Infantry weapon damage changes

[Allahu Akbar]

So you completely agree with me?

You could of just said that instead of all the insulting **** talking.



This is where you are showing your ignorance, and total lack of real world experience...

These "problems" you found on Wikipedia, have no considerable affect in real life on a rifle that needs to hit an area the size of a basketball...


By that I mean, the difference between the performance of a basic M14, and Sniper rifle like the M40, is going to be only an inch or two at 100y.

Even with an extreme example of a really worn out rifle, you might open up too 3"-6" groupings.

So go ahead now and write your page and a half reply about something you found on the internet once...

No, I don't agree with M14 instantly downing someone.


"insulting **** talking" - hypocrite.

This is where you are showing your ignorance, and total lack of real world experience...

Do tell me how often a 7.62x51 drop someone in one shot if you have real world experience. Ignorance is all on you.

These "problems" you found on Wikipedia, have no considerable affect in real life on a rifle that needs to hit an area the size of a basketball...

Re-re-read my post, I didn't find it on wikipedia. http://looserounds.com/2015/01/30/the-m ... 14-legend/

"effect" - "“Report on Tests for Ad Hoc Committee on Accuracy and Testing of 7.62mm Ammunition and M14 Rifles.” Seven rifles each from batches accepted from H&R, Winchester, and Springfield Armory had been shipped to Aberdeen for testing to find and cure the causes of the M14’s inability to meet its accuracy requirements. Examination and testing of the 21 rifles uncovered the following:........."

"No M14 ever built will stay accurately zeroed and tight group shooting ...”

It's also a generally accepted fact that M14 design tends to have disappointing accuracy(again, accuracy; not interchangeable with precision) without properly bedded stock.
Unless you can prove to me M14 in Vietnam all have properly bedded stock, there should be bad accuracy for M14 in-game as well. (+0.02 minimum deviation)

Even with an extreme example of a really worn out rifle, you might open up too 3"-6" groupings.

I have already posted that a relatively modern M1A with unbedded stock has 3.5moa and a similarly "modern" 7.62 AK can do just under 2moa.
Stop being ignorant and post actual data instead of imaginary accuracy numbers.

Again:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/sho ... p?t=315851

After all the upgrades, it finally does 1.5moa; standard not-battleworn M1A(reasonable to assume those old M14 problems are alleviated or nonexistent on it) did 3.5moa.

Last I checked, rack grade military rifles is acceptable up to 4.5moa or so.

[Allahu Akbar]

Can you post it in spoiler for me to read? Either I missed the point or I missed the post.

As for gun data, it really does mean nothing to me, I have no understanding of the coding behind PR and a limited knowledge of ballistics. Does that mean that what I have to say is now invalid? No, I don't think so. Afterall, I play the game don't I? And I don't think I'm alone in my ignorance.

I literally just posted data to argue for a ppsh damage buff...
It's very relevant.
Real life has a balance of its own.

Personally I don't think they were, but opinion will inevitably vary. Whatever the case there is no denying now that they are incredibly ineffective.

It was 900rpm 4-5(depending on armor) shot kill 71round superior handling weapon compared to 900rpm 3 shot kill 20/30round weapon.

I cannot recall any such occasion where kits equipped with the Skorpion were running riot. The Mp5 is a slightly different matter, and clearly was a good weapon. But the only people that made squads comprised of crewmen and medics were seasoned PR players, typically people of both competence and skill. They were also people who enjoyed a challenge, and a bit of fun; those squalid half-wits.

Skorpion was extremely effective in close quarters(where primary AK for militia officer became secondary weapon) for spraying down one or two people. Especially back when armed insurgent medic looked similar to civilian.

Mp5 was only good because it had 30 round magazine, where it is employed(MEC, generally AAS maps) makes it a lot less relevant.

Why not just remove the Sappers weapon altogether? Give them an extra IED or mine to play with, you clearly cannot defend yourself with the kit, so why keep up the visual pretense that you can?

Pistol works when headshotting unsuspecting blufor(just one lone blufor unworthy for IED).
Just need to buff .45 and 7.62x25(1911 and TT-33) properly.

Again, if you think they are bad; look at Makarov. 9 damage; it's the kolibri(BF1) of PR.

And why are they so rare? In part surely because of the god awful weapons these kits are equipped with. If you want to change the attitude of the playerbase then you do it through the gameplay, and if you make the medic kit even more ineffective in a firefight then you are bound to see insurgent teams with even less medics. Running and dying gets old rather fast.

The difference between virtually no medic and zero medic is not much.

The M60 is a recent addition reflecting the militia factions broad associations.

So they can have bodyarmor too.

Your English is clearly very advanced, so I have to assume your being purposefully ignorant of the difference between my very clear indication of the past and present. The Militia faction as we know it now used to be the Chechen faction, it was the main inspiration behind the development of the what we have now. The Chechen faction however is no more, it is a dead faction, an ex-faction, it has ceased to be.

At present the militia faction represents a far more generic force, with assets and arms pulled from a variety of conflicts. We could use body armour, as perhaps significant parts of the Chechen militia did, but what about those maps in which the conflict portrayed is for example, in the Balkans? There isn't really a realistic alternative here, the faction itself prevents that.

Them being based on Chechen already means they can use body armor, now they have even more reason to have body armor.

As for Balkans, maybe someone will make ISIS faction.

I don't see the double standard at all.

You don't see it because it's your double standard.
Lacking in effectiveness in long range -> no problem.
Lacking in damage for a few subguns -> OMFG PR IS BROKEN.

My complaint is that sidearms, shotguns and low caliber weapons are now virtually obsolete in their role as weapons due to these recent changes. I don't have a problem with the balance on maps like Fools Road, in fact, before the removal of scopes from the Militia faction (0.97? I forget) the map was in fact unbalanced, in favour of the militia; it was also rather generic.

They should be obsolete as offensive weapon against armored enemies...
They are side arms and door-openers.

You may say that these changes were both necessary and appropriate, something which has added to the realism of the mod, and something you enjoy. On the other hand I think it has undermined the gameplay, which for me, has left the mod slightly less enjoyable.

I didn't say these changes are exactly perfect.

Again I have posted data to BUFF damage of these problematic pistol rounds.

[Kingy]

I literally just posted data to argue for a ppsh damage buff...
It's very relevant.

My understanding was that you made the PPSH marginally more powerful or equal to the MP5? Which as anyone who has used the weapon since these latest changes would know, typically requires you to hit with the majority of rounds in each clip to take down an armoured opponent.

Real life has a balance of its own.

Don't be absurd of course it doesn't. Unless you mean to say that the balance reality adheres to is in fact gross imbalance.

Skorpion was extremely effective in close quarters(where primary AK for militia officer became secondary weapon) for spraying down one or two people. Especially back when armed insurgent medic looked similar to civilian.

Yes, but it was severely handicapped against anything further away than say ~40/50m. I don't see the problem with it being powerful at close range, it functioned as an effective sidearm when you were right on top of the enemy.

Pistol works when headshotting unsuspecting blufor(just one lone blufor unworthy for IED).
Just need to buff .45 and 7.62x25(1911 and TT-33) properly.

Again, if you think they are bad; look at Makarov. 9 damage; it's the kolibri(BF1) of PR.

I understand that you want to buff weapons like the Makarov, but, from my understanding, only so that it can compete with the 9mm pistols after the ballistics changes. Pistols which in my opinion, are far too ineffective now.

The difference between virtually no medic and zero medic is not much.

That's a fallacy and you know it, why exacerbate an already unfortunate problem?

So they can have bodyarmor too.

Yes, they could I suppose. But I imagine it is very easy to find pictures of Chechen militia using scopes, it's inevitable after all that certain outfits will be better armed than others. So why not give the Militia back their scopes? Why not just turn them into a conventional faction; a cruder, low tech version of the Russian Armed Forces?

They should be obsolete as offensive weapon against armored enemies...
They are side arms and door-openers.

When I mentioned repetition this is what I meant, we clearly have opposing views on this that will not budge. You value realism, I gameplay. I'm bored of walking in circles.

You don't see it because it's your double standard.
Lacking in effectiveness in long range -> no problem.
Lacking in damage for a few subguns -> OMFG PR IS BROKEN.

No sorry, I still don't see it. Taking Fools Road as the example, the Militia faction always (until recently) had the upper hand in close combat, weapons like the PPSH were devastating at close range. But the Brits always had the upper hand from a distance, any semi-competent player knew that as Militia engaging at anything more than 100m was a poor decision. That doesn't mean that the game was unbalanced, simply that each team played to different strengths.

In this case certain weapons are being made far less effective and there has been no offset, nothing to balance the scales. While conventional factions seem to be getting an across the board buff, which will in turn lead to more team stacking and a less enjoyable experience.

On the other hand I think it has undermined the gameplay, which for me, has left the mod slightly less enjoyable.

Don't exaggerate my arguments in order to make me look unreasonable, you are not the font of all knowledge, neither is your opinion gospel; there's so much unmerited arrogance in your attitude.

[Allahu Akbar]

My understanding was that you made the PPSH marginally more powerful or equal to the MP5? Which as anyone who has used the weapon since these latest changes would know, typically requires you to hit with the majority of rounds in each clip to take down an armoured opponent.

Again, 71 round magazine. Post-change 9mm is 5 shot kill to armored target at 10m(close enough to bleeding out instantly), unless you have Makarov or a severely underpowered 1911(which magically does 16 damage compared to 9mm's 20) then you should not need more than 5-6 shots to hit as limb damage is actually higher than damage to armored torso.

Buffed PPSH damage(22-23) can push 5 shot kill range out to 30m.(that's against armored torso and limbs, by the way)

Don't be absurd of course it doesn't. Unless you mean to say that the balance reality adheres to is in fact gross imbalance.

It does and I have already proven it.

Yes, but it was severely handicapped against anything further away than say ~40/50m. I don't see the problem with it being powerful at close range, it functioned as an effective sidearm when you were right on top of the enemy.

Correction: it functioned as an effective primary when you were right on top of the enemy.
And that is absolutely wrong.

I understand that you want to buff weapons like the Makarov, but, from my understanding, only so that it can compete with the 9mm pistols after the ballistics changes. Pistols which in my opinion, are far too ineffective now.

Makarov is mostly ineffective against armored targets because it shoots 9x18, which is even smaller than 9x19.

That's a fallacy and you know it, why exacerbate an already unfortunate problem?

No it isn't. Practically no medic and no medic has no difference.
People already do not play medic to kill people; not to mention there is unarmed medic kit(there would be zero reason to have that kit by your "logic"). All that is needed is for medic to not be shootable by blufor when/after holding medbag.

Yes, they could I suppose. But I imagine it is very easy to find pictures of Chechen militia using scopes, it's inevitable after all that certain outfits will be better armed than others. So why not give the Militia back their scopes? Why not just turn them into a conventional faction; a cruder, low tech version of the Russian Armed Forces?

At a certain point in history, Chechen Militia actually is very close to a cruder, lower tech version of RusFor.

And that is exactly how they are in Assault on Grozny.
What is problem with that? Nothing.

When I mentioned repetition this is what I meant, we clearly have opposing views on this that will not budge. You value realism, I gameplay. I'm bored of walking in circles.

No, the difference is that I value both realism and gameplay and I have the solution to both problems while you have none.

No sorry, I still don't see it. Taking Fools Road as the example, the Militia faction always (until recently) had the upper hand in close combat, weapons like the PPSH were devastating at close range. But the Brits always had the upper hand from a distance, any semi-competent player knew that as Militia engaging at anything more than 100m was a poor decision. That doesn't mean that the game was unbalanced, simply that each team played to different strengths.

Not sure how stacked the games you played were; but it was easy to do well in British faction because the gun(more recoil than AK-74 but lower recoil than the much more common AKM/47 and all of them kill in three shots) works just fine in close range as it does at long range due to best BUIS(a red dot for many rifles). Militia hardly had upper hand in close combat; it was just the only viable way to win due to comparative lack of long range shooting capability.

You keep citing ppsh but you ignored British AR with its 900rpm.

In this case certain weapons are being made far less effective and there has been no offset, nothing to balance the scales. While conventional factions seem to be getting an across the board buff, which will in turn lead to more team stacking and a less enjoyable experience.

Why do you think I have posted many factual information in favor of improving weapon of non-conventional forces while simultaneously decreasing effectiveness of conventional forces weapons?

Don't exaggerate my arguments in order to make me look unreasonable, you are not the font of all knowledge, neither is your opinion gospel; there's so much unmerited arrogance in your attitude.

I did not exaggerate your argument, I take it apart piece by piece.

The idea that weapons should be closer to reality is sound, but this current execution of the idea is bad; that's why we can tweak the numbers and damage drop off to improve it, perhaps slightly raising armor damage reduction while improving damage on all weapons(so armor does make a difference but people can bypass armor effectively by shooting unarmored parts, think Insurgency the soruce game).

[fecht_niko]

Kingy & Comrade pls stop destroying this thread with your bs walloftext nonsense that no one is reading apart from you...

Most players here agreed that the new damage system destroys gameplay & teamwork which is PRs fundament.

People who think realism > gameplay should switch to arma because of engine limitation.

So dear DEVs pls revert that broken system before long time players stop playing.

[solidfire93]

Kingy & Comrade pls stop destroying this thread with your bs walloftext nonsense that no one is reading apart from you...

Most players here agreed that the new damage system destroys gameplay & teamwork which is PRs fundament.

People who think realism > gameplay should switch to arma because of engine limitation.

So dear DEVs pls revert that broken system before long time players stop playing.

Agree and please forum mod's lock this Thread cause it's this is not a feed-back Thread anymore....

there are enough feed back on this Thread and we don't need more of it....

and hope this Thread make it better...
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... ystem.html

[Smiley1967]

One question do the DEVs still play PR?
If yes tell me when was your last round USA won on vietnam maps?
The M14 was the only weapon that was equal to the Ak now they are weaker than befor, great.. not gonna set veitnam maps anymore cause to see USMC getting fully out capped again isnt so nice for the game exp.

[fecht_niko]

Smiley the AK needs like the M16 2 hits. M16 is way more accurate and spays way more bullets in the same time -> M16 better

The M14 is a 1-shot rifle and semiauto meanwhile the mosin is a boltaction gun -> M14 much better

All NVA vs USMC I've played so far ended in NVA getting rekt.

[BigBang]

My PC is "dead" so I don't know if something changed in 1.4.10. I played in the beggining of May (I don't know if it was .8 or .9) and if guys didn't tell me waepon damage has changed I didn't even realized it. Except shotguns so I thought that change was only about them. Such a poor guy I am

One thing was said here already. If this damage change afects gameplay and balance so much it would be evident on the W/L ratio on different maps. If it was 51:49 on Fallujah pre .8 and 60:40 post .8 there is an affect. Without those data most of the debate is only toughts...

System now isn't perfect and need some work to do. Now it is some like alpha version of the damage system and shouldn't be implemented in game in this early stage. Idea of damage based on real data is good but it needs more aspect beeing put in consequences other than kinetic energy only. Some good points was said here but most of the replies was "BS whining" bring back old system.

So good job Zwilling, but for now it still needs some work to be done Maybe bring back old system for now But don't abandon this idea

[Kingy]

No, the difference is that I value both realism and gameplay and I have the solution to both problems while you have none.

I explained my position already; go back to the old model. You simply seem incapable of recognising as legitimate any opinion that belongs to someone else.

fecht niko is right anyway, were ruining this thread. I would just add that anyone expecting the return of the old model is more than likely going to be disappointed, it seems to me more likely that they will double down on a bad decision in order to avoid offending Zwilling. Hopefully this version then can be tweaked into something more enjoyable.

One question do the DEVs still play PR?

Yes they do, and so does Zwilling so there's no need to go down that route.

[Allahu Akbar]

Kingy & Comrade pls stop destroying this thread with your bs walloftext nonsense that no one is reading apart from you...

Most players here agreed that the new damage system destroys gameplay & teamwork which is PRs fundament.

People who think realism > gameplay should switch to arma because of engine limitation.

So dear DEVs pls revert that broken system before long time players stop playing.

#notyourcomrade

For the last time, there is a more realistic(current numbers are far from realistic) fix for this that improves both gameplay and realism. You are literally making up bs to attack.
Maybe if you ever read then you would not have embarrassed yourself like such.

One question do the DEVs still play PR?
If yes tell me when was your last round USA won on vietnam maps?
The M14 was the only weapon that was equal to the Ak now they are weaker than befor, great.. not gonna set veitnam maps anymore cause to see USMC getting fully out capped again isnt so nice for the game exp.

M14 used to be "equal to AK" because everything else, except perhaps shotgun, was better than AK.

You cannot blame loss on weapons on U.S. side because now M16s are two-shot kill and M14 are one-shot-kill while vast majority of NVA weapons are two-shot kill with higher recoil and lower rate of fire compared to M16. Or worse.

You can't expect better weapon to save you everytime when you play like potato.

Maybe you should also never set Grozny because Russia gets out capped sometimes?
Also, stop playing any map where one side holds majority of flags at beginning, because the other side being out capped just happens?

I explained my position already; go back to the old model. You simply seem incapable of recognising as legitimate any opinion that belongs to someone else.

fecht niko is right anyway, were ruining this thread. I would just add that anyone expecting the return of the old model is more than likely going to be disappointed, it seems to me more likely that they will double down on a bad decision in order to avoid offending Zwilling. Hopefully this version then can be tweaked into something more enjoyable.

Yes they do, and so does Zwilling so there's no need to go down that route.

If you ever think I don't recognize your opinion as legitimate then maybe that is because your opinion isn't legitimate.

It is perfectly fine to argue that changes like this(poorly implemented) should have been worked on more before implmented; but if you are going to call for reverting everything everytime something went wrong, then everyone would be stuck pre-v1.0. (though game breaking change is not exclusive to post-v1.0)

Yes, this change is retarded if the intention was just to make M14 more used(could have simply went back to old-old model of one shot black and white, and lock M14 in semi-auto).

You are ruining the thread because you kept asking for damage model to be reverted instead of improved.

Old damage isn't good either. The bad decision is forcing the update of weapon damage model onto everyone before it is ready, not the decision to make damage model more realistic.



As for playing the game, I wish he wasn't playing the game and, instead, actually work on fixing this.

[Murphy]

Allahu Akbar, please realize you are pounding the same point in each 1000 word essay you submit to this thread. You seem to misunderstand what Kingy was getting at. Stop hijacking the thread to regurgitate the same thing over and over. You also provided very little in the way of "fixes" other than talking as if you are the end all authority when it comes to wounds sustained in combat (I assume you were a medic in the military otherwise your wiki-fu is strong). Your feedback has been submitted, and re-submitted about 100 times over, so please stop.

The thing is their bad decision warranted a lot of input from many players to get an actual picture of how it truly affects this community, instead of just having to guys posting walls of words coming to the same point over and over again. So show some maturity and allow others to express their opinions.

[LimitJK]

well, the devs spoke about the current damage model being very WIP, so lets hope the announced tweaks will come soon and look how they play out.

i really hope that the decision on whats the best way to go for the game is not made yet, and that ALL options are taken into account.
this includes a rollback to the former damage model if necessary.

im confident that the devs will continue with the level of professionalism they showed in the past when dealing with the topic and will never value the wealth of this game less than a preceived blow to the pride of any developer at any time.

my best regards

[tankninja1]

One question do the DEVs still play PR?
If yes tell me when was your last round USA won on vietnam maps?

I think the bigger problem for Vietnam maps is just the map balance. Ia Drang is somewhat stacked against the Americans because only the US side can be out capped, the NVA team can suck eggs and still manage to sneak out a win if they keep the flags in limbo.

Charlie's Point and Barracuda both have a similar problem which is an increasingly large problem in PR which is "flag stagnation". Such maps include Muttrah, Kashan, Sahel, Kozlesk (w/ tunnels flag), Khamisah, to some extent Operation Marlin, and Ramiel AAS. All those maps tend to have the exact same flag layouts and fighting over the exact same flags with fobs and infantry holding out in more or less the same locations. It doesn't help that on some layers of Barracuda and Charlie's Point the NVA get BTRs which can curb stomp any American attack. Also the proliferation of NVA rpgs is detrimental to game balance.

[Mostacho]

#notyourcomrade

I explained my position already

Stop competing on who has the last word and saying the same thing please

If you guys really need to continue arguing, do it in the private chat

Thank you

[Allahu Akbar]

I'm still waiting to hear what is your experience that people should think you have a clue?

I don't have to have any experience(though I do) if you don't.

Which you clearly don't, since you have been avoiding posting of your own "credentials."

I have posted all the actual info, which you did not read thus have zero counterargument against(so you have conceded on all of those points).

Again, it has already been established that wound channel of M80 7.62x51 round only truly begin to expand past 10 cm of penetration and does not expand fully even at 20 cm, where does that say "instant-lethal" to you? If you can even pretend to know anything about terminal ballistics, I should not have to explain further.

I will continue to re-post this until it penetrates your thick skull(hint: the relevant round is in the middle):

For comparison:


If these are not enough, I have more.

Nothing you talk about has any bearing on how a rifle's cartridge performs, or with the damage setting in PR.

Those list of problems have effect on how the RIFLE performs, thus accuracy can be nerfed.

All you have are heresay and imagination on how the round performs so I'm still waiting on your proof that 7.62x51 will instantly down someone in one hit.

The report you like to put up as your ultimate proof has a major flaw, and also displays your inexperience when it comes to firearms.

The "logic" of yours has a major flaw: you call something as having major flaw with zero reason/evidence to back it up.

PS

No one is re-reading your posts...

PS

That is why you cannot argue with me, same reason why you continuously embarrass yourself with every new post.

I wonder if we will have to wait as long this time for you to get banned as we did last time????

Only you would get banned, there's no last time for me.

Allahu Akbar, please realize you are pounding the same point in each 1000 word essay you submit to this thread. You seem to misunderstand what Kingy was getting at. Stop hijacking the thread to regurgitate the same thing over and over. You also provided very little in the way of "fixes" other than talking as if you are the end all authority when it comes to wounds sustained in combat (I assume you were a medic in the military otherwise your wiki-fu is strong). Your feedback has been submitted, and re-submitted about 100 times over, so please stop.

Maybe if people will stop regurgitating the same bs again.
I will continue until it get through their thick skull.

As for fixes, I have posted information proving current model to be wrong even with damage based purely on kinetic energy, possible adjustment based on kinetic energy, and tweak based on wound channel both temporary and permanent. -ample evidence to fix both realism and gameplay.

I do not need to be a medic in military to question these things; Zwiling already admitted that current model is purely based on kinetic energy(and still, it was wrong, as I have proven). Not to mention there is plenty of research into terminal ballistic that prove 7.62x51 ball ammo to not be as magical "one-shot" round as people(read: internet armchair commandos who have only shot paper targets) thought.

[BigBang]

Liver shot. It almost doesn't matter about caliber And you wont run even meter. Deer hunting science

[Nightingale87]

Do you really take all that into consideration in the 3-4 seconds that a firefight lasts????....
My god Im a noob!...(I know I am but...)

You do know this is a video game right? You die and you RESPAWN!!!!....even one life events...saturday night...you died...you get kicked...yo go to a different server and keep playing...so...

My point is, Can you make the game more "realistic" if you dont have people fearing for their lives in the heat of battle? mmm...well I dont really think so. You can make it more "detailed" when it comes to caliber and imparct and grouping, and a long etc.

Can it be improved?...well I guess...everything can be improved.

There is no unbalance end of the game a noob like me can use to out play any vet...the same applies to a whole match in any map. Still a game of skill...not knowledge about the size of a bullet.

For my part I just thank the DEVs for doing a fantastic job of keeping this great game running and alive. Thanks to the community for helping improve the game. Im not saying things discussed here are irrelevant, I just think it´s not worth having a fight over this.

Cheers!

[DogACTUAL]

Really good channel with a lot of terminal ballistic tests, mostly with civilian cartridges but also quite a few military ones: https://www.youtube.com/user/tnoutdoors9

All those ballistic gel tests give a really good insight how the different cartridges behave.
The terminal ballistics are really well showcased and analyzed carefully.

An interesting document linked on the channel about the stopping power of different handgun cartridges:
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866

Give it a read, really informative stuff.