Soldier protection (dev branch)

[rye1 21]

I didn't understand are you being ironic? or you actually wants an armor like robocop?

It is a mystery isn't it?

[carlostex 38]

I like TPW_Fall mod. Even though it might be a little overdone it could be tweaked and improved. Factors like engagement distance, projectile velocity, projectile caliber could have effect on whether a soldier would be knocked down or not.

I don't care what people say, but even wearing hard body armor and being shot by a rifle caliber bullet is no picnic. I wouldn't like to try it. There are other factors as well, like everybody praising that AR500 plate which is very good in stopping even rounds as high as 7.62x54. Hard body armor like that won't absorb the energy from the bullet very well and even though a bullet does not have a lot of mass the human body will take energy from that shot as well.

Trauma and fragmentation are important too. How about limbs hit by bullet fragmentation? I'm not that hardcore to ask for fragmentation to be implemented, but there's gotta be a penalty for humans and AI being hit, even if armor stops the bullet. I'm not talking about damage or hitpoint damage, but more of temporary decreased awareness and accuracy for the AI, same for the player.

I'm not in favor of 50% chance a soldier gets knocked down if shot kinda of shot, i'm in for a system where this can be implemented with some level of autenticity and game balance.

[Ckrauslo 12]

I think one thing is funny, i get hitted by one shot i'm dead, but i discharge 30 rounds into an enemy soldier chest at close range and he still kills me

---------- Post added at 00:20 ---------- Previous post was at 00:19 ----------

It is a mystery isn't it?

Yes it is (whispering mysteriously)

[lugiahua 26]

You are comparing different times and with no proper technology, now we have technology, and when they create something to protect you more, someone goes and create something to bypass that protection, this is how it goes,

---------- Post added at 05:20 ---------- Previous post was at 05:19 ----------

There is always room to implement bullets, and make them more powerfull, they always create new loads, and new calibers, gun makers study this all the time

Well, let's just look at real history...

21 years ago(1993) the standard of protection for NATO soldiers was NIJ II (PASGT or similar armor), today it's NIJ IV. (IOTV with ESAPI plates), some newer helmets and masks are reaching NIJ III as well. (capable deflecting 7.62x39 above certain distance)

Yet 5.56mm bullet basically stayed the same, still the old SS109/M855.

Even the rarely seen armor piercing "Black Tip" M995 is still incapable to defeat current body armor.

I think armor is improving much faster than cartridge. Furthermore, do all factions get access the latest cartridge? Like do FIA and AAF have high-tech AP rounds?

[bonchie 39]

Well, let's just look at real history...

21 years ago(1993) the standard of protection for NATO soldiers was NIJ II (PASGT or similar armor), today it's NIJ IV. (IOTV with ESAPI plates), some newer helmets and masks are reaching NIJ III as well. (capable deflecting 7.62x39 above certain distance)

Yet 5.56mm bullet basically stayed the same, still the old SS109/M855.

Even the rarely seen armor piercing "Black Tip" M995 is still incapable to defeat current body armor.

I think armor is improving much faster than cartridge. Furthermore, do all factions get access the latest cartridge? Like do FIA and AAF have high-tech AP rounds?

That could be true into 2035.

But that's kind of beside the point. This is still a game and gameplay matters. If proper wounding/knockdown isn't implemented then that should be balanced by how many shots it takes to "kill" in the game (even if it's technically not as realistic).

[chortles 263]

But that's kind of beside the point. This is still a game and gameplay matters. If proper wounding/knockdown isn't implemented then that should be balanced by how many shots it takes to "kill" in the game (even if it's technically not as realistic).

Ironically enough, your accepting/agreeing with the idea that Arma is a game and that "balance" isn't a dirty word actually makes me more sympathetic to your position here. :lol:

[-Coulum- 35]

Ironically enough, your accepting/agreeing with the idea that Arma is a game and that "balance" isn't a dirty word actually makes me more sympathetic to your position here. :lol:

Haha so true.

Pretty much realism is out of the picture right now. And it never really was, even in arma 2. Now it is, exactly as you say, all about getting the right balance for enjoyable gameplay.

Just an example of how body armour does work.

Hit in the body armour 4 times and once in the helmet by 7.62 (apparently). No permanent injuries to speak of He didn't even seem to be physically incapacitated at the end. Of course, he wasn't calmly firing back at the enemy either...

Personally I think the protection system is actually at a reasonable state right now. Any less effective and body armour isn't going to be useful anymore. I personally have adjusted my approach to fit it. Mainly get in closer and unload the clip on em.

One benefit is it encourages manoeuvring and getting close, which imo makes things interesting.

I do hope BIS is able to improve the simulation aspect of it further, in the future however (ie. plate cover the correct areas, not the entire hitzone).

Right now, one simply improvement, not so much to protection, but to hit reactions, is to make the ai aim decrease longer. Right now it decreases drastically for maybe a tenth of a second. This should be extended to 1 to 2 seconds.

[supercereal4 29]

Haha so true.

Pretty much realism is out of the picture right now. And it never really was, even in arma 2. Now it is, exactly as you say, all about getting the right balance for enjoyable gameplay.

Just an example of how body armour does work.

Hit in the body armour 4 times and once in the helmet by 7.62 (apparently). No permanent injuries to speak of He didn't even seem to be physically incapacitated at the end. Of course, he wasn't calmly firing back at the enemy either...

I was about to reference this video as well, because a good amount of people seem to be pushing for falling down when getting shot- which I can't say I'm opposed to (it's certainly plausible that one could fall after absorbing a bullet... I'm sure we've all seen the vid of the soldier next to the Humvee who takes a round to the chest and falls flat on the ground...) but then we have videos like this and an abundance of videos showing off body armor where the wearer is shot at point blank range, and simply stutters a bit, but is far from falling down. If BIS does decide to go down the path of implementing this feature, I'd hope they'd use it conservatively i.e. When the target is idle and/or relaxed or when the target is hit in the legs and a slight chance when the target is running.

[dnk 13]

1st, how do you know they were all shooting 7.62 and not 5.45. Makes a pretty huge difference. Might be it was mixed calibers and he got hit mostly by the 5.45s.

Even then, old 7.62x39 isn't as powerful as everyone makes it out to be. It's not a whole lot better than 556, 20% more energy only (compared to NATO 762 which is 65% more energy and about 40% heavier than x39), but better at range. And given where he's shooting, the opposite ridgeline, it seems he's being engaged at a pretty far distance, 500m or so. At that distance, the bullet's lost at least 70% of its energy (perhaps up to 80%, depends). And it might've been 5.45, which is much weaker at range. Even as the 7.62, at ~500m it's basically just a 9x19 round. Hard to tell with the fisheye lens how far it is. Might be 300, might be 700m...

Anyway, at range even the mighty 7.62x39 can be stopped by a IIA vest (which is a very weak sort of armor). Not sure about the helmets, but US ones are made of kevlar, which I'd imagine would stop similar threats to IIA (which is also kevlar, if I'm not mistaken). Distance is very important because velocity is very important to energy.

I'd like to see him shake off several 7.62x51 hits from 50m, or a headshot from 300m. Actually, no I wouldn't; I'm not into those sorts of videos... :/

Ultimately, that video is just solid proof of the psychological dimension of getting hit. He doesn't receive any serious damage, but it still clearly affects him, his movement, and his overall performance greatly. He throws his gun down in the middle. It's clearly proof that we need either weaker protection values or (preferably) a TPW sort of approach.

Edited January 29, 2014 by DNK

[Kirill 1]

Distance is very important because velocity is very important to energy.

Is In the game the damage depends on the distance now? I tried to check out - it seems so. But dependence - indirect.

[Maxzy 12]

Is In the game the damage depends on the distance now?

Not just now - it is so for a long time already. But what DNK talking about, I think, is that in game you have to shoot some units 3-4 times at point blank range to kill them, and that's what makes this game frustrating sometimes. You sneak up to a couple of enemy soldiers - they no farther than 15 metres - you think "Ha-ha, I've got ya", you aim, you rapidly shoot 4 times at one of them and already changing your aim to another one, but you missed one of the shots and he turns around instantly and kills you with the first bullet. Curtain drops. Ragequit. :)

[John Kozak 14]

Is In the game the damage depends on the distance now? I tried to check out - it seems so. But dependence - indirect.

Damage is scaled with a relation to bullet velocity, and bullet velocity drops with range. It's this way since OFP, IIRC.

[dnk 13]

I was pretty much just talking about that video and reality. I don't play against AI anymore, so I don't know how they're reacting to hits. All I know is humans are finally dying again with less than a full magazine. huzzah!

What I do want is some mixture of more damage (which we've got with the latest patch) and more effects to being hit (at least much of the time) as you can see in the video. Being shot at and especially getting hit have serious effects beyond bloodloss or tissue damage. I'd like to see that in the game.

The game does reduce bullet velocity and damage based on distance. There's been videos of it. We have fairly realistic ballistics (well, minus quite a few variables) in that sense. What DW said.

[-Coulum- 35]

1st, how do you know they were all shooting 7.62 and not 5.45. Makes a pretty huge difference. Might be it was mixed calibers and he got hit mostly by the 5.45s.

Even then, old 7.62x39 isn't as powerful as everyone makes it out to be. It's not a whole lot better than 556, 20% more energy only (compared to NATO 762 which is 65% more energy and about 40% heavier than x39), but better at range. And given where he's shooting, the opposite ridgeline, it seems he's being engaged at a pretty far distance, 500m or so. At that distance, the bullet's lost at least 70% of its energy (perhaps up to 80%, depends). And it might've been 5.45, which is much weaker at range. Even as the 7.62, at ~500m it's basically just a 9x19 round. Hard to tell with the fisheye lens how far it is. Might be 300, might be 700m...

Anyway, at range even the mighty 7.62x39 can be stopped by a IIA vest (which is a very weak sort of armor). Not sure about the helmets, but US ones are made of kevlar, which I'd imagine would stop similar threats to IIA (which is also kevlar, if I'm not mistaken). Distance is very important because velocity is very important to energy.

I'd like to see him shake off several 7.62x51 hits from 50m, or a headshot from 300m. Actually, no I wouldn't; I'm not into those sorts of videos... :/

Ultimately, that video is just solid proof of the psychological dimension of getting hit. He doesn't receive any serious damage, but it still clearly affects him, his movement, and his overall performance greatly. He throws his gun down in the middle. It's clearly proof that we need either weaker protection values or (preferably) a TPW sort of approach.

Yes there are definitely alot of unkowns. And that video is by no means supposed to be "proof". But, it does go to show armour does work, if not in all scenerios, than definitely in some. It does save peoples lives. And when combined with videos and documentation of armour tests in more controlled settings (which have been posted in this thread), where AR500 plates are able to stop 7.62 rounds, it kind of gives you that idea that you know what, getting shot 4 times in the centre of mass with an armoured plate on might not lead to me instantly dropping. The video is more food for thought though, than proof.

What I do want is some mixture of more damage (which we've got with the latest patch) and more effects to being hit (at least much of the time) as you can see in the video. Being shot at and especially getting hit have serious effects beyond bloodloss or tissue damage. I'd like to see that in the game.

agreed

The game does reduce bullet velocity and damage based on distance. There's been videos of it. We have fairly realistic ballistics (well, minus quite a few variables) in that sense. What DW said.

Yes but that being said, the effects don't seem to be that drastic until you get to extreme ranges. Ie. the difference between 50 and 150 metres is pretty negligible. The difference between 5 and 1000 is exponentially larger. At leas thats the feeling I get in my tests.

[chortles 263]

Admittedly when the standalone collimators and holographic sights (for rifles) are zeroed to 200 meters, I actually expect a negligible difference for assault rifle bullets at 50 meters versus 150 meters...

By the way, the point of bringing up the Miami shootout was because even statistically anomalous occurrences are still possible and therefore perfectly authentic/realistic since they actually did happen at all.

[LowFlyZone 10]

I'm starting to convert over to the Arma 3 damage system and learn to like it. Ever since the last patch which fixed the headshot issues, as well as silenced weapon damage I'm enjoying the game a bit more (yes but sometimes AI don't react to hits at all now or are invincible).

It still sucks dying from a single shot fired at 300+ meters from a wild AI unit that happened to random 360 and pinpoint my vector, but as others have said, body armor is finally usefull and I think we are nearer the game vs reality sweetspot. Even I would tend to forget that in Arma 2 OA we were fighting poorly equiped insurgents, I think some of them had no protection at all.

That being said, it's pissing me off when I can't easily single shot kill a DR Irregular (has body armor) with an 7.62 M24 sniper rifle at medium range, I like my sniper rifles to be single shot kill no Q's & A's, feels propa bad ass yeh! :cool:

[Kirill 1]

I do not understand why you can not do something like:

)

What's the problem?)

[Rodbar 10]

I havent played for a while , loaded up Adapt first mission I sneak up on some enemy empty the clip into him from 10 mtrs away he is on the ground and I shoot him with my last bullet point blank and he one shot kills me , loaded up a scenario shot an enemy about 60 mtrs away he hit the deck and then I shot him 6 more times and he kept flinching every hit and he also one shot kills me ,,,,, its BS and a game killer for me .

[rye1 21]

By the way, the point of bringing up the Miami shootout was because even statistically anomalous occurrences are still possible and therefore perfectly authentic/realistic since they actually did happen at all.

Basically you are saying that yes there should be focus on better damage capacities but ArmA should still retain the randomness of it all?

[chortles 263]

More of recognizing what the outermost boundaries of what should be possible in Arma can be like... even if in many circumstances it wouldn't be happening. ;)

EDIT: And now we've got a whole devblog article on the "soldier protection" subject! :D

Edited January 31, 2014 by Chortles

[Kirill 1]

I am very worried "grenadier vest protects against grenades" ... I know that there is a heavy body armor for combat engineers ... but grenadiers and all ordinary soldiers often use the same body armor! It's like a game of excessive "Ballance". Still it looks like a RPG game. Magician gets less damage from magic ...

I would be very cautious in this matter. We already have too much arcade moments in the game!

Edited January 31, 2014 by Kirill

[L3TUC3 32]

More of recognizing what the outermost boundaries of what should be possible in Arma can be like... even if in many circumstances it wouldn't be happening. ;)

EDIT: And now we've got a whole devblog article on the "soldier protection" subject! :D

That was a pretty good explanation and pretty much confirms what we already figured out (moving away from class based hitpoints to damage modifiers based on gear). It's good to see improvements and continued changes on it.

[Ckrauslo 12]

1st, how do you know they were all shooting 7.62 and not 5.45. Makes a pretty huge difference. Might be it was mixed calibers and he got hit mostly by the 5.45s.

Even then, old 7.62x39 isn't as powerful as everyone makes it out to be. It's not a whole lot better than 556, 20% more energy only (compared to NATO 762 which is 65% more energy and about 40% heavier than x39), but better at range. And given where he's shooting, the opposite ridgeline, it seems he's being engaged at a pretty far distance, 500m or so. At that distance, the bullet's lost at least 70% of its energy (perhaps up to 80%, depends). And it might've been 5.45, which is much weaker at range. Even as the 7.62, at ~500m it's basically just a 9x19 round. Hard to tell with the fisheye lens how far it is. Might be 300, might be 700m...

Anyway, at range even the mighty 7.62x39 can be stopped by a IIA vest (which is a very weak sort of armor). Not sure about the helmets, but US ones are made of kevlar, which I'd imagine would stop similar threats to IIA (which is also kevlar, if I'm not mistaken). Distance is very important because velocity is very important to energy.

I'd like to see him shake off several 7.62x51 hits from 50m, or a headshot from 300m. Actually, no I wouldn't; I'm not into those sorts of videos... :/

Ultimately, that video is just solid proof of the psychological dimension of getting hit. He doesn't receive any serious damage, but it still clearly affects him, his movement, and his overall performance greatly. He throws his gun down in the middle. It's clearly proof that we need either weaker protection values or (preferably) a TPW sort of approach.

Depend very much, if you get hit by a bullet that travaled a great distance the impact could be worse than a point blank impact because the bullet accumulate kinetic energy, the only thing that the distance makes is the bullet to slow down, but depending on the velocity it would pack a greater punch, and speaking of actual history a simple flak jacket some time ago "70s" could survive a few shots of ak's and know a 7,62 round could easily pass previous armors, and other thing a bullet have different loads that would pack more or less velocity and energy

---------- Post added at 12:26 ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 ----------

is not something impossible to be breached, after being shot 4 times, and enduring 30 rounds in semi rapid fire around the 17th shot they made a hole in it, and remembering a plate is a very small area that protects only the chest, but leaves the stomach and other areas susceptible of being shot, and causing damage

[becubed 24]

Depend very much, if you get hit by a bullet that travaled a great distance the impact could be worse than a point blank impact because the bullet accumulate kinetic energy, the only thing that the distance makes is the bullet to slow down, but depending on the velocity it would pack a greater punch

You have that the wrong way around. Velocity is what gives something kinetic energy. As the bullet slows down it sheds energy until it comes to rest and it's kinetic energy is zero.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy

[Ckrauslo 12]

You have that the wrong way around. Velocity is what gives something kinetic energy. As the bullet slows down it sheds energy until it comes to rest and it's kinetic energy is zero.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy

Being hit from a round that traveled over 1000 meters is almost the same as being hit from a 44 point blank range, it has lost most of the velocity, and as it takes more time to travel trough the body, it causes more damage, it doesn't necessarily means that the round should lose all velocity, if you don't believe just check that sniper documentary made from History Channel

---------- Post added at 17:05 ---------- Previous post was at 17:02 ----------

And that is because as the distance increase the angle of the shot increase as well, so this make the bullet gain more energy, the one who got all wrong is not me i'm sorry

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:05 ----------

The damage to the body from a round that traveled a longer distance is bigger

---------- Post added at 17:19 ---------- Previous post was at 17:08 ----------

watch after 6 minutes and see what arc will do to increase the damage, and 1000 or 1800 fps, will still deliver a good speed and energy, and allied to the way the bullet comes down the target will deliver more damage