Soldier protection (dev branch)

[L3TUC3 32]

Is it even realistic to have a body armor suit? BI, stop forcing the game to be unrealistically balanced please!

Um, not sure what the problem is. Currently the csat "clothing" + non plate vest doesn't offer as much protection as just a plate carrier. Comparitively all the mentioned combined values don't equal one another for total armor per faction. AAF/Nato guys with plate carriers can take more to the chest and that seems likely to me.

A protective suit doesn't seem all that far fetched if today's bullet resistant vests can be worn under a sports jacket. I don't see why it can't be integrated or combined with fatigues. It's not implausible for the setting of the game.

[instagoat 133]

RE medical system: Why it does take away from gameplay.

I have only extensively tried the ACE system, which seems to be very much a system the realism players want ingame.

1: Menu based healing system. I am opposed to this since Arma already has too many menus, way too many, and ideally the medical system should be simply based on wysiwyg, ie, look at somebody ingame and see how badly hurt they are (are they limping, shaking, blood on their clothes, pale face, etc). This is all possible. Adding a medical menu system slows things down, and while it would have been a decent choice in 2000, minimal menus should be the law of the land in our time and age. Arma needs -less- menus, not more.

2: Loosing Legs and Unconsciousness. Both are bad, the former not as bad as the latter, but the latter is a special crime in my opinion. It rarely adds tension, and adds more frustration. This is what I mean by taking gameplay away from the player: you fall unconscious, and you cannot do anything until you roll over. With players, it may work, but trying to get the AI to work with this is a major doozy. One reason why I did not like the advanced medical system in Arma 2 was that the AI was completely unreliable in saving you. Any system that physically stops the player from playing while continuing the game around him is bad, and you can have adequate solutions without this.

I am not opposed to bleedout, but I am opposed to forced immobility and forced passivity. The player should remain in control of doing at least -something- until they are positively dead. For example, self heal (minigame style like Americas Army, self diagnose, apply treatment, defend yourself until medic arrives.).

But, advanced injury animations could do a lot for improving gameplay. Can´t say this too often.

[semiconductor 309]

2: Loosing Legs and Unconsciousness. Both are bad, the former not as bad as the latter, but the latter is a special crime in my opinion. It rarely adds tension, and adds more frustration.

So, you don't want frustration and want fun only? Well, this is some sort of "Press X to win" and I hope this will never take place in Arma. Losing legs and falling unconscious forces player to be more careful and cooperate with rest of his team so they can help him if something goes wrong. ACE also won't let you run 10 kilometers with 8 Javelins in your backpack and this is awesome too: player should think about weight of his equipment and cooperate with other players, especially drivers. Edited December 14, 2013 by Semiconductor

[Smurf 12]

2: Loosing Legs and Unconsciousness. Both are bad, the former not as bad as the latter, but the latter is a special crime in my opinion. It rarely adds tension, and adds more frustration. This is what I mean by taking gameplay away from the player: you fall unconscious, and you cannot do anything until you roll over. With players, it may work, but trying to get the AI to work with this is a major doozy. One reason why I did not like the advanced medical system in Arma 2 was that the AI was completely unreliable in saving you. Any system that physically stops the player from playing while continuing the game around him is bad, and you can have adequate solutions without this.

I am not opposed to bleedout, but I am opposed to forced immobility and forced passivity. The player should remain in control of doing at least -something- until they are positively dead. For example, self heal (minigame style like Americas Army, self diagnose, apply treatment, defend yourself until medic arrives.).

I can't fully agree on this because otherwise we would have just simple binary states: alive or dead. Give players a chance to get "revived" (as long they don't get too damaged\HS'ed, time\blood limited ...), creating a fighting for buddy scenario, adds some flow to the game. America's Army (all versions) have it, other games also, this brings good memories for some?

If shot on both legs, why not lose them? Less than that there is the limping animation that hopefully will appear sooner or later.

But I can live without forced prone aswell :D

I agree that it shouldn't be too complex or deep, leave that for mods.

And coupling with AI... well that's another problem and features shouldn't be limited just because AI can't use them.

One thing is sure: As it is, it's too little.

[Maxzy 12]

We also need proof of this accusation that the helmet protects the whole head. If it does, why can I one-hit kill people by hitting them in the face with 9mm?

I'm using stable branch. I've placed two of every soldier unit that there is on the map (disabled AI of course) and shot them with 9mm Rook from point blank range right in the face (using bullet tracing script) - there was none that wears a helmet and dropped from the first hit, it always took two or even three hits to kill. Only ones that died from one hit was those who don't wear helmets.

And another thing - something is reeeeeeally wrong with OPFOR Heli Pilot and Heli Crew - it takes 5-6 6.5mm bullets to the torso and 17-20 !!! bullets to the leg to kill them. Fucking ridiculous. Very dissappointed with desicion to include this completely broken system back to the stable branch. A game is practically unplayable. Now we'll have to wait hell knows how long for it to be right again.

[instagoat 133]

So, you don't want frustration and want fun only? Well, this is some sort of "Press X to win" and I hope this will never take place in Arma. Losing legs and falling unconscious forces player to be more careful and cooperate with rest of his team so they can help him if something goes wrong. ACE also won't let you run 10 kilometers with 8 Javelins in your backpack and this is awesome too: player should think about weight of his equipment and cooperate with other players, especially drivers.

So, basically you are arguing that games should deliberately not be fun in distinct situations, and introduce bad gameplay design just for the sake of simulating a state from real life which cannot be adequately simulated because this is a computer game?

I am not arguing "press X to win", quite the opposite. I am all for a more advanced medical system. What I am against is design choices that throw the player out of control of his character for prolongued periods of time without him being able to do anything about it. You can do many things which would still simulate a realistic damage behavior without resorting to being blackscreened or artificially immobilized (agony state from A2 med module). For example:

Caliber dependent knockdown. Being shot would result in body alarm response state for a short amount of time (reset fatigue to zero briefly, timespan depending on unit AI level) and then shock, with whiteouting of the screen and increased shake, as well as injury animations where appropriate (Holding side of body if shot in the groin, limping if mildly injured in the leg, dragging the leg if badly hurt, visual and aural impairment if hit in the head (ringing, blurring, whiteout). Bleeding would increase the shock state slowly until death unless bleeding is stopped (FAKs). Pain effects such as limping and shaking can only be diminished by medics, who can mend injuries once to the next higher injury state (So dragging the leg to a limp, for gameplay reasons.). AI would display injury too.

No need for unconsciousness, injury animations and screen effects would be sufficient to impair the player when hit, and cause confusion for him when under fire. Further, a simple medical system (three choices max, for example: apply FAK (stabilize/stop bleeding), apply splint (reduce injury state in one body area only, preferring the worst affected.), use morphine (Reduce shock effect, shaking and visual impairment.).

More is not needed, and even this would be a -major- but necessary overhaul. No gameplay killing design disasters required.

RE: revives. I think these work only in games with a comparatively compact gameplay area. In Arma you could be hundreds of meters away from friendlies and be the only survivor of your vehicle. With A2 med module or ACE, you would bleed to death unless saved (not so much with ACE because you can self heal.), and be in danger of having your session cut short for lack of the game allowing you to move even when injured. It would be much more enjoyable (and thrilling for the survivor) if he had to physically limp back to his lines under fire, managing his injury with his FAK until a medic could attend to reducing his shaking and pain response.

I have to add, though, I am opposed to the current "healing fully" system of the medics. Injuries should be permanent, and should only be reduced in effect but not removed by medical attention.

My two cents.

[-Coulum- 35]

@Solzenicyn and devs

It would be easier to provide feedback on this feature if we knew what is within your team's goals and capabilities.

• Are you guys limited to using the current "damage reduction" system or is there a possibility for a more realistic penetration/deflection system.
  
• Are you guys planning/able to define where armour covers better (ie. helmet covers just the top of the head rather than the whole face).
  
• Is it within your scope to add more hit effects (ragdolling, animations, sway).
  

I think it is necessary for us to get this info because depending on your answers our feedback will change.

Like already mentioned, the in-game ability of a plate to prevent fatal injuries are not unrealistic -

thus keeping the target alive longer. But there are other negatives to such a hit currently no in-game. And if these are not going to be modeled it may be better to nerf armour more for gameplay's sake...

We need to know how close to complete you guys consider the current system - are you guys just tweaking numbers or still adjusting and adding mechanics - because our feedback will vary depending.

What do you want our feedback to be about?

Thanks.

[semiconductor 309]

So, basically you are arguing that games should deliberately not be fun in distinct situations, and introduce bad gameplay design just for the sake of simulating a state from real life which cannot be adequately simulated because this is a computer game?

Well, I don't agree that unconsciousness is a bad gameplay design in general and yes, Arma should deliberately not be fun in distinct situations. Because solving those frustrating situations is much more rewarding than Counter-Strike-style mindless shooting. Most of the games follow (in a varying degree) the paradigme that player is always right and should feel entertained at all times. What differs Arma from those games (not saying those games bad, they just deliver fun in different way) is that player can actually make a wrong and irreversable decision, that there is a situations that player just can't handle. For example, it took me four days of frustration and failed attempts to slip to the evac camp in "After Montignac" but it felt just amazing when I finally made it. :D That is why I think that it's ok for a game to be not fun in some situations - player will get lots of fun when he solves them. But that is unarguably that players should be able to tune difficulty as they see fit.

I agree that falling unconscious feels frustrating, especially if player can't call for help, but that's a price for making a mistake. When player can only rely on help of his teammates, he will think twice before trying to play Rambo or wondering around in hostile area leaving his team behind.

No need for unconsciousness, injury animations and screen effects would be sufficient to impair the player when hit, and cause confusion for him when under fire. Further, a simple medical system (three choices max, for example: apply FAK (stabilize/stop bleeding), apply splint (reduce injury state in one body area only, preferring the worst affected.), use morphine (Reduce shock effect, shaking and visual impairment.).

To be honest, I don't completely like ACE's unconsciousness: when unconscious state lasts longer than a couple of minutes, most of the players just hits Alt+Tab and surf internet until they are healed, so of course it need to be carefully configured and players should not fall unconscious each time they injured. But I do believe that there should be some sort of percetable "punishment" for reckless actions and in some cases player should seek for help of other players. After all cooperation and helping others is actually pretty fun. :)

Concerning control over character: ACE temporarily take control from player and artfically immobilizes him when he runs too much with heavy gear. That's frustrating but that make sense because that's how it works in real life and that is why cargo trucks/planes/ships were invented in a first place. In real life feeling of tiredness is actually a message telling runner that if he don't stop right now then he will suffer some negative consequences. Current fatique system just constantly sending you the message by blurrying your display that you exceeded your abilities to run but negative consequences will never take place, player can simply ignore that message and continue to run for unlimited amount of time. Among other things, that makes cargo trucks just useless - why use them with their tiny cargo space if you can carry all those fancy AT rockets by yourself? So, I guess that sometimes game should prevent player from controlling his character.

In Arma you could be hundreds of meters away from friendlies and be the only survivor of your vehicle. With A2 med module or ACE, you would bleed to death unless saved (not so much with ACE because you can self heal.), and be in danger of having your session cut short for lack of the game allowing you to move even when injured. It would be much more enjoyable (and thrilling for the survivor) if he had to physically limp back to his lines under fire, managing his injury with his FAK until a medic could attend to reducing his shaking and pain response.

I don't think it would be enjoyable enough unless there is a chance of losing ability to move. If player will never lose his ability to walk or shoot he will perceive it as a ordinary state of things like there is nothing to be glad about. It will also prevent from happening some cool scenarios like evacuation form behind enemy lines. Why ask others for help if you can do everything alone?

Of course medical system is a very controversial question and everything written above is just my own opinion that can possibly be wrong, I'm not a game designer after all. :)

Anyway, BI can make medical system configurable through Difficulty menu and/or some mission module, so everyone can tune medical system up to their needs and in the end everyone will feel more or less satisfied. :D

Edited December 15, 2013 by Semiconductor

[progamer 14]

Um, not sure what the problem is. Currently the csat "clothing" + non plate vest doesn't offer as much protection as just a plate carrier. Comparitively all the mentioned combined values don't equal one another for total armor per faction. AAF/Nato guys with plate carriers can take more to the chest and that seems likely to me.

A protective suit doesn't seem all that far fetched if today's bullet resistant vests can be worn under a sports jacket. I don't see why it can't be integrated or combined with fatigues. It's not implausible for the setting of the game.

Weight, cost and many other things are factors of why this doesn't exist right now and I doubt such tech if it was somehow developed would be out the the prototype phase by 2030.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Weight, cost and many other things are factors of why this doesn't exist right now and I doubt such tech if it was somehow developed would be out the the prototype phase by 2030.

Kevlar suits have been around forever the main reason they're not in use now is that kevlar alone doesn't stop rifle rounds but that doesn't mean alternatives to the current ceramic plate situation isn't being researched. The whole armoured body suit thing has been brought up every decade so it's not farfetched for it to show up in 2030 especially in regards to the other kind of gear that CSAT has.

It's not like they have Crysis suits or something - their suits are nowhere near as protected as the plate carriers (around half the effectiveness of such) with the benefit of being lighter

[L3TUC3 32]

@Solzenicyn and devs

It would be easier to provide feedback on this feature if we knew what is within your team's goals and capabilities.

• Are you guys limited to using the current "damage reduction" system or is there a possibility for a more realistic penetration/deflection system.
  
• Are you guys planning/able to define where armour covers better (ie. helmet covers just the top of the head rather than the whole face).
  
• Is it within your scope to add more hit effects (ragdolling, animations, sway).
  

I think it is necessary for us to get this info because depending on your answers our feedback will change.

Like already mentioned, the in-game ability of a plate to prevent fatal injuries are not unrealistic -

thus keeping the target alive longer. But there are other negatives to such a hit currently no in-game. And if these are not going to be modeled it may be better to nerf armour more for gameplay's sake...

We need to know how close to complete you guys consider the current system - are you guys just tweaking numbers or still adjusting and adding mechanics - because our feedback will vary depending.

What do you want our feedback to be about?

Thanks.

This. Pretty much a more elegant request to what Kju. asked.

[maturin 12]

@Solzenicyn and devs

It would be easier to provide feedback on this feature if we knew what is within your team's goals and capabilities.

• Are you guys limited to using the current "damage reduction" system or is there a possibility for a more realistic penetration/deflection system.
  
• Are you guys planning/able to define where armour covers better (ie. helmet covers just the top of the head rather than the whole face).
  
• Is it within your scope to add more hit effects (ragdolling, animations, sway).
  

I think it is necessary for us to get this info because depending on your answers our feedback will change.

Like already mentioned, the in-game ability of a plate to prevent fatal injuries are not unrealistic -

thus keeping the target alive longer. But there are other negatives to such a hit currently no in-game. And if these are not going to be modeled it may be better to nerf armour more for gameplay's sake...

We need to know how close to complete you guys consider the current system - are you guys just tweaking numbers or still adjusting and adding mechanics - because our feedback will vary depending.

What do you want our feedback to be about?

Thanks.

I might be just bumping here,

[dnk 13]

Like already mentioned, the in-game ability of a plate to prevent fatal injuries are not unrealistic -

thus keeping the target alive longer. But there are other negatives to such a hit currently no in-game. And if these are not going to be modeled it may be better to nerf armour more for gameplay's sake...

I would also like this responded to. That said...

The realism side of me says, yes, let's keep people as bulletspongy as they are now. Why not empty a mag into someone to kill them? It's only realistic, especially for 2035 armors. That said, shooting someone 3 times in the arm with 7.62 really ought to be incapacitating, if not solely due to bloodloss (decent odds of hitting an artery, and even if not that's a lot of tissue damage to ignore and fight on with). The headshots... not realistic that point-blank AR rounds to the face (or any part of the head) aren't lethal. This brings me to the other side of the issue...

It's both nice and not nice for gameplay to have headshots be 2-hit lethal for helmets. It's nice because it reduces the incidence of instakills of the player due to bad luck (mostly a COOP concern). On the other hand, when I'm the one doing the shooting and am placing well-aimed lead on an opponent's head, it's unendingly frustrating to watch them just duck down and live on. "Getting the drop on someone" just has a lot less importance than before the patch now. Now, it's more about getting in closer and spraying them with lead or just getting lucky and hitting someone that was already hurt (or sniping with a 1-hit weapon). Players need to close distance now to dump entire magazines at each other, and sprinting across open ground isn't as stupid as before since they can take 3 or 5 or more shots and live to see their destination. I feel like, even if the armor system is more realistic (at least for the torso), the actual action and gameplay have become less so.

With fewer consequences for being caught in a bad spot, players have even less reason to move tactically and with good awareness, and bad play (in a realism sense) is just not nearly as punished as before.

Also, it's pretty clear to me now that to get fast kills you need to aim for the legs.

[.kju 3245]

I would assume these the difficulty settings are pretty important for the discussion / current situation as well - especially as 95% are playing on Regular (default)..

class CfgDifficulties
class Recruit
	class Flags
		armor[] = {1,1};
	myArmorCoef = 1.5;
	groupArmorCoef = 1.5;
class Regular
	class Flags
		armor[] = {1,1};
	myArmorCoef = 1.2;
	groupArmorCoef = 1.2;
class Veteran
	class Flags
		armor[] = {0,0};
	myArmorCoef = 1;
	groupArmorCoef = 1;
class Mercenary
	class Flags
		armor[] = {0,0};
	myArmorCoef = 1;
	groupArmorCoef = 1;

BIKI on Extended_armor.

Unfortunately no public docu available on ArmorCoef (or the other hardcoded difficulty modifiers).

[christianmo 10]

Gameplay and realism wise i don't see any problem that you shouldn't be able to take a few hits before going down. The game is set in the future, where thinner and more effective armor is most likely available.

Besides that i really don't like the fact that helmets seem to protect the whole face, even though their visual model only protect the brain case. Either change the visual appearance of the helmet so it covers the whole face or split the head into multiple hitszones.

Another issue is that it's hard to determine where on the body you have been hit. In most games that not a problem since you got a health meter/red-zone system. I think you should get some sort of feedback, either a simple message like "left arm wounded" or "leg crippled" or a visual system like little figure which limbs go from green to red when damaged.

On top of that it would be nice with some impact sounds from bullets hitting your plate or grazing your helmet.

[Kirill 1]

Example solutions:

Body armor and helmet

1. Helmet and vest close a specific area (not + hit point for all head or body )

2 . Reduce the surface of the plates on the chest and back. ( unprotected armpits, shoulders, neck , hips ... )

3 . Plates are by weight . You can insert 2.

4 . Plates - physical barrier to bullets. ( no modulator ) .

5 . Plates are divided into classes according to the level of armor. Example: "A" class plate can take a 9mm bullet (without damage to the body ), but will be broken 7.62mm .

6. Plates have their hit point . For example: A armor received 20 bullets 9mm - the result - a plate does not work.

7. Armor type affects endurance and speed reactions.

Reaction to hit bullets in body armor

1. Only for heavy bullets 7.62 and above ! - Fall. This fall from the blow, not from fear or surprise.

2 . drop weapon

3 . Hit without penetration - easy, medium ( red screen , easy disorientation )

But it is necessary to improve the system normal wounds.

Idea. Blow bullets in unprotected body (torso ) - not always fatal . It looks like a " critical hit " from Fallout . It is fatal in 70 % of cases ( for example).

We need to create separate areas for each leg and arm ( lameness ...).

Very important to turn ON the bleeding !

Edited December 15, 2013 by Kirill

[[ha]boris 49]

Will my part improper to say that the current system of protection as wounds, needs radical transformation?

[iratus 71]

I would also like this responded to. That said...

The realism side of me says, yes, let's keep people as bulletspongy as they are now. Why not empty a mag into someone to kill them? It's only realistic, especially for 2035 armors. That said, shooting someone 3 times in the arm with 7.62 really ought to be incapacitating, if not solely due to bloodloss (decent odds of hitting an artery, and even if not that's a lot of tissue damage to ignore and fight on with). The headshots... not realistic that point-blank AR rounds to the face (or any part of the head) aren't lethal. This brings me to the other side of the issue...

It's both nice and not nice for gameplay to have headshots be 2-hit lethal for helmets. It's nice because it reduces the incidence of instakills of the player due to bad luck (mostly a COOP concern). On the other hand, when I'm the one doing the shooting and am placing well-aimed lead on an opponent's head, it's unendingly frustrating to watch them just duck down and live on. "Getting the drop on someone" just has a lot less importance than before the patch now. Now, it's more about getting in closer and spraying them with lead or just getting lucky and hitting someone that was already hurt (or sniping with a 1-hit weapon). Players need to close distance now to dump entire magazines at each other, and sprinting across open ground isn't as stupid as before since they can take 3 or 5 or more shots and live to see their destination. I feel like, even if the armor system is more realistic (at least for the torso), the actual action and gameplay have become less so.

With fewer consequences for being caught in a bad spot, players have even less reason to move tactically and with good awareness, and bad play (in a realism sense) is just not nearly as punished as before.

Also, it's pretty clear to me now that to get fast kills you need to aim for the legs.

I agree on this. one of the core features that makes Arma gameplay different (I usually would say "more tactical") to most of the shooters out there is the fact that you can die from being hit by one or two bullets. It might be more realistically to be able to survive four hits and fight on, but I don't believe it will make for better gameplay. Think about it: If a player knows he can most likely survive 4 hits, crossing a street under fire to get into another building suddenly becomes an option. Crossing an open space where the enemy could engage him from several hundred meters away becomes an option too. Also it leads to shorter combat distances since players will try to get into autofire distance when possible for reliable kills.

A good medical system might help here, but only if it punishes the character hard if he gets shot to the point that players really dont wants to get shot at (which may lead into the "taking controll away from the player" discussion)

That's somewhat the dilemma with the body armour system: One one hand you want the player to feel the difference, i.E. letting him take more bullets when using vests. On the other hand if a character can survive about 4 bullets it changes the gameplay fundamentally.

[WhiskeySixx 10]

I am just down in the dumps with this new system at its current state... It totally ruins real stealth missions. 4-5 shots to kill in 100 meters with a silienced weapon. Its nearly impossible to kill a soldier before they hit the dirt below cover even if you have the drop. Its current state would be alright for EXTENDED ARMOR and maybe something a little more fine tuned with it turned off.

[dnk 13]

Well, when you make it that armorless people can get 1-shotted by a torso/head shot, then yeah having plate carriers add 1-2 bullets of protection triples their "health" while preserving the more lethal playstyles we've grown accustomed to. It still makes sense to wear that vest, regardless of weight costs, as it does to wear a helmet, even if that helmet only offers a 1-in-3 chance of saving your life from a headshot (a reasonable compromise, btw).

[13islucky 10]

May I ask just how many of you are on devbranch? It's been somewhat toned down over here and works surprisingly well. A headshot is a headshot, except for 9mm which is stopped by a helmet on the first shot. .45ACP upwards is a kill.

[Kirill 1]

May I ask just how many of you are on devbranch? It's been somewhat toned down over here and works surprisingly well. A headshot is a headshot, except for 9mm which is stopped by a helmet on the first shot. .45ACP upwards is a kill.

entirely?

Why second 9mm bullet in the helmet should be deadly?

Do not look for a logical explanation ... Just made ​​crooked.

Armor system and wounds made ​​incorrectly to begin with. It is treated only alteration system.

[mjolnir66 48]

May I ask just how many of you are on devbranch? It's been somewhat toned down over here and works surprisingly well. A headshot is a headshot, except for 9mm which is stopped by a helmet on the first shot. .45ACP upwards is a kill.

Why is this? IRL, a ballistic helmet will stop anything upto and including .357 Magnum reliably until the helmet physically falls apart.

[13islucky 10]

.357? I was told that most modern infantry helmets had one shot protection against anything under 7.62x25mm, which isn't quite as effective as .357.

[thegodfather 11]

I would like to prove a point Using this video:

In this video, you will see how effective the caliber rounds are against varies walls, and using this video to show how effective body armor would be against these different caliber rounds.

I will exclude the GM6 Lynx 12.7x108mm and the M320 LRR .408 because we know body armor is not made that for that and it should be one shot kill as it is now.

Mk 18 ABR, Rahim, Zafir 7.62x62mm, looking at this video I strongly doubt that body armor would be very effect for this round up too 800 meters, maybe even more, as you can see it rips through bricks walls. it should be a one shot kill form a direct shot.

The 6.5mm as you can see in the video less powerful then the mighty powerful 7.62x62mm, but the 6.5mm is able penetrate through brick walls at close range, I doubt that the body armor will help much or at all form ranges form 100 to 200 meters 1 shot kill direct shot, and after 200 meters it's still parity dreadful, to 400 meter's. Body armor not looking so helpful right now.

The 5.56mm now here we see a possibly for body armor to have actually effect, this bullet is still lethal of course if the target is not wearing armor and should be one shot kill if the target is not wearing armor form ranges 100 to 150 meters hard too tell. but for person wearing armor it should only be a one shot kill if it's between the ranges of 25 and 50, form my point of prospective, but you can argue form my point my view.

.45 ACP armor has diffidently has part to play.

9mm​ this round will lethal vs non armored infantry, but people with armor would depend on the range 9mm would very noneffective vs high armor personal.