Weapon damage reduced when attached a silencer?

[dysta 10]

I've played with the recent update of the ARMA 3 Alpha (0.58), and I found out that the firearm attached with a silencer is getting harder to kill, even in CQB range.

The AI I've tested can take up to 4 shots of 6.5mm caseless in about 50 meters, without a silencer is 2-3 shots. I wonder if the new update made the damage system is applied with the penalty with a silencer attachment.

Actually IRL, adding a silencer may causing the bullet velocity becomes unstable, which means slightly deadlier in smaller chance, but usually it drop the velocity, but not too much:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/05/foghorn/ask-foghorn-does-a-silencer-effect-the-velocity-of-the-bullet/

[lolipoyi 10]

Nice piece of info in that link. Hopefully will end some misconceptions. Tanks. :ok:

[PN11A 2]

I swear we revisit this same topic every few weeks

[dysta 10]

Not until the 0.58 version has it, that's why I need to point out.

[Insanatrix 0]

Where are you shooting them? Usually they go down in 1 shot with the 6.5mm rounds. Also the damage of the round is determined by the round itself and not the gun or it's attachments AFAIK. For example, if the muzzle velocity is 850m/s, it's still 850m/s with a silencer unless otherwise defined.

I believe damage is calculated as (Velocity/Typical Speed) * Hit = Damage done.

*edit* Maybe you have extended armor on which may extend to the AI units as well?

[rye1 21]

It's called freebore boost. People have discussed this numerous times. If you relate velocity to wounding then you have to resource where that thought pattern affects the game. Higher velocity means worse wounds? How? As the above poster says, there's many variables around damage values. Shot placement, distance, armour values, so forth.

[samco 1]

Higher velocity means only higher energy , how and how much this energy will be transferred to the target ? In some cases even a slower bullet could be deadlier than a faster one because it will transfer its entire energy while the faster one could go throught the body exchanging little energy.

[dysta 10]

It sounds a bit conflicting. Unstable velocity when using standard rounds for silenced weapon can still causing the same or lesser damage. Maybe you're right, silencer isn't make a magical difference.

I've tested the result again in game editor, pretty much 2 shots at the torso, both silenced and without. Maybe I'm accidentally shoot at the target's arms or legs to cause fewer damage...

[rasdenfasden 12]

Whatever way it is, I hope that they'll add proper SD ammo soon.

[Inimical_rize 1]

Suppressors and silencers can be dramatically different on various weapons, Suppressors are predominantly used to suppress the gas and flash, yes suppressors do decrease sound initially but thats not what they're designed for, silencers are as they say to silence, to use a silencer effectively you need to use subsonic rounds, this is simply a bullet with a little less gunpowder. Suppressors you can still use the same round weather the suppressor is attached or not.

As for velocities and the ballistics at the terminal end of the scale (upon entry to the target) it's not necessarily the velocity behind the round but more the are of transition the round is in or passed. In supersonic flight if a round say a .338 lapua magnum round hits you at a distance of 900mtrs it will cause a minimal temporal cavity, this is the the air, dirt and clothing sucked in behind the round for a supersonic round travelling stable its quite small. When you see ballistic gel hit with a supersonic stable round youll see a small cavity open and close, this is temporal, it closes.

A subsonic unstable round, using the .338 again, once its hit the transition zone of flight, the are where the round goes from supersonic to subsonic. The round it's self is confused and will tumble and roll Untill it finds its own way of cutting through air the easiest way it sees fit. getting hit in the transition period (for a .338 can be between 15-40mtrs dependant on the muzzle velocity of the weapon fired from) you will have a Mid temporal cavity, again its medium sized. still deadly.

Subsonic flight the round is tumbling on all of it's axis usually, and 1 of 3 things can happen in this zone this is the terminal ballistics snipers call the 'door nock'

a stable entry is where the tip of the round hits the target on a neutral axis i.e dead on, tip to skin is a good time to be hit either in supersonic or subsonic (supersonic and subsonic correlate to the depth of tracking the round has on the target i.e the distance it enters the target and what direction it heads or 'tracks')

An unstable entry is where the round hits you on a 100% axis, i.e its going to hit you broad side and slap you, this causes a huge temporal cavity, and is usually a small football size (u.k football not american handegg) grab a football and imagine having it in your stomach, yeh ouch.

tl:dr

It doesn't matter if the round is supersonic or subsonic, suppressed or silenced, Su or Sub is only for the depth of tracking or penetration distance on a target, it's only what stability the round enters the target at. the above is info is on a target without body armour using .338 lapua magnum fired from a L115a3.

[Smurf 12]

^ Nice input, makes sense. Doubtfully the game will simulate this kind of behaivor.

Somewhat related, pretty cool:

What are the down sides of having a supressor or silencer attachted to the weapon? How can it translate to the game?

[Inimical_rize 1]

Down sides to a suppressor you could implement it and this would cause a 100%flash and bang to about a 40% flash and bang but will cause a lot of smoke to be emitted from the barrel due to cooling and reheating of the gas in the suppressor it also reduces range, this smokes caused by how gas and the round move in the suppressor its self.

for a Su and Sil it causes bullet drop, 1 click on a schmidt and bender scope (use by brit snipers, me.) is 10cm at 100cm, so at 900 its 90cm, by implementing a suppressor or silencer you can expect to add about 5-7clicks elevation on a target dependant on attachment. it goes more in depth but this means having to explain ballistics charts, vibrations in the barrel, recoil and muzzle velocities.

Silencers and subsonic rounds, from a 100% flash and bang to a probable 30% pop, his or 'thuck' kind of noise.

Why the weapons still flash with any type or muzzle attachment is beyond me, silencers and suppressors are moderately the same but still have their own area of effects on the weapon, and they both usually decrease or kill flash completely, attach dependant.

Edited May 29, 2013 by Inimcal_

[rye1 21]

It sounds a bit conflicting. Unstable velocity when using standard rounds for silenced weapon can still causing the same or lesser damage. Maybe you're right, silencer isn't make a magical difference.

I've tested the result again in game editor, pretty much 2 shots at the torso, both silenced and without. Maybe I'm accidentally shoot at the target's arms or legs to cause fewer damage...

Yeah but is it common for unstable velocity changes to be apparent with Military ammunition and Military suppressors?

[EagleTigerSix 10]

Subsonic rifle ammo is ballistically inferior to most pistol rounds even.

[defk0n_NL 2]

Higher velocity means only higher energy , how and how much this energy will be transferred to the target ? In some cases even a slower bullet could be deadlier than a faster one because it will transfer its entire energy while the faster one could go throught the body exchanging little energy.

quoted for truth

[Inimical_rize 1]

Higher velocity means only higher energy , how and how much this energy will be transferred to the target ? In some cases even a slower bullet could be deadlier than a faster one because it will transfer its entire energy while the faster one could go throught the body exchanging little energy.

But then you have to factor stability on entry, any obstructions, the wind on route and the type of round, but on the most part you are correct.

I would like to see more bullet variants including sub sonic ammo.

[dale 11]

An extended barrel (suppressor or silencer) will give the ammo the same amount of damage and maybe extended accuracy, but a lot of people think that it completely silences the weapon, which it seems to in Arma 3 currently.

Even if you remove the bang of the bullet being fired you still have a large amount of mechanical parts in the gun making large amounts of noise (especially automatic guns).

[rye1 21]

quoted for truth

You quote a man still discussing energy when multiple Wound Ballistic Experts discredit the myth that energy is the main 'problem causer'. They agree that energy is a symptom for certain ways the bullet will perform in ballistic gel, and in human tissue, but do not rate it as a damaging factor as depicted by the temporary cavity which is the dispersing factor of the vast amount of energy, known to be the cause of very little tissue destruction and detachment. Other rounds such as the MK262 have proven the energy theory to be quite misinformed with the medical-human aspect of wound ballistics. For instance shallow wounds aren't about energy, they're about dissipation of fragments with very little penetrating energy, yet are known to be the most effective rounds to put someone down due to overwhelming pain. This is not about energy. It's about tissue destruction, the primary cavity. The reason why faster rounds can do little damage is because the way the round performs 'through-and-throughs' are more likely to occur to to the fact the penetrating power you have is more than the width of tissue the bullet enters; and shot-lines on a face-front target tend to agree with this argument through exampled shoot-outs in some research data. Therefore it's in, and it's out. No tumble, no yaw, no real internal structure or organ damage. Some through-and-throughs have been known to go through flesh and not affect any other part of the body, allowing the fight to continue.

Even if you remove the bang of the bullet being fired you still have a large amount of mechanical parts in the gun making large amounts of noise (especially automatic guns).

I agree. You'll always have the noise of your action (cycling), muzzle blast and the noise of the projectile impacting. Unless we're using the Welrod.

[defk0n_NL 2]

Other rounds such as the MK262 have proven the energy theory to be quite misinformed with the medical-human aspect of wound ballistics. For instance shallow wounds aren't about energy, they're about dissipation of fragments with very little penetrating energy, yet are known to be the most effective rounds to put someone down due to overwhelming pain.

are you a troll or something? :plain:

Edited June 4, 2013 by defk0n_NL

[rye1 21]

What are you trying to point out? You've bolded two points about energy. Penetration needs energy behind it, we understand that as velocity. The energy debate tells us that you need lots of energy to be placed into the human body to cause damage, as if energy is a 'damage causer', which is untrue.

As Doctor Gary K. Roberts puts it: "Physics. It's real. Kinetic energy is simply a measure of the work potential of a projectile. As noted above, although part of the equation, kinetic energy in and of itself it is not a predictor of incapacitation effectiveness. Recall:

-- Bullets cannot physically knock down a person by the force of their impact.

-- Kinetic energy or momentum transfer from a projectile to tissue is not a wounding mechanism.

-- The amount of "energy" deposited or momentum transferred to a body by a projectile is not directly proportional to the amount of tissue damage and is not a measure of wounding power.

-- Wounds of vastly differing severity can be inflicted by bullets with identical kinetic energy and momentum.

What a bullet does inside the body--whether it yaws, deforms, or fragments, how deeply it penetrates, and what tissue it passes through is what determines wound severity, not KE!"

The energy debate is full of leaks. So, no, I'm not a troll.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#energy

Edited June 4, 2013 by Rye

[defk0n_NL 2]

What are you trying to point out? You've bolded two points about energy. Penetration needs energy behind it, we understand that as velocity. The energy debate tells us that you need lots of energy to be placed into the human body to cause damage, as if energy is a 'damage causer', which is untrue.

As Doctor Gary K. Roberts puts it: "Physics. It's real. Kinetic energy is simply a measure of the work potential of a projectile. As noted above, although part of the equation, kinetic energy in and of itself it is not a predictor of incapacitation effectiveness. Recall:

-- Bullets cannot physically knock down a person by the force of their impact.

-- Kinetic energy or momentum transfer from a projectile to tissue is not a wounding mechanism.

-- The amount of "energy" deposited or momentum transferred to a body by a projectile is not directly proportional to the amount of tissue damage and is not a measure of wounding power.

-- Wounds of vastly differing severity can be inflicted by bullets with identical kinetic energy and momentum.

What a bullet does inside the body--whether it yaws, deforms, or fragments, how deeply it penetrates, and what tissue it passes through is what determines wound severity, not KE!"

The energy debate is full of leaks. So, no, I'm not a troll.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#energy

None of the above was ever said.

what was said. was this:

"Bullets that travel with a lower velocity aka energy have the potential of doing MORE damage"

:j:

[rye1 21]

You quoted a statement made that supported the energy theory as a damage causer and the energy transfer theory. So yes, it was said. :j: As I've stated, the potential is because of the way the bullet acts within the body; not because of energy.

[defk0n_NL 2]

Its the bullet that does the damage, but the velocity it travels within would constitute for a damage dealing factor. would you say not?

[roguetrooper 2]

[Crierd 24]

Down sides to a suppressor you could implement it and this would cause a 100%flash and bang to about a 40% flash and bang but will cause a lot of smoke to be emitted from the barrel due to cooling and reheating of the gas in the suppressor it also reduces range, this smokes caused by how gas and the round move in the suppressor its self.

for a Su and Sil it causes bullet drop, 1 click on a schmidt and bender scope (use by brit snipers, me.) is 10cm at 100cm, so at 900 its 90cm, by implementing a suppressor or silencer you can expect to add about 5-7clicks elevation on a target dependant on attachment. it goes more in depth but this means having to explain ballistics charts, vibrations in the barrel, recoil and muzzle velocities.

Silencers and subsonic rounds, from a 100% flash and bang to a probable 30% pop, his or 'thuck' kind of noise.

Why the weapons still flash with any type or muzzle attachment is beyond me, silencers and suppressors are moderately the same but still have their own area of effects on the weapon, and they both usually decrease or kill flash completely, attach dependant.

Suppressors alone don't reduce range. There is no discernible downside to utilizing a suppressor. A suppressor and silencer are the same thing, they are simply different names, like saying soda vs pop. In direct impingement firearms such as the AR-15 a lot of gas blows back in your face, whereas a gas piston shoots any excess gasses, which there are more of when using a suppressor, into the air out near the barrel rather than blowing back in your face through the chamber.

I really hope the devs do proper research. (I'm sure they do.) The misinformation on the forums and on the Alpha Bug Tracker is astounding.