.50 cal rifle

[HuBBa 1]

Well.. never to be the one to stay out of a heated debate i thought i'd put in my 2 cents since i am behind one of the .50 rifle mods out there, the M99.

A lot of people asked me to make it stronger, they said "uh it can't take out a jeep with one shot.. i want it to do that". The problem with that statement is the way damages are calculated in OFP as opposed to real life (calculated hehehe)...

In reality, you stop a vehicle with a .50 by putting a round in the engine, shooting out the tires, shooting the tank or shooting the driver. In OFP the only two viable versions of this is shooting the tires & the driver since we cannot calculate a engines all vital parts. If you put a weapon that takes out a jeep with one hit (roughly 70-100 in damage to do the job properly) you make it about the same strength as a LAW (100 in damage). this means that you would take out a BMP with 1-3 shots. a T80 with 5-6 shots. and that is just basically a too dangerous and unbalanced weapon imho.

So what i opted for instead, was balance before kickass. The Damage is about 5 times that of a 7.62 sniper round (50) which is a bit of a test really. It kills of a Jeep in 2-3 shots if you hit it on the right spot. But it won't do much against a bmp (unless you carry a shitload of ammo and the BMP doesnt attack Lets not forget that this is a game, and not real life.

On soft targets though.. it's brutal...

well.. thats my 2 cents. if you want to check out the rifle it's over at Op: Thunderbolt.

Have fun,

[FILO] HuBBa

[The Jub-Jub Bird 1]

That is a good point, and well done good idea to fix the issue.

It is a shame that OFP doesn't have a sophisticated damage zone engine. If it had that would could shoot out an engine block...now that would be cool!

Jubs

[AntiPasta 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([FILO] HuBBa @ Mar. 27 2002,14:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A lot of people asked me to make it stronger, they said "uh it can't take out a jeep with one shot.. i want it to do that". The problem with that statement is the way damages are calculated in OFP as opposed to real life (calculated hehehe)...

In reality, you stop a vehicle with a .50 by putting a round in the engine, shooting out the tires, shooting the tank or shooting the driver. In OFP the only two viable versions of this is shooting the tires & the driver since we cannot calculate a engines all vital parts. If you put a weapon that takes out a jeep with one hit (roughly 70-100 in damage to do the job properly) you make it about the same strength as a LAW (100 in damage). this means that you would take out a BMP with 1-3 shots. a T80 with 5-6 shots. and that is just basically a too dangerous and unbalanced weapon imho.

So what i opted for instead, was balance before kickass. The Damage is about 5 times that of a 7.62 sniper round (50) which is a bit of a test really. It kills of a Jeep in 2-3 shots if you hit it on the right spot. But it won't do much against a bmp (unless you carry a shitload of ammo and the BMP doesnt attack Lets not forget that this is a game, and not real life.

On soft targets though.. it's brutal...

well.. thats my 2 cents. if you want to check out the rifle it's over at Op: Thunderbolt.

Have fun,

[FILO] HuBBa<span id='postcolor'>

errr... i always thought bullets in OFP are either capable of damaging armor (tanks, bmps, etc) or not.

For instance, you can take out a jeep (or even a scud) with a m16, m60, kozlice, whatever. You can not, however, take out a T80 with an m16, afaik.

So wouldn't it just be possible to set damage to 100 and not make it armor-piercing?

[HuBBa 1]

Nope. a damage of 100 would still damage the tank. The explosive setting (as in explosive bullets) only gives an area damage effect (which a normal bullet dont).

There were a barret floating around that had over 100 in damage, which took out a T80 in 4 shots or so. Very powerful, very unrealistic

[FILO] HuBBa

[Assault (CAN) 1]

Hey HuBBa, your M99 .50 cal is a nice mod, same goes for your M24. The only problem with the.50 is that there is no mag, so there is only 1 bullet per inventory slot. That needs to be adressed, or has it already?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">as you yourself said, the barrel lengths are differnet. So would there not be a difference in the velocity of the round? The M134 barrel length is 559mm, M60 is 560mm and FN FAL is 533mm.<span id='postcolor'>

1 or 2 inches won't make that much of a difference in velocity. A 1mm difference is practically nothing, same goes with a 3cm difference. The velocities of those weapons would probably be within 100fps of each other. Most 7.62 NATO (.308) rifles I know of have barrel lengths varrying from 18 to 26 inches. Most target shooters I see have a 24 or 26 inch barrel since they perform better at longer ranges.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> An AK47 (uses 7.62 x 39mm Soviet M1943) wouldn't have as much energy potential as a FN FAL (uses 7.62 x 51mm NATO).<span id='postcolor'>

Yes you are right, the casings are different sizes.

The 7.62x39 round is more comparable to the 5.56mm NATO or .30-30 winchester round in power and effective range.

Look at the 7.62 NATO (.308 Win) round here. Note the muzzle velocity and energy.

Look at the 7.62 x 39 Russian round here.

Look how much shorter the casing is (39mm vs. 51mm on the NATO round) Also note the muzzle energy and velocity compared to the 7.62 NATO (.308 Win) round.

HTH

Tyler

7.62x39 Russian.

7.62x51 NATO (.308 Win)

Note: these are not completely to scale, the 7.62x39 round should be smaller, but you get my point.

[HuBBa 1]

The M99 "Big Shot" is a single shot bolt action rifle. Ie. it doesn't come with a magazine like it's fellow Barrets, the M82 and the M95.

Check Barret's homepage.

[FILO] HuBBa

[Assault (CAN) 1]

I know, but it seems a bit absurd to only have 1 round per ammo slot when you can have more. A weapon with a max of ten rounds is not very useful.

[HuBBa 1]

Talk to Barret Guns m8 Not me. The reason i did this one and not the M82 was that there were 3 in production already. I might however do the M95 in the future. And that has a magazine

[FILO] HuBBa

[Deadman 0]

I guess flyboy knows he's beat

[USSoldier11B 0]

I'm just curious why this is still being debated. People are gonna make, and have already made Barrets for OFP whether some people think it is stupid or not. Also, don't bullshit about what a weapon can or cannot do if you have no experience with them, or if you cannot back up your claims with factual data. Thank You.

[Dead-Ćnd-Start 0]

hmm... if i remember P-51s in WW2 which had 50cals (up to 6) couldn't penitrate a panzer's armour (if i remember correctly, i heard some bullshit story of having to bounce the bullet of the ground to hit the bottom of the tank) but i'm no expert.

then, think of theese things,

If a 50cal could penatrate armour then

a) Why do tanks have big guns?

b) why did in africa in ww2 (insert german plane name, possibly ju-88) get a realy high calliber cannon to knock out tanks?

c) why bother using rockets/bombs in ww2 if you could hust shoot em?

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1) Friendly Fire isn't.

2) If you've got more ammo then you have bad guys, your in combat. <span id='postcolor'>

FYI. #1 is right.

#2 is If you are short of everything except enemy, you are in combat.

See Murphy's Laws of Combat for all 33.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

There are way more than 33, lots of quotes have been added, I've seen lists 200 quotes long.

My favorite: Never tell the Platoon Sergeant you have nothing to do.

A good one: Combat will occur on two adjoining maps of two different scales ......lol

Tyler

[USSoldier11B 0]

Hey, I'm only talking about the original list.

I've heard alot of new ones too.

Like: "Peace Keeping Missions are neither."

[HuBBa 1]

UsSoldier: well.. i have made a Barret M99 .50 cal So the answer is yes, people will still make them.

[FILO] HuBBa

[USSoldier11B 0]

I know, I've download yours and a couple others. I was just advocating your right to do as such.

[HuBBa 1]

Yaaaay =)

[Aaron Kane 0]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............

I found what I think would be an excellent combination...

[FILO]Hubba's weapon model, with the damage statistics of the M82 over at www.NATOsoldier.com

Since your weapon fires slower than the M82, it would offset the higher damage done. Trust me.... what've you got to lose.... c'mon.... you know you wanna.....

[advocatexxx 0]

Well BIS should definitely fix the ability to destroy M60 Tanks with M2 machine guns.

[WKK Gimbal 0]

You can destroy M60s (and even Abrams) with an M16, if you got enough ammo...

It's because there's no minimum damage barrier on vehicles.

BTW, just made a .50 cal, for fun's sake. The AI popped my head off from +1000 meters

[Dead-Ćnd-Start 0]

i couldn't remember it, i could only remember thoose 2...

where could i find the whole list>?

[RedRogue 0]

I'm laughing my arse off here. This thing is still going on, and as for Flyboywannabe his credibility was pretty much settled on page 3.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

LOL, I had his 'credibility' settled after reading his second post.

For those with bad memory or a slow PC, here it is:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ok i'm a Army Ranger, I operate a Barrett .50 cal M82A12, dubbed the "hefty fifty", not the little one the BIG one. we got to play with this rifle me and my small group, a .50 cal round WILL i repeat WILL go throught the skin of russian tanks and it would rattle the shit out of the Abram. And yes there something saying we cant shoot at the bodies of enemy soliders, outlined from the Geniva Convetion (the war crimes convention) states the if we use a .50 cal round against an enemy solider we are subject to war crime reguardless if we win or lose. if they dont have a backpack your not suppose to shoot them, i know the commander in the Abrams have a .50 it's use to destroy light armored targets,i should know i'm a .50cal user, was lectured about it. If you want can get you a copy of that part o the geniva conventin if you want it email me and i'll get it, it may take a while but i'll get it <span id='postcolor'>

LOL, every word of his post is false, even the crap about the Geneva convention or as he would put it: geniva conventin

LOL

Tyler

[Joe Porta 0]

You lot shouldint give Flyboy such a hard time! I remember when I met him back in Nam'68, he was my Platoon sergent he saved my life countless times.

We conducted numerous Black ops' into Cambodia hiting supply lines on the HoChi Mien trail. When we got back to the US we were spat on. Disgusted I left the armed forces to grow my hair long and do drugs, it was untill the American-Australian war broke out Flyboy coaxed me back, he was reassemblying his old unit to do what it was good at destroying modern MBTs' with light munitions.

The American-Australian War was the biggest war since the bigone. Those darn ozzies would wire up kangaroos with P.E.4. They would hop in to base and kill a dozen guys with no remorse. Hell I didint take boomerang shrapnell in the ass for my country just to hear a bunch of forigners bad mouth a genuine American Hero.

(no prizes for anyone who can guess were i got this material from)

[WKK Gimbal 0]

Well, I must admit that he has taught me alot about the military too.

Like this:

First there is a corps. A corps has divisions. A division has brigades. A brigade has battalions. A battalion has companies. A company has platoons. A platoon has squads...

and THEN... then squads have "small groups"!

Impressive!

I've also learned that a handheld 12,7 mm rifle can kill a T72 on the spot, while a turret mounted 30 mm APT round doesn't do shit to it.

Impressive!!!!!