Should body types and gender actually have an effect on melee and shit?

[vampiresoap]

Like being taller and bigger gives you an advantage in melee but also means you're way more likely to get hit by bullets. That kind of thing. Also, I know this is probably going to piss some people off, but aren't males with normal body types supposed to be way stronger than females with normal body types? I've had too many young men getting killed by berserking grandmas to not gripe about this lol

[mumblemumble]

I would honestly say yes. I think it would add extra depth to the game, which is always interesting. Some may say its sexist, but honestly the truth of the matter is men are bigger and stronger than women...

[cultist]

I don't think it's worth the effort. Damage depends on weapon wielded. Chance to hit is determined primarily by the melee skill. Even if males have a small boost of some sort, it's still going to come down to who has the better melee skill. The player will most likely never notice this feature unless you make it wildly unbalanced.

[Canute]

Just give male a +1 damage bonus on mellee damage, and female a bonus on mellee cooldown ! :-)

[ZestyLemons]

No. This is an idea that only enforces stereotypes.

Skill influences your ability to fight, not your body type or your gender. A black belt or other similarly trained person will whoop an untrained person regardless of age or stature.

[ArguedPiano]

No. This is an idea that only enforces stereotypes.

Skill influences your ability to fight, not your body type or your gender. A black belt or other similarly trained person will whoop an untrained person regardless of age or stature.

Well said!

[Boston]

Like with literally everything else in reality, skill is the most important aspect of an activity. Especially when it comes to fighting.

A guy that is big and strong, yet not very good at fighting, will get their ass beaten by a 80lbs-soaking-wet girl who knows martial arts.

Stop reinforcing negative stereotypes.

[mumblemumble]

No. This is an idea that only enforces stereotypes.

Whats so bad about that? I mean, the stereotype that men are stronger is true. Also, Skill is PART of it. You might be an amazing swordsman, but if someone has twice your strength, its an uphill battle, even if they aren't the most skilled.

Dark souls is a good example, where many monsters aren't per-say skilled, but are strong enough they can shit all over you unless you have immense skill.

I would honestly say that in reality, some weapons require a certain strength amount to use EFFECTIVELY. Sure, an average woman could wield a sledgehammer, but a man could use it far more effectively most of the time, even if hes not trained in fighting, just because he can more easily lift, swing, and handle the heavy weight. This is assuming the male is stereotypically strong, and the female is weak, of course, but this is statistically true.

Honestly, I don't even see the big deal, women are better snipers, men are better brawlers...why is everyone so offended?

And why is it a NEGATIVE stereotype? You guys are enforcing  the NEGATIVE stereotype that women want equality in all things.  (Incase you don't get it, I'm poking fun at the idea of "stereotypes" and that "oh no, stereotypes are always bad!!!)

I'd rather offend EVERYONE with stereotypes which reflect reality, than outright DENY reality...which is what most people do. They insist that the average woman is always toe to toe with an average man in all fields, and this is simply NOT the case. Physically, physiologically, psychologically, men and women are VERY different, and YES, these differences have effects in performance of many things...which means sometimes men, or women are OBJECTIVELY BETTER for some tasks on average.

True, some men and women are exceptions, but this doesn't mean statistically its untrue. Generally speaking pistol rounds to the head are fatal, but do you want to test with your own brain to try and fight the "stereotype" on traumatic gunshot wounds to the head? Didn't think so....

A guy that is big and strong, yet not very good at fighting, will get their ass beaten by a 80lbs-soaking-wet girl who knows martial arts.

Citation?

Part of combat is force...ever seen a bunny rabbit KILL a lion?...no?..Want to know why?...The scale is entirely off...Theres simply NOT ENOUGH FORCE which the body of a rabbit can generate to kill a lion. Even with a rabbit high on drugs, versus a lame, sick lion, the lions paw weights more than the rabbit, so killing it is easy. The lion puts less effort into killing it than the rabbit puts into trying to flea.

inherently, FORCE IS NEEDED to do damage... Ever wonder why theres the stereotype of a girl beating savagely on a guy and the guy ignoring it? Because this is reality sometimes, where a girl, even at her angriest, cannot generate the force to damage or stun the male. Sure, skill is an element, but that brings up another factor : if 2 equally skilled people, male and female fight, is the female evenly matched? No...Because a man has larger bones, longer limbs, taller frame, bigger strength, and even with similar, or WORSE skills, the power factor can easily compensate.

Just like the lion and rabbit, skill is meaningless if force does not scale. You might be an expert mechanic but if you cannot lift something, you will NEVER get that job done alone. And likewise, you might be an expert martial artist, but if you lack the strength to cause harm to a male, or the size to effectively breach their defenses, you wont be winning anytime soon.

just remember the core element to it : Skill is how effectively one can USE force, but if one has less force, its unlikely they will do BETTER than one with more. Some tasks that are less laborious are different, but someone who can effortlessly do a task, but isn't very skilled will do better than someone which knows the job inside and out, but has to exert all their strength just to barely do the task.

[vampiresoap]

No. This is an idea that only enforces stereotypes.

Skill influences your ability to fight, not your body type or your gender. A black belt or other similarly trained person will whoop an untrained person regardless of age or stature.

The fact that you suddenly bring skill into the equation shows that you have no concept of scientific methods and controlled environment. (Ever heard of the phrase "all else being equal"?)...

A man and a woman engage in combat. Both of them are equally skilled. Now you're forced to bet on who wins. Your life depends on the outcome. Who will you put your money on? 9 out of 10 of any sane group of people would bet on the man because they are not as delusional as you are.

Also, body type does not influence your ability to fight? Really? So when you're super overweight, you fight just as well as when you're fit and muscular?

[mumblemumble]

Exactly...

Also, I DEMAND video of a 10 year old black belt kicking the ass of a 350 pound, pacifist body builder. Get on it guys, for equality ~ 

Actually, lets use another analogy.... 2 robots are made, both for destroying concrete with a hammer.

1 is VERY simple, just a 5 lb sledge hammer swung with plenty of force. Nothing fancy, kinda shaky, but it does the job, and has a sturdy frame

another robot is developed with math being done by the robot to account for the most effective angle to strike, aiming for the weakest point, and striking in an angle so the force hits the weakest areas of concrete corresponding to the xrays the machine can take of said concrete... But the engine is smaller, and the hammer head is lighter, and its frame is not made of steel, but of machined aluminum

Now, objectively robot 2 is WAY more "skilled" as it takes into account so many factors...this said, can it even exert the necessary force to break the concrete?... Not likely...does all the fancy gizmos n math make up for it?...not really.

And so, even though one is an "expert" at how to break concrete, it doesn't have the HARDWARE for it.

Actually thats a good comparison, skill is like software, force is like hardware. Good software helps, but nothing gets done if you dont have the hardware. And better hardware can often do better with worse software, than good software with bad hardware..

[A Friend]

Oh my! How controversial!

Dunno about the female disadvantage but I think body types influencing combat seems alright. As long as it's just small advantages.

[milon]

Don't forget this isn't the present. This is way in the future. How do you know that females aren't on par with males in terms of strength, size, etc?

[Limdood]

disagree, unnecessary for a near-unnoticeable (or way overboard if it is noticeable) effect.

[BoogieMan]

I have 3 years of Karate experience and during sparring I got the upper hand on more physically fit and vastly(8+ yrs) more experienced fighters on several occasions by being stronger and heavier than them. By steering the fight into positions where I would gain more advantage, such as against the wall on on the ground where my inferior speed and skill was less of a penalty, and by being willing to take a few hits while doing so. Bulling them against the wall, even luring them into headlocking me so I could reach down and grab their legs with my hands and lift them off the ground and slam them down on their backs. Much easier to get on top and utilize weight and strength advantage. Even if my opponent was equally sized or even stronger, as one was, I was still able to pin him to the ground because I could add more of my weight to my grapples than he could on his back. If it weren't sparring and instead lethal combat, it could still play out similarly, just everyone would be much more injured afterwards.

Skill makes a big difference and is obviously the single best contribution to effectiveness. However strength, size, pain tolerance, and more importantly the willingness to take hits, makes a big difference. It can serve as a tie breaker and also can close some of the gap in case of skill disparity that scales more and more the bigger the difference.

Don't forget this isn't the present. This is way in the future. How do you know that females aren't on par with males in terms of strength, size, etc?

Well, we don't know that for sure and it doesn't make evolutionary sense. Women didn't evolve to have as much upper body strength because they didn't need it. We're not going to evolve *naturally* much in the next few thousand years and anything technological would be available to everyone.

However if we're discussing gender effects on gameplay, while men would be stronger, faster, clot slightly faster, and able to tolerate heat a little better.. Women would tolerate cold better (even though they always say they are cold) suffer less in the short term during starvation, live a bit longer, and be slightly less likely to catch as well as recover a little faster from illness.*

*on average

[Headshotkill]

Don't forget this isn't the present. This is way in the future. How do you know that females aren't on par with males in terms of strength, size, etc?

Your answer is kinda answered by the ingame lore when you check out the information text about humans:

"Humans are largely unaffected by evolutionary pressure on other planets."

Meaning they're kinda the same like the present. Which means men are statistically stronger than women.
Then again if you just can't these stereotypes and get triggered, I'll even out the playing field for you and give a statistically proven male stereotype:

Women have statistically proven better social skills than men.