Ballistics and Weapon Reliability

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

This is more inteded for SA, but it could apply to the current mod as well.

Why is it that weapon damage is tied to the weapon being used and not the actual ballistics of the round? If we look at http://www.dayzdb.co...apon-comparison we can see that the both the AKs and the M4/16 maintian the same damage. Even though they are using compeltly diffrent sized rounds. Or we see a FN FAL doing twice as much damage as an AK, even though they use the same size bullet in the chamber?

You see posts of complaing of certain guns being more powerful then other like the makorov, which does take a mag to kill some, or the .45 being to powerful. Why do we not use the actual ballistics of the round. ArmaII is a simulator, I would think the rounds were set up with ballistics in mind, if not, I think weapon damamge can be ajusted manualy in the coding.

If we look at a ballistcs calculator. http://gundata.org/b...tic-calculator/ <--- free and easy to use. Doing a comparison between a 5.56 (.223) and a 7.62 (.308) using federal Full Metal Jackets, which are the standerd military rounds. We will see a graph that looks like this.

A = .223 Remington, American Eagle (Federal) FMJ, 62gr

B = .308 Winchester (7.62mm NATO), American Eagle (Federal) Full Metal Jacket Boat-Tail, 150gr

Range Drop (inch) Velocity (fps) Energy Time (miliseconds)

A B A B A B A B

0 -1.4941 -1.4936 3019 2820 1255 2648 0 0

100 0.0006 0.0075 2713 2598 1013 2248 105 111

200 -3.2501 -3.6576 2427 2387 811 1897 222 232

300 -12.4360 -13.4456 2158 2185 641 1590 353 363

400 -29.1322 -30.5401 1907 1993 501 1323 501 507

500 -55.4506 -56.4146 1676 1812 387 1093 669 665

600 -94.2269 -92.9111 1468 1643 297 899 860 839

This is just Balistics alone. The bullet that hits the target. As you can see, the 7.62 has twice the energy at 100 yards, and then tapers off. At its lowest point of 600 yards. The 7.62 still maintains more energy to its target then the 5.56 at around 150 yards.

Then lets talk about weapon reliability. The AKs known for being inacurate, but extreamly reliable. Cleaning? What? Pffft if you want to clean it, run a shoe lace down the barrel. The M4/16, crazy accurate but this thing is prone to Jamming, freaking often. You need a full blon cleaning kit for this. Rods, brushes, cloths, oil. And when you are taking that bolt asembly apart, doint loos those peices, ya those ones that are only a fourth of an inch long that hold the whole thiing together but need to be cleaned other wise they are the key reason for the jam.

As I was military and while on the range, consistently you would have JAMs from the soldiers left and right of you . The weapon needs a certain amount of lubrication, to much and you get bolt overrides, that is where it tries to feed to rounds at once. That or you would get a round that would fail to load by not enough lubrication, mainly the carbon from the gas system that was blown back into the chamber would cause this. Then the other common jam was after about a hundred rounds you would have so much carbon iin the bolt area from the gas system, that the weapon just wouldn't cycle.

My Basic training weapon (M16A2), jammed so royaly, that I was tought the emergency relase of the charging handle. I couldn't pull it back so i gave it to the drill seargeant, he couldn't pull it back, and so he than put it on the ground leaned up agasint a tree upright and then jumped on the charging handle to dislodge the bolt that was jamed forward. After this I learned how to keep the weapon preperly oiled. After a combat load, which is six 30 round mags, you have to field strip it and clean it, reoiling it. Oh, and what ever you do, don't put the wapon on the ground in a hurry, you get any sand in that bitch and you are going to be spending a few minutes cleaning the sand out and putting a fresh coat of oil on.

If given a choice of a AK or a M4/16, I would go AK. As a urban setting, you are not dealing with range and you can get over the accuracy details, but the reliablity, and punch it gives is all there. The .223 is a good urban round as well, but the weapon, M4/16 is so not worth the head ack of a Jam in the middle of a fire fight. If I were to use a .223 weapon, I would probubly go with a HK 416.

In DayZ, I use the M16 ACOG as that weapon fits my play style. 100 to 400 yards. The weapon never jams in game, it gives me the ability to get accurat head shots, and it does the exact same damage as an AK.

Though in SA, if all thiese things were taken into effect, I would be looking for a M14. It dosn't hold as many rounds as an AK. But it still uses the same round. While also having the reliablity like an AK. But being accurate as all hell.

[-Gews- 7443]

It may come as a pleasant surprise to learn damage is tied to the velocity of the bullet in question, different bullets do different "base" damage and different bullets have different levels of drag.

Example:

Range-------5.56 NATO damage------7.62 NATO damage

000----------------3555---------------------------8000

100----------------3078---------------------------7281

200----------------2663---------------------------6627

300----------------2304---------------------------6031

400----------------1994---------------------------5490

500----------------1670---------------------------4997

600----------------1445---------------------------4548

700----------------1251---------------------------4139

800----------------1082---------------------------3767

900------------------937---------------------------3429

1000----------------810---------------------------3130

The ballistics are by no means perfect, but I assume it would be too much work to incorporate a full ballistics calculator into the game.

As for the comment on the 7.62 NATO doing almost twice as much damage as the 7.62x39, they went with energy to calculate the damage at the muzzle. Obviously that's not the best solution, effectiveness and energy don't really correspond in that manner.

As I see it, there's two ways to decide gun damage: formulas, or fudging. Either they decide on a formula (ie, energy) and base calculations on that, or they arbitrarily decide damage values based on (essentially) their personal opinions. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, my favorite example of the "fudging" method is how .45 ACP used to do three times the damage of a 9mm before they updated the damages to (mostly) follow energy.

Honestly I'd only be 100% happy if I was the one deciding all the damages. I don't like the hitpoints model, either, it's way too limited, I would definitely make it more of a chance-based system so you didn't get the exact same result each time. :lol:

[Saethkept 134]

The 7.62 x 51mm NATO round is fully 12mm longer than the formerly Warsaw Pact 7.62 x 39mm. The difference being more grains of powder and a larger bullet in the longer cartridge. If I remember correctly the standard NATO FMJ round was 165 grains ... or is that the match grade round? While the Warsaw Pact FMJ round was 139 grains? Something like that. Thus more velocity and energy at extreme ranges. At least they got the tracer round colors right.

Nevertheless, while your ideas are interesting OP, DayZ and Arma for that matter are already realistic enough for me. It's a video game. Polygons have no mass. I suppose you could argue that they exist since they occupy a hard drive and pass into video memory but why? It's a game. That said, I also enjoy tinkering with such things in shooters/mil sims, yet all I need is enough realism to suspend my disbelief.

[dayz247 59]

My Basic training weapon (M16A2), jammed so royaly, that I was tought the emergency relase of the charging handle. I couldn't pull it back so i gave it to the drill seargeant, he couldn't pull it back, and so he than put it on the ground leaned up agasint a tree upright and then jumped on the charging handle to dislodge the bolt that was jamed forward. After this I learned how to keep the weapon preperly oiled. After a combat load, which is six 30 round mags, you have to field strip it and clean it, reoiling it. Oh, and what ever you do, don't put the wapon on the ground in a hurry, you get any sand in that bitch and you are going to be spending a few minutes cleaning the sand out and putting a fresh coat of oil on.

1) Sounds to me like your DS failed you when it came to weapon maintenance.

2) Basic combat load is 7 mags

3) With proper maintenance an M16 series weapon will easily fire well over 500 rds without jamming, I know this for a fact. I get incredibly aggravated when I hear people (and my soldiers..... ) complaining that the m16/m4 is not reliable, I carried one for 4 years in Iraq with very little problems. IN FACT I have had more jams, misfeeds, and misfires from the M9 than I have had from an m16 or m4, and have shot the m9 far less. Most issues I have had from the m16 were ammo issues, not weapon issues. This is a huge issue as in years past the ammo utilized in conus for ranges was mainly reloaded ammo, and was done to a low standard. In recent years this has not been nearly as big a problem.

4) I agree that the 7.62R should do slightly more damage that 5.56x45

5) 7.62x39 is not the same as 7.62x51. There is a huge difference in energy levels between the two. The russians do have a comparable cartridge its the 7.62x54 (which has almost the exact same ballistics and energy, so much so that civilian rounds are typically loaded to the same specs as 308 win (parent case for 7.62x51).

<end> rant

Edited May 3, 2013 by dayz247

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

The entire point I was trying to make was that the rounds should be the determing factor of the damage, not the weapon used. The weapon was to be the reliability, accuracy factor. All though many of the replies are pointing out the diffrences in the sizes of the 7.62 NATO round, they have latched onto the whole balistics point. The link I had given was so that people could play around with the diffrent loads out there.

As to what dayz247 said about with proper maintnance. I would agree with him. Afer having such a horrible jam, I took much better care of my weapon. Once every two weeks I would goto the armory and re-oil it and clean off any rust it had. While deployed, I cleaned it every night to make sure there wasn't any dust in the reciever area. I never had a jam after that. But when every one else around you was having jams left and right. You quickly come to realise the weapon needs a lot of care.

[-Gews- 7443]

5) 7.62x39 is not the same as 7.62x51. There is a huge difference in energy levels between the two. The russians do have a comparable cartridge its the 7.62x54 (which has almost the exact same ballistics and energy, so much so that civilian rounds are typically loaded to the same specs as 308 win (parent case for 7.62x51).

True, there is a huge difference in energy, about 40%, one is a full-power rifle round, the other is an intermediate cartridge. Still, if you shoot someone with both, I doubt they'd notice the difference. I think the game puts too much emphasis on differences in energy... law of diminishing returns and all that.

Here's the wide-spread Fackler wound profiles (of course Fackler is just one view of things and wound profiles in jelly are certainly not the final word):

The top two are 7.62x39mm (M43 and M67), the other are 7.62x54mmR and 7.62x51mm rounds. The pink is the depth of an average human torso...

Of course these rounds will behave differently each time, and homogenous gelatin is not directly comparable to a human filled with different dermal layers, muscle tissue, veins, tendons, organs, bones, and other various titbits. Still, these diagrams can be useful.

The red is the permanent cavity, the white is the temporary "stretch cavity". Do the more powerful rounds look nearly twice as effective, even in this scientific substance? Not to me... although that can all change with expanding bullets that cause more damage and make better use of the round's energy.

The difference right now is 8000 vs 4500, the larger round is 1.778 times as effective. If one was to take the square root of that number, you'd end up with 1.333, which would mean the smaller round would do 4500 and the larger round would do 6000. That seems much more reasonable to me (in terms of difference, not in terms of damage, maybe the 7.62x39 should do 6000 and the 7.62x51 should do 8000, that's all up for debate).

[Orest 3]

I would prefer the devs rather used the "fudge" damage values (get values from real world observations in combat or otherwise) as Gews puts it as compared to the energy formula. It would not be perfect, but it would be slightly more realistic wrt observed damage as energy alone does not determine the round's performance.

Also would really like for barrel length to play a part in the damage value and the effective range values.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Orest

[m.w. vindicator 880]

I enjoy these talks on ballistics. Hopefully the devs take notice.

I dislike the current system and I would like a more organic damage system. On shot from pretty much anything to center of mass should cripple the person who got shot. I would like the victim to be knocked over by the shot and suffer bleeding that can't be stopped my on bandaid.

Intermediate rounds and full scale rifle rounds to do massive damage on center of mass hits. Humans don't have hit points. Even if you survived the bullet hit, you would be bleeding and maybe unconscious. While the lethality of intermediate rounds is dispute able, the wounding potential is undeniable.

Currently players can walk off hits from intermediate rounds which is silly, to say the least. 762x51 doesn't have the same problems because the character is almost always knocked out from the hit, which usually results in death.

My problems with rifles and nothing compared to my issues with pistol calibers. Submachine guns and pistols are very poorly represented in game. In vanilla ArmA , Smgs aren't bad but in DayZ they suck.

At most someone should survive 2-3 shots from a 9x18 makarov or a 9mm parabellum. After 2-3 shots the body would be full of holes, bleeding catastrophically, suffering extreme pain, organ failure, and then death. Surviving one shot should be possible for sure, but it shouldn't be a cake walk to get back to normal. .45 ACP should have the stopping power that it is designed to have. A good hit should force the victim to stumble or fall entirely.

Shots to limbs should cripple (rocket has confirmed this :) ).

[Very Ape 748]

I imagine people will be daunted by the realistic weapon damage, given that everyone seems to be toting military hardware.

But, rest assured, guns will be rare in standalone (I think.) I want to be overjoyed at finding a pistol.

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

As gews has put it, different bullets have different profiles. A .223 (5.56) is considered a tumbling round. This is that once it enters the body, it back end starts to flip over its nose. Energy does play a role though in the ability to bust through a bone and keep going, instead of being stopped in its tracks. At distance the diminished energy get to the point where even a good thick shirt will stop the bullet and leaving you with a good bruise. One down fall behind the Tumbling round is at range, it starts to tumble on its own just from the pressure of the atmosphere, but this long range shooting. Even if Ballistics isn't used, I would like damage tied to the bullet, and not the gun. The weapon has its own characteristics that are a determining factor as well to determine what weapon you prefer to use.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Theonis

[-Gews- 7443]

I imagine people will be daunted by the realistic weapon damage, given that everyone seems to be toting military hardware.

Meh, I'd rather have my character get shot by a military round than a hunting round. Maybe not 30 military rounds, though. :P

Even if Ballistics isn't used, I would like damage tied to the bullet, and not the gun. The weapon has its own characteristics that are a determining factor as well to determine what weapon you prefer to use.

Damage right now is tied to the bullet, although they use a somewhat strange method.

Step 1, they make a new bullet class. Here they define the properties of the bullet: base damage, penetration, and aerodynamic drag.

Step 2, they make a new magazine class... this is where it goes wrong. For whatever reason, they chose to have the muzzle velocity tied to the magazines, and not to the weapon. That means an M4 Carbine has the same muzzle velocity (and therefore damage, since damage is tied to velocity) as an M16 or anything else which uses the same magazine.

They should have tied muzzle velocity to the weapon itself instead. Some guns also have their own bullet classes even though they should be shooting the same (or very similar) loads (I'm looking at you, AS50). A couple bullet classes also have what I consider messed up or bugged damage values.

EDIT:

Also, adding more, even though damage should be tied to the bullet, some bullets seem to do a lot more damage for NO reason.

I'll give one specific example, the above-mentioned 7.62x39mm and 7.62 NATO comparison.

They've given the 7.62x39mm a base damage of 8 at 710 m/s.

They've given the 7.62 NATO a base damage of 12 at 900 m/s.

In real life, one bullet is 123 grains, the other is 147 grains. 20 grains shouldn't make massive difference in terms of the effect on a human, given the same speed. I doubt it would be noticeable at all, people aren't very thick creatures.

If you reduce both 7.62s to the same 710 m/s speed, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 710 m/s: 4,500 damage

7.62 NATO at 710 m/s: 6.310 damage

And if you bump them both to 900 m/s, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 900 m/s: 5,704 damage

7.62 NATO at 900 m/s: 8,000 damage

So while it's still much better than pretty much every other game, there could definitely be a ton of improvement in the damage models.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Gews

[m.w. vindicator 880]

I imagine people will be daunted by the realistic weapon damage, given that everyone seems to be toting military hardware.

But, rest assured, guns will be rare in standalone (I think.) I want to be overjoyed at finding a pistol.

I really sincerely hope that finding a pistol is an amazing feat!!

[m.w. vindicator 880]

Meh, I'd rather have my character get shot by a military round than a hunting round. Maybe not 30 military rounds, though. :P

Damage right now is tied to the bullet, although they use a somewhat strange method.

Step 1, they make a new bullet class. Here they define the properties of the bullet: base damage, penetration, and aerodynamic drag.

Step 2, they make a new magazine class... this is where it goes wrong. For whatever reason, they chose to have the muzzle velocity tied to the magazines, and not to the weapon. That means an M4 Carbine has the same muzzle velocity (and therefore damage, since damage is tied to velocity) as an M16 or anything else which uses the same magazine.

They should have tied muzzle velocity to the weapon itself instead. Some guns also have their own bullet classes even though they should be shooting the same (or very similar) loads (I'm looking at you, AS50). A couple bullet classes also have what I consider messed up or bugged damage values.

EDIT:

Also, adding more, even though damage should be tied to the bullet, some bullets seem to do a lot more damage for NO reason.

I'll give one specific example, the above-mentioned 7.62x39mm and 7.62 NATO comparison.

They've given the 7.62x39mm a base damage of 8 at 710 m/s.

They've given the 7.62 NATO a base damage of 12 at 900 m/s.

In real life, one bullet is 123 grains, the other is 147 grains. 20 grains shouldn't make massive difference in terms of the effect on a human, given the same speed. I doubt it would be noticeable at all, people aren't very thick creatures.

If you reduce both 7.62s to the same 710 m/s speed, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 710 m/s: 4,500 damage

7.62 NATO at 710 m/s: 6.310 damage

And if you bump them both to 900 m/s, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 900 m/s: 5,704 damage

7.62 NATO at 900 m/s: 8,000 damage

So while it's still much better than pretty much every other game, there could definitely be a ton of improvement in the damage models.

I agree. I don't really care how backwards their behind the scenes methods are also long as they produce good results. DayZ mod has more problems than Vanilla Arma 2 it seems. Pistol is Vanilla seems to kill decently even though they suck in DayZ

[dayz247 59]

Meh, I'd rather have my character get shot by a military round than a hunting round. Maybe not 30 military rounds, though. :P

This is an incredibly good point. The 5.56 and the 9mm are prime examples of this. With ball or FMJ ammo they do not do a great deal of damage (especially at a distance with the 5.56). With hollow point or soft point ammo, they will do an incredibly large amount of damage (I'm talking tissue here).

Damage right now is tied to the bullet, although they use a somewhat strange method.

Step 1, they make a new bullet class. Here they define the properties of the bullet: base damage, penetration, and aerodynamic drag.

Step 2, they make a new magazine class... this is where it goes wrong. For whatever reason, they chose to have the muzzle velocity tied to the magazines, and not to the weapon. That means an M4 Carbine has the same muzzle velocity (and therefore damage, since damage is tied to velocity) as an M16 or anything else which uses the same magazine.

They should have tied muzzle velocity to the weapon itself instead. Some guns also have their own bullet classes even though they should be shooting the same (or very similar) loads (I'm looking at you, AS50). A couple bullet classes also have what I consider messed up or bugged damage values.

EDIT:

Also, adding more, even though damage should be tied to the bullet, some bullets seem to do a lot more damage for NO reason.

I'll give one specific example, the above-mentioned 7.62x39mm and 7.62 NATO comparison.

They've given the 7.62x39mm a base damage of 8 at 710 m/s.

They've given the 7.62 NATO a base damage of 12 at 900 m/s.

In real life, one bullet is 123 grains, the other is 147 grains. 20 grains shouldn't make massive difference in terms of the effect on a human, given the same speed. I doubt it would be noticeable at all, people aren't very thick creatures.

If you reduce both 7.62s to the same 710 m/s speed, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 710 m/s: 4,500 damage

7.62 NATO at 710 m/s: 6.310 damage

And if you bump them both to 900 m/s, this happens:

7.62x39mm at 900 m/s: 5,704 damage

7.62 NATO at 900 m/s: 8,000 damage

So while it's still much better than pretty much every other game, there could definitely be a ton of improvement in the damage models.

I think a better way of doing this would be a combination. First, the bullet should have a base value for damage (this would be low).... which is then multiplied by the length of the barrel (perhaps some sort of equation could be determined to assist here).

For example, lets say we give a base damage to 5.56 of 215. Then when it is shot through an M16 you get: 215*16 = 3440 damage (at muzzle). When shot through an m4 you get: 215*14.5 = 3117.5 damage (at muzzle).

These are just examples, but would make the drop in energy/velocity more apparent in shorter barreled weapons. This would help with the MP5 issue (doing same damage as M9/g17) etc etc.

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

This is an incredibly good point. The 5.56 and the 9mm are prime examples of this. With ball or FMJ ammo they do not do a great deal of damage (especially at a distance with the 5.56). With hollow point or soft point ammo, they will do an incredibly large amount of damage (I'm talking tissue here).

I think a better way of doing this would be a combination. First, the bullet should have a base value for damage (this would be low).... which is then multiplied by the length of the barrel (perhaps some sort of equation could be determined to assist here).

For example, lets say we give a base damage to 5.56 of 215. Then when it is shot through an M16 you get: 215*16 = 3440 damage (at muzzle). When shot through an m4 you get: 215*14.5 = 3117.5 damage (at muzzle).

These are just examples, but would make the drop in energy/velocity more apparent in shorter barreled weapons. This would help with the MP5 issue (doing same damage as M9/g17) etc etc.

I would be happy with something along thies lines. The Round gets a base damage, then the weapon being used effects it in some way from its own characteristics. I want to actuly need to make a choice on what I am using, and not becuase of its looks or its coolness factor. The curent system (using the 5.56 and the 7.62 russian) of both using the same damage scale just dosn't cut it. I can understand wanting to survive a hit from a bullet, but make an actule diffrence in what you are using.

Rocket has already said that there will not be a large veriety of weapons when the game first comes out. Just many attachments. Which means you will build the weapon to fit your play style. But lets say the weapon you want to make, isn't actuly best for that job? Do you stick with your favorate weapon, or do you switch over to what actuly works best?

[koze 113]

While everyone is going on about how much damage rounds should do in game due to their real life ballistics, I'd like to say:

If the .50 cal is going to in the SA, most people would argue that is too 'OP' because they aren't used to that sort of power in COD. Anyway, when a .50 cal round enters say a torso, shock from the round entering the wound causes just as much damage, if not more than the actual round's impact. This is because all that shock will rupture everything, even bones within a certain vicinity (Don't know the dimensions exactly).

This being said if you're hit in the upper leg (quads) then it would rip your whole leg off, or your muscle, bone and nerves will be completely destroyed. Either way you will die from blood loss.

[dayz247 59]

While everyone is going on about how much damage rounds should do in game due to their real life ballistics, I'd like to say:

If the .50 cal is going to in the SA, most people would argue that is too 'OP' because they aren't used to that sort of power in COD. Anyway, when a .50 cal round enters say a torso, shock from the round entering the wound causes just as much damage, if not more than the actual round's impact. This is because all that shock will rupture everything, even bones within a certain vicinity (Don't know the dimensions exactly).

This being said if you're hit in the upper leg (quads) then it would rip your whole leg off, or your muscle, bone and nerves will be completely destroyed. Either way you will die from blood loss.

Hit from 50 cal will almost always result in immediate death from the shock itself, no need to even worry about massive loss of blood which happens immediately afterwards.

a 50 cal will easily go through a brick wall, cut a man in two, and continue on through multiple walls. OP, yes....