Silencers - Why do they exist in ArmA 3?

[white 1]

Suppressors are used in most video games now-adays so why should they not? I mean, it adds a whole new way to play the game. "Stealthy"

lots of people care so much about realism and how vehicles and weapons behave, i thought they would also care about a completely arcade and unrealistic feature such as this.

everytime i argued about fps, theres always someone saying "shut up this is a simulator not cod, it doesnt need fps".

but the same person clings to fictional weapon attachments and third person, which breaks that line of reasoning.

personally i would prefer melee as an stealthy alternative.

[CptCubano 1]

Ill agree with you on the melee, wish there was some way to sneak up to a guy and use some cord, knife, hands or something to kill him instead of shooting all the time. The only concern I have about it is the AI are ridiculously accurate and aware :|

[Maslofski 10]

i only use the silencer to get less recoil on the mk200

[lesscubes 1]

Suppressors are now common-place for first-world special forces & light infantry as well as police tactical teams. Are they truely silent? No. That's not really the point either, it's about signature reduction. The US military is even fielding them on light and medium machine guns now. (On a limited basis.) 30 decibels of sound reduction and a drastically different sound profile is no small thing.

Its realistic to have them in game. Do they act entirely correctly? Nope. But SHOULD they be there? Absolutely. I wouldn't mind melee if it were done right, but then you're stuck with QTE's (Press V to break this sentries neck! etc.) which I NEVER want to see in an ARMA game or very mechanical animations which aren't terribly pleasing to the eye. It'd be hard to do in a way that felt natural to the game. I44 has bayonets, that'd be a fun option, but I'd venture to say there are more sound suppressors used in action than bayonets now.

[OOZorro 1]

I always wanted to see the player actually screwing on the silencer , as well as other attachments, for more realism

[scrim 1]

I wouldn't say they're very common, but the Americans have actually started issuing them in a larger extent to regular infantry units in Afghanistan. Not to mask the sound of the weapons, but to mask the muzzle flash and smoke.

[mr_centipede 31]

I don't get what's so Hollywood about arma3 suppressor? What are we talking about here? Are we talking about a sound file or the config?

[white 1]

I don't get what's so Hollywood about arma3 suppressor? What are we talking about here? Are we talking about a sound file or the config?

because in reality theres a loud high pitched "clack" when firing even subsonic rounds at 100db minimum while in arma its like 10db and sounds like just the air pressure, like in movies.

[chortles 263]

Isn't that "clack" from the weapon cycling? Mind you, we have no vanilla bolt-action weapons that can mount a suppressor in the alpha by which to test this...

[rye1 21]

You can still hear the sound of your action (cycling), the muzzle blast (escaping air) and noise of the projectile impacting in reality - haven't tried ARMA, I used a suppressor on a pistol just for James Bond looks in PVP, that's about it.

[Sanguinius 1]

30 years from now, who knows?

But really, a louder silencer is a better silencer, in terms of realism. Wait, let me rephrase that.

But really, a louder sound suppressor is a better sound suppressor, in terms of realism. Because the guns aren't silenced.

Most of the clack is the weapon cycling, which unfortunately is a feature that most weapons seem to have. HOWEVER, considering caseless ammunition is used in the MX, a large amount of the weapon's sound is reduced. And then, if subsonic rounds, you may get a weapon which is near silent. In real life. I still want the clack, because that is an awesome sound.

[white 1]

30 years from now, who knows?

But really, a louder silencer is a better silencer, in terms of realism. Wait, let me rephrase that.

But really, a louder sound suppressor is a better sound suppressor, in terms of realism. Because the guns aren't silenced.

Most of the clack is the weapon cycling, which unfortunately is a feature that most weapons seem to have. HOWEVER, considering caseless ammunition is used in the MX, a large amount of the weapon's sound is reduced. And then, if subsonic rounds, you may get a weapon which is near silent. In real life. I still want the clack, because that is an awesome sound.

the thing is, in this topic someone posted a table with different supressors and weapons, in average they took down sound from 160db to 130db. 130 is still as loud as a jet engine, and sub sonic rounds apparently only lessen the noise by about 10db.

even if it came down to 80db, it would still be a loud noise, and would be perceivable at some distance, the thing is, the sound becomes very different, its like banging wood togheter, thats the "clack" sound i was talking about. im sorry because i really wasnt very clear.

still, veeery far from the silent "only trigger+air pressure" sound, to me that only exists in movies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressor

but i guess in 30 years they could make an eletronic silencer that reproduced back the exact same sound from the gun and countered the soudn waves neutralizing them completely. who knows.

all in all, i just think that it should be a lot louder ingame.

Edited March 17, 2013 by white

[Trauma.au 10]

I've tested them in A3 and found that an enemy AI faced away from me will hear un-suppressed shots and react at 300m (they should react from further imo), they only reacted to suppressed fire at 150m. So while we don't have SD ammo I have observed a difference there. Hopefully we can do away with the need for SD ammo to make AI react correctly, it should only be of value when you don't want a sonic crack.

The suppressor should be the sound modifier, not the magazine as it has been in the past. I'm confident that is how BIS have set it up for A3.

[metalcraze 290]

Yep we need SD ammo to matter. It's actually great now that a suppressor doesn't make a wrong type of ammo not being heard from only from 50m or less.

[Dwarden 1124]

welrod was indeed genial design

[OrangeRPG 1]

You guys realize that subsonic ammo doesn't cycle bolt? And it's called suppressor not silencer plus in RL suppressors still pretty loud, even if suppressor is wet. Suppresors in arma 3 are way, way to quiet....

[Nichols 243]

You guys realize that subsonic ammo doesn't cycle bolt? And it's called suppressor not silencer plus in RL suppressors still pretty loud, even if suppressor is wet. Suppresors in arma 3 are way, way to quiet....

Seriously a subsonic ammo doesn't cycle a bolt????

Who told you that? If you learned it by watching videos from the internet then you need to find something else to do. Subsonic rounds can and will cycle a bolt on any weapon IF they are loaded (manufactured or reloaded) correctly; if not then yes you have a problem.

You can never completely silence a weapon; due to the amount of things that are happening when you shoot. The physics of it are just not possible at all.

[TG Marksman X 10]

You guys realize that subsonic ammo doesn't cycle bolt? And it's called suppressor not silencer plus in RL suppressors still pretty loud, even if suppressor is wet. Suppresors in arma 3 are way, way to quiet....

Subsonic rounds will indeed cycle.

Take note of how loud the round hitting the dirt is compared to the M4 cycling... Pretty quiet ehh?

[trent 14]

It's more about hiding the muzzle flash. Especially at night which is when most spec ops missions will take place.

[PN11A 2]

This thread is full of so much mis information i have no place to begin. Ill just say it depends alot on what type of round you are shooting.

[fiberopticrabbit 1]

I just made a post in another suppressor thread, but I'll get the big one across here. NOBODY uses subsonic ammo for any sort of use of force capacity. It is ineffective velocity wise, expensive, and impracticable to load separately. Please feel free to ask me anything on the subject. I shoot suppressed regularly in the states.

From the other thread so it can be seen.

I would like to add my knowledge of suppressors. I personally shoot suppressed, shoot regularly, and am heavily involved in the shooting community in the USA.

Simple points need to be reiterated.

• Suppressors (NOT silencers) DO NOT lower muzzle velocity.
  
• NOBODY uses subsonic ammo. It is an annoyance and waste of money. Yes, it exists, yes, it makes the weapon alot quieter, but it is massively impracticable due to the reduced velocity; which is how BIS seems to be treating cans in the Alpha. Once again, subsonic ammo is simply not commonly used. Not my our military, not by our LEOs, and not by the civilian shooting community.
  
• Suppressors DO NOT make you more accurate (to any noticeable degree), they do however, reduce felt recoil significantly. That last part is why they are so popular on SBRs (short barreled rifles)
  
• Suppressors reduce volume of the shot and concussion (obviously), but they do not make them SILENT, the make it hearing safe. It simply changes the characteristics of the noise, stripping it of heavy 'bass notes' and make it dissipate faster over distance and not sound like a gunshot. That last part is key. The shot might either be lost by ambient noise and distance, or confused with something else.
  

The list of CONS is very very short. It's why our Special Operations Forces use them, without deviance, all of the time.

• Added weight; changing balance and handling characteristics for the worse. Largely mitigated by use on short weapons or by weapon systems not intended for quick handling (i.e. precision systems)
  
• Over gassing the weapon system. Unless the weapon system is tuned (i.e. buffer weight, gas pot diameter) for a suppressor, there is a possibility for malfunction or poor feeding due to the bolt carrier speed being significantly faster than normal. Most modern AR15s will either do fine, or even newer weapons having gating systems to change the gas system when a can is attached.
  
• AND THATS IT
  

I hate seeing people make up 'facts' about suppressors or weapons in general on this forum. Defer to those with experience instead of making stuff up or googling it from other random people that don't know what they are talking about. I don't mean to be insulting, but if we want accuracy for Arma; then lets have accuracy, not speculation.

I would really appreciate it if BIS would take note on these points on suppressors. It kills me how they are currently treated in the Alpha. it's is just plain not accurate to real life. In addition, suppressors ARE NOT like 2 feet long like seen in game. Their length is frankly ridiculous. Cans for .308 are as short as adding 6 to 8.7 inches to the host system. (adding, because it covers the flash hider/comp, which is removed from the length calculation of the suppressor)

Please feel free to reply or as questions all. If someone wants to refute me for some reason, please bring hard facts and supporting evidence. You may note I have not posted any sources with my claims besides my own experience; that is because it is all public knowledge, however, if refuted I can certainly rain it down.

Edited March 18, 2013 by FiberOpticRabbit

[Cyanyde 1]

Actually I can hear "suppressed" rounds from quite a fair distance away in Arma 3.

Not like other games where it literally silences the rounds.

If someone is 50m away and I can still hear their shots, I don't see what the problem is.

[fiberopticrabbit 1]

Actually I can hear "suppressed" rounds from quite a fair distance away in Arma 3.

Not like other games where it literally silences the rounds.

If someone is 50m away and I can still hear their shots, I don't see what the problem is.

From experience, they are little too quiet in ALPHA, but not by too much. You guys need to stop trying to compare the sound with youtube clips. By way of how audio recording works, the video already filters out all the concussive force and carrying energy from the sound of an unexpressed rifle. They will sound nearly identical in a video, but it's very different in real life. It is not simply LOUDER or quieter, but a whole range of factors that make suppressors sound and act how they do over distance. It needs to be experienced. Often suppressed rifles CAN be heard from a decent distance, maybe about (speculation) 200m, but they are often not recognized or ignored due to being so 'light' of a sound.

The biggest problem with them is that they reduce damage and range in the alpha, which is simply not what suppressors do. They are also visually waaay too long. Not opinion, fact. Browse AACs website.

Edited March 18, 2013 by FiberOpticRabbit

[PN11A 2]

From experience, they are little too quiet in ALPHA, but not by too much. You guys need to stop trying to compare the sound with youtube clips. By way of how audio recording works, the video already filters out all the concussive force and carrying energy from the sound of an unexpressed rifle. They will sound nearly identical in a video, but it's very different in real life. It is not simply LOUDER or quieter, but a whole range of factors that make suppressors sound and act how they do over distance. It needs to be experienced. Often suppressed rifles CAN be heard from a decent distance, maybe about (speculation) 200m, but they are often not recognized or ignored due to being so 'light' of a sound.

The biggest problem with them is that they reduce damage and range in the alpha, which is simply not what suppressors do. They are also visually waaay too long. Not opinion, fact. Browse AACs website.

So you are telling me, that if i load 300blk out ammo into a suppressed sbr. That it won't have the killing power needed? I assume with your statements you are talking about subsonic 5.56 ammunition otherwise that statement is incorrect.

[fiberopticrabbit 1]

So you are telling me, that if i load 300blk out ammo into a suppressed sbr. That it won't have the killing power needed? I assume with your statements you are talking about subsonic 5.56 ammunition otherwise that statement is incorrect.

300BLK is of course a huge asterisk. If you are bringing it up then you are aware it is something of an special cartridge. 300BLK is NOT subsonic by standard; it is still a supersonic cartridge. Subsonic 300BLK is another special loading, and while much more effective than other cartridges in it's class as a subsonic round (the whole design was based on this), subsonic 300BLK still has pretty piss poor effective range compared to non subsonic 300BLK or any other standard cartridge. The subsonic loading is definitely for specific applications even with 300BLK and once again is not the norm, it achieves it's energy per foot pounds on impact from it's weight, not it's speed. It's literally like throwing a really heavy rock at something. It won't go very far, but it'll hurt when it gets there.

Any round, subsonic or not, fired at sufficiently close range to the target has the ability to be lethal. We are talking about broad term application, and in broad term application, no one uses subsonic loadings because as soon as you have targets past the effective range of the subsonic velocity you are firing a highly under powered round. It's not very practical to carry specialty ammunition unless you are going on a specialty mission where you know for certain (no plan survives contact with the enemy) you will only be engaging in close distances. At longer distances, the enhanced suppression qualities of the subsonic loadings are negligible at best; leaving you with nothing more than a low velocity round and nothing to show for it. Supersonic rounds are generally considered to be unstable in flight, inacruate, and much less than desirably lethal in velocity once they have traveled back down to subsonic. Starting out this way is fighting the math no matter how you swing it.

It sort of seems like you were trying to bring up something with which to shoot me down, and you chose an semi-uncommon round that has very specific properties with which to do so; which isn't really relevant to proving me wrong, nor to the discussion for ARMA in general.

Additionally, 'killing power' is a misnomer. Lets talks things like velocities and hydro static shock instead of intangible concepts.

I was actually out with my buddy a couple months back shooting his suppressed Noveske 300BLK upper, both with subsonic and supersonic rounds. Subsonic had alot of issues cycling, even out of a premium rifle.

Edited March 18, 2013 by FiberOpticRabbit