Panzer Jager

Weapons blocking bullets is realistic for some types of ammunition (like Handguns at longer ranges), but a Rifle would go through it no problem. It should also render the weapon useless. Page 17, effects of Assault Rifle ammo fired through an AK-47 magazine into gel behind it: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf

You can always put recoil through a calculator, there are some that do that. While it is not 100% accurate it gives a decent approximation. 5.45x39 powder charge is somewhere near 25gr, although I know it's actually lower than that I don't know the exact number. http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

One thing that bothers me in this realism simulator is that weapons with very short barrels, such as the G36C and XM8 Compact, produce the same velocity as an M16A4. The game features differening velocities based on what magazine is loaded, as opposed to a more realistic solution of basing it off of what weapon is being fired and what ammo it is firing. This is represented properly in ACE, but I think the system should be represented in ArmA 2 or Operation Arrowhead as well. Example: 30-Round Stanag, 5.56x45 M855 Ball M16A4 Velocity = 945ms M4A1 Velocity = 885ms 30-Round G36, 5.56x45 M855 Ball G36K + XM8 Velocity = 850ms G36C and XM8 Compact Velocity = 770ms 20-Round Stanag, 5.56x45 Mk262 OTM Mk12 SPR Velocity = 850ms That's another point I want to bring up - it is unsafe to fire the Mk12 SPR with standard M855 Ball or any other ammo that is not Mk.262 OTM. However, in ArmA 2, it fires M855, which not only makes it unrealistic but also much less lethal and less accurate than it should be. Anyhow, what with Operation Arrowhead including many more short-barrel weapons (SCAR CQC) I think it'd be a good step in the right direction to simulate varying muzzle velocities with changes in barrel length, just like in real life. Here are some numbers on 5.56x45 just for reference. Obviously barrel length also affects velocities of other cartridges. M855 M16A4 + XM8 Sharpshooter + XM8 LMG = 945ms M4A1 = 885ms G36 + MG36 = 930ms G36K + XM8 = 850ms G36C + XM8 Compact = 770ms Mk.16 Standard = 870ms Mk.16 CQC = 800ms M249 SAW = 970ms Mk262 Mk12 SPR + Mk.16 Long = 850ms XM8 Sharpshooter = ~875ms

Personally I think a penetrating hit to the forehead should kill immediatley (like 10x damage taken), a hit to the upper torso should kill a man very quickly (1x damage taken), a hit to the stomach/lower torso should not reliably kill (0.5x damage), and hits to the limbs should reduce ability to fight back. Hits to the upper torso are much more lethal for a few reasons; -1) The central nervous system and heart are in the upper torso -2) Any high-energy projectile will fragment when it hits bone even if it's nature is NOT to fragment when passing through mere tissue, thus the probable hits to the ribs are very lethal -3) Hits to the lung, while have been known not to always kill a man outright, are very unpleasant. Personally I think the game should emphasize more on wounding the target and incapacitating them, which while may not be the nicest thing to watch on your monitor, is absolutely the most realistic if you read Infantry combat reports. Incapacitating is much, much more likely to occur when hit by full-metal jacket ammunition as opposed to dying right on the spot, before they even hit the ground.

Right, but the game does feature extremely short barrel weapons - I'm suggesting that muzzle velocities be implemented for their sake ;) even if you may not notice the difference between M4A1 and M16A4, you will notice a difference between G36C and M16A4, and it should be that way in the game IMO.

Not true, especially for 5.56x45 M855. 5.56x45 M855 only fragments reliably at hit velocities above 790ms, and short barreled weapons such as the G36C don't even produce that much speed at the muzzle - thus creating a tiny wound channel. Reduced muzzle velocity for other calibres such as 7.62x51 M80 may not have a seriously noticable effect, but it still reduces effective range. Here is some real data with pics: http://www.cbjtech.com/dokument/Reduced%20effectiveness%20of%20the%205.56%20NATO%20due%20to%20shorter%20barrels.pdf Basically, if you're using something like a Mk.16 CQC with M855, your effective range is about 15m (and even then the amount of fragmentation is extremely low), as opposed to an M16A4's effective range of about 150m. Those numbers are the two extremes of the "usual combat range" - I wouldn't consider a 10x range difference neglectable.

Typically short barreled weapons also have lower weight, so same overall recoil, but short barrel weapons are more comfortable in close-quarters. If you mean what would be their advantages in-game, well, none. Weapons in the game are not designed to be fair, they are designed to be realistic. I could ask you why anyone would carry an M24 or M40A3 over an M107? The M107 is more accurate, fires faster, hits harder, doesn't drop as much, and has more cartridges in the magazine.

Actually I know that, I even said it in my first post. Here: Along with that, it is debatable as to whether special forces use subsonic 5.56x45 as well, since subsonic ammo cannot fragment it would create really small wounds and deliver very little energy - even 9mm subsonic would be superior. So I don't know why the game has two different types of magazines for subsonic and ball 5.56, as subsonic 5.56 is pratically pointless.