Can we get slight differences between weapon variants...

[chortles 263]

Mind you, even a carbine isn't immune to "lowering" -- or "raising" -- depending on the sizes of the rooms, hallways, stairwells, etc., but the idea seems to be that it can at least be kept 'shouldered' in some areas where longer weapons would be auto-lowered.

[machineabuse 11]

Worth mentioning that with many cartridges that velocity usually doesn't have a huge effect on accuracy (groupsize) in practice. The drop on a 10inch sbr will obviously be greater than a 14inch gun but they will often shoot comparable groups. Terminal ballistics is a wholly different story. Muzzle blast and flash out of shorter barrels will be... dramatically profound :)

[chortles 263]

I believe that those differences are part of what's being hoped for too... and (as with so many things) we have no idea how much the devs actually want any of this, much less have intent to try to implement any of this.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Mind you, even a carbine isn't immune to "lowering" -- or "raising" -- depending on the sizes of the rooms, hallways, stairwells, etc., but the idea seems to be that it can at least be kept 'shouldered' in some areas where longer weapons would be auto-lowered.

I have to install the weapon lowering mod to see if its too much of a negative but I think by simple testing of lowering my weapon in game it would be just enough.

Worth mentioning that with many cartridges that velocity usually doesn't have a huge effect on accuracy (groupsize) in practice. The drop on a 10inch sbr will obviously be greater than a 14inch gun but they will often shoot comparable groups. Terminal ballistics is a wholly different story. Muzzle blast and flash out of shorter barrels will be... dramatically profound :)

From what I see in the config A3 still uses only the ammo's velocity.Since we have to share optics for them all and as someone pointed out,different weapons get different optics due to greater drop over distance,just adjusting dispersion seems best way to do it.

I believe that those differences are part of what's being hoped for too... and (as with so many things) we have no idea how much the devs actually want any of this, much less have intent to try to implement any of this.

In the config its clear that carbines are meant to be less accurate.There is a single shot dispersion and a full auto/burst dispersion.MX rifle is 0.00093 with MXC at 0.0014.An inconsistency though is that there is also a singlemedium optics/singlefar optics and the far optics is set at 0.00093.Means the weapon gets improved accuracy with a long range optic installed which isn't really good IMO.

Some findings...

The MXC has far optic dispersion as 0.00093 so its same dispersion compared to regular rifle when shooting thru a far optic.

The excellent R3F French Weapons Pack MOD does something a bit different.It has single/full auto/medium auto all have different dispersions.At first I thought its just not right to do that but I now feel its needed.The reason is that you can learn to pull down with mouse and concentrate full auto fire in small areas.Its ok at 300m but not good at 600m.With the R3F French Weapons Pack mod using these differences it makes it harder to concentrate large amounts of bullets at longer distances when auto firing.

There is something wrong with the MXSW autorifle.It seems to recoil much more and you can't use the mouse pull technique as well with it.Just doesn't feel like a LMG which are made to have little recoil.It has dispersion of rifle at 0.00093.I do not know if this weapon is made to be super accurate but I think for gameplay reasons it should have a bad dispersion and a better recoil model.Other weapons have very little recoil and are death machines with ability to autofire in tight circles.

[machineabuse 11]

From what I see in the config A3 still uses only the ammo's velocity.Since we have to share optics for them all and as someone pointed out,different weapons get different optics due to greater drop over distance,just adjusting dispersion seems best way to do it.

That's just painfully artificial. In real life the difference in dispersion between a 20" and 16" barrel is so negligible it's not even worth mention.

For that matter, the difference in drop between a 20" and 16" barrel is under 4" at 500m. If you want to change anything just make it so that optic compatibility is tied to weapons. Even Acogs have BDCs that are spec'd to barrel lengths.

[chortles 263]

Is it me or do optics currently not work that way in the sense of not being tied to any particular barrel lengths/calibers/loads?

[machineabuse 11]

Nope, you can even grab optics off a completely different weapon family and it will be zeroed correctly.

I suspect that currently in Alpha all weapons are using the same ballistic curve but with different damage values.

[Wolfstriked 11]

I am not bothered by the barrel length being tied to bullet drop.Would add complexity to the development with devs having to make slightly different optics to account for the slightly different bullet drops with different barrel lengths.But I am bothered by other issues.Just playing around with it some more and I think some bad design decisions were made.

MXM is just very slightly more accurate than MX/MXSW.

MXSW has much worse recoil than the other weapons in same family.

Some simple tweaks that would work.

Leave marksman rifles accuracy alone but give it the recoil of the auto rifles.With practice you can leave small accurate groups at 600m and this is wrong IMO and the larger recoil will prevent this.Larger recoil also gives the feel of a more powerful shot for effect.

Make auto rifles much less accurate by bringing them down to the dispersion setting used in the R3F French Weapons Pack for full auto fire. So from 0.00093 to 0.005.Give them much less recoil to give them the feel these weapons should have.

Been thinking that maybe the accuracy differences between assault and carbines is too large.You cant see the effect by using the MXC though as it has same dispersion when using a far optic,as does most alpha weapons.A weapons dispersion should not change when using different optics.

[BlankDisc 10]

Q:What's the difference between an m16a4 and m4? A; About 100fps.

And the M4 carbine is mechanically more accurate. So this issue/thread is kind of pointless, imho.

The ballistic profile should be dictated by the ammunition type/load for the most accuracy/realism across the board vs work/manhours.

Just as long as the ta31 reticle works properly, I'll be happy- I think they did fix it since the last time I played vbs2.

[ht-57 0]

And the M4 carbine is mechanically more accurate.

That is an incorrect statement.

The m16a4 has a 20" barrel producing a muzzle velocity 3110 ft/s. It features a single shot or burst fire [three round] selection. it also has a non telescoping stock and is approx one pound heavier then the m4, It shoots the same load as the m4, 5.56 62grain 193 ball ammo. It has an effective range of 800m. the m16a4 is the standard issue rifle for the usmc today .

The m4 has a 14.5" inch barrel with a telescoping stock. It has a muzzle velocity of 2900 ft/s with an effective range of 600m

Its primary use is for cqb engagements.

[max power 21]

I think the point is there's less than a 10 percent difference in performance. While I would like to see this difference, I am uncertain if the average user would be able to detect any difference under most conditions.

[ht-57 0]

To the op point,

we are talking about accuracy not performance. Longer barrel = more accurate over distance, not so much when its upclose and personal. if you are tuning a corner in a house a compact firearm is obviously the way to go. Not trying to start a flame war, just wanted to put some facts out there. If arma is about details like bullet drop and such. I think being able to place effective fire 200m further down range is worth noting. I think it could be considered mission critical if given the choice of firearm at the onset of said task.

[BlankDisc 10]

That is an incorrect statement.

The m16a4 has a 20" barrel producing a muzzle velocity 3110 ft/s. It features a single shot or burst fire [three round] selection. it also has a non telescoping stock and is approx one pound heavier then the m4, It shoots the same load as the m4, 5.56 62grain 193 ball ammo. It has an effective range of 800m. the m16a4 is the standard issue rifle for the usmc today .

The m4 has a 14.5" inch barrel with a telescoping stock. It has a muzzle velocity of 2900 ft/s with an effective range of 600m

Its primary use is for cqb engagements.

Correction, 130fps. And the M4/m4a1 IS more MECHANICALLY accurate due to stiffer barrel (a function of O.D. over barrel length).

The US designation for 62 grain ammo is the m855, m855a1, and m856. Effective ranges for both systems on a point target are 550m. Sights don't even go 800 on a m16a4 (unless factoring a rco-but 'book'/fm figures go off iron sights). M4 muzzle velocity is 2970fps. I'm not trying to dog you man, I was SDM instructor for a spell.

if you're curious how the effective range is actually derived.

Anyway :rolleyes:, moving on:

I think the point is there's less than a 10 percent difference in performance. While I would like to see this difference, I am uncertain if the average user would be able to detect any difference under most conditions.

Yeah Pretty much. I think modelling of different ammo types would be a much more fruitfull endeavor, ie m80 ball vs lr118. For example, HT-57's m193 ammo would have a bigger difference in performance vs m855 or mk262 than would m16vs m4. While a full on shooting simulator would be the bees knees, its never going to be 100% accurate, especially from different points of view. Personally, I dislike the button to hold breath as trained shooters do it naturally (as do most people when trying to preform a task that requires fine motor skill). Your aim should be refined to the point that when you begin to hold your breath (or more precisely reach the natural respiratory pause) all that is left is breaking the trigger, without disturbing sight alignment.

[dnk 13]

While discussion is good, keep in mind that the devs don't always participate here. For all we know, they may already have seen this and are discussing it now.....

The modding community does participate here. They have at least as much of an effect on the game that I play as the devs do.

I mean, I normally play a totally differently-configurated game with a different weapon/model set and different sounds and different AI and different maps and different coms than what the game OA shipped with...

These discussions aren't just for devs, and that doesn't matter for the end product the community will get.

[max power 21]

To the op point,

we are talking about accuracy not performance. Longer barrel = more accurate over distance, not so much when its upclose and personal. if you are tuning a corner in a house a compact firearm is obviously the way to go. Not trying to start a flame war, just wanted to put some facts out there. If arma is about details like bullet drop and such. I think being able to place effective fire 200m further down range is worth noting. I think it could be considered mission critical if given the choice of firearm at the onset of said task.

For the same firearm, it's not so much difference as you'd think. The real difference lies in the different weapon systems. Case and point, the m24 sniper system has a 24 inch barrel but an 800 meter point target effective range, but the m16a4 has a 20 inch barrel but a 550 meter effective range. The M4 has a 16 inch barrel but a 500 meter effective range.

The difference in barrel length between the m16 and the m24 is the same as the barrel length between the m4 and m16 but the difference in effective range is 6 times greater.

For the m4 and m16 systems, the difference in barrel length is about 20 percent, the difference in muzzle velocity is about 10 percent, and the difference in effective range is about 10 percent.

Effective range is defined as the maximum range at which a shooter can hit a standard target 50% of the time. Weapon system is I think defined as the weapons, ammunition, and other gadgets.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Max Power

[Wolfstriked 11]

Effective range also is used to indicate stopping power.Weird how the most realistic combat simulator in history doesn't mention anywhere the stopping power of the weapons while the players of Dayz are let in on the inner workings of the simulation.Anyone know what damage a weapon does in A3,what amount of HP infantry has,what the hit potential drop off is for weapons etc?

Also M16/M4 is bad to compare as the barrel is only reduced by 1/4.But when you look at other carbines the difference is more severe.....AK74 is 16in and AK74su is 8 inch barrel.I read one account of a soldier say of the G36c that he wouldn't take it into combat unless it was completely indoor fighting.

If you guys are bored download and try the R3F French Weapons Pack.It does something different by making rifles at reduced accuracy which in turn makes sniper weapons feel different in game(carbines at same dispersion as rifles though).I wonder if this is better to do for all assault rifles and leave the marksman and sniper rifles to have the better accuracy.

What I really like in the R3F French Weapons Pack is that the dispersion is upped when you select burst and even further degraded when you go full auto.This removes the ability to mouse pull the recoil and do accurate groups which is just wrong.I am killer with a certain alpha weapon at full auto fire that its ridiculous.

MX rifle

single 0.00093

Full auto 0.00093

R3F_famas_F1

single 0.00175

burst 0.0035

Full auto 0.005

[machineabuse 11]

Ok "Stopping power" finally reared its ugly mythical head. /grabs popcorn and sits back ;D

[rasdenfasden 12]

I think different muzzle velocities with different weapons should be in, especially when you have weapons with wildly different barrels using the same mags, such as MXC vs MXM.

Edited April 21, 2013 by RasdenFasden

[max power 21]

Effective range also is used to indicate stopping power.

No it doesn't. I believe the term is 'desired effect'. I don't believe there is a range at which rifles stop being lethal. We were talking about this when we were talking about performance.

Weird how the most realistic combat simulator in history doesn't mention anywhere the stopping power of the weapons while the players of Dayz are let in on the inner workings of the simulation.Anyone know what damage a weapon does in A3,what amount of HP infantry has,what the hit potential drop off is for weapons etc?

http://browser.six-projects.net/cfg_weapons/classlist?utf8=%E2%9C%93&version=68&commit=Change&options[group_by]=weap_type&options[custom_type]=&options[faction]=

I have no idea what you're talking about. I believe DayZ mod uses the same formulas and values as Arma 2. From my experience, the behaviour of the 6.5mm weapons seem to conform to what I would expect from such a weapon in Arma 2, so I would imagine they are based on the same scale.

Also M16/M4 is bad to compare as the barrel is only reduced by 1/4.But when you look at other carbines the difference is more severe.....AK74 is 16in and AK74su is 8 inch barrel.I read one account of a soldier say of the G36c that he wouldn't take it into combat unless it was completely indoor fighting.

I would also not want to take anything into battle unless it was the best tool for the situation I would be expected to face, even if there was only a 1% difference.

Okay, so here's some similar weapons with vastly different barrel lengths. It's probably a bad example, but here we go:

The M16a1, with a 20 inch barrel, has a dispersion angle of 0.032 degrees based on an accuracy test result of 2 inches at 100 yards. It has a muzzle velocity of 1000 m/s.

The XM177E2, with an 11.5 inch barrel, has a dispersion angle of 0.045 degrees based on an assessment of 2.75 inches at 100 yards. It has a muzzle velocity of 838 m/s.

The difference in barrel length is 8.5 inches, or 42%. The difference In terms of accuracy, there is a difference of 0.013 degrees, or 40%. The difference in muzzle velocity 162 m/s or 16%.

The maximum effective range of an m16a1 is 550m. The maximum effective range for an xm177e2 is 350m. The difference is 200m, or about 35%.

I think the XM does pretty well for having a barrel that's way too short for the bullet it's firing. They had problems with this thing tumbling bullets down range, making huge fireballs and generally being a piss poor weapon design. Even here, though, the XM puts lethal hits on a man sized target at 350m 50% of the time. I expect players would notice a difference in accuracy and performance at range here, but I would also expect them to, given the track record of the XM. The surprise would be that the XM was actually a functional tool for air / vehicle crews.

If anyone has any idea of the barrel lengths of the weapons in A3 we can compare those based on their ingame stats.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Max Power

[Wolfstriked 11]

I researched effective range and stopping power came up but either way its not what I meant with OP.And I looked at the link you posted and still don't per weapon listed.This is not good for the game as I noticed the whole squad I was running with last night had all equipped silencers on their weapons.I told them that silencers drop damage and accuracy down and they said no they don't.So now I also have no idea on that.:confused:

[rye1 21]

Yes, I think suppressors in game do? If someone knows then post it up. But if 'stopping power' is based on accuracy come effective range then that would change dependent on the type of round you're using. As Max said, it's not an indicator of.

[max power 21]

I researched effective range and stopping power came up but either way its not what I meant with OP.And I looked at the link you posted and still don't per weapon listed.This is not good for the game as I noticed the whole squad I was running with last night had all equipped silencers on their weapons.I told them that silencers drop damage and accuracy down and they said no they don't.So now I also have no idea on that.:confused:

Looking at that link I posted, it would appear that 6.5mm rifle suppressors slow the muzzle velocity down to 60%, and reduce the maximum damage to 80%. I think the damage calculation for arma is complex but, based on these numbers, you would expect the suppressed rifles to do less than 80% of the damage of unsuppressed rifles at all ranges, probably much less. Maybe we can assume that the mx series of rifles has a gas system bleed-off device that converts supersonic ammo to subsonic, like the cancelled MP-2000 (which I always thought was quite a nice looking submachinegun).

Edited April 23, 2013 by Max Power

[rye1 21]

"True" suppressed running subsonics have been quoted by Dr Gary K. Roberts to do around the same amount of tissue damage as pistol calibers and velocities. I don't know how that equates in-game.

[samco 1]

"True" suppressed running subsonics have been quoted by Dr Gary K. Roberts to do around the same amount of tissue damage as pistol calibers and velocities. I don't know how that equates in-game.

in-game its 80% less damage maybe because they don't have the same armor-piercing capability .

Terminal ballistic is a delicate argument ... if there is no body armor sometimes a slower bullet deals more damage than a faster one because the latter can go through the body with relatively little injury , whereas the slower one will stuck in the flesh thus transferring all of it kinetic energy to the tissues.

[max power 21]

"True" suppressed running subsonics have been quoted by Dr Gary K. Roberts to do around the same amount of tissue damage as pistol calibers and velocities. I don't know how that equates in-game.

I think he must be talking about more massive bullets... Tissue damage from pistols is pretty much all crush cavity. So, the damage they do can be boiled down to bullet diameter * length of wound tract (ignoring what exactly the wound tract intersects). So I would imagine that Gary Roberts is saying that there's not much difference in wound tract length given a slower bullet when the maximum depth you have to penetrate is the average human torso. So both heavy and light bullets are able to penetrate greater than nine inches of ballistic medium, probably.