Talking about cfgAmmo...

[SoldierIsNotHistory 0]

Hi community,

I know that there is a some topic concerning the question of cfgAmmo, cfgMagazine, cfgWeapons.

This topic is just a discuss place, where we can put reflexion together, concerning ArmA ballistic.

The aim, discussing the best way to have realistic ballistic in ArmA. This will be more difficult, but i hope community will work together to create a right common point of view.

The aim is not to create "my" rule, just to think together about this topic.

Less Talking, More acting.

---

In ArmA, three class can concerned us, at the beginning.

It's cfgAmmo that define ammunition, cfgMagazines, that define cartbridge, and cfgWeapons that define a way to use them.

In fact, the most difficult, it's to determinate the right value parameter for each ammo.

There is 3 parameter:

hit

indirectHit

indirectHitRange

I have made test, and i can say that hit param have to be independent of weapons or magazine.

dammage caused on unit in game are calculated on a formula between velocity impact, hit, and indirectHit.

So i think, we can call this like Energy (Joules)

So, hit parameter (in cfgAmmo) have'nt to be defined following muzzle velocity, because ArmA engine is already calculating this.

We have to found a way to define hit parameter, just concerning weight of bullet, lenght... but no speed

For example:

If you take 9x19 Parabellum, the weight of bullet is 8.0 grammes.

For 5.56x45mm M855 (SS109) we have 4.0 grammes

So, if we isolate speed, and do the most simple calculation, we have hit of 9x19 Parabellum nearly twice hit of M855.

So, we write

9x19_Para hit=8

5.56x45_M855 hit=4

The real difference will be in the magazine, that define the speed, and so, with hit and speed, ArmA will be able to calculate, and find that 9x19_Para with 350m/s do less damage thant 5.56x45_M855 at 922m/s

So, from my point of view, ammunition hit, indirectHit and indirectHitRange have to be defined just concerning the NATO (or US) name and rules for each ammo.

I am waiting your advice, and i hope we will try to define rules, together like a real community

Best regards,

SoldierIsNoHistory.

[canukausiuka 1]

I have been trying (off and on for the past few weeks) to work on some sort of formula to do just that. I've had a few that were close, but would still give me strange results.

The big issue is that KE is proportional to v^2. This is true in ArmA as well. But because of this, high-v rifle rounds tend to be way overpowered compared to pistol rounds (obviously they should be stronger, but I mean badly overpowered).

I'd be glad to see more work done in this area, as its something I'd like to see relatively consistent and standardized.

[Le++ 0]

Problem is that it hard to realistically model a bullet's affect on the body. Other than speed and mass, you need to consider shape (spitzer of a rifle round, as opposed to 9x19 round head), rigidity (armor piercing, regular FMJ or hollow point) and center-of-gravity (like the Russian 5.45 that tumbles after about 10 cm). Also, the amount of damage done to a human by a bullet isn't only the energy is transfers to the body - fragmentation was shown to be a major part of the wounding characteristic of the NATO 5.56. The Russian 5.45 was designed to yaw quickly after hitting flesh, causing a larger wound-cavity (later shown to be less effective than the NATO 5.56, that often fragmented on impact).

Other factors to consider are the protection of the target - an unarmored civilian will be stopped by a single handgun round, while a soldier with a grade IV ceramic vest could take several 7.62 rifle rounds in the chest without being more than bruised (and perhaps cracked/broken ribs).

Overall, I don't think that we should bother to much with the damage model of the bullets. Your main goal should be avoid taking any hits. I don't think it really matters if you get killed by 2 or 3 5.56 rounds to the chest. A 0.22 handgun aimed at your head will kill you better than a 5.56 M4 aimed at your vest protected chest. Since soldiers aren't tank protected from small arms fire (no vest covers the entire soldier), it doesn't really matter the actual damage of the round - it's pretty easy to suspend you disbelief by getting killed with a handgun from 5 meters away, even though you are wearing a vest, no matter where the bullet hit exactly.

Any way, enough renting. Address effective range first, bullet damage later...