Suggestion: rebalance game with realistic weapon performance/damage.

[bazbake 456]

Many times headshots don't kill. Maybe the headshot could have a damage multiplier that would make a headshot an instant kill for larger calibers and a dying/seriously fucked up for lower calibers. End result would be the same without medical treatment, but with medical treatment you could have a chance of survival.

[Wiley 49]

Again, grazes would be swell, because that's pretty much what you're dealing with on a non-fatal head shot. That or a lateral shot through the mouth.

Pretty much anything that penetrates you may as well call a kill shot, particularly without a well equipped trauma center within spitting distance. Basically what I'm saying, except in statistically insignificant circumstances anything that penetrates the brain pan is something you don't wake up from.

[Knollte 13]

While I usually like your suggestions BazBake I am opposed to this one.

I am because your since contradicts everything I know about ballistics.

The only point I agree with you is that a 12 gauge should be devastating out to 100 meters firing solid projectiles.

This is going to get long and it's going to involve a lot of math, but by the end of it I think it may change the nature of how the game works for the better and for everyone involved.

(lots of text)....

• 12 Gauge Buckshot = 8 round simultaneous burst x 3000 damage
  
• 12 Gauge Shotguns = 15,500
  
• AS50/M107 = 7,000
  
• M1911/Revolver = 6,000
  
• Other Pistols/PDW/MP5 = 3,500
  
• Lee Enfield/CZ550 = 3,000
  
• FN FAL/AKM/DMR/M14/M240/Mk48/Dragunov = 2500
  
• AK/STANAG/M249/L85/M16/M4 = 1500
  
• Hatchet=? (Actually, hatchet wounds are a doctor's worst nightmare...))
  

.....

A .45 ACP more deadly than a Lee Enfield ? This is simply wrong wound ballistics are alot more complicated than simply diameter of round.

While that might be true for pistols and revolvers rifles (including .223) are a diferent beast alltogether I will not go into all the details (partly because I dont want to invest all the time to read it all up again) but a supersonic round (all military rifle rounds) creates a wound cavitiy which is

alot bigger than the calibre itself(named:temporary cavity).

„In such a case, the permanent cavity is stretched so far, and so fast, that tearing and rupturing can occur in tissues surrounding the wound channel which were weakened by fragmentation damage.11^,12 It can significantly increase damage13 in rifle bullet wounds. „

according to: http://www.thegunzon...o-wounding.html

Its really a no brainer if you see ballistic shooting tests that rifles are more deadly than psitols and revolver apart from maybe some mutants like the desert eagle:

to give you an impression here are some videos

• .45ACP:(1911,Revolver)
  

• .308winchester basicly 7.62*51mm(FN-Fal,M14,and some Snipers):
  

So I would say Arma 2 base damages are about right the shotguns should do alot more damage closeby but your chart is way of and your physics as well.

the damage should be somthing like this:

• AS50/M107 = dunno does not matter onehitkill
  
• 12 Gauge Buckshot = 8 round simultaneous burst x 3000 damage
  
• 12 Gauge Shotguns = 15,500
  
• Lee Enfield=12,500
  
• FN FAL/AKM/DMR/M14/M240/Mk48/Dragunov/CZ550 = 8000
  
• AK/STANAG/M249/L85/M16/M4=5000
  
• M1911/Revolver = 4500
  
• Other Pistols/PDW/MP5 = 3,500
  
• Hatchet=? (Actually, hatchet wounds are a doctor's worst nightmare...))
  

Hope this does not upset you but the suggestion has no justification in reality.

Greetings Knollte.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Knollte

[xximrtwoixx 104]

In a game where every weapon has the same damage and effective range, your point is valid. But the M1014 is rarer than the AK-74 but the AK-74 does about half as much damage, holds 4 times the ammo, has full auto, and has an effective range about twice as far.

Why? Because assault rifles are overpowered and shotguns are nerfed.

I repeat, the M1014 is rarer. The only compromise in effect seems to be that its effective range has been buffed compared to its real-life effective range (unless it's using sabot rounds or something).

And the idea that all of these games are already balanced is doubtful. The Winchester 1866 was nerfed a couple days back. It's as if people keep complaining that since they can't win in close quarters against a gun designed for close quarters they need to keep making it weaker.

But no one's stopping people from finding their own shotguns. And there's no reason a SCOPED, semi-auto weapon with a range of 800 meters and no recoil should have more stopping power than an iron-sight semi-auto shotgun with a range of 100 meters that is harder to find. It's not just bad real game physics, it's crappy VIDEOGAME LOGIC^TM.

Balancing weapon damage based on rarity, rounds held, range, etc are all examples of VIDOEGAME LOGIC.

There should be no balance to anything, values should be assigned to damage to provide the most "authentic" playing experiance as possible. Weapons should have capacities and drawbacks that mimic their real life counterparts as closely as they can. This already partly exhists in the game, shotguns only hold 8 rounds, .45 only holds 7, revolver 6. These are "authentic" values taken from real life and this is why militaries deploy magazine fed weapons that fire smaller calibers than sporting rifles. Volume of fire is an attribute that holds value in a combat situation, raw killing power with limited side effects is more valuable in sporting scenarios as it maximizes harvest.

The issue IMO is that there are no drawbacks that simulate the additional drawbacks associated with different weapon systems. Things like encumbrance that effect large/heavy weapons, scarcity that effects aquisition of rare ammo, and dependability that make simple things like pump actions or revolvers have additional value.

These subsystems are where any "balancing" needs to come into play as it would also increase immersion and give a more authentic feel to playing. Yes these systems would ruin the fun of all the AS50 toting snipers but it would keep the lethality of the .50's intact and have them represent what they are, an very deadly sniper system that has logistical draw backs.

I do agree that shotguns need to be increased given the fact that players do not wear body armour in DayZ, but what is represented via ARMA II are values that already calculate body armour into the mix, at least thats what the BI forums say. Thats why shotguns/handguns are so ineffective, they do not have enough energy to penetrate body armour effectively.

Also damage/death is never going to be truly represented, and people thinking any type of advanced medical treatment are on crack. SHTF and we are back to the old west in terms of med treatment no sterilization, amputation, and slow death due to infection. People would not be able to be "saved" after taking one to the dome. Death is also hard to simulate, if you being wounded had harsher penalties or medical treatment was made harder it would severly effect play. I would be fine with a system that lead to more KO statuses to represent someone not being able to "stay in the fight" while not really being dead. Even a permenent KO status for your last 1k blood, but this would effect the lone wolf play style greatly as they would basically always bleed out.

[Wiley 49]

@Knolite: In the interest of accuracy, the JSP expanded. I'd respectfully submit that while it's carrying a buttload more energy, it doesn't get to transfer it when it's an FMJ round like the .45 video. Not to be argumentative, but I don't think that's an apples to apples comparison.

[Knollte 13]

No offense taken I am sure there is alot I can still learn about ballistics

I think this one is more acurate:

Alot less impressive but still multitudes from .45ACP

And if I am not mistaken numerous militaries use tumbling fragmenting 7.62*51mm ammo like the Bundeswehr which are really devestating.

[Wiley 49]

In that one the front projectile tumbled, which greatly affected the wound track. Still, velocity is undeniably a factor. You could see it was starting to develop a bigger track through the gelatin just before the bullet curved down.

I was more focused on the rifle aspect of the post, because I think he's pretty much dead on, catching a .50 BMG versus a .308 is not going to be that vastly different in a FMJ situation. They both are moving around the same speeds, the .50 just holds its speed a bit further out. They're both going to obliterate any bone they hit as well.

Handguns vs rifles, you've got a point.

[bazbake 456]

That's a .45 ACP. Ball round. And my video lasts a lot longer than .00001 seconds. Your video shows temporary cavitation. Mine shows permanent cavitation.

This is why you seriously need to learn about ballistics, wound trauma, and anatomy before you start throwing up slow motion images of bullet wounds in ballistic gel. Here's a paper by Martin Fackler, M.D., one of the original developers of ballistic gel as a medium for testing bullet trauma. And here's another where he debunks the myth of high-velocity weapons causing more damage than low-velocity weapons.

He makes a very clear point in both of these papers that it's the size of permanent, not temporary, cavitation that kills targets. And also adds that slower rifle bullets were more deadly than faster rifle bullets.

You don't have to read it, but you do have to understand that showing what a bullet does in the first .05 seconds of it passing through the body is meaningless. It's how well the body recovers from that initial wound. What you're seeing in the slow motion image you posted (without posting any images of any other bullets to compare it to) is temporary cavitation caused by hydrostatic shock over less than a second. Thing is, hydrostatic shock doesn't kill people. It hurts. It stuns. It doesn't kill. People die from oxygen deprivation to the brain, primarily from blood loss, occasionally by getting shot to the medulla oblangata.

You should really be worried about what the wound looks like afterward.

For an example of this, here's the wound a .50 BMG makes after it has tumbled through ballistic gel (an occurrence that isn't even all that frequent).

Those striations are temporary wound damage. Still think it's regularly blowing peoples' arms and legs off with one shot? In this case, it didn't even start tumbling until it reached almost 9 inches of depth. If it passed through your arm it wouldn't even cause an inch of temporary cavitation. In a large enough human body, bouncing off bone, you'll get a nasty exit wound. But it's not blowing arms and legs off.

And this is a weapon that's supposed to make body parts explode?

What kills people is blood loss to the brain and disruption of the central nervous system, not shockwaves to the chest. Fundamental conceptual misunderstanding of how firearms work.

tl;dr You should read about ballistics because everything you think you know is a lie someone told you that sounded good at the time.

Edited August 14, 2012 by BazBake

[Juunro 2]

While you are right about the physics of the guns and how shotguns should probably do a hell of alot more damage, from a gameplay perspective I feel I should point this out:

The M1014 benefits from having some of the most ridiculously common ammunition in the game. 12 gauge shells can be found in virtually any building in the game; the milspec ammo cannot. That is a fairly dramatic advantage in my experience so far.

But yes, I'd like to see the shotguns actually do more damage... alot more damage at that. But I am biased; I always carry M1014's if I can possibly help it, because let's face it, what's a zombie apocalypse without a shotgun?

[bazbake 456]

While you are right about the physics of the guns and how shotguns should probably do a hell of alot more damage, from a gameplay perspective I feel I should point this out:

The M1014 benefits from having some of the most ridiculously common ammunition in the game. 12 gauge shells can be found in virtually any building in the game; the milspec ammo cannot. That is a fairly dramatic advantage in my experience so far.

Actually, is that really true? One magazine of STANAG...30 rounds. One magazine of M249 ammo? 200 rounds. One magazine of AK...30 rounds.

One magazine of M1014...8 rounds.

Furthermore, the range of the M1014 is about 100m/40m. The range of the STANAG weapons is 400 meters. And all of these weapons have a faster fire rate than the shotgun.

So the magazines hold 4 times as much ammo and can hit you from 4 to 10 times as far away. And to even get 8 rounds of 1014, you spend most of your time crafting it out of the 2 to 4 rounds of shotgun ammo you find lying around. It's already more than balanced within the game mechanics: exchanging stopping power for number of shots, range, and fire rate. And you can always adjust loot tables to make ammo more or less rare.

The M1014 is a military weapon you find in military loot spawns. It should be treated like one.

[Knollte 13]

Well if I had a saying the .50 rifles would not be in the game in their current form but for other reasons(handling like an assault rifle in weight and stuff).

The data you provided surely are interesting but they clearly show a relation between temporary cavity and permanent which corelates with my earlier sources which state

„In such a case, the permanent cavity is stretched so far, and so fast, that tearing and rupturing can occur in tissues surrounding the wound channel which were weakened by fragmentation damage.11^,12 It can significantly increase damage13 in rifle bullet wounds. „

So I do not argue with you that the .50 should not be as powerfull as its depicted in movies but i still dont get your damage tables:

• 12 Gauge Buckshot = 8 round simultaneous burst x 3000 damage
  
• 12 Gauge Shotguns = 15,500
  
• AS50/M107 = 7,000
  
• M1911/Revolver = 6,000
  
• Other Pistols/PDW/MP5 = 3,500
  
• Lee Enfield/CZ550 = 3,000
  
• FN FAL/AKM/DMR/M14/M240/Mk48/Dragunov = 2500
  
• AK/STANAG/M249/L85/M16/M4 = 1500
  
• Hatchet=? (Actually, hatchet wounds are a doctor's worst nightmare...))
  

listing the 1911 with higher damage than FN-FAL an M-16 while your sources show the horrific permanent wounds inside the body caused by this rounds.

[#BASEDGOD 27]

@BazBake, have you ever shot a .50 rifle?

[Bambo (DayZ) 42]

None of what you said is true.

:)

When I was a kid, every ten-year-old thought that a .357 magnum left a hole in your chest the size of a baseball. Of course, firing the gun made it obvious that this made no sense. A .50 caliber bullet leaves a hole the size of a 1/2'' icepick unless it hits bone, in which case it starts to tumble and leaves a larger temporary cavity (not an enormously large permanent cavity). The trick is, the rare case in which the .50 caliber bullet tumbles outside of ideal conditions is not an excuse to make the .50 caliber BMG round a magical exploding round.

What we really have are two camps. There is the camp full of people who heard through rumors how sniper rifles work. Then there is the camp full of people who know how sniper rifles actually work. You're in the first camp. I'm in the second camp. If you were in the second camp, we could actually have a reasonable debate about the damage sniper rifles should do compared to JHP handgun rounds or shotgun rounds. But you're not, and until you get in the second camp, you're just a guy on the internet confusing truthiness for the truth.

Your "link" didn't even address anything that I talked about. I did not say that a .50 cal can blow a man in half. I said that it could REMOVE A LIMB. Which, if you know ANYTHING about firearms, is entirely plausible. A .50 cal can remove an arm or a leg, and the resulting hydrostatic has the potential to instantly kill the target. You don't have to believe me either. Look up videos of this. Hell, my favorite one is where this guy goes buck hunting with his .50. It successfully kills and guts the deer in one fell swoop. I'm not saying that a .50 can literally blow a man to bits...but what I am saying is that there is not a scenario I can think of where getting hit directly with a .50 cal results in the target re-cooperating back to full health (ie: all organs, all limbs...etc etc.). And in a world like Day Z, getting hit with a .50 cal in any place other than the fingers or the toes would probably be a death sentence.

Sadly...I think you just THINK you're in the second camp. Have you ever fired a gun before? Taken one apart? Studied the physics of them? Doesn't seem like it. I'm from Tennessee for Christ's sake. Knowing how to operate and correctly use a firearm here is like a rite of passage to becoming a man lol. Don't feed me this shit that "I don't know what I'm talking about". I've got a goddamn callous on my right shoulder from shooting!

Also, if you read carefully, you can further analyze the OP's ignorance of guns:

The 5.56x45mm NATO round (.223) never had and never will be the puny .22LR's "baby brother". Seriously...who the hell would think that:

http://cdn5.thefirea...nny_223-tfb.jpg

Herrrrrr deeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Edited August 14, 2012 by scoopolard

[DR@GON (DayZ) 20]

OP... you put a lot of thought into that and it makes some sense... however, I'd have to say the rifle rounds come out a bit weak it seams...

Anyway, with your calcs compared to current damage of weapons in game, it seems to me that they are including the protection a ballistic vest would give you... and rifle rounds are going to penetrate better than pistol or shotguns.

Anyway, I'm *NOT (edit lol)* claiming to be an expert, but no one's brought up armor and the complication that adds to all this math.

I agree that pistols and shotties seem weaker than they should be. I'd rather see the .50 cals out of the game personally, just for balancing purposes

Edited August 14, 2012 by DR@GON

[xximrtwoixx 104]

Actually, is that really true? One magazine of STANAG...30 rounds. One magazine of M249 ammo? 200 rounds. One magazine of AK...30 rounds.

The M1014 is a military weapon you find in military loot spawns. It should be treated like one.

This is flawed logic, a shotguns drawbacks don't merrit it having a damage increase. It like everything else gets a value that represents the damage it would do, as I stated it is messed up because it is set for opponents in body armour.

Also in almost all cases "sporting" ammo is always better than military grade ammo, it is built to tighter tolerances and comes in enough varieties that a shooter can select specific rounds for specific tasks.

This is why you get an ar-15 chambered for Nato 5.56 instead of .223 remington, you can shoot both then, if you get a .223 gun your really only screwing up your barrel if you shoot 5.56.

Also using balistic gels and firing rifles from close range into them does not truly simulate their effects on liquid filled meat bags that surround bone. Rifle rounds are used at distance and they have nasty effects when they come into contact with solid objects inside the body. This simply can't be simulated with gel and it is viewed as un-ethical by society to test on animals. Solution look at what happens when you shoot an animal...

Here's some examples of a .50 bmg in action against deer (they are bigger tougher bags of meat than humans)

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2115910

http://www.primalrights.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=117

and here's a pretty good representation of what a slug does

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=109958&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45

I know from experiance if you hit one with a slug in the shoulder blade true instead of clip it like the above images you can get some nasty stuff from the bone fragments and if you don't hit the spine it will give you a more impressive exit wound.

Bones get in the way, and slugs don't have enough velocity to punch through them the way a .50 does.

Its like an arrow it will kill a deer quick and do alot of damage but if you hit it in the shoulder you won't do shit because its to slow.

[Wiley 49]

@BazBake: I read most of the second Fackler report you linked up until he got too far into talking about actual treatment of the wounds, and I took away something slightly different from what he was saying. The way it came off to me is that the permanent cavity is actual destroyed flesh that needs to be removed because it will die off. What his point seemed to me to be is that the temporary cavity is capable of healing, not that it would be undamaged. Crushed versus stretched.

[ravenger 10]

If you have ever seen a .50 cal bullet hit a human it can take off limbs and tear you in half. The reason a .50 cal can tear a man in half is a process called cavitation. It's like throwing a rock into water, the "hole" in the water gets larger than the rock due to the momentum of the water moving away from the rock. The same happens with a body. The .50 cal is a large bullet with an incredible amount of kinetic energy (mass times speed, all that good stuff). The .50 cal bullet is a 1 hit kill weapon and having to take 2 shots if the man has 12000 blood is rediculous. I would talk about how I dont like dayz hit point system but thats for another topic.

[bazbake 456]

@BazBake: I read most of the second Fackler report you linked up until he got too far into talking about actual treatment of the wounds, and I took away something slightly different from what he was saying. The way it came off to me is that the permanent cavity is actual destroyed flesh that needs to be removed because it will die off. What his point seemed to me to be is that the temporary cavity is capable of healing, not that it would be undamaged. Crushed versus stretched.

"Cavitation is nothing more than a transient displacement of tissue, a stretch, a localized "blunt trauma." Is is not surprising that elastic tissue such as bowel wall, lung, and muscle are relatively resistant to being damaged by this stretch, while solid organs such as liver are not. Most of the muscle subjected to temporary cavity stretch survives; tissue survival has been verified in every case in which muscle was allowed to remain in situ and healing was followed to completion." -- Fackler -- 4.

""It is now appreciated and documented that bullet fragmentation is the predominant reason underlying the M-16's increased tissue disruption. Despite this recent evidence, a generation of surgeons and weapon developers has been confused and prejudiced by the assumption that "high velocity" and "temporary cavitation" were the sole causes of tissue disruption." -- Fackler -- 5

"It should be noted, however that stretch from temporary cavity tissue displacement can disrupt blood vessels or break bones at some distance from the projectile path...but in practice this happens only very rarely. Data from the Vietnam Conflict show that the great majority of torso and extremity wounds were attributable to the damage due to the permanent cavity alone." -- Fackler -- 6

"The nondeforming rifle bullet of the AK-74 causes a large temporary cavity which can cause marked disruption in some tissue (liver), but has far less effect in others (muscle, lung, bowel wall)." -- Fackler -- 7

"A large slow projectile will crush (permanent cavity) a large amount of tissue, whereas a small fast missile with the same kinetic energy will stretch more tissue (temporary cavity) but crush little. If the tissue crushed by a projectile includes the wall of the aorta, far more damaging consequences are likely to result than if this same projectile "deposits" the same amount of energy beside this vessel." -- Fackler -- 7

"By definition, no tissue is included "in" the temporary cavity: tissue is pushed aside by it." -- Fackler -- 14

As impressive as temporary cavitation looks in ballistic gel shot at 2000 frames per second, it's not what's going to kill you unless you die of liver damage. Eventually. At some point in the future. If you don't see a doctor...maybe.

Anyway, to sum it up, it's the dark part of those diagrams that determines how deadly the bullet is, not the outlined and dashed part. That part just tells you how much it hurts to get shot by one.

@Ravenger97

...

No.

[Wiley 49]

Interesting read. It just seems so counterintuitive. I'm still not convinced that all the tissue in the temporary cavity is just swell and unharmed. While my medical degree expired quite some time ago, I have trouble believing that tissue would be moved that far and that fast without some damage. Elastic, yes. That elastic? I'm not convinced.

I have no trouble believing the effectiveness of the temporary cavity is very overstated. That seems highly plausible.

Definitely food for thought.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

@BazBake: I read most of the second Fackler report you linked up until he got too far into talking about actual treatment of the wounds, and I took away something slightly different from what he was saying. The way it came off to me is that the permanent cavity is actual destroyed flesh that needs to be removed because it will die off. What his point seemed to me to be is that the temporary cavity is capable of healing, not that it would be undamaged. Crushed versus stretched.

Agreed, OP will not acknoledge anything that does not support his quest to nerf players he believes to operate with an "unfair" advantage like snipers, ambushers, KOS, groups, late game character, and basically anyone else that can ruin his day at will.

Look at the quote he used against your correct assesment of the documentation he linked to, it makes no sense, the writer is clearly talking about treatment of gun shot wounds and what tissue needed to be excised. This does touch on where damage comes from, but again it is specific to tissue damage.

"Most of the muscle subjected to temporary cavity stretch survives; tissue survival has been verified in every case in which muscle was allowed to remain in situ and healing was followed to completion." -- Fackler -- 4.

People/animals are filled with bones, a bullet striking a bone causes things like I linked to last page, ballistic gel will never be able to simulate this and this is why "armchair" shooters will not be able to realize what a bullet actually does.

As impressive as temporary cavitation looks in ballistic gel shot at 2000 frames per second, it's not what's going to kill you unless you die of liver damage. Eventually. At some point in the future. If you don't see a doctor...maybe.

Anyway, to sum it up, it's the dark part of those diagrams that determines how deadly the bullet is, not the outlined and dashed part. That part just tells you how much it hurts to get shot by one.

Have you ever shot anything with a high powered rifle, or better yet field dressed an animal that was gut shot by one?

You pour their organs out, you wouldn't maybe die later, you would bleed out laying on the ground.

How impressive was the .50 BMG on the deer? Thats what happens when a large projectile moving faster than speed of sound hits bone, do ballistic gels simulate bone? Its the biggest load of shit that people think you can test bullet effects via ballistic gel.

Edited August 15, 2012 by xXI Mr Two IXx

[Just a Goat 25]

I happened across this in a Google search on something else DayZ related. This is ridiculous.

Larger calibers traveling slowly leave more brutal cavitation than smaller calibers traveling quickly. Bigger and slower = MEANER. (Different "types" of bullets can alter cavitation and create fragmentation to increase trauma, but the basic physics are simple.)

Stop pretending to know anything about firearms, OP. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

You know nothing about 5.56mm

You know nothing about shotguns.

You know nothing about .45 ACP

You make several errors in basic physics

You know very little about exterior and terminal ballistics, you know very little about contemporary weapon design, and your post is entirely packed full of ridiculous nonsense. It's not surprising that your conclusions are absurd.

The 5.56 wasn't designed for "wounding"; it was an outgrowth of the Small Caliber High Velocity projects and started life conceptually as a miniature 30-06 FMJBT projectile. One of the main thrusts to the project was increasing hit probability through flatter trajectory, but nobody had any idea why it worked (in terms of lethality) until not all that long ago. The wounding mechanism isn't yawing - the bullet really isn't large enough or long enough for that to count much - it's yawing and then fragmenting violently, thus making the temporary wound cavity a more permanent one - especially when the fragmenting happens around the area the bullet exits. This is somewhat reliable out to 150-200m, depending on your barrel length. If you don't believe this, you can google image search exit wounds on hogs and coyotes; some of them you can fit your fist in.

The .308 and similar full sized rifle rounds in FMJ flavor will yaw like all spitzer projectiles (pointy bullets). You'll get more severe wounds than 5.56mm starting out past 200m or so.

The stubby .30 caliber-ish assault rifle rounds (AKM) are an entirely different animal than either of those, lacking both the high velocity fragmenting projectiles of the 5.56 and having an inferior trajectory to the .308/.303/7.62x54R, etc.

Shotguns have inferior range (with buckshot) due to spread, which renders the shot pattern too large on most past 25m. Shooting slugs, they suffer from poor accuracy due to not being rifled. It is important to understand that a shotgun with 00 Buckshot is essentially shooting nine crappy FMJ pistol pullets at someone. It works, but it's not magic, and it's no different than shooting someone with 9 rounds out of a 9mm SMG.

Handguns suffer from poor effective range due to short sight radius, lack of a shoulder stock, rainbow-like trajectory, and slow speed (the slower you go, the more time the wind has to mess up your shot)

All centerfire (non-.22) pistol calibers are going to be inferior to centerfire rifle calibers as a simple matter of velocity. Making a handgun more powerful than an assault rifle is utter nonsense; making a 5.56mm long arm less controllable than a 9mm or .45 handgun is only slightly less nonsense.

Force isn't transferred equally to the shooter and the projectile. Momentum is. F=ma, but P (momentum) = mv. Rifles are heavier, longer (more leverage for the barrel weight to counteract muzzle rise), and have a stock for stability - a reasonable rifle caliber (the very definition of an assault rifle!) is going to be very controllable. I can hand someone an AR-15 and have them rapidly hitting targets offhand at 50 yards in less than 5 minutes. I can hand them a handgun and they won't be able to hit a damn thing at 20 feet no matter how hard they try.

Temporary cavities are a matter of velocity. And they are just that, temporary, unless you have fragmenting ammo (some types of 5.56mm ball ammo, soft points, etc.) The early 90's called, they want your hydrostatic/cavitation nonsense back; Fackler knows what he is talking about, but you don't seem to understand what he's saying.

Most military firearms with flash hiders on them are not "campfire bright"; the game generally gets this right. Something like the muzzle flash from an M16A2 can be damn hard to see. Pistols, shotguns, SMGs without flash hiders, and some of the larger sniper rifles and/or rifles with muzzle brakes will have flashes of varying sizes, some very large.

Don't try to lecture me on "silencers" either OP, I have one sitting on my coffee table. Suppressors on centerfire rifles firing supersonic ammunition don't remove the supersonic crack of the bullet, but do lower the muzzle blast at lot - on a 5.56mm, below .22LR levels. They're very useful for hiding where the shot is coming from. On pistols, SMG's, and rifles with subsonic ammo, they can be very quiet - some paintball guns are going to be louder. On most platforms they also eliminate flash entirely.

You've crammed a bunch of other nonsense in there but I'm tired of writing. People need to stop thinking they're firearms know-it-alls simply because they've watched TV and played video games.

Lastly, addressing a bunch of comments in this thread in general, no weapons in here would likely be found with hollow point ammo except for the CZ550 (it being a hunting rifle), and the pistols (sometimes, possibly). The 5.45 rounds in the AK-74 have a hollow cavity but they're not "hollow points" per se.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Uncle Scrotor

[Teamwork is OP 0]

Post was too long for one, had to split into two.

Don't try to lecture me on "silencers" either OP, I have one sitting on my coffee table. Suppressors on centerfire rifles firing supersonic ammunition don't remove the supersonic crack of the bullet, but do lower the muzzle blast at lot - on a 5.56mm, below .22LR levels. They're very useful for hiding where the shot is coming from. On pistols, SMG's, and rifles with subsonic ammo, they can be very quiet - some paintball guns are going to be louder. On most platforms they also eliminate flash entirely.

They’re called silencers dude. I saw it in movies and stuff!

Handguns suffer from poor effective range due to short sight radius, lack of a shoulder stock, rainbow-like trajectory, and slow speed (the slower you go, the more time the wind has to mess up your shot)

I agree with your points, however, Effective range is 100m give or take. Tom Given’s has the right idea, imagine your local megamart, how long is the isle? If you had to take a shot, you better well have practiced and become proficient at shooting distance. 100m handgun shots are difficult but not impossible; just don’t try it with a crappy handgun. And shoot “minute of badguy”.

So, basically, most of my observations come down to DayZ's reliance on VIDEOGAME PHYSICS^TM based on VIDEOGAME LOGIC^TM.

And replaced so eloquently by the OP with TARD (aka GLUESTICK EATING) LOGIC^TM

Continuing on.

In short, bullet damage = penetration area * [trauma/velocity]. Since I am arguing that sniper rifles are overpowered and shotguns underpowered, how much base trauma a bullet does versus its velocity would only overemphasize my point, so I'll leave it out and save us some maths. (If you're curious look up Hydrostatic Trauma and Big Hole Theory.)

Hydrostatic trauma as the main wounding mechanism has been discredited and fallen out of favor with those more knowledgeable than just about all of us 10-20 years ago. While a lot of PD’s were still using federal hydrashock (that were designed on this principle, if you couldn’t guess from the name) rounds back in the 90’s, even then there was a lot of controversy on their effectiveness, and have since been replaced with rounds that give a benefit over standard ball (which hydrashock acts like a lot of the time).

Here's a chart of the cartridge sizes for the guns in DayZ:

• STANAG rounds (L85A2 AWS, M16 variations, M4 variations, M249), AK-74, ASK-74 = 5.56mm
  
• FN FAL, AKM, DMR, M14, M240, Mk48, Dragunov (+camo) = 7.62mm
  
• CZ550 = 7.8mm (it can chamber for 6.2mm, but I'll assume it's the deadlier version)
  
• Lee Enfield = 7.9mm
  
• Glock 17, Makarov PM, PDW, Bizon, MP5, M9 = 9mm
  
• M1911, Revolver = .45 caliber/11.5 mm
  
• M107, AS50 = .50 caliber/12.7mm
  
• 12 gauge Shotguns (Winchester? All other shotguns) = 12 gauge/18.53mm
  

You do know that the dragunov round, the akm round and the FAL/DMR/M14 etc . . . are actually three different rounds right? This is as stupid as saying the new round I created that shoots a 7.62mm bullet but only has 2grs of powder behind it is the same thing. Same goes for the 5.56 nato variants and the AK74’s.

Now, if you like the current damage tables, please refrain from pointing out VIDEOGAME LOGIC^TM as a defense.

No, no. TARD LOGIC ^TM is making much more sense than VIDEOGAME LOGIC ^TM.

Please continue.

Some real-world observations.

1. The 5.56mm NATO (STANAG) round was designed for wounding, not killing. In fact, in real-world tests it lacks stopping power and its purported "yawing" ability, which allows it to pass at an angle to create larger wounds, only works if it hits center mass at close range. Otherwise it's a .22 LR round's baby brother.
   
2. The nickname for the .45 ACP is literally the "Manstopper."
   
3. Shotguns are messy.
   
4. The AS50 can be upchambered to hold explosive rounds, but based on the game's ammo this is a standard .50 BMG round. In other words, big but not that big.
   

5.56 nato rounds were covered by Uncle_Scrotor.

.45acp rounds were not the manstoppers you were thinking of. First off most would argue that the nickname manstopped would be more appropriate for the .44mag. Secondly this myth of manstopping abilities originates with the .45lc or long colt or colt, not the .45 acp. And just for you, and to be clear, .45lc =/=.45acp.

AS50 cannot be upchambered to hold explosive rounds. WTF upchambered. AS50 like other nato .50bmg rifles can utilize ap,api rounds etc . . . There is no need to upchamber the rifle as they are still .50bmg rounds.

Common sense says that there is probably some gun out there which is just complete overkill. But what I can reliably say is that "The Manstopper" can be reliably expected to incapacitate or kill a target in about 1-2 shots.

By Manstopper I’m assuming you mean the .45acp. Pistol rounds suck at killing people, plain and simple. Pistols primarily exist for only a few reasons.

1: they are easy to conceal, and while suck at killing people are better than throwing puppies at someone.

2: to provide the ability to return fire while attempting to retrieve your long arm.

3: last ditch effort when you have expended all your long arm rounds.

4: in very tight quarters where a long arm would not be able to be utilized, think tunnel rats.

.45acp just like other major defensive pistol rounds suck at killing people. They work primarily by punching small neat little holes and making the bad person spill their kool-aid. No pistol round can reliably incapacitate or kill a target in 1-2 shots. And yes before you comeback with TARD LOGIC^tm about shooting someone in the head, there have been many documented cases where the bullet strikes the cranial vault and circles around it instead of penetrating (happens even with rifles). There have also been many document cases where people have been shot multiple times and lived, as well as being shot once and dying, hence unreliable. If you go to any good firearms training (.mil, lapd swat instructors, FBI HRT instructors etc. . . ) they will say don’t shoot once or twice and assume it’s all good, shoot to neutralize the target (either through incapacitation or killing) with as many rounds as is needed, admin reload as needed while threat scanning, only then should you potentially move up on the downed hostile.

[Teamwork is OP 0]

So let's go into why a rifle would still be useful if the damage was nerfed back to realistic levels. And why people in the real world would use small-caliber projectiles for warfare.

By realistic levels, I am assuming you mean superior to handguns? Also, ballistic/projectile experts might design rifle rounds with smaller calibers due to the high velocity and aerodynamics for longer range shooting. Just a thought. Maybe.

The larger the bullet, the greater the amount of force of the propellant you need to send it a certain distance. And propellants produce three things in addition to force: light, heat, and sound.

The larger the bullet, the louder the crack of the gun, the greater the amount of heat, and the brighter the muzzle flash. The smaller the mass of the bullet, the less propellant you need to send the bullet a certain distance. This means smaller caliber rounds can be fired a greater distance while drawing less attention.

Don’t even know where to start with this one. You do know that caliber does not have a direct linear correlation with mass of the projectile right? I can get 200gr .40s&w rounds and 180gr .45acp rounds. Are you telling me that the store is selling me rounds that can’t exist? Also a few words for you, flash retardant. Also powder type and burn rates, especially in regards to barrel length. You do know that most firearms when fired (excluding crew served) have a spl in the range of 140-170 or so with the majority of them (and the majority of ammo) hovering around 160db (this is somewhat dependant on the testing methodology, however the majority of spl for various firearms will be roughly be similar)?

Law 3: When two bodies act on each other, they produce equal action and reaction forces in opposite directions.

This is why sniper rifles use smaller calibers. In order to achieve their maximum effectiveness, they have to produce an incredible amount of force. But most of that force goes back into the gun.

Anyone else see the contradiction in the TARD LOGIC^tm here? (answer in black below)

Equal action and reaction =/= but most of that force goes back into the gun

Yes there will be equal forces acting upon the gun and shooter that was applied to the projectile, however you’re not factoring in the differences in masses of the two objects the forces are applied to. Also could it not be that aerodynamic drag increases with cross-sectional area? That tricky physics is just as hard as maths.

Also, it seems like the report for guns isn't loud enough. A sniper rifle should definitely reach past the outskirts of the city with a pistol reaching at least several blocks -- even when silenced.

Um . . . yeah. . . no . . . I’ve shot a lot of suppressed pistols and suppressed rifles. When properly configured and using subsonic ammo, they are indeed very quiet, and would not be heard several blocks down. Hell the suppressed 10.5 ar15 (firing subsonic) with integral can on the end was quieter than us talking at the outdoor range.

So, my point?

This is how real-world physics and gun technology already provide weapon balance outside of the traditions of your typical FPS. Assault weapons and light machine guns should have less stopping power per bullet but a greater rate of fire. Heavier assault weapons should have twice the recoil but twice the stopping power. Shotguns should have the greatest stopping power by far but a short effective range. And handguns, despite having the smallest effective range, should be more powerful per round than assault rifles with very little recoil and with the added bonus of only taking up a secondary slot.

I get it, someone sprinkled some crack on your gluestick eating habit. Now it makes sense.

As for sniper rifles, they shouldn't get to break the laws of physics just because typical FPSs let them. Greater damage = greater recoil = harder to handle. An AS50 or M107 should kick like a mule 4-8 times harder than the other sniper rifles while other sniper rifles should only maintain tight shot groupings with steady handling, accommodation for bullet drop, and patience instead of 1-hit body shots.

While they might break your ideal of the laws of physics, I think you and me/rest of the world have a different understanding of physics (or is it just a more accurate understanding?).

And all guns should have to deal with the realities of being campfire bright and incredibly loud. Real silencers don't silence anything! They just make them less eardrum-shattering.

Could be the reason why only Tards refer to suppressors as silencers. Me thinks there hath been too much counter strike and movies used as research. And please . . .Please for the love of god . . . make it stop!

Edited August 27, 2012 by Lord_smegnatron

[KTL SHiNE 2]

I understand what you are saying and I mean no hate at you but really a pistol doing that much health? Maybe if it had some crazy recoil or delay, second of all a automatic gun such as a M4 (trying to relate) will not take 12 shots to kill people maybe 4-5 at MAX. Another thing, a DMR or CZ550 will do much more damage then that,even in the leg... Finally people need rewards for finding high end military gear, I mean why go through raiding and all that for a high end assault rifle such as a M4 if a pistol can do 6x more damage. Let's also not forget this is a video game , yes it may relate to a military simulator, but it's still a game, if you want realism go out there yourself.... Sorry if this came out as hate but that is just my opinion :) either way I wish you good intentions with this post. ( sorry for misspells, IPods autocorrect is a bitch)