Armed Assault weapon ballistics

[l mandrake 9]

Oops I do apologize. I used to shoot 9mm Browning/Beretta and never noticed sonic cracks of any kind, but Wikipedia has shown me to be wrong - apologies to BIS and massive respect for the best game ever (judging by the demo anyway)  

*EDIT* Ahem, upon further research the NATO 9mm round is only MARGINALLY supersonic: the typical muzzle velocity of M9 pistol is 1160fps (standard ammo), the speed of sound is approx 1100 fps, so the deceleration of the bullet will bring it below the sound barrier very soon after leaving the barrel - hence there will surely be no audible sonic boom unless you are very close to the shooter (at which point the boom will, I guess, be masked by the noise of the gunshot?)

I appreciate this is total, anal nitpicking and yes, I still should have checked before I made the original moan  

[ThePredator 0]

The Makarov is not supersonic and the Beretta is not really "supersonic".

You might notice the crack but the report of the gun itself will probably be louder.

Most ammunitions are subsonic at 50 meters. On this distance the delay between muzzleblast and impact are like instant (for the human eye & ear).

Anyone who was close enough to hear a sonic crack made by a 9x19 mm handgun has to be some tough grunt...

[Jack-UK 0]

Hmm, i dont mind about changing the distance that certain rounds can fire and stuff like that...

But wind... you can't *feel* wind in a game... i think although it may give a slight drop in realism.. is it really worth it for a game? :S

If you cant feel wind, its hard to judge which way its blowing (unless u look at a tree, say) but i dont think implementation of bullets blowing in the wind is necessary for a game

Just my 2 pence

[ThePredator 0]

Why feel if you can actually see wind?

Smoke, trees, grass, flags...all have to behave correctly, of course. It shouldn't be a HUD issue, to gauge the wind direction. It should be a skill to estimate the speed & direction

[Jack-UK 0]

I understand your POV, but i just dont think that its going to be too viable...

If you're trying to attack an enemy, taking time to look for an object being responsive to the wind could cost you those vital seconds which allows the enemy to move positions or fire a shot back at you...

I just think its taking realism to the 'extreme' without compensating for restrictions in video games

[ThePredator 0]

Sorry to interrupt you...

What distances are we talking about??

Everything you shoot at under 300 m is not affected by wind (7,62x51 mm that is) and with the 5,56x45 you better get as close as 200 m or you might fail to hit the Hotel (exaggerated, just a little, though).

Infantry combat on ranges less than 200 m is normal. If you are scoped, 400-500 m is already a long distance (even a sniper normally kills in those ranges, even if trained to hit targets at 1000 m +.

But this is not 'Nam or a plain desert somewhere in the arab-world.

[Jack-UK 0]

Ah i have no idea about all the military stuff and actual physics...

Im just putting across my opineon that something which is restricted by a game, such as sensing the wind direction, speed etc should not be made more difficult by implementing wind which will affect the bullet 'flight path'

But i guess if it only really gives a noticeable disruption at long distances it wont be so bad.. but i dunno... im still not sure if i support the idea

[ThePredator 0]

The common infantry man will not notice the wind drift, since most guys just spray and pay.

The more advanced marksmen know about the affection and the pros will use the wind as their ally.

ArmA is about combat. Wind is an environmental aspect always present at any war in past and future. So I hope their will be some game featuring the fundamental elements of infantry combat.

[icebreakr 3159]

Hopefully ballistics will be fixed in the next patch, since this is very funny (or sad) for a military sim... Like one guy said before, Swat4 also has big bugs in the ammos and only few "realism modders" fixed that to make guns/ammo similiar to RL counterparts.

[ThePredator 0]

OT: Apropos SWAT 4, are you the IceBreakr from SWAT 4?

If you are, you might know my alias .338LapuaMagnum, I was the dude messing around with the ballistics system in Code 11.

This system was pre-historic, so I am quite happy with ArmA as it is, not perfect, but waaaay better.

[icebreakr 3159]

OT: thats right, our member LoneWulf did a great realism mod for S4, but he quit when Stetchkov got out. So we quit S4 eventually, too

p.s. i'm getting a feeling that pistols are still "laser accurate" in ArmA... same thing happened in OFP...

[l mandrake 9]

p.s. i'm getting a feeling that pistols are still "laser accurate" in ArmA... same thing happened in OFP...

not for me they're not (demo) -- can't hit a cow's arse at 5 paces with the makarov  

[frederf 0]

Yeah, the bullets come out of the M9 like a cheap rented paintball gun. Which is nice, so your engagement ranges are about that of a real life pistola.

[icehollow 0]

IMO if OFP/Arma had 100% realistic weapon aiming and ballistics , we had ohhh jeez...about 10101606004 threads from kiddies complaining about issues related to them not being able to hit anything past 50 meters in a firefight....

if this thread was about BUGS with the ballistics , then alli can say is what ive said already quite a few times : 1.1 : only screwed ballistics on the SPR , 1.2 : fucked ballistics , 1.3 (which demo runs on) : ballistics seem to be fine.

[icebreakr 3159]

icehollow: well, military sims are not for whining kiddies and i believe eventually they'll grow up :] i'm almost a 30 year old gamer and game developer and i love realism in games. Always have and always will and i'll buy english Arma even if i own a Chech version now just to play along with my team buddies :] if ballistics won't be fixed in one of the next patches, we'll just wait 'til a good mod arrives that offers what we seek.

[znashin 0]

I play the demo and far from complaints all I've got for the system is praise.

At about 100-150m while prone and holding breath the m4 aimpoint hits a standing target about two out of three times which sounds about right to me. It certainly feels right.

The mgs can be used effectively at longer ranges in short bursts and are a formed squads worst nightmare.

Sniper rifles. Hmm. I've never been a big fan of sniper rifles in fps. afaik in real life they are never used defensively or for suppression and they always seem to be over-used by kids that like to think of themselves as Riggs from lethal weapon. If a mission has a sniper rifle in it it should be for a specific task that has been written into the mission, not for some kid who likes to stay safe and rack up kills while his buddies in a squad risk their lives trying to get the job done and protect each other. Wind mod? Why not. It'd be close to last on my list of things to change in arma though.

It makes me laugh in the coop demo mission when everyone makes a grab for the sniper rifles and leave the SAWs. The longest engagement range on that mission is about 350m (from spawn to the other side of town) iirc. Shots that take one short burst from a SAW. I had to laugh harder when someone called it a sniper's mission. I thought "No. It'd be a sniper's mission if we were on that hill 400m south, only had one or two targets and had a safe way to extricate ourselves after we'd done the damage."

Don't get me wrong, I like sniping in ofp/arma more than in any other game, and think it's just about the only game where sniping actually approximates it's real life role. I just think it's waaaaaayyyyy over-used. People take them just for the mystique sometimes when the squad would be much better served with another riflemen, mgunner or crew.

[ThePredator 0]

Quote[/b] ]Sniper rifles. Hmm. I've never been a big fan of sniper rifles in fps. afaik in real life they are never used defensively or for suppression and they always seem to be over-used by kids that like to think of themselves as Riggs from lethal weapon. If a mission has a sniper rifle in it it should be for a specific task that has been written into the mission, not for some kid who likes to stay safe and rack up kills while his buddies in a squad risk their lives trying to get the job done and protect each other.

Outsh, that hurts...

I for myself am a sniper most of the time. I rarely shoot...I am the forward observer / JTAC / scout. More of the advanced eyes for the commander, which is what snipers do most of their time anyway.

But if I have to shoot, I make that single bullet count. Nothing better than saving your pal's arse by one well placed shot from far off the countryside.

However, it is too easy, so everybody feeling trigger happy can grab a scoped rifle an rack kills, which is not what snipers are supposed to do. Adding wind drift would sort out the serious sharpshooters from the regular score-hunter.

[shataan 1]

"Infantry combat on ranges less than 200 m is normal. If you are scoped, 400-500 m is already a long distance "

I can tell you this. 200 meter or less combat ranges in a mil game is not as fun nor feels anywhere near a skillbased feeling as being able to dial in yer ACOG in a game like Delta Force 2 on targets between 300 to 650 yards..... where it had wind effected bulletfrop.... and getting a kill.

That is why I totally hate many supposed mil games these days. The developer like morons outfits the rifleman class with what? An aimpoint deathdot fakescope. Then what in their infinite wisdom do they do next? They have a Sniper Class....

We are left with what? A huge gap inbetween a soldier outfitted only for CQB distances, and the Sniper Class who can get so far out, the Rifleman Class connot even see his enemy to return fire.

This is where the ACOG scoped Soldier is so important. They have the ability to at least force the Snipers to relocate. What do most Devs do? They still give the Rifleman Class the aimpoints, and then dumb down the sniper Class so bad, they force them to Snipe at CQB ranges. Pitiful.

I heard AA has ACOGs. Gods I hope so.

[l mandrake 9]

An aimpoint deathdot fakescope.

Lolz

I must admit I find the aimpoint a bit pointless on an assaut rifle at 100m+ engagements. I hope there's 4x ACOG in ARMA full version too, but the problem with Delta Force ACOG was it turned EVERYBODY into pseudo-snipers ('campers' in kiddiespeak) and you couldnt move 5 metres without getting perforated from distance...

However in ARMA the grass, trees and bushes may correct this - with ACOGs it will be REALLY important to move from cover to cover carefully....

The other problem with ACOGs is force balancing - do the Communists have anything equivalent for their AKs? If not, the war's gonna be a bit one-sided (which is probably why we got 'fakescope' aimpoints from the submachinegun armoury instead).

[ThePredator 0]

There ar ACOG's on the M4 with M203...

The OPFOR don't have anything scoped besides the SVD.

It does not have to be balanced at all. War is never balanced. As you can (sadly) see in Iraq, the non-ACOG guys execute hit-and-run ambushes without hi-tech equipment and (questionable) success.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

However in ARMA the grass, trees and bushes may correct this - with ACOGs it will be REALLY important to move from cover to cover carefully....

You've never played Armed Assault, have you? There is

almost no "cover" to move between and the grass is pure

eye-candy; it doesn't "conceal" you in any way at all!

[znashin 0]

Quote[/b] ]Outsh, that hurts...

Did come out a tad harsh didn't it. If you like playing snipers the over-play of them probably annoys you as much as me. It wasn't meant as an attack on anyone. People can and should play the game the way they enjoy it the most. It's the mission designers I'm at odds with.

Quote[/b] ]do the Communists have anything equivalent for their AKs?

Of course! Will they be modded as much as the m4? Of course not!

There was that sweet ak from the mission in resistance where you play the kid on a little island defending against spetznasties. I think it was called the ak-101 but I've no idea what the scope was. Some weird flattened affair with a big flat crosshair. Seemed more powerful than the aug's or H&K's anyway.

[l mandrake 9]

It does not have to be balanced at all. War is never balanced.

It's a game, not war; it needs balance or it's too easy/hard.

Quote[/b] ]You've never played Armed Assault, have you? There is almost no "cover" to move between and the grass is pure

eye-candy; it doesn't "conceal" you in any way at all!

Yes I've played the demo. On the CTF map it's almost possible to move from one camp to the other undetected if you are patient enough (moving between bushes or crawling through the grass). In OPF you couldnt do this so there is certainly more cover available in ARMA (at least in some parts of the island).

Mandrake

[NeMeSiS 11]

We are left with what? A huge gap inbetween a soldier outfitted only for CQB distances, and the Sniper Class who can get so far out, the Rifleman Class connot even see his enemy to return fire.

IMO thats part of the fun, be creative, ask for artillary/air support, or get an armored vehicle, or try to distract/supress the sniper with most of your team so you can give a few people the chance to flank him.

What would you do in real life when a sniper opens fire on your team? All run towards it rambo style?

[Kruniac 0]

It does not have to be balanced at all. War is never balanced.

It's a game, not war; it needs balance or it's too easy/hard.

Quote[/b] ]You've never played Armed Assault, have you? There is almost no "cover" to move between and the grass is pure

eye-candy; it doesn't "conceal" you in any way at all!

Yes I've played the demo. On the CTF map it's almost possible to move from one camp to the other undetected if you are patient enough (moving between bushes or crawling through the grass). In OPF you couldnt do this so there is certainly more cover available in ARMA (at least in some parts of the island).

Mandrake

Balance has nothing to do with a combat simulation. Simulated combats can never be too hard/easy. They are what they are.

A scenario involving defending against an ambush would be a -hard- simulation. A scenario involving executing an ambush would be an -easy- simulation.

Balance has NOTHING to do with a combat sim.

You cant say "Hey guys. Dont use that rifle - its imbalanced" in a realistic combat situation, so dont expect to say it with this game.

Hell, id push for an entire anatomy system to be implemented to better chart/display wound effects (Liver hit, muscle but no organs, etc). Realism>Gameplay in THIS game.