Why does the cross bow do more damage than the m4?

[taco86 156]

Balancing. You have to make a trade-off between realism and gameplay.

While certainly the reason and answer to my initial question, I clearly don't like dropping realism for "game play"...  Some realistic projectile physics and wounds in this "anti game" would be very welcome.

 

 

edit: I also don't think it is that unrealistic for a crossbow to be more damaging than a 5.56mm bullet.

It is unrealistic though...  Take a look at what a crossbow does to simulated animal tissue, then compared it to a HV rifle round such as the 5.56...  Now either projectile will be lethal if it hits a lethal area, however the trauma to the body in the case of the 5.56 is many magnitudes greater...  As for the bolt, you have a relatively consistent and controlled wound channel.  In the case of the 5.56, the initial wound channel may be more narrow, however once the bullet tumbles and disintegrates you've got many pieces of copper/lead moving through your body at over 1,000 mph dumping  their energy.  The result is several ragged, unpredictable, and permanent wound cavities which are surrounded by several inches of mush caused by the 50+ gs caused by the bullet fragments transferring energy resulting in rapid temporary expansion of tissue...  HV rifle rounds can literally turn your innards into bloody mushy goup, an arrow or bolt fired from a modern bow/xbow does nothing of the sort.

Edited April 19, 2014 by taco86

[TheScruffyBandit 382]

The real question is "why is the 5.56 so weak?"

 

Exactly. Firearms are currently drastically underpowered, the m4 is just the most obvious in terms of per shot damage.

 

I can only imagine this has been done in favor of balance.

[pale1776 375]

You know why theyre doing that? Welcome to build 0.42, almost halfway through alpha (FINALLY)

Do you want M4s and other guns to be as common as can openers were early on, and be stuck with a crossbow worse than your fists?

[taco86 156]

This is a topic about the relative lethality of the crossbow, not a topic about balancing spawn rates of m4s and crossbows...

Edited April 19, 2014 by taco86

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

Hrm.

 

Though if you make the crossbow kill in more then two - three shots to the chest, it will become utterly useless, you have to factor in realism.

 

A crossbow will kill you, just like a bullet, if it hits any of your vital organs. We need vital organ hitboxes, or something.

 

That way a shot to the chest can be lethal or nonlethal depending on where it hits.

 

I personally think the crossbow should be a two hit kill on the chest, perhaps causing the player hit to bleed and lose a lot of blood. One hit is just outrageous, its nearly the same as a 7.62 round right now...

[TheScruffyBandit 382]

Hrm.

 

Though if you make the crossbow kill in more then two - three shots to the chest, it will become utterly useless, you have to factor in realism.

 

A crossbow will kill you, just like a bullet, if it hits any of your vital organs. We need vital organ hitboxes, or something.

 

That way a shot to the chest can be lethal or nonlethal depending on where it hits.

 

I personally think the crossbow should be a two hit kill on the chest, perhaps causing the player hit to bleed and lose a lot of blood. One hit is just outrageous, its nearly the same as a 7.62 round right now...

Unfortunately, while I agree with you that this would be nice.... I doubt we'll see something like that happening, simply because it would be much more demanding than more traditional systems of calculating damage based on hit location.

 

We're most likely stuck with the old "1 hit in the head, 2 or 3 in the body" for weapons like the M4, just like videogames have been doing since the dawn of time.

 

edit: If only 2 or 3 hits with an m4 did kill a player reliably, I doubt we'd be having topics like this! I know I have a friend on DayZ who claims to have been hit around 10 times with 5.56 and managed to walk away from the engagement and I've shot people multiple times with an FNX only to have them crawl or walk away from me, bleeding from every single inch of flesh on their body.

Edited April 19, 2014 by TheScruffyBandit

[taco86 156]

A crossbow will kill you, just like a bullet, if it hits any of your vital organs. We need vital organ hitboxes, or something.

 

I think this point is very important.  Having a system of hit boxes within hit boxes (much like WOT and War Thunder) would be fantastic imo.  Implementing a similar armor system in which only very minimal damage is sustained if a bullet cannot pass through would also be fantastic as well.  While I know this is not a "simulator" like Warthunder, Warthunder has been able to do allot with how realistic their damage is calculated.  What I think makes this so impressive is the volume of fire represented in war thunder...  Many of the aircraft are capable of shooting more than 120 projectiles a second which all have rather robust ballistics and terminal ballistics being calculated...  The game also has a system in which you're not dead until your pilot is shot or very critical portions of the aircraft are destroyed such as wings.  Most of the "hits" simply cause damage to components of the aircraft which obviously negatively impact the aircraft's ability to fly.  This is a system of hit boxes within hit boxes done right and the number of calculations going on in WT far exceeds any firefight that happens in dayz.

Edited April 19, 2014 by taco86

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

Unfortunately, while I agree with you that this would be nice.... I doubt we'll see something like that happening, simply because it would be much more demanding than more traditional systems of calculating damage based on hit location.

 

We're most likely stuck with the old "1 hit in the head, 2 or 3 in the body" for weapons like the M4, just like videogames have been doing since the dawn of time.

 

edit: If only 2 or 3 hits with an m4 did kill a player reliably, I doubt we'd be having topics like this!

 

Hey, two - three shots in the leg knocked a freshspawn who was trying to knock me out last night out, and I used another two rounds to finish him off, though I'm waiting for my mag to run out so I can toss this damn M4.

[amiasfree 262]

What are you even talking about?  Knife wound causing more pain and a larger cavity wound than a bullet?  You're nuts man and talking nonsense.  A knife generally leaves a very "controlled" and predictable wound pattern that is relatively easy to treat in comparison to gun shot wounds...  A wound from a modern HV military rifle leaves a very chaotic wound channel making them very difficult to treat...  Lets not forget that the tissue surrounding the permanent wound channel of the bullet has just eaten 50+ gs and been turned to bloody mush as well...

Shoot yourself in the hand with a 22 pistol.

 

Know stab yourself in the other with a huge combat knife.

[Grzech 50]

Me and my father we build crossbows, using the leaf spring from old mercedes 124 model.  From 30 meters, steel bolts pierce trough 30 cm diameter trunk of a pine, like a fu..n AP tank sabot :D my oldman are a bit crazy with that kind of a sh...t :D

Edited April 19, 2014 by Grzech

[Whyherro123 2283]

Shoot yourself in the hand with a 22 pistol.

 

Know stab yourself in the other with a huge combat knife.

You are deliberately underpowering the bullet in this instance to make your knife look better by comparison. A .22LR has MUCH MUCH less powder than a .223/5.56mm, anybody who knows anything about firearms knows that. Shoot yourself in the foot with a 5.56mm, you are liable to lose the foot. Stab yourself, you will have a neat hole that, depending on what it hit as the blade went through, could require only stitches and bed rest to recover from.

lrn2debate, please

[AshleyP 121]

Stabbing causes a much more pain inducing large-cavity wound that is much slower and more damaging than a bullet. I would rather be shot than stabbed myself.

 

Imagine you have a bucket of water. Stab it with a knife. It goes slop slop slop.

 

Then throw a ball-bearing into it as hard as you can. A big fountain of water goes everywhere.

 

That's what a bullet does to the human body. Velocity + mass hitting water - and the human body is essentially a bag of water - equals big shockwave, blood everywhere, nasty. I would rather not be stabbed *or* shot, but I surmise that stab wounds leave more tissue intact and in a combat situation would take more time to stop the enemy from shooting you in the head.

 

It's been a while since I read John Keegan's The Face of Battle, but one thing that comes through is that arrow/crossbow-based combat results in a lot of wounded soldiers, who were probably going to die of infection but might survive on the battlefield for a while, whereas cannot and gunshot equals large masses of dead soldiers lying dead, because firearms are simply more lethal. The velocity kills.

[sabaka (DayZ) 70]

Shoot yourself in the hand with a 22 pistol.

 

Know stab yourself in the other with a huge combat knife.

 

 If you're shooting yourself with a .22 pistol you should also be stabbing yourself with a butter knife.

To make the comparison fair...

[pale1776 375]

You really underestimate the human body. Ya if you get shot and don't have antibiotics you could die of infection but the initial bullet wont kill you unless it severs an artery, hits a vital organ, or hits the spine.

You would be surprised the kind of punishment the human body can take.

Youd also be surprised from what your veteran father says, such as mine.

[taco86 156]

Shoot yourself in the hand with a 22 pistol.

 

Know stab yourself in the other with a huge combat knife.

I'd say it all depends on what the .22lr hits...  If it manages to pass through w/o hitting anything substantially solid, sure, I'll take the .22lr...  However if it does hit anything solid, like say a knuckle?  Yeah, you've got exploded bone bits and fragments everywhere and no chance of any kind of surgery success in saving your finger and the surrounding area...  In this situation I'd much rather have someone jab a knife into the top of my hand.

[akafugitive 244]

A firearm is more deadly then an arrow because firearms can deliver multiple rounds down range at a larger range, rapidly and accurately. Like the guy posted above soldiers are trained to target the kill zones and that what makes them effective. I know a lot of guys who have been hit by the inaccurate blind fire of insurgents and are alive today. An arrow specially with the right head delivers way more area damage then a smaller object traveling at high speed.

[taco86 156]

An arrow specially with the right head delivers way more area damage then a smaller object traveling at high speed.

If you're comparing an arrow with even a small caliber HV rifle like a 5.56 you're simply wrong...  A 5.56 causes SIGNIFICANTLY more trauma than an arrow or bolt...  Both will destroy or very significantly damage any organ they pass through, however the effect on the tissue beyond the initial wound channel is FAR FAR greater in a 5.56 or any rifle.  The rifle rounds just have so much more energy and transfer FAR FAR more much much faster.

Edited April 19, 2014 by taco86

[gibonez 3633]

Because "BALANCE".

 

If only dayz stuck to its mil sim roots and forgot about the crazy arcade elements it has now.

[amiasfree 262]

You are deliberately underpowering the bullet in this instance to make your knife look better by comparison. A .22LR has MUCH MUCH less powder than a .223/5.56mm, anybody who knows anything about firearms knows that. Shoot yourself in the foot with a 5.56mm, you are liable to lose the foot. Stab yourself, you will have a neat hole that, depending on what it hit as the blade went through, could require only stitches and bed rest to recover from.

lrn2debate, please

Since we went from M4 vs crossbow bolt to simply gun vs knife/stabbing, I figured a .22 comparison would be more appropriate. .22 is the most common ammunition in the world, or something like that, right? Also I have to disagree, if you were stabbed in the foot, depending on how it was done you could easily lose half or all of your foot. One thing is for sure is that the severed nerves would render your foot permanently numb at best and unusable at worst

 

I'm not saying its as effective as a gun, but a blade can do much more than superficial damage. If you were shot in the chest with a crossbow, do you really think you'd be able to do anything after than other than lay there wishing you were dead, if it didn't collapse your lung or pierce your heart?

[Canned Muffins 82]

Crossbow is perfect as is. With its short range,slow reload,and silent death nature its just a perfect fit for the game. I see it as the perfect hero,hunter,or urban fighter weapon. If you can get close enough to a target you dispatch them fast and quietly before anyone around notices. A shot to the chest is absolutely devastating as it should be. If people think it should not kill instantly thats fine then make them fall unconscious instead because the trauma and blood loss would do just that. Incapacitate or quick death are the options I see this weapon delivering. Say a bolt misses your heart but takes out a lung well at this point you are drowning in your own blood and on the ground. Perfect stealth weapon and survivalist tool.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Canned Muffins

[gibonez 3633]

Crossbow is perfect as is. With its short range,slow reload,and silent death nature its just a perfect fit for the game. I see it as the perfect hero,hunter,or urban fighter weapon. If you can get close enough to a target you dispatch them fast and quietly before anyone around notices. A shot to the chest is absolutely devastating as it should be. If people think it should not kill instantly thats fine then make them fall unconscious instead because the trauma and blood loss would do just that. Incapacitate or quick death are the options I see this weapon delivering. Say a bolt misses your heart but takes out a lung well at this point you are drowning in your own blood and on the ground. Perfect stealth weapon and survivalist tool.

 

I don't think people are asking why the cross bow is so powerful.

 

think people are asking why the m4 or most of the firearms so weak.

 

If the crossbow kills to 1 shot to the chest you bet your ass the m4 should too.

[Canned Muffins 82]

I don't think people are asking why the cross bow is so powerful.

 

think people are asking why the m4 or most of the firearms so weak.

 

If the crossbow kills to 1 shot to the chest you bet your ass the m4 should too.

Depends on what a person has on in terms of protection. Vests may stop bullet ballistics but not arrows or bolts. If no protection is involved say a new spawn with a t-shirt than yeah one for one the damage to the chest will be the same. I see damage and protective items playing a roll in how PVP plays out in the future.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Canned Muffins

[akafugitive 244]

If you're comparing an arrow with even a small caliber HV rifle like a 5.56 you're simply wrong...  A 5.56 causes SIGNIFICANTLY more trauma than an arrow or bolt...  Both will destroy or very significantly damage any organ though pass through, however the effect on the tissue beyond the initial wound channel is FAR FAR greater in a 5.56 or any rifle.  The rifle rounds just have so much more energy and transfer FAR FAR more much much faster.

A 5.56 is effective because it is designed to not pass through actually. The back of the round moves faster then the tip on impact, folds over itself and breaks apart causing a larger wound then the round itself. That has a devastating effect to the body but does not necessarily have instant killing power when placed in a not lethal zone. We call them the walking dead, they have received a lethal wound and are alive but patching the external damage is not going to save them because the internal damage cannot be fixed without causing more damage that will kill them anyways.

[Deathlove 2286]

Depends on what a person has on in terms of protection. Vests may stop bullet ballistics but not arrows or bolts. If no protection is involved say a new spawn with a t-shirt than yeah one for one the damage to the chest will be the same. I see damage and protective items playing a roll in how PVP plays out in the future.

Actually vest can stop specific arrow head damage. I showed this earlier.

 

 

As with bullet types arrow types play a HUGE roll in the penetration.

[gibonez 3633]

Depends on what a person has on in terms of protection. Vests may stop bullet ballistics but not arrows or bolts. If no protection is involved say a new spawn with a t-shirt than yeah one for one the damage to the chest will be the same. I see damage and protective items playing a roll in how PVP plays out in the future.

 

Even with soft body armor the 5.56 round carries enough energy to break your chest cavity in and probably destroy your heart.

 

A steel plate or ceramic plate yea you would survive that pretty intact.

 

Maybe when a weight system is in place they can accurately model the effects of soft body armor vs rifle rounds.

 

 

That is a simple 9mm round that does that damage to the clay.

 

Imagine a rifle round with exponentially more energy.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cvZC7tQM8k

9mm again and thats with a trauma plate that absobs the force.

 

 

Finally a tiny .380 round or .32 acp and look at that nasty wound.