Ballistics, accuracy ?

[cartier90 0]

I think the speed of rounds are too slow, fire the default rifle - M4 I believe, at a target 500 m away, takes just over a second to reach, or at least for dust to appear. With 850 m/s round speed, this shouldnt be the case. Is the round speed in a config somewhere ?

[frederf 0]

Yeah I was going to say, if the muzzle is level. The range until the apex of the trajectory is 0m. This is all just technical masturbation talk of course. We all know what each other are talking about and the post wasn't of much use to begin with so here we are.

Does ArmA2 calculate terminal damage based on muzzle velocity or terminal velocity? I seem to remember it did it (incorrectly) as muzzle velocity until some mod changed it and 5.56 "just tickled" at 700m.

[Inkompetent 0]

Does ArmA2 calculate terminal damage based on muzzle velocity or terminal velocity? I seem to remember it did it (incorrectly) as muzzle velocity until some mod changed it and 5.56 "just tickled" at 700m.

Yes. Damage is a function of an ammunition-specific constant and the projectile's velocity, so damage does decrease over distance.

[flake 10]

With 850 m/s round speed, this shouldnt be the case

perhaps its 850 m/s *at the muzzle*. the bullet will slow to less than that while its travelling.

[cartier90 0]

Sure, but I know they dont slow down by a huge amount over 500m.

[frederf 0]

According to a quick ballistics calculator I found online an M16 will have time of flight:

400 yd in 0.5 sec

670 yd in 1.0 sec

850 yd in 1.5 sec

BIS's bullet model most definately includes bullet slowdown in mid flight which causes the unsymmetrical shape around the apex. Gravity most certain shapes the trajectory as can be noted by firing from a hill or a valley. The drop will be less pronounced for a hilltop shot of the same range since gravity has a component that's toward the target.

[mr.g-c 6]

Muzzle Velocity issue, please vote here:

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2411

---------- Post added at 12:28 ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 ----------

or at least for dust to appear. With 850 m/s round speed, this shouldnt be the case. Is the round speed in a config somewhere ?

Yes, like in Arma1 dust on impact is delayed by some ms. Never really understood why, but can be changed according to some modders mentioned it around Arma1 times.

[cartier90 0]

Im really not usually the pedantic type - but for some reason this bothered me :).

The delay in dust reaction must be the same for opponent AI to 'realise' that theyv'e been hit. There is a discernable delay sometimes from 'hit' to death animation.

[galzohar 31]

They delay from "hit" to "hit animation" is not really because of any realism features. It's because if you're "busy" doing one animation, you cannot start a new animation until the current animation is complete. If your current animation is short or almost complete, the delay will be small, but if it's long (like getting shot right as you start getting up from prone) there will be a huge delay and look really weird. In short - engine limitations :(

[cartier90 0]

Perhaps ARMA3 could encorporate Eurphoria type dynamic animations ( GTA4 ) . They are amazing. Particularly grabbing out for handles or rails when falling down stairs.

Very seamless as well. Shooting a cop running laterally across you in the foot will mean he stumbles and tries to regain balance.

When mowing through 10-15 peds there is a slight delay or jolt in the game, at least on consoles - on my PC there isnt.

Come to think of it, in terms of the argument that there is too much 'going on' to incorporate dynamic animation, no more than 15 - 20 units

would usually be in your FOV , similar - in fact, less than times square in GTA4. GTA4 is a pioneer and R* have megabucks so it stands to reason

that the tech will filter down eventually.

Edited July 6, 2009 by cartier90

[whisper 0]

That's not true in ArmA2. In ArmA1 that was true but in ArmA2 barrel length is also an affect so a 30rdn STANAG fires differently from an M4 and a M16.

Sure of that? I see no reference in config files indicating such behavior. But my old eyes are rusty :)

[leckig 0]

The bullet however never rises above the axis of the length of the barrel. It only drops.

well, actually right, you just set up your scope so the net effect is that on a short distance the bullet seem to be going up.

[frederf 0]

Sure of that? I see no reference in config files indicating such behavior. But my old eyes are rusty :)

I'm not 100% sure but I swear I heard it mentioned as an ArmA2 feature at some point. I don't think it's in the config at all. I think I remember it actually uses the dimension of the p3d model.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Frederf

[householddog 10]

I think over around 600 meters the bullets drop verlocity from 800m/s to around 500m/s. It is an appreciable amount.

Here's a wikipedia entry on the subject. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_ballistics#Drag_resistance_modelling_and_measuring

[mr.g-c 6]

I'm not 100% sure but I swear I heard it mentioned as an ArmA2 feature at some point. I don't think it's in the config at all. I think I remember it actually uses the dimension of the p3d model.

Any sources regarding to this?

They delay from "hit" to "hit animation" is not really because of any realism features. It's because if you're "busy" doing one animation, you cannot start a new animation until the current animation is complete.

This is a bug, nothing else. It was there in Arma1 until 1.05 version or so and was re-introduced in Arma2 again :rolleyes: :(

On top of that it was often announced that Arma2 has a so called "animation-blending" system or how can you explain that you can play a walk and a reload animation at once..... ;)

[frederf 0]

Lol I think you are the source:

I hope this too, also that the Muzzle velocity is not set anymore by the Magazine-class, but rather by the ammo itself, multiplied with some factor based on the barrel length. It was very odd to see in Arma1, that M4 has the same ballistics/range/damage at distance X, like the M16 has.

[B()NE 10]

I find the weapons to be fairly adequate for the game, but the most annoying aspect of the combat in ARMA2 is the wholly unrealistic act of having to "guess aim" at distances, it just feels wrong raising your sites to ridicuous levels to make a long distance shot with an assault weapon. The best way a game has dealt with this was in the Delta Force series where you made adjustments on the scope and then shot on target as normal, if the limitation of the round/velocity still made the shot inaccurate, fine, thats the weapons limit, even with marksmens scope I hate having to raise sights when I really shouldnt be doing this in a combat situation. :rolleyes:

[frederf 0]

Bone, you do not understand realistic weapons. ACOG, Aimpoints, and M16A4 ironsights are not field adjustable. They have a zero and that's it.

M24s, M40s, and probably the DMR and SPR.. yeah, they should have adjustable sights.

[cartier90 0]

Perhaps slightly off topic. Anyone noticed the difference in sound when observing your unit firing a weapon from different angles ?.

Using alt at 85 degree the gunshot sounds normal, same as from POV, but from 90 degrees (side on ) to face on the 'crack' of

the round is heard. Anyone with experience of this ?

[B()NE 10]

Bone, you do not understand realistic weapons. ACOG, Aimpoints, and M16A4 ironsights are not field adjustable. They have a zero and that's it.

M24s, M40s, and probably the DMR and SPR.. yeah, they should have adjustable sights.

Yep Fred, I should have qualified that a bit more, sure I know ACOG etc are not adjustable, but the others just feel wrong :cool:

[OGC_Curt 10]

I had to register to get into this thread. It seems that a lot of people (maybe I'm wrong) think that a sight or scope is simply zeroed at a certain distance and the bullet follows a straight line to that path and then starts to sink. I wish this were the case, because things would be a lot easier. The truth is the bullet starts to drop right after it leaves the barrel.

Here's a web page I found that explains bullet trajectory:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Rifleman%27s_rule

If you look at the third picture with the rifle and the bullet trajectory you'll notice that the rifle is zeroed in two different points because of the bullet trajectory. I think, I may be wrong, that a M-16 that is zeroed at 300m will also be zeroed at 100m because the bullet is shot upward to cross the sights at 100m, raises up on an arch then comes down to cross the sights again at 300m.

When I was in the army we sighted our weapons for 300m and you had to adjust your aiming to be able to hit the target any closer than 300m or any further than 300m (we didn't shoot any further than 300m). IRL you have to know the bullet trajectory in order to aim correctly. I remember when shooting at a 150m target IRL I had to shoot it at the waist line in order to hit center mass.

I guess this all doesn't really matter, but it's interesting to learn something new. I hope no one already covered this in the thread.

Edited July 7, 2009 by OGC_Curt
because!

[akd42 10]

I had to register to get into this thread. It seems that a lot of people (maybe I'm wrong) think that a sight or scope is simply zeroed at a certain distance and the bullet follows a straight line to that path and then starts to sink. I wish this were the case, because things would be a lot easier. The truth is the bullet starts to drop right after it leaves the barrel.

Here's a web page I found that explains bullet trajectory:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Rifleman%27s_rule

If you look at the third picture with the rifle and the bullet trajectory you'll notice that the rifle is zeroed in two different points because of the bullet trajectory. I think, I may be wrong, that a M-16 that is zeroed at 300m will also be zeroed at 100m because the bullet is shot upward to cross the sights at 100m, raises up on an arch then comes down to cross the sights again at 300m.

36yards/300m is the Marine Corps method. 50yards/200m is another, perhaps better, option.

Edited July 7, 2009 by akd42

[Eclipse4349 0]

Personally, I feel like the ballistics are incredible. It would be nice to be able to adjust sniper scopes, but, then again, it could be patched in, I'm sure... Just the fact that this game actually simulates muzzle velocity (time to target) and ballistic arc makes me warm inside, regardless of whether it is dead-on realistic for every weapon variant. It sure beats the hell out of the rest of my FPS's!

[mr.g-c 6]

Lol I think you are the source:

Hehe, that was just a "wish" by me in that topic....... im pretty sure its still the same like it was since 9 years - muzzle velocity defined in the magazine class independent of the weapon its used with :(:rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 22:24 ---------- Previous post was at 22:21 ----------

Personally, I feel like the ballistics are incredible. It would be nice to be able to adjust sniper scopes, but, then again, it could be patched in, I'm sure... Just the fact that this game actually simulates muzzle velocity (time to target) and ballistic arc makes me warm inside, regardless of whether it is dead-on realistic for every weapon variant. It sure beats the hell out of the rest of my FPS's!

Sure, its nice, also that damage is resulting from the muzzle-velocity, means lower damage at higher distance. But for the most of us faithful fans this is nothing new, just a warmed-up old soup, unimproved and heavy advertised with "realistic ballistics". :rolleyes:

Many of us did suggested so many cool and easy tweaks in that regard to BIS since End of 2006 as Arma1 came out, ranging from different muzzle-velocities per Rifle, over bullet weight, over penetration resulting from various factors and so on and so forth.

Mods like ACE for Arma1 did realized some of those tweaks but they needed awefully workarounds for that and all we realism fan were hoping that BIS adds at least some of that or that its more easy to mod.