Feature #13587

Increase 5.56 rounds damage.

Added by 50.cal almost 5 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.

Status:Assigned Start date:09/09/2010
Priority:Normal Due date:
Assignee:- % Done:

0%

Category:Weapons
Target version:-
Affected ArmA II version: First affected ArmA II version:
Reproduced by another DH user:No Single / Multi Player?:
I am using some Mods:No BIForumURL:
I am using:OA only NGUrl:
Reproducible for you:No WIKIurl:
Related to content of DLC:

Description

Obs

The 5.56 weapons are definitely lacking power in game.

US army did issue a new version of this ammo and in substance here's the results:

"During testing, the M855A1 performed better than current 7.62mm ball ammunition against certain types of targets, blurring the performance differences that previously separated the two rounds".

References

http://www.army.mil/-news/2010/06/23/41283-army-begins-shipping-improved-556mm-cartridge/index.html?ref=home-ata71-img
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56x45mm_NATO#M855A1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33481923/M855A1

Expected Behavior

Damage should be increased accordingly.

Regards.


Related issues

related to ARMA2 Community Issue Tracker - Bug #11479: Bullets do not enough damage over distance Closed 06/26/2010

History

Updated by kju almost 5 years ago

  • Due date set to 09/16/2010
  • Category set to Weapons
  • Status changed from New to Feedback
  • Affected ArmA II version changed from Please select... to 1.54.72888
  • I am using set to OA only

See #11479.

This is the way to report it. Ty

Updated by Tozmeister almost 5 years ago

"Damage should be increased accordingly." According to what though? I can't find any information on this new rounds ballistics performance or effectiveness vs soft tissue.

Also, This new round can't be adopted by other NATO countries as it breeches the 1899 Hague convention.

Updated by 50.cal almost 5 years ago

Those data are still classified.

Anyway in game 5.56 rounds are really underpowered. Specially past 200-300m.
Between 200 and 400m I can actually hit my targets several times and see them running around just like if nothing did happen.
It makes those weapon completely ineffective.

Updated by q1184 almost 5 years ago

I think the real problem is that non-lethal hits don't influence AI behavior in any gameplay-relevant way. After taking a hit (or more), the AI seems to remain just as capable and willing to fight. This creates the observed impression of rounds being ineffective. Increasing bullet damage will just make every hit within a cetain range lethal, which isn't right either.

The solution would be in making the AI more 'human' in how they react to being shot (retreat, seek cover, go down in agony, lose consciousness etc). Injuring a man should either render him less effective as a combatant (not only physically, but also morally), or take him out of action completely.

Updated by 50.cal almost 5 years ago

Now that's an excellent remark.
I've seen an attempt to do what you've mentioned in SLX mod. It is quite good actually if you consider how AI react to fire. At least they fall and stay on ground wounded...sometimes they continue to fight and you have to finish them.

Hope we'll have something like this in vanilla version!

Updated by Ayger almost 5 years ago

I believe you talk about US ammunition right?
In few words..this gonna kill PvP.
In every game BLUFOR has better weapons/better vehicles etc.
Now...if they have better ammunition=3-4 long shots for OPFOR<1-2 shots for BLUFOR
I really think this isn't right :/

Updated by vasmkd almost 5 years ago

+1 for Ayger's comment

Updated by 50.cal almost 5 years ago

Ayger wrote:

I believe you talk about US ammunition right?
In few words..this gonna kill PvP.
In every game BLUFOR has better weapons/better vehicles etc.
Now...if they have better ammunition=3-4 long shots for OPFOR<1-2 shots for BLUFOR
I really think this isn't right :/

I'm afraid but this game is not about being fair or balanced it's about simulating real weapons/ammo, etc.

Now the solution for "balancing" the PVP version of the game stands in how you'll define PVP rules. IE make US troops fight against more insurgents.

Anything concerning "balancing" the game should not stand in the way of how it simulates things.
This or you'll end up playing "Arma 2 : Modern Warfare".

Updated by Mariachi almost 5 years ago

50 cal

When I play warfare for example I choose m16 and its better than ak74, cause its more precise and a little bit more powerful. So I cant say that 5.56 lacks something, it has real characteristics ingame. And as for balancing. BIS could do some things adding more guns and vehicles to the east side. The reds dont have sight adjustment for svd and ksvk. Do u think its real? They dont have TWS on each weapon. Its absolutely not interesting to play on their side. And if all will play at the bluefor side on warfare its gonna become coop not PVP mode.

Updated by 50.cal almost 5 years ago

I must agree that all weapons have pretty accurate bullet speed modelled but all 5.56 and 5.45 feel underpowered.
I know, increasing damage is not the ultimate solution but it will a least make it a bit more believable.

As for ak74 alike being less effective than m16, there's nothing I can do since it's just true.."5.56 nato has around 1600 joules; the russian 5.45 has about 1100 joules".

And once again, balancing is not my concern here since it's game/mission design related.

I just want to see either increased damage with all weapons or realistic unit behaviour when being hit. This or I swear I'll start to throw rocks instead of using AR :)

Updated by kju over 4 years ago

  • Due date deleted (09/16/2010)
  • Affected ArmA II version deleted (1.54.72888)

Updated by kju over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Assigned

Updated by maturin over 4 years ago

As for ak74 alike being less effective than m16, there's nothing I can do since it's just true.."5.56 nato has around 1600 joules; the russian 5.45 has about 1100 joules".

Joules don't kill people. 5.54 is designed to be lethal through yawing in tissue, whereas 5.56 yaws less in order to increase accuracy but has increased hydrostatic shock due to its velocity and trends to fragment at close range. Simply looking at the energy is a stupid reason to make on round take away more hitpoints. After all, if the 5.54 cartwheels around inside your chest, it will hurt you with all 1100 joules of energy. If the 5.56 goes straight through because it is faster and more stable, then only a fraction of that energy will be transferred to you.

Updated by rye over 4 years ago

5.45 Tumbles on impact, they call it the poison bullet for a reason. You're talking wound ballistics not joules, the hit point system isn't that advanced anyway and would be a hell of a challenge to replicate true wound patterns.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/M855.jpg
http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/AK-74%20545x39.jpg

A 5.56 FMJ tends to overpenetrate, everyone has heard the stories of Taliban or even Viet Cong taking multiple hits. It would be too hard for the engine to replicate, imo, but increasing the damage values slightly wouldn't be a bad thing. As he is talking about longer ranges past 300m, I agree with this, it has less velocity and should do more damage as it tears more, expanding more energy.

Also available in: Atom PDF