Ammo Calibration : Poll & Discussion

[WrecklessMEDIC 129]

"Oh and apparently women will need a tampon every once in a while if they survive a long time."

Hello there

And what would be wrong with that? Its just part of life. And fyi one doesn't need to have exclusively tampons, there are other things.

Regardless, get back on topic please.

Rgds

LoK

That's just weird dude. I really hope they don't go that far.....lol.

[Hikurac 115]

"So if we add a Makarov pistol, its going to simply fire 9mmP instead 9mmM. If we add an AK74, it'll fire 5.56mm, not 5.45mm. Thats why I haven't added those in. Those of us who are real gun nuts would revolt (but I have a feeling the wider community dosn't give a crap as long as it looks cool  :)" - Chris Torchia

 

Good to know this is someone working on the Bohemia team... Way to dumb down the anti-game I suppose.. Hell, as long as its for that wider community I guess its A-Ok. I wonder if this is how the Elder Scrolls fans felt when Skyrim came out.

 

Can't wait till some sucker tries to fire a 5.56 through a AK74 because he did it on Standalone.

[Hikurac 115]

Oh and apparently women will need a tampon every once in a while if they survive a long time.

http://modernwomandigest.com/disturbing-new-feminist-trend-free-bleeding/

 

Hell that concept will be gone well before any apocalypse occurs my friend. Gotta love the modern feminist movement!  :thumbsup:

[terminal_boy 860]

At least we know that the zombies will find and eat the feminists first now.

[scriptfactory 620]

Can't wait till some sucker tries to fire a 5.56 through a AK74 because he did it on Standalone.

Tell me you are joking. Please. These arguments are getting so ridiculous and hyperbolic that I have to feel that some people don't realize this is just a game.

[Hikurac 115]

Tell me you are joking. Please. These arguments are getting so ridiculous and hyperbolic that I have to feel that some people don't realize this is just a game.

Yea the arguments are ridiculous. Yes I am exaggerating how I feel. I do it for a reason. There are soooo many simulation/gaming companies out there that half ass survival and realism. For ONCE I would like to see a company have the balls to go through with it. That was Rocket's vision after all, the "anti-game". A true simulator. Yes the bullet issue is minuscule, but each time one of these slip-ups occurs, it proves detrimental to the overall development. Its like a domino effect, slowly leading up to the developers becoming too lazy or scared to make realism a priority. The end result is always the same. The casual players get their quick thrill and leave for some other game, whilst the original and hardcore fans are left with a broken, arcady, pile of crap.

 

Yeah, the arguments are stupid, but i'm willing to make them in order to get the anti-game that many of us have always wanted.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

Yea the arguments are ridiculous. Yes I am exaggerating how I feel. I do it for a reason. There are soooo many simulation/gaming companies out there that half ass survival and realism. For ONCE I would like to see a company have the balls to go through with it. That was Rocket's vision after all, the "anti-game". A true simulator. Yes the bullet issue is minuscule, but each time one of these slip-ups occurs, it proves detrimental to the overall development. Its like a domino effect, slowly leading up to the developers becoming too lazy or scared to make realism a priority. The end result is always the same. The casual players get their quick thrill and leave for some other game, whilst the original and hardcore fans are left with a broken, arcady, pile of crap.

 

Yeah, the arguments are stupid, but i'm willing to make them in order to get the anti-game that many of us have always wanted.

Anti-game =/= pure realism.

The whole point of an anti-game isn't that it replicates reality as close as possible, but that it is not meant to be played for fun and is challenging without artificial limitations. Having fictional lore, such as a 5.56x45mm AK-74, is not breaking some sort of anti-game code.

I'm sure most of us want the 5.45x39mm AK-74 and would like some of the inconsistencies/inaccuracies fixed, but it seems a lot of people are one-sided and over exaggerate their arguments. The devs will be much more likely to take you seriously if you effectively convey your argument and point out logical reasoning in front of your point, rather than whining and complaining that it's 'arcadey'/consoley'/'gamey'/'broken'/what-have-you. You also have to be willing to see the reasoning the devs will or will not do something, or at least consider it, because you're only going to be disappointed and look stupid when you complain that something in-game doesn't match your exact definition for how you think the game should be.

 

Regardless, it's been clarified over and over again that these things are temporary or aren't happening yet. Nowhere has any of the devs said that we will never have correct-firing weapons, and plenty of times they have stated that they won't do it yet. People are going crazy, even when the devs just speculate on something that hasn't happened yet.

[crazykage 1063]

I am not sure how to respond to Krazycage. Half the post supports my comment, a third is remarkable bravado, the rest absurd.

Take twenty random civilians to a range, give them a good hunting rifle, have them fire standing. Most will miss.

Further proof, IMO, that you know NOTHING about shooting IRL (will explain in a moment), and still fails to argue FOR the continuation of randomized ballistics in any logical way. Your argument thus far is simply that our characters are not military personnel and should therefore not shoot like one. Fine. But that does not take the following into consideration:

-Our characters are (as stated by another poster previously) NOTHING. BLANK SLATES upon which WE THE PLAYER establish a background, history, lore, personality at OUR discretion. NOWHERE in this games forums, literature, or developer comments of any kind, does it implicitly state that our characters are anything otherwise (other than by players such as you). If nothing else, they have stated the opposite, wanting to not impose playstyles on the players, simply giving them the tools. What all this means is that my character is who "I" want him to be. Not who you THINK he should be.

-Let us say, for the sake of argument, that my character ISNT, nor ever WILL BE, military. This does not take into account the following: Law enforcement, Hunters, Olympic ski shooters, gun enthusiasts, civilian militia, natural born "Carlos Vasilli Hathcock Zietzev" shooters, etc. To say that NONE of the player's characters have military experience would be unlikely (realistically). To say that none of them whatsoever have ANY experience or even background knowledge of firearms defies ALL logic (much like many of your posts I have seen thus far, which are chock full of logical fallacy).

I am beginning to think you DO fall into the camp of players I mentioned earlier: your argument only makes sense (to me) if seen from a selfish perspective that wants to limit other players' ability to kill you in game. You want a simplified, LEVELED playing field. If I am wrong, prove it to me, and I will gladly rescind that statement. My argument is NOT selfish. I want a system that is challenging, balanced, realistic, and is FAIR to all parties. Randomized ballistics IS NOT FAIR to everyone. Its only fair to the victim that was outsmarted and/or outmaneuvered. And of course, all this is to say NOTHING about shooting zombies. I might want to play as a carebear type character one day, that wouldn't hurt a fly. But Im STILL going to need to shoot zombies, aren't I?

Lastly, to return to the second half of the above comment and why I believe you know nothing about shooting IRL.

The only argument I have AGAINST the statement is this: Most would NOT miss. ALL OF THEM WOULD!!!!! 20 civies (assuming all have no experience or knowledge) handed even a very GOOD rifle, and told to fire it in a standing position, would miss. ABSOLUTELY!!!!!

That guy I mentioned, whom I taught to shoot? I didn't hand him the rifle, and simply tell him to shoot it from a standing position. THATS THE HEIGHT OF STUPIDITY! I explained correct sight alignment, sight picture, bone support, hasty and loop slings, proper handling, safety (was actually the first thing), breathing and trigger control, showed him good shooting positions (prone, sitting, kneeling [NOT STANDING]) and explained proper bone support, among a myriad of other tips and tricks learned from personal experience. OF COURSE A CIVIE would fail in the scenario you just depicted. NOBODY takes well aimed shots at ranges exceeding 50 meters from a standing position! We don't even do that IN GAME!

Half the post supports my comment (none of it does. I argue emphatically against it, by explaining that shooting is not that hard, in support of my argument that even IF all of the characters are not military, that this STILL should not imply that NONE of them know how to shoot. A little practice, common sense, intelligence, and a source of knowledge is all it takes), a third is remarkable bravado (Marine. Comes naturally to me. But I didn't come here to brag, rather to prove a point. And there is NOTHING remarkable about my shooting skills. Compared to many in the corps, I could be considered merely mediocre), the rest absurd (Really? More logical fallacy. Stating a fact does not make it true. Fish can also be cats. See? Doesn't work. I honestly think that you KNOW you have no basis for a valid and logical argument, and are simply trying to push a selfish agenda in the hopes of leveling the playing field).

[Hikurac 115]

Anti-game =/= pure realism.

The whole point of an anti-game isn't that it replicates reality as close as possible, but that it is not meant to be played for fun and is challenging without artificial limitations. Having fictional lore, such as a 5.56x45mm AK-74, is not breaking some sort of anti-game code.

I'm sure most of us want the 5.45x39mm AK-74 and would like some of the inconsistencies/inaccuracies fixed, but it seems a lot of people are one-sided and over exaggerate their arguments. The devs will be much more likely to take you seriously if you effectively convey your argument and point out logical reasoning in front of your point, rather than whining and complaining that it's 'arcadey'/consoley'/'gamey'/'broken'/what-have-you. You also have to be willing to see the reasoning the devs will or will not do something, or at least consider it, because you're only going to be disappointed and look stupid when you complain that something in-game doesn't match your exact definition for how you think the game should be.

 

Regardless, it's been clarified over and over again that these things are temporary or aren't happening yet. Nowhere has any of the devs said that we will never have correct-firing weapons, and plenty of times they have stated that they won't do it yet. People are going crazy, even when the devs just speculate on something that hasn't happened yet.

Yeah, I hope your right. I just don't want to see DayZ go down the drown. Sorry for being dick-ish.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Hikurac

[crazykage 1063]

Hello there

 

And what would be wrong with that? Its just part of life. And fyi one doesn't need to have exclusively tampons, there are other things.

 

Regardless, get back on topic please.

 

Rgds

 

LoK

I hear Cherokee hair works quit well....

[PhillyT 554]

Further proof, IMO, that you know NOTHING about shooting IRL (will explain in a moment), and still fails to argue FOR the continuation of randomized ballistics in any logical way. Your argument thus far is simply that our characters are not military personnel and should therefore not shoot like one. Fine. But that does not take the following into consideration:

-Our characters are (as stated by another poster previously) NOTHING. BLANK SLATES upon which WE THE PLAYER establish a background, history, lore, personality at OUR discretion. NOWHERE in this games forums, literature, or developer comments of any kind, does it implicitly state that our characters are anything otherwise (other than by players such as you). If nothing else, they have stated the opposite, wanting to not impose playstyles on the players, simply giving them the tools. What all this means is that my character is who "I" want him to be. Not who you THINK he should be.

-Let us say, for the sake of argument, that my character ISNT, nor ever WILL BE, military. This does not take into account the following: Law enforcement, Hunters, Olympic ski shooters, gun enthusiasts, civilian militia, natural born "Carlos Vasilli Hathcock Zietzev" shooters, etc. To say that NONE of the player's characters have military experience would be unlikely (realistically). To say that none of them whatsoever have ANY experience or even background knowledge of firearms defies ALL logic (much like many of your posts I have seen thus far, which are chock full of logical fallacy).

I am beginning to think you DO fall into the camp of players I mentioned earlier: your argument only makes sense (to me) if seen from a selfish perspective that wants to limit other players' ability to kill you in game. You want a simplified, LEVELED playing field. If I am wrong, prove it to me, and I will gladly rescind that statement. My argument is NOT selfish. I want a system that is challenging, balanced, realistic, and is FAIR to all parties. Randomized ballistics IS NOT FAIR to everyone. Its only fair to the victim that was outsmarted and/or outmaneuvered. And of course, all this is to say NOTHING about shooting zombies. I might want to play as a carebear type character one day, that wouldn't hurt a fly. But Im STILL going to need to shoot zombies, aren't I?

Lastly, to return to the second half of the above comment and why I believe you know nothing about shooting IRL.

The only argument I have AGAINST the statement is this: Most would NOT miss. ALL OF THEM WOULD!!!!! 20 civies (assuming all have no experience or knowledge) handed even a very GOOD rifle, and told to fire it in a standing position, would miss. ABSOLUTELY!!!!!

That guy I mentioned, whom I taught to shoot? I didn't hand him the rifle, and simply tell him to shoot it from a standing position. THATS THE HEIGHT OF STUPIDITY! I explained correct sight alignment, sight picture, bone support, hasty and loop slings, proper handling, safety (was actually the first thing), breathing and trigger control, showed him good shooting positions (prone, sitting, kneeling [NOT STANDING]) and explained proper bone support, among a myriad of other tips and tricks learned from personal experience. OF COURSE A CIVIE would fail in the scenario you just depicted. NOBODY takes well aimed shots at ranges exceeding 50 meters from a standing position! We don't even do that IN GAME!

Half the post supports my comment (none of it does. I argue emphatically against it, by explaining that shooting is not that hard, in support of my argument that even IF all of the characters are not military, that this STILL should not imply that NONE of them know how to shoot. A little practice, common sense, intelligence, and a source of knowledge is all it takes), a third is remarkable bravado (Marine. Comes naturally to me. But I didn't come here to brag, rather to prove a point. And there is NOTHING remarkable about my shooting skills. Compared to many in the corps, I could be considered merely mediocre), the rest absurd (Really? More logical fallacy. Stating a fact does not make it true. Fish can also be cats. See? Doesn't work. I honestly think that you KNOW you have no basis for a valid and logical argument, and are simply trying to push a selfish agenda in the hopes of leveling the playing field).

 

I can hit a zombie or a player from a standing position in game with mosin, m4, and SKS at 100m. 

 

The reason I find all of this endlessly entertaining is because hitting people and being hit is as easy as pie in this game.  All this talk about dispersion has the ring of whiners.  I don't care if they fix whatever it is you guys claim is broken.  I don't read the data files for tricks or efficiency.  I am not against anything for some bizarre desire to gain an advantage.  As long as everyone is saddled with the same restrictions, I don't care.

 

I will play the game in whatever state it is in.  I have a good time with it.

 

I shoot all the time, now I can't claim I can shoot 50 rounds from standing through the ten ring at 100 yards like yourself, but I do try my best.  Maybe someday I can join your lofty position Kage.

[minime1000 78]

So anti-game it's back to gamey.

[Daemonkid 493]

-Snip-

Nice retort, you got slammed and this is the best you could think of to say back to him.

Ahahahahahahahahahaha. You're awful bro. 

[finnpalm 312]

From Chris Torchia:

 

 

 

Thoughts? In a game that aims for realism do we (the users) not care about guns being chambered in the right caliber?

 

My thoughts is to have a true calibers for all weapons they put in the game is a good thing that will bring an extra dimension to game play. Will I keep this rifle that has a more commonly found caliber, or will I keep the other one that is cooler or better or whatever?

 

I'd like that a lot.

[Daemonkid 493]

There is a substantial body of evidence demonstrating humans' seemingly natural aversion to killing. Much of the research in this area has been conducted by the military; analysts have found that soldiers tend to intentionally fire over the enemy's head, or not to fire at all.

Studies of combat activity during the Napoleonic and Civil Wars revealed striking statistics. Given the ability of the men, their proximity to the enemy, and the capacity of their weapons, the number of enemy soldiers hit should have been well over 50 percent, resulting in a killing rate of hundreds per minute. Instead, however, the hit rate was only one or two per minute. And a similar phenomenon occurred during World War I: according to British Lieutenant George Roupell, the only way he could get his men to stop firing into the air was by drawing his sword, walking down the trench, "beating [them] on the backside and ... telling them to fire low".

World War II fire rates were also remarkably low: historian and US Army Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall reported that, during battle, the firing rate was a mere 15 to 20 percent; in other words, out of every hundred men engaged in a firefight, only fifteen to twenty actually used their weapons. And in Vietnam, for every enemy soldiers killed, more than fifty thousand bullets were fired.

What these studies have taught the military is that in order to get soldiers to shoot to kill, to actively participate in violence, the soldiers must be sufficiently desensitized to the act of killing. In other words, they have to learn not to feel -- and not to feel responsible -- for their actions. They must be taught to override their own conscience. yet these studies also demonstrate that even in the face of immediate danger, in situations of extreme violence, most people are averse to killing. In other words, as Marshall concludes, "the vast majority of combatants throughout history, at the moment of truth when they could and should kill the enemy, have found themselves to be 'conscientious objectors'". 

In regards to that, during WW1 & 2. You have young men being shipped off to fight a war. Many prior had not even held a firearm or even contemplated killing a man. On both sides of the war, they were basically kids, 18+ (With others lying about their age) these kids were no way prepared to fight a war.  They thought maybe if they don't kill anyone, they won't be killed.  That's just the way I see it.

 

Also, put a mask or face covering on someone and watch how easily a man will kill another man as long as he never sees his face. That's an important aspect, seeing another face humanizes the target and makes you think twice, cover up the face, the target is viewed as less than human.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Daemonkid

[Guest]

I would like to see 7.62x54R in the game. This would actually help the economy in that 7.62x54Rmm would be much more common than 7.62x51mm NATO or .308 Winchester. 

 

Also, the SVD uses 7.62x54R, as do the PKP and Pecheneg, so it would not be an "exotic" ammunition.

 

There should definitely be realistic ammunition types, and I was quite surprised to see that the 91/30 used NATO ammunition.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Guest

[PhillyT 554]

Nice retort, you got slammed and this is the best you could think of to say back to him.

Ahahahahahahahahahaha. You're awful bro. 

 

Did I?  

 

Oh, I thought I was responding to his main defense against anyone who isn't up in arms about the supposed issues with shooting, that we are just looking to get shot less.  The idea isn't an accurate response since it doesn't really help a person.  If you are getting shot less, you are hitting less, and the people shooting at you will still likely kill you.

 

My main response is I don't see any issue with the shooting mechanic as it stands.  I kill people all the time.  I am shot by people all the time.  IF you cannot hit your target it is your issue, not the game.

 

But you and your crusade enjoy yourself.  You obviously take this much more to heart than myself and the majority of the community.  I will be pleased that you will never really find peace with this game since it won't ever be what you want it to be.

[Cuqah 22]

Really? Is it so much to ask for to code different types of ammunition? This isn't some crazy request that has never been done before in the history of video gaming. It makes no sense to add a level of detail such as blood types and heart attacks and try to go the lazy route of having most guns use the same ammo even if their real world counter parts don't. Even your sig that is a quote from Mr. Torchia reads: "gun shops in Russia and in Czech Republic and the massive variety of guns and ammo you can find there.". This game started as a mod from ArmA 2, a game which the devs went to great lengths add depth and realism in the firearms dept. It is very disappointing that the Devs want to try to take the Call of Duty route when it comes to firearms realism.

they stated before that while they will likely add more later, they would rather focus on more important issues. 

[Daemonkid 493]

 

 

My main response is I don't see any issue with the shooting mechanic as it stands.  I kill people all the time.  I am shot by people all the time.  IF you cannot hit your target it is your issue, not the game.

 

 

I kill people all the time, still doesn't mean dispersion isn't a stupid fucking mechanic. Revolver is useless over 25 meters, it doesn't shoot straight anything passed that range, which is dumb. 

SKS has decent dispersion, but i've missed targets when pointed straight at their torso at 30 meters and the bullets veers to the left really wide and then I have to shoot again, and HOPE it doesn't miss wildly like that again, even though my gun is pointed right at his chest and we're only 30 meters away, well within the weapons effective range. You're telling me that's fine? That this is okay to simulate that we're not rifle experts? I'm sorry bullets go where the barrel is pointed, not veer off at a 40 degree angle out the barrel, then next shot the gun decides it's going to shoot straight.

 

I'm also the kind of guy who likes to not waste any bullets in a fights, I do not shoot unless I am sure I can get the hit, even before pulling the trigger, I line up my shot, take into account target movement, compensate for travel time and likely point of impact. I should be rewarded with a hit, not have my shot veer off like it's sentient. There are 100x better ways to simulate this, sway ect. Skills should be priority we're not playing a dice rolling game.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Daemonkid

[PhillyT 554]

And there is the issue, you guys are greatly overstating the level of dispersion. I was just at Stary, in the metal building, and fired from one wall to the other, which was around 30m. St ding, breath held, all shots were in a torso sized area using the 1911. Is that useless? No!

Saying you dislike any dispersion and exaggerating to say bullets are so random to be off by 40 degrees isn't a very compelling argument against dispersion because those claims are flat out wrong.

[Daemonkid 493]

YOU claim there flat out wrong. I've witnessed it. It doesn't happen all the time, just enough to frustrate the fuck out of people who took every preparation to line up the shot and being patient only to have their fucking shot miss in a random direction. It's fucking awful. Cone of fire has no place in this game, at all. I'm not over stating it or exaggerating anything because i've witnessed it, others have witnessed it. In my play experience it's cost me dearly sometimes. It has 0 place in this game. Reward a skilled shooter. Every time I pull the trigger it shouldn't be a fucking dice roll.

[infiltrator 275]

And there is the issue, you guys are greatly overstating the level of dispersion. I was just at Stary, in the metal building, and fired from one wall to the other, which was around 30m. St ding, breath held, all shots were in a torso sized area using the 1911. Is that useless? No!

Saying you dislike any dispersion and exaggerating to say bullets are so random to be off by 40 degrees isn't a very compelling argument against dispersion because those claims are flat out wrong.

Tests much more extensive than yours have been done already. Most handguns are horrible past 30m, regardless of stance, condition, fire rate or anything else.

I am not saying I don't like any dispersion, if there wasn't any all the guns in the world would be perfect hits if properly aimed (not the case). But dispersion SHOULD by all means be a fraction of what it is now (1/3 or 1/4) and sway should be amped to compensate and allow us to rely on breath control and skill rather than dice throws when shooting.

[Pandema 352]

Dispersion is kind of OK as a mechanic. Just not at current levels.

 

I understand that we're not soldiers and that we're not all trained to shoot, and that our lack of experience presents all sorts of factors that are hard to factor into a game. But assigning dispersion numbers in what seems like a rather arbitrary manner is just insane. Having the attachments of the rifle (barring bi-pods and compensators) affect the accuracy is even more insane.

 

 

Dial down the dispersion on the guns (seriously, some of these guns seem to be lacking rifling from the numbers) increase sway and recoil.

 

they stated before that while they will likely add more later, they would rather focus on more important issues. 

 

I feel if Torchia had worded his post better no one would care.

 

Saying no one cares about authenticity is going to get you some shit. If he'd said that the calibers wouldn't line up for a while because they want to focus on more important issues right now and would come back to it, would be fine.

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

DayZ is not a Milsim, end of story.  Once you soldier boys get this out of your head you will finally be able to find solace in knowing that this is not Arma and hopefully cope with this and not cry in the corner anymore.  Myself personally would love this game to be as hard as possible but I am going to take what the developers give me and if I enjoy it, awesome, if I don't, oh well.  Again, if you don't like the fact that they don't add every single caliber known to man in the game, wait until mods are released and slap it on your server. 

[pycco 38]

At least we know that the zombies will find and eat the feminists first now.

LMAO

 

My thoughts is to have a true calibers for all weapons they put in the game is a good thing that will bring an extra dimension to game play. Will I keep this rifle that has a more commonly found caliber, or will I keep the other one that is cooler or better or whatever?

 

I'd like that a lot.

exactly you get the whole point of this thread, this is what will make a great game not streamlining

 

DayZ is not a Milsim, end of story.  Once you soldier boys get this out of your head you will finally be able to find solace in knowing that this is not Arma and hopefully cope with this and not cry in the corner anymore.  Myself personally would love this game to be as hard as possible but I am going to take what the developers give me and if I enjoy it, awesome, if I don't, oh well.  Again, if you don't like the fact that they don't add every single caliber known to man in the game, wait until mods are released and slap it on your server. 

LOL, why don't you take what you are given.  if you don't care do all of us a favor and not post such nonsense.