is hard under duress). I could see all mainly slashing weapons (so not knives nor giant twohanders) get the 0-200 treatment, but drawing an arbitrary line between one slab of sharpened metal and another... Especially when a Billhook (the gardening tool, not the polearm!) is 50-150%.

Because sharp borders between weapon classes only exist in your imagination, and in a game we need to classify border cases somehow.

Says the man making a sharp border between two rather similar bolt-action guns. And, BTW, there are rather sharp borders between different types of weapons IRL. E.g. you will never have an SMG cross over into a purely rifle role (600 meter potshots, for example) because a handgun cartridge has its limits. Even if you put a metre of barrel on the SMG and screw in into a vise.

Sharp borders are supposed to reflect some kind of inherent advantage. In the case of sniper rifles, the biggest difference should be the optics. Which would neatly explain the difference between the HR and the BA. There are even scoped hunting rifle sprites floating around.

What, shoulds all weapons work exactly the same? What's the point in that?

No, similar weapons should work similarly. All GPMGs and LMGs have relatively similar rates of fire IRL, both mechanically and doctrinally. The difference is primarily in how long you can sustain your fire without needing to change/cool the barrel, get more ammo (or even if you are given spare barrels and ammo mules), the caliber(s) they fire, the feeding mechanism (belt, mag, what kind of mag), weight, and more.

Most of these can be implemented in OXCE without inventing new and arbitrary differences on top. Heck, you could even give them different fire modes, like the M60 getting Short Burst, Long Burst and Full Auto while the LMGs have Snap Shot, Short Burst and Long Burst.

Maybe make some actual arguments first, since I can only guess what you are getting at. What does Bravery have to do with sniper rifles?

I think that's a jab at the .308 sniper rifle. That gun makes your bullets veer towards what you're shooting at depending on how much chutzpah you have.

I could buy that as some sort of 'veterans can control their fire better in combat' if it was applied to all guns, or at least to all similar guns. But no, only the G11 and the Mosin have this. At least the Mosin is a similar gun.

The UAC weapons having a uniform bravery bonus is good example of how it could work.

What's wrong with the stars, which you can throw at people but need good stats to actually kill with them?

Because IRL, getting any thrown weapon to hit and 'stick' is an exercise in frustration even under range conditions. Hitting something with a rock is far more difficult than shooting them.

I suppose the lack of damage could be attributed to 'no stick', but the wild accuracy scaling is completely the opposite of reality.

A bonus-less maxed human marksman using a sniper rifle gets 2/3 the base accuracy of a master knife thrower with knives. A typical sniper rifle's accuracy compensates for those, but give both of them +10 stat (commendations, enhancements, armours) and the thrower starts pulling ahead. An average recruit (45 throwing, 55 firing) has base 50% with throwing weapons (*0.5-1.5 depending on what weapon and fire mode they're using) while getting base 30% with sniper rifles (*0.5-1.5, again) and 55% (*.6-1.3, or so) with plain old rifles.

I will guarantee that if you pick a dozen random grunts, policemen, FBI agents, etc, they will be an order of magnitude better with rifles, sniper or not, short range or long, than hitting people with throwing knives at 50 paces.

Now, you can of course make unrealistic throwing weapons for gameplay purposes. But in that case, the argument is not "what's wrong?", because there's plenty wrong. The argument is "Do you want cool throwing weapons or not?". Some people do, some do not.

And all the while, people's expectations get subverted because the in-game throwing weapons behave completely differently from how you'd expect them to, with nary an explanation. Even though you could have 'field manual' article saying these are 'rule of cool' weapons.

And even then, they're so good compared to the competition it's ridiculous. It's the 'Rookies, forget about rifles, grab all the grenades you can! That Sectoid two screens over needs killing!" all over again.

Bullshit. My life would be so easy if it was true.

How you complicate your life is your business. What matters is how your efforts translate into the game.

As long as a handgun can outshoot an LMG at 30 tiles, a bolt action fires faster than a semi-auto PSG-1 and people shoot miniguns without power armour, I am not seeing any sort of 'balance' in the game. It's all made up on the spot, inherited from the OG or outsourced to Dioxine, with little done to reconcile the differences.

Dioxine has his own big project and doesn't have the time to balance mine. I did consult with him a few times and I borrowed some ideas from Piratez, because why reinvent the wheel?

Which shows that the basic balance of a lot of weapons is not taken from Piratez... how exactly? I'm not saying everything is literally copy-pasted, but the influence and the similarities in design philosophy are obvious.

It's not because of Piratez...

It's inspired by Piratez making melee viable and a central part of the game. So you also wanted to have the same, even if you didn't want to have the exact same effect. Why reinvent the wheel and all that. So that's where we are.

Now you're just twisting my words, pistol sniping has nothing to do with the line you quote (which obviously applies to complaints like "gun X is useless").

I suppose I skipped a step. Sorry. Pistol sniping was brought up, and you resisted any change, going "It's fine; don't use pistols if you don't like them; find a pistol you like and stick with it; I have no issues with them; no weapon tiers in this game." Until it became abundantly clear how silly the end result was.

Although I admit that dumb shit people do to game the system tend to surprise me regularly. Sniping with pistols being one of them.

It was the path of least resistance, taught to players repeatedly over early apprehension missions. No wonder they learned to rely on pistol potshots. Because it worked.

Also, making this from scratch is boring and would require a ton of engineering research which I'm not willing to do and would probably take years.
...
Like I'll let anyone "rebalance" my mod, lol.

Yes, exactly what I said earlier. Nobody, not Solarius, not Dioxine, not 8mono, not Eddie, not me, nobody, has the mental and physical endurance to do this. So the balance is what it is and it's up to the players to find their sweet spot in it (or fail and play other mods/games). Perhaps tweak some data that seems excessively strange if that helps.

And I meant as a submod, if done by a different person. Like Eddie did.

[Vakrug]

Lol. The Light Cannon is the most OP weapon in the first part of the game. Juku has already addressed it, but didn't mention my favourite buckshot ammo which is just pornographic (and I consider it broken).

Seriously? HOW??? I need a tutorial!

I played XCOM Files several times and each time I said to myself: "ok, this time I will give more chances to Light Cannon!" And every time Light Cannon proved to be useless! It is inaccurate like crap and deals LESS damage than Sniper Rifle. And if an enemy is standing next to you, you would want a shotgun in your hand instead. Ability to switch an ammo is an advantage in theory, but in practice it is too slow to be beneficial. So how to use it correctly?

[Juku121]

In theory, the Light Cannon is a shotgun, unlike a sniper rifle. Takes about a turn and carrying extra ammo to make it into one, though. And it kinda sucks compared to other shotguns when you can't make the alien eat the barrel first.

And, well, if the enemy is so unarmoured that shotguns work on them, I want neither the LC nor a sniper rifle. I want a proper shotgun, an automatic weapon, even a good handgun.

Damage is the result of sniper rifle damage scaling, and I'm slowly starting to think all damage scaling just wrecks balance, because it's hard to account for and moves weapons across categories with way too much ease.

Finally, yeah, the fact that a bullet from a .300 or maybe even a .400 caliber sniper rifle (and not an AM rifle!) has about the same damage and armour penetration as a literal hand cannon is a typical example of XCF balance. Which is all over the place.

[termidor]

Because it's not a martial weapon.

That's not a coherent argument. Switchblades and Shivs are under 50-150 while a saber, a martial weapon by definition , is 0-200 . The Bill hook the same , it has in his description it is a kitchen toll yet somehowe it is a martial weapon ! Katana , Wakizashi , Kukri also have the standard roll while a greatsword has the consistent one. There is the case of the Chitin knife which the fluff given makes reference to inconsistent damage, but in the rest of the cases it doesn't make sense.

Because sharp borders between weapon classes only exist in your imagination, and in a game we need to classify border cases somehow.

They literally fill the same weapon role in an squad, I'm not making shit up. The hunting rifle is 33%TU snap 72 acc, 70%TU aimed 125 acc to the bolt action 40% TU snap 70 acc , 70% TU 110 acc. Both are bolt action, both are better suited for longer ranges. It is specially obvious when you add the Mosin, which is a sniper rifle, yet get a generic damage formula.

 Also from a balance perspective, the more consistent damage, accuracy, average damage (33*1,25 due formula = 41,25 , equivalent to a 110 acc bolt action ),firing rate and great snap range means that using the bolt action is actively worse, for a weapon that you will get latter than the hunting rifle which you get with Promo I, the bolt action need to be dropped by Dagon.

What, shoulds all weapons work exactly the same? What's the point in that?

Bc they are exactly the same type of weapon? Specially in the case of the PKM which is a GPMG . I will also add that in general I consider Mg being weak, but at least the M 60 and specially the Mg3 can fill the role of long range auto fire (which is a bit niche anyways). Meanwhile the PKM and the Minimi are sad weapons, specially in the case of the first. Their auto fire is more innaccurate, their snap shot sucks even more than the Ak 47 one, they don't get the same crouching bonus and having then being used by high ranking enemies is more favourly to the player than to the enemy most of the time.

 If we go by real life stats, the PKM fills the same role of the M 60/Mg 3 while being ligther, while the Fn minimi is a LMG. Maybe distinguishing more clearly between GPMG and LMg would the betetr option, bc the black ops LMg are  a bit bad as well (and they also get two shot snaps ).

Maybe make some actual arguments first, since I can only guess what you are getting at. What does Bravery have to do with sniper rifles? What's wrong with the stars, which you can throw at people but need good stats to actually kill with them?

 In regards to thrown weapons is how they scale with accuracy, making then able to be guarantee hit weapons at close ranges. Taking the Throwing knifes for instance, any soldier above 65 throwing accuracy is practically guarantee to hit with then, and they do hit like a truck when they do. For what should be difficult weapons to master, you instead get brutal close quarter weapons that are ligth and specially in the case of the stars, are very easy to carry. Their power bonus also scale super hard, which compounded make then very ridiculous.  The issue I see is mainly with their ease of use, as a 70 throwing accuracy soldier (which if trained is not that hard to get) would be making a very effective use of this weapons. I think that then being specialist weapon (hard to master, but incredible once you do) would be much better.

Regarding the bravery formula is a genuine question, I don't understand the reasoning being. Why would it take to be brave to fire this weapons? Bravery, as an accuracy stat, if anything , seem more adecuate to PSI weapons, representing mental fortitude of the user to prroject the weapon atatck.

Lol. The Light Cannon is the most OP weapon in the first part of the game. Juku has already addressed it, but didn't mention my favourite buckshot ammo which is just pornographic (and I consider it broken).

In the first part of the game a shotgun is much more effective weapon. A bit latter on (and not that much really) the CAWS completly overshadows the LC as a close weapon due to actually hitting his targets, being much more weigth efficiency specially in regards to ammo and why not, having better inventory use. Also that the LC  Bs ammo get a higher spread, which I consider 
a negative. If by experience you consider it is fine then so be it, but in every playthrougth I do I try to use it and immediatly wish that I used something else.

[Yankes]

Finally, yeah, the fact that a bullet from a .300 or maybe even a .400 caliber sniper rifle (and not an AM rifle!) has about the same damage and armour penetration as a literal hand cannon is a typical example of XCF balance. Which is all over the place.

if you get hit by TANK cannon into hand you will take less damage than hit between eyes using 9mm.
This mean sniper rifle could in theory hit less armored parts of targets and bypass most of armor.

[Juku121]

Not necessarily. The tank round will tear off your hand, or explode and make chunky salsa out of you. While 9mm rounds - or even .45s - have been known to leave their targets completely unfazed, whether because the people were hopped on drugs/adrenaline, or because the bullet bounced off their skull/other bones.

You'd be surprised how survivable a handgun shot is, compared to even a 'varmint' round like M855 which can lop off limbs and perform other serius fuckery if you're unlucky. Modern rifle rounds are no joke.

Sniper rifles already get their 'armour penetration due to accuracy' simply from damage scaling, no need to make their actual armour penetration value near-identical as well. And, perhaps most damningly, sniper rifles do their damage regardless of shot placement, with snap shots off the cuff and so on.

Finally, this applies across all enemies. A sniper rifle will work the same against an Ooze, a Silacoid or a Zombie, none of whom has much in the way of vulnerable organs.

A lot of this is kinda beyond the scope of the game's damage model, though. One has to make do with what's available. It's just that right now, not much has been done, and thus the Light Cannon is an inferior Sniper Rifle (and an inferior shotgun, and an inferior flamethrower, and an inferior OICW).


If it was possible to separate damage bonuses by fire mode, one could make a better distinction between sniper rifles and just plain hard-hitting weapons. Eh, one can dream.

[Vakrug]

In theory, the Light Cannon is a shotgun, unlike a sniper rifle.

A shotgun with 50% snap accuracy. (Shotgun Shotgun has 135% snap accuracy)

Finally, yeah, the fact that a bullet from a .300 or maybe even a .400 caliber sniper rifle (and not an AM rifle!) has about the same damage and armour penetration as a literal hand cannon is a typical example of XCF balance. Which is all over the place.

I think that problem is that Sniper Rifles and Cannons deals the same type of damage (KINETIC), while realistically they should deal different type of damage.
But, when I told that Sniper Rifles are overpowered, Solarius disagreed.

P.S. Another interesting idea is: accuracy that is determined by target's remaining Time Units. Is is harder to hit a moving target after all. Of course it cannot be implemented that straightforward: Time Units spent on shooting should not diminish accuracy as Time Units spent on running. Probably too revolutional idea... Yeah, what am I talking about? Right now player can't see real melee chance to hit. Seeing wrong chances to hit in range would be terrible.

[Juku121]

Hence my comment about making the enemies gnaw on the Light Cannon's barrel first. At least the LC has somewhat better pellets.

IDK, sniper rifles and cannons do have a similar damage mechanic (high-energy kinetic impact). It's just, well, logically a cannon should go through a lot harder stuff than even an anti-material rifle. Armour, Silacoids, tanks, buildings...


Solarius disagrees a lot with other peole's balance complaints, usually with little or even outlandish justifications. Seriously, I just read how he said swords require less skill to use than knives because why else did people invent them?

Spoiler"Swords":

People invented swords because they had also invented something called a warrior class that could waste years on personal weapon training, and the people they tended to use swords on were usually poorly armoured, not because swords are easy to use. Well, that and a sword is expensive and the warrior class needed a status symbol, too. A sword is probably the worst melee weapon to hand to a complete newbie.

Which is why I said the balance is what it is, and you either take it, leave it or mod it.

Edit: I suppose the best way to put the situation is, there is no reasoning with Solarius. Either you bring up a point and he agrees with it, or he doesn't. Perhaps he'll change his mind later, perhaps not. Can't really cast too many stones here, I am not entirely innocent of this myself. /edit

Lots of people find the mod fun with the current balance, including the author, and that's ultimately what counts. We nitpickers might wish otherwise, but we could also wish for Gollop to make a proper sequel instead of taking Epic's money and making XCOM2 with free aim, a couple extra action points and OP murdercrabs. And basically ignoring any and all feedback, to the point his own appointed 'community council' people publicly lambasted him. Solarius is in good company (except for that Epic cash).

[BDoubleDs]

Solarius disagrees a lot with other peole's balance complaints, usually with little or even outlandish justifications.

to be fair, he should.  no one really knows the ins and outs of the mod like he does.  that doesn't mean there doesn't deserve tweaks here and there.  but ive been around game forums for 20 years and people cry foul over balance for all sorts of things.  people rarely *playtest* like they should to truly discover balance issues. 

things like certain guns being less powerful than others in game when compared to real life are like... who cares for me.  half the fun is figuring out what works well.  hell, some card games (like hearthstone) are literally designed with this in mind.  building in discovering what items, cards, weapons.. etc.  are better than others as part of the fun.

my only gripe is more UI based for a proper tech tree search.  empty search trees are typically a big no no for new inexperienced users.  its not a horrible thing... but it definitely creates an unnecessary newbie hurdle.   i mean all that ends up happening is people just go to a wiki or some other forum post to find the information, so all ur really doing is just making it more difficult by proxy.

[Juku121]

Well, in theory you're right.

If XCF was a fully abstract game like MTG, Hearthstone or Gwent, there'd be little to complain about. But the game and the mod are supposed to be somewhat simulationist. Moreover, I suppose the biggest issue I have with it is that Solarius isn't particularly consistent about which camp he's in. Sometimes he's all "It'd take years of research, I'll pass.", "I did not imagine someone would want handgun ranges to correspond to barrel lengths and calibers!" at other times he's "Bullshit! I do care about 'realism'!" or "This makes no sense [to me], away it goes!" I guess it comes down to him drawing the 'realism' line somewhat higher than a tactical nerd like me or a classic X-Com 'realist' like krautbernd do.

As far as playtesting and random player bitching goes, you're right. But, sadly, Solarius himself isn't reliable either (the 'Light Cannon OP' thing being a prime example). Which makes the glib dismissals of feedback all the worse, it's a case of the blind leading the blind, at best. He does seem to be learning and going more and more "I read it and will think about it, kthanksbye!" like a regular, mainstream game developer.


As to the tech tree search, making a full 2D tech tree is pretty much impossible (at least if humans are supposed to read it). There are third-party tools to show you snippets of it, and the in-game browser does show you the prerequisites and unlocks pretty well, and allows you to hyperlink yourself to what you need with passable efficiency. I think most mod devs consider the tech tree viewer a sort of cheat anyway, and would say that a 'new inexperienced user' should keep away from it. Honestly, a 'new inexperienced user' should actually keep away from any and all megamods as well.

[Yankes]

Not necessarily. The tank round will tear off your hand, or explode and make chunky salsa out of you. While 9mm rounds - or even .45s - have been known to leave their targets completely unfazed, whether because the people were hopped on drugs/adrenaline, or because the bullet bounced off their skull/other bones.

You'd be surprised how survivable a handgun shot is, compared to even a 'varmint' round like M855 which can lop off limbs and perform other serius fuckery if you're unlucky. Modern rifle rounds are no joke.

Sniper rifles already get their 'armour penetration due to accuracy' simply from damage scaling, no need to make their actual armour penetration value near-identical as well. And, perhaps most damningly, sniper rifles do their damage regardless of shot placement, with snap shots off the cuff and so on.

Finally, this applies across all enemies. A sniper rifle will work the same against an Ooze, a Silacoid or a Zombie, none of whom has much in the way of vulnerable organs.

A lot of this is kinda beyond the scope of the game's damage model, though. One has to make do with what's available. It's just that right now, not much has been done, and thus the Light Cannon is an inferior Sniper Rifle (and an inferior shotgun, and an inferior flamethrower, and an inferior OICW).


If it was possible to separate damage bonuses by fire mode, one could make a better distinction between sniper rifles and just plain hard-hitting weapons. Eh, one can dream.

Completely unfazed? Hit between eyes? No amount of drugs will help you if you permanently lost ability to move. Even if it do not penetrate your skull it could knock you out as it have comparable energy to heavy boxer punch.
This is whole point, if you hit critical organ then even 9mm can one hit you, if you hit only not important ones, you can spend whole clip and still have live enemy.

Same with aliens, even if they do not have critical organs there still could be parts that are lot more harder or completely useless that not amount of bullets put in them will kill them. Take example of zombie, most of it is "dead meat", you could safety remove it and zombie could even be more dangerous as lost some useless ballast, but hit in spine will neutralize it off as it will not able keep standing upright because whole spine support is missing (not mentioning that in most versions zombie still need nerve system to function).

This is someway comparable to dagger vs greater sword, against armored enemy in hand of skilled fighter dagger can do a lot of more damage than any sword.

[termidor]

to be fair, he should.  no one really knows the ins and outs of the mod like he does.  that doesn't mean there doesn't deserve tweaks here and there.  but ive been around game forums for 20 years and people cry foul over balance for all sorts of things.  people rarely *playtest* like they should to truly discover balance issues. 

things like certain guns being less powerful than others in game when compared to real life are like... who cares for me.  half the fun is figuring out what works well.  hell, some card games (like hearthstone) are literally designed with this in mind.  building in discovering what items, cards, weapons.. etc.  are better than others as part of the fun.

my only gripe is more UI based for a proper tech tree search.  empty search trees are typically a big no no for new inexperienced users.  its not a horrible thing... but it definitely creates an unnecessary newbie hurdle.   i mean all that ends up happening is people just go to a wiki or some other forum post to find the information, so all ur really doing is just making it more difficult by proxy.

Sure, the issue with lack of balancing in SP games is that it reduce choice. I don't think that having knifes for instance use the full accuracy formula is good for gameplay as it just made then completly worthless as a melee backup, specially when I can bring for instance an iron pipe , be more effective with soldiers below 100 melee accuracy and allow as a bonus to capture enemies and give an extra cash. Similarly I don't think having consistency is bad bc it actually reinforce choice rather than making some weapons clearly dominant over other. For instance between the 5,56 rifles the M4 and SA 80 both bring different advantages while being very similar. Once you get the  G11 all other rifles are inferior, which just makes the strategic dimension worse. Why would I want to play with all the diffent options when one rifle is better than others?