Yet another topic about guns balance.

[run4way 45]

Hello. Latest gun nerfing was not bad, but not perfect in my opinion.

.45ACP weapons like m1911 and Revolver: 4500/1389 (before/after)

5.45x39 (.30) weapons like all AK's except AKM: 3555/2722

2722/1389 = 1.95 (ingame .30 to .45 ratio)

From Wikipedia:

Weight of .45ACP bullet: 15.26 - 13.48g (0.01526-0.01348kg)

Velocity: 262 m/s (for 1911)

Bullet energy = m * u² / 2, so .45ACP energy = 0.01526 (i'm took max) * 262 * 262 / 2 = 523.753 J

For 5.45x39:

Weight: 3.2g (0.0032kg)

Velocity: 915 m/s

Energy = 0.0032 * 915 *915 / 2 = 1339.560 J

1339560/523753 = 2.5 (my ratio)

So, i think that 5.45 guns was overnerfed. 5.45 must be more lethal and .45ACP must be more stopping like it be IRL where .45 have more stopping power than 5.45 (in game it might be like more chance for break bone or victim can get faint from shock)

upd. i got mistake - forgot to divide result by 1000 (cuz i used gramms). Fixed.

Edited August 3, 2012 by run4way

[milancz 10]

IMO 5.45 should be on par with 5.56, 1911 doing slightly more dmg than a 9mm (is fine atm). But what I really hate are .50cal sniper rifles. Guy who can do a headshot at ~600m with an M24 with first shot has my respect, bodyshotting somebody with a duped lazorgun is lame as hell tho. Thermal L85 shoudnt be in the game too. After more than a month of using it I can say its OP as ****.

[evolution (DayZ) 51]

HOLY PHYSICS!

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

Your best bet is to post in the Bohemia forums as they're the ones who made the changes.

Rgds

LoK

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I'd be interested to see you run that for shotgun slugs/pellets 00 buck combat loads are about the same as .40 cal bullets I do believe.

[run4way 45]

I'd be interested to see you run that for shotgun slugs/pellets 00 buck combat loads are about the same as .40 cal bullets I do believe.

So i googled some info about this: http://www.chuckhawks.com/shotguns_protection_field.htm

If you figure out the total muzzle energy (ME) of a standard 12 gauge, 2 3/4", 00 buckshot load, which launches 9 pellets at a muzzle velocity (MV) of 1325 fps, it is roughly similar to that of the old .45-70-405 grain rifle load (MV 1330 fps, ME 1590 ft. lbs.); but with much less penetration. (It is the penetration that makes the 405 grain .45-70 bullet (SD .273) effective.)

Energy 1590 ft.lbs = 2162 J, so 12 gauge shotgun more powerful than 5.45 guns (ratio 1.6) but have less penetration but more stopping power, more damage in close shot.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

Is that for each pellet individually?

[CHOSENMARINE 43]

ya.

[CHOSENMARINE 43]

Is that for each pellet individually?

they're called bullets, and yes.

[run4way 45]

Sorry CHOSENMARINE, but no. It's total muzzle energy, so:

Each individual 00 pellet, of course, is carrying only 1/9th of the total energy of the load, so you'd better be able to get 100% of them into a vital spot.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/shotguns_protection_field.htm

[Duckman404 37]

IMO 5.45 should be on par with 5.56, 1911 doing slightly more dmg than a 9mm (is fine atm).

5.45 is notably less powerful than 5.56, but what really bugs me is that barrel length has no effect on the velocities/damage of the rounds.

For example, both the AKS-74U and the AK-74 Kobra do the same amount of damage, even though the 5.45mm round coming out of the AKS-74U should be a lot slower due to the short barrel length.

Another little gripe is that 9x18mm Makarov is as powerful as 9x19mm NATO; it really isn't, since it's significantly slower with similar bullet weights.

[bazbake 456]

5.45 is notably less powerful than 5.56, but what really bugs me is that barrel length has no effect on the velocities/damage of the rounds.

For example, both the AKS-74U and the AK-74 Kobra do the same amount of damage, even though the 5.45mm round coming out of the AKS-74U should be a lot slower due to the short barrel length.

Another little gripe is that 9x18mm Makarov is as powerful as 9x19mm NATO; it really isn't, since it's significantly slower with similar bullet weights.

The damage a bullet does isn't really based on how fast it's moving. It's based on how much shithouse it wrecks on its way through the body. Faster bullets actually do less damage because the muscle seals back over the wound when the bullet goes through which prevents bleeding out. Slow, heavy bullets transfer more of their energy into the surrounding wound as they go through, which makes them more dangerous. They also push through meat instead of sliding through it, crushing tissue along the way.

Some exceptions, though. A fast bullet hitting bone transfers kinetic energy into the surrounding tissue. A fast bullet hitting armor transfers that energy into the impact point and out.

On a side note, a yawing bullet slices the surrounding tissue and tunnels through as well. I can't remember if it is more likely to yaw early if it's traveling slowly or if it's traveling faster. It may depend on the type of bullet.

[Duckman404 37]

The damage a bullet does isn't really based on how fast it's moving. It's based on how much shithouse it wrecks on its way through the body. Faster bullets actually do less damage because the muscle seals back over the wound when the bullet goes through which prevents bleeding out. Slow, heavy bullets transfer more of their energy into the surrounding wound as they go through, which makes them more dangerous. They also push through meat instead of sliding through it, crushing tissue along the way.

Some exceptions, though. A fast bullet hitting bone transfers kinetic energy into the surrounding tissue. A fast bullet hitting armor transfers that energy into the impact point and out.

On a side note, a yawing bullet slices the surrounding tissue and tunnels through as well. I can't remember if it is more likely to yaw early if it's traveling slowly or if it's traveling faster. It may depend on the type of bullet.

Kinetic energy is calculated as 1/2(m) * (v)^2, which means faster bullets will have more energy to impart on a body. In the case of 9x19mm NATO vs 9x18mm Makarov, you have similarly heavy bullets (95 grain Makarov, 115 grain Parabellum) that travel at different velocities; about 310 m/s vs 380 m/s or so. This means the 9mm NATO round should be doing a lot more damage than the Makarov.

As for yaw, that depends on how a bullet is designed, not on velocity. A long, relatively unbalanced bullet has a greater tendency to yaw than a highly stable bullet. 5.45 tends to yaw quite a lot and cause sharply angled wound channels due to it's design, while the 7.62x39mm round doesn't yaw nearly as much.

[milancz 10]

5.45 is notably less powerful than 5.56, but what really bugs me is that barrel length has no effect on the velocities/damage of the rounds.

For example, both the AKS-74U and the AK-74 Kobra do the same amount of damage, even though the 5.45mm round coming out of the AKS-74U should be a lot slower due to the short barrel length.

Another little gripe is that 9x18mm Makarov is as powerful as 9x19mm NATO; it really isn't, since it's significantly slower with similar bullet weights.

I have no 100% reliable source, nor did I shoot the 5.45 (did 5.56), but I think the difference is not that big, can you elaborate?

Agreed on the barrel length.

And the makarov vs 9x19... I'm not exactly an expert but IMO just simple physics can't cover the whole problem of damage done to tissue. AFAIK high velocity can sometimes mean clean in and out penetration without much damage unless vital areas are hit but low velocity can mean that bullet is not leaving the body, thus transferring all of the energy on target. Simply put i'm not sure if similar bullet + more gunpowder = more damage.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Fang

[Duckman404 37]

I'm not exactly an expert but IMO but just simple physics can't cover the whole problem of damage done to tissue. AFAIK high velocity can sometimes mean clean in and out penetration without much damage unless vital areas are hit but low velocity can mean a lot of deviation in trajectory, causing a bigger wound and the bullet not leaving the body, thus transferring all of the energy on target. Simply put i'm not sure if similar bullet + more gunpowder = more damage.

Actually, as long as the bullets both either tumble or fragment, you'll be doing a lot more physical harm to someone if the bullet continues out the other side; it gives twice as many holes to bleed from, causes greater shock, and still tears up just as much tissue.

Another example is 5.56mm NATO; typically, the round will fragment horribly at distances of less than 150 metres, due to how damn fast it's going; as soon as it starts tumbling, it just tears open and causes massive wounding, like a little shotgun blast. However, once the velocity drops, the round no longer impacts with enough energy to fragment, so you get less wounding. 5.45mm will tumble reliably, but it doesn't fragment due to having a comparatively low amount of kinetic energy.

That said, in any case: shot placement > tissue damage > caliber

Sadly, ARMA 2 doesn't exactly simulate the internals of a human body very accurately.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Duckman404

[run4way 45]

RL formula: (m * u * u) / 2, so velocity give much more energy than weight.

Ingame formula: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Weapons_settings

FMJ bullet energy hit = sqrt(weight/2) * speed/5, so weight and velocity give approximately equally.

Because of this, guns with better muzzle speed not so good versus guns with heavy bullets.

Edited August 3, 2012 by run4way

[Catman (DayZ) 23]

Don't forget your standard army issue FMJ is going to do less tissue damage than say something like a CZ550* hunting round - as the hunting round will have a soft nose designed to cause the bullet to expand on impact.

(*merely plucked as an example)

[milancz 10]

Yep thats pretty important too. FMJ versus other types, especially JHP and such. But its safe to assume that most of the ammo in game is FMJ. Maybe the 1911 could be using nonjacketed lead rounds to have some extra damage (more deformation i think).

And yes with rifle rounds, the velocity impacts how they fragment or tumble, but I was pondering about handguns. Tumbling/fragmentation with standart FMJ .45 9x19 9x18 does not occur very often I think. But the effect on living targets could be debatable. When shooting steel plates - sure, the more energy the better it will go down, because it will never penetrate and transfer all of the energy. But with a pissed off guy it could be a different story. I never tried shooting anything living or dead with a handgun :D but the standart police ammo issued here is 9x19 FMJ and from what they say it sounds like it does full penetrations sometimes without immediate effect on target and it still has enough energy to ricochet like crazy and some of them are using bought subsonics or handloads, but I'm not sure if its to increase the wounding or reduce the chance to ricochet. So the 9x18 maybe isnt that bad vs unarmored tissue, but it has to suck when shooting through car windshield etc I imagine.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Fang

[Duckman404 37]

Yep thats pretty important too. FMJ versus other types, especially JHP and such. But its safe to assume that most of the ammo in game is FMJ. Maybe the 1911 could be using nonjacketed lead rounds to have some extra damage (more deformation i think).

And yes with rifle rounds, the velocity impacts how they fragment or tumble, but I was pondering about handguns. Tumbling/fragmentation with standart FMJ .45 9x19 9x18 does not occur very often I think. But the effect on living targets could be debatable. When shooting steel plates - sure, the more energy the better it will go down, because it will never penetrate and transfer all of the energy. But with a pissed off guy it could be a different story. I never tried shooting anything living or dead with a handgun :D but the standart police ammo issued here is 9x19 FMJ and from what they say it sounds like it does full penetrations sometimes without immediate effect on target and it still has enough energy to ricochet like crazy and some of them are using bought subsonics or handloads, but I'm not sure if its to increase the wounding or reduce the chance to ricochet. So the 9x18 maybe isnt that bad vs unarmored tissue, but it has to suck when shooting through car windshield etc I imagine.

I believe most police forces use some sort of JHP expanding ammo, whether it's in .40 S&W or 9x19mm, just because of overpenetration being a risk; you don't want to shoot through the perpetrator and hit an innocent bystander, for example.

Most non-military 9mm rounds are ideally suited for around 8 to 14 inches of penetration in ballistics gelatin, which means a shot to the center of mass will usually not be a through-and-through.

Military rounds are a different kettle of fish, of course, since they're forced to use FMJ ball ammunition. In this case, it's better to have the enemy bleeding from two holes instead of one, and to tear as much flesh up as possible with a high velocity bullet.

When it comes to ball ammunition, bigger is usually better, but for the much more effective JHP loadings, there's very little difference between rounds with similar kinetic energy; 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP will all cause very similar, sometimes indistinguishable wounding.

Not to mention what is probably the most reliable man-stopper available: .357 Magnum. It's very high velocity compared to 9mm, and is capable of slinging heavy ~150 grain 9mm caliber bullets at speeds better than 9mm +P loads. Would you say a 9mm round, going slower, would be more effective than a recklessly fast .357 magnum round? I shouldn't think so! :)

As for 9x18mm Makarov, there's a good reason it's considered inferior to 9x19mm; it really is just a lighter, less powerful round, comparable to .380 ACP. In America, .380 ACP is generally considered the bare minimum for a self defense CCW cartridge, so that does say something about the effectiveness of the subsonic 9mm rounds. And, therefore, that's why I think 9x19mm NATO should do more damage than the 9x18mm Makarov guns!

Edited August 3, 2012 by Duckman404

[MJOne 3]

And on a side note... You can't just look at the Kinetic Energy produced by a certain round. It's alot about ENERGY TRANSFER.

If the bullet goes through the body and continue on, it means that it still carries energy within it, so all the KE was not transfered to the target.

However a bullet that stop in your body will have transfered all its energy to you. So you must realize that overpenetration is key in this.

Just a thought...

/MJOne

[run4way 45]

Yes, there are a lot of factors and in real life 9x18mm bullet into heart more deadly than 7.62mm into arm. But it's game and in game should be some simplification. Not like now, of course, where all 9mm guns and even smg does equal damage.

[MJOne 3]

I agree... :)

[milancz 10]

I believe most police forces use some sort of JHP expanding ammo, whether it's in .40 S&W or 9x19mm, just because of overpenetration being a risk; you don't want to shoot through the perpetrator and hit an innocent bystander, for example.

Most non-military 9mm rounds are ideally suited for around 8 to 14 inches of penetration in ballistics gelatin, which means a shot to the center of mass will usually not be a through-and-through.

Military rounds are a different kettle of fish, of course, since they're forced to use FMJ ball ammunition. In this case, it's better to have the enemy bleeding from two holes instead of one, and to tear as much flesh up as possible with a high velocity bullet.

When it comes to ball ammunition, bigger is usually better, but for the much more effective JHP loadings, there's very little difference between rounds with similar kinetic energy; 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP will all cause very similar, sometimes indistinguishable wounding.

Not to mention what is probably the most reliable man-stopper available: .357 Magnum. It's very high velocity compared to 9mm, and is capable of slinging heavy ~150 grain 9mm caliber bullets at speeds better than 9mm +P loads. Would you say a 9mm round, going slower, would be more effective than a recklessly fast .357 magnum round? I shouldn't think so! :)

As for 9x18mm Makarov, there's a good reason it's considered inferior to 9x19mm; it really is just a lighter, less powerful round, comparable to .380 ACP. In America, .380 ACP is generally considered the bare minimum for a self defense CCW cartridge, so that does say something about the effectiveness of the subsonic 9mm rounds. And, therefore, that's why I think 9x19mm NATO should do more damage than the 9x18mm Makarov guns!

Here in Czech. rep both policemen and civilians are restricted to carry ball ammo, JHP is for some retarded legal reason forbidden. Everybody is mad about it, but you know.. gubbermint. What policemen are issued with is S&B 115gr 9mm FMJ, not exactly the best round for the job.

Yep the bigger bullet the better. Mak is .03 or maybe .3 mm (forgot which exactly) thicker but that doesnt make a difference I guess. From what I researched it seems that there are some sweet mak loads as well but when comparing standard fmj ammo the luger is stronger, you're right.

And yep, .357 is a sweet cartridge, superb performance and still very manageable. Some pistols are chambered for it too but I finally discovered the beauty of revolvers after hating them for a long time so I'm probably gonna get me one of those babies in .357 :)

And for the mak ingame: it definitely should do less damage than other handguns, but I wouldnt implement it by making it even weaker as it is now, but by making other guns stronger. Its not the most powerful caliber around but its still a gun and not a BB gun :D

[xximrtwoixx 104]

they're called bullets, and yes.

Really they're called shot but who wants to be a D-bag...

Based on the damage values and the fact that SD bullets are silenced IG even in non SD gun I think most values in the arma engine come from the bullets and have nothing to do with the weapon that is being used. I imagine its the same way for ARMAIII also as it seems like a fundemental basis for code that would not be changed.

This inherently messes things up for different weapon platforms that are designed to get more out of a given round, especially if a better ammo system were incorporated, ie break down magazines of the same bullets to fill others. This would not allow a dev to have different "bullets" that are IRL the same but different IG because of the platform they are going into. IE a 9mm for MP5 that does 1500 damage compared to the 9mm in an M9 that does 900 damage.

I would rather have a realistic ammo system that allows me to scavenge ammo and gives value to weapons with common ammo rather than exacting damage across weapon platforms.

Also my opinion IRL is that if you don't/can't shoot a deer with it then you really don't want to use it to shoot people. 7.62x51 just cuz 6.8 would be to hard to find after shtf.

[bazbake 456]

This inherently messes things up for different weapon platforms that are designed to get more out of a given round, especially if a better ammo system were incorporated, ie break down magazines of the same bullets to fill others. This would not allow a dev to have different "bullets" that are IRL the same but different IG because of the platform they are going into. IE a 9mm for MP5 that does 1500 damage compared to the 9mm in an M9 that does 900 damage.

I would rather have a realistic ammo system that allows me to scavenge ammo and gives value to weapons with common ammo rather than exacting damage across weapon platforms.

Reality is unrealistic.

How much extra damage do you think you would get from shooting a bullet from a 9mm Uzi as opposed to a 9mm pistol? The three most important factors for weapon damage in order are 1) placement, 2) cavitation, and 3) hydro shock based on projectile velocity. And hydrostatic shock, while evidenced in scientific literature, is also inconsistent and unpredictable.

Placement is on the shooter, cavitation is caused by the shape, size, and material the bullet is made out of, and hydrostatic shock is completely random and dependent on the individual target's response to trauma caused by high-velocity projectiles. But projectile velocity is limited by the size of the propellant driving the bullet anyway.

So really, while the maximum effective range is going to be dependent on both bullet and the gun, damage is primarily decided by the bullet you shoot from the gun. Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people. Guns just happen to be an effective delivery system for spinning hunks of metal strapped to explosives.

Edited August 4, 2012 by BazBake