 About Snipers |
  |
 Oct 18 2006, 04:25 PM
Post
#76
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 16-August 06 Member No.: 9,130  |
Yes, but now no one in their right mind would choose to even use APDS. The -1 DV is practically equal to the -4 AP. So any benefit you would have gotten from the -4 AP is canceled out by the -1 DV.
|
 |
 
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:35 PM
Post
#77
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
Mmm. I see your point. :(
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:45 PM
Post
#78
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
Sort of.
You're thinking in terms of averages, but statistics are statistics and dice are chaos. On the average, those four armor dice would equal one hit. But that means that fifty percent of the time, those four armor dice will produce more than one hit. So, a lot of the time, my version of APDS pays off. (It also means that a fair good deal of the time, those four armor dice would produce zero successes, and the -AP modifier means nothing.) And don't forget - as is so often forgotten in these discussions - the convert-to-stun rule. In my system, 9mm ball at 4P AP -1 versus an armor jacket would need four successes to do physical damage. But 9mm APDS would need 1. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:53 PM
Post
#79
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 906 Joined: 16-October 06 Member No.: 9,630 |
Your forgeting APDS doesn't run the risk of blasting yourself on a glitch like Explosive ammo does. Also its hard to tell what math you all are using. But it appears you assume every four dice nets a hit. That is only true when buying its. When you actually roll it comes out to every 3 dice. On a six sided die there are six possible out comes. A hit happends on the roll of a Five or a Six. Thats two out of six. Or one third the time. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:53 PM
Post
#80
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
If you intend to have any level of realism with the damage codes, you will have to consider the science of terminal ballistics at the very least on the level Raygun and kzt were talking about it -- which is to say quite superficially. I will not go through the figures you've suggested in detail, since I guess that's exactly the sort of think you want to avoid... but any particular reason why you'd make the 5.7x28mm penetrates no better than the 9x19mm, .45 ACP penetrates better than either, .44 Magnum penetrates as well as 5.56x45mm, and 7.62x39mm penetrates better than 5.56x45mm? For the ammo types, keep in mind that 1 DV is worth 3 dice, more or less, so that 3 points of armor penetration balances out with 1 additional DV for pure damage output. At +1 DV/+2 Armor, that would usually make hollowpoints more useful against armored targets too.
If it's APDS, then surely the plastic shell strips off the penetrator when it exits the muzzle. For weapons of caliber smaller than .50 BMG, of course, more common are designs where the projectile is enveloped in a jacket just like on most other bullets, like the US M993 and M995 and the Russian equivalents. Also, for small arms, the penetrator is likely to be bullet-shaped if somewhat lengthened, and if you're talking about the high quality stuff especially in the West it will be made of tungsten carbide instead of steel. In any case, for what it's worth, real world logic justifies the lowered DV. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 05:15 PM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 906 Joined: 16-October 06 Member No.: 9,630 |
In real life they are developing a type of bullet that only behaves as both and armor piercing round and standard ammo. (saw it on discovery channel’s future weapons show)
Now I don’t recall the details but to sum up. It hits body armor or another hard target and it acts like an armor piercing round. But when it hits a soft target like flesh it behaves like standard ammo making a larger wound. Now the problem the military and police often run into with armor piercing is it goes through the target and might hit bystanders. Especially is the target isn’t wearing armor. As I recall though the bullet does not act as both at the same time. It hits flesh its like regular ammo. Hits armor it acts as armor piercing. So is it really that far fetched that APDS ammo might have a method of countering the normal loss of damage caused by an armor pericing. Concidering they are developing bullets now that would act as two types of ammo depending on that they hit. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 05:39 PM
Post
#82
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
People shot by any real rifle (sorry, .22lr doesn't count) tend to be much more messed up than people shot by a pistol, everything else being equal. And if I'm shooting at someone I'm not trying to kill them, I'm trying to make them stop doing whatever they were doing. Once they go to zero body that works fine. (You can always shoot again after that.) And if you are barely hitting them (no extra successes) that's like grazing and minor peripheral hits. It takes a lot of grazes and through-and-through limbs wounds to stop someone. If you have a decent level of skill you will typically have more successes than they have body successes. I’m perfectly willing to have a game where incompetent idiots shoot the hell out of each other before falling down and bleeding on the floor, while someone who knows what they are doing is really lethal with the same gun. Rifles are in a whole different category from the typical service handgun. The bullets are moving at least twice as fast and the typical wound profile is hence vastly more devastating. People tend to be physiologically incapacitated a lot more often when shot once by rifles (or shotguns) then by pistols. If you signficantly reduce the pistol damage that also provides the same effect. To properly reflect this requires some change in the ammo rules also, but not a whole lot. There is more you could do by performing surgery on the rules, but that gets hard. Bullet placement is really the key to effectiveness with small arms, which is hard to simulate in a game that doesn't have hit locations (and most of games that do it doesn't work well). I’m toying with using the graphical template concept from Millennium’s End, but this requires major changes in the mechanics and concept of combat. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 05:42 PM
Post
#83
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,150 Joined: 19-December 05 From: Rhein-Ruhr Megaplex Member No.: 8,081 |
As far as I know the 4,6*30mm ammunition of the H&K MP7 is designed to penetrate armor, and to increase damage in tissue (by tumbling).
Don't know if it's true ;). (The MP7 is imo well designed, but must be one of the most ugly guns in existence) |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 06:14 PM
Post
#84
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
So is the 5.7mm bullets from FN IIRC. Wound track looked a hell of a lot like a .22LR hollowpoint. This certainly isn't good for the target, but it isn't something you want to count on. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 06:17 PM
Post
#85
|
|||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
They were probably talking about (or hyping up, as the case may be) blended metal bullets which a certain firm (Le Mas Ltd, now apparently bankrupt) claimed would remain solid when hitting hard objects but would pulverize in human tissue. Only they couldn't demonstrate that it actually worked as advertised, and there were other issues with it -- like drastically shortened range. Seems to whole thing has been buried for a few years now. Even if it had worked exactly like they claimed, it would still have been worse at penetrating armor than dedicated armor piercing rounds, and its wounding capabilities would have been inferior to controlled expansion rounds because such ammo would not have penetrated deep enough in tissue. Moreover, regardless of advances in material technology, bullets dedicated to piercing armor will pierce armor better, and bullets dedicated to causing more lethal wounds will do that better.
Rounds that penetrate through the target are not as big an issue as rounds that miss the target altogether. The police get quite a few misses per hit, so that's what they're worrying more about -- at any rate, taking too long to disable (kill) the target is more likely to cause loss of innocent life than rounds that penetrate through, so if AP ammo is what it takes, AP ammo is what they'll use. Provided that they have any, of course. The military isn't going to give a damn what happens to rounds that penetrate through the target in most cases, and they're usually stuck with FMJs anyway -- AP rounds will usually not penetrate much further through tissue than those.
Which usually works out to be synonymous, since killing them is pretty much the only reliable way to "stop" them with a firearm. :)
Not necessarily true, depending on which part of the body the bullet travels through. The higher velocity projectiles tend to cause more extensive damage to penetrated bones and will really fuck up the liver should they go through it, but through muscle tissue a 5.6mm diameter spitzer bullet will leave behind the same sized hole regardless of whether it moves at 1500fps or 3000fps -- a hole much smaller than that which a 11.4mm roundnose creates at any velocity.
The whole point of the 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm cartridges is indeed the ability to penetrate soft body armor with a very compact weapon. The tumbling is supposed to counteract the otherwise extremely limited wounding potential of an extremely light, extremely small non-deforming bullet, but even in an optimal situation the overall size of the resulting permanent cavity is quite small -- ruling out hits through the liver or other organs that cannot handle stretching from the temporary cavity, I assume it will be smaller in volume and surface area than with a 9x19mm FMJ in the same conditions. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Oct 18 2006, 06:22 PM
Post
#86
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
The SS190 looks like this in gelatin. Kinda resembles a 5.45x39mm FMJ impact chopped in half. Insufficient penetration + small permanent cavity = meh. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 06:53 PM
Post
#87
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
The part about 13 CM into the wound track where the FMJ round yaws and shatters is where the terminal ballistics get exciting. A through-and-through impact on an arm may well miss that part. But shooting people in the arm isn't going to result in a physiological stop very often until you are dealing with heavy hunting bullets or crew served weapons. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 07:28 PM
Post
#88
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
You keep saying this, but still have yet to show us any evidence of it, namely in context of AR-15 vs. 45 ACP pistol. I'm willing to bet that you're "vastly" overstating the case, and that single hits from .223/5.56mm rifle rounds aren't anywhere near as effective at "resulting in a physiological stop" as you appear to believe them to be. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 07:43 PM
Post
#89
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,333 Joined: 19-August 06 From: Austin Member No.: 9,168 |
You'd think that, but it's not true. I have to train myself not to think that way. But on average, you'll get one or more hits on 3 dice 70% of the time. You'll get one on 4 dice 80% of the time. I agree generally that subtracting dice from your opponent is always good. It creates a smaller pool, which is more likely to glitch, and gives them less dice to reroll with edge. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 07:56 PM
Post
#90
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
Compare the wound profiles yourself. Which does more tissue damage? http://www.brooksidepress.org/Products/Ope...ures/Fig12.html http://www.brooksidepress.org/Products/Ope...ures/Fig04.html Or a slightly easier to view versions that are not part of an offical DoD publication: http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wou...230gr%20FMJ.jpg http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wou...ofiles/M193.jpg http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wou...ofiles/M855.jpg And since someone mentioned .22LR http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wou...040gr%20RNL.jpg And for completeness, a 12 gauge shotgun wound http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wou...%20Buckshot.jpg |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 08:45 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Perhaps you missed Raygun linking to firearmstactical.com earlier in the thread. He's also got that very same rifle gelatin test profiles by Fackler on his site.
The increased tissue damage in this case is completely dependent on the fragmentation of the bullet in question, which does not always happen with either M193 or M855 -- though it is more likely with the former. When the bullet stays intact, again excluding shots through the liver etc., there is very limited increase in tissue disruption comparing impacts of common rifle bullets at 1000fps, 2000fps or 3000fps. This is why I could not agree with your original statement that "[t]he bullets are moving at least twice as fast and the typical wound profile is hence vastly more devastating". Consider the performance of common 7.62x39mm FMJs to that of the 230gr .45 ACP FMJ -- well over twice the velocity, but causes smaller wound cavities on average. Plus there is the whole issue of insufficient penetration with most of the light fragmenting 5.56x45mm's. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 09:56 PM
Post
#92
|
|||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 21-July 06 Member No.: 8,928 |
Can you show me that math, please? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:02 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
P(one 6-sided die comes up not 5 or 6) = 2/3
P(X 6-sided dice come up not 5 or 6) = (2/3)^X P(X 6-sided dice come up at least 1 5 or 6) = 1 - ((2/3)^X) With 3 dice: 1 - ((2/3)^3) ~= 70.4% With 4 dice: 1 - ((2/3)^4) ~= 80.2% However, the average amount of successes with 3 dice is 1, so it still holds that 1 DV is roughly worth of 3 AP when considering damage output vs. personnel only. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:25 PM
Post
#94
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
What you seem to be arguing is that a .45 FMJ that behaves as expected does more damage than the rifle bullet that behaves in an extremely unlikely fashion and doesn't yaw, rotate, or fragment as they virtually always do. That's likely to be true. Ok. This indicates exactly what? How is this useful information to combat mechanics, which need to be based on typical behavior, not "if you assume the moon is made of blue cheese then" type assumptions? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:38 PM
Post
#95
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
The M855 does not "virtually always" fragment by any account, and that would be stretching it even for the M193, which does it rather more often. If you only ever got direct hits through soft tissues at close ranges with long rifle barrels the statistics might look better, but my understanding is that of all the M855s hitting people these days it might not even be 50% that lose a large portion of their mass to fragmentation.
In addition, when talking about rifle fire in general, it might be better to consider worldwide averages and not just the assault rifle standard of the US armed forces. Not all SS109s fragment as readily, only a small portion of 7.62x51mm NATO ball does so, and Soviet/Russian equivalents (which, I imagine, make up the majority of rifle FMJs fired at people around the world right now) have no such properties. Yawing only allows an assault rifle bullet to increase the permanent wound cavity caused to about the same measures as the .45 roundnose solid for a portion of the distance penetrated -- the area covered by the side of an M855 is roughly equal in size to the frontal area of a .45. Not quite "cheese-moon" issues, I think you'll admit. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:44 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
But I don't think these debates are helping the issue. Less science and more game, gentlemen. That's my guiding principle.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:54 PM
Post
#97
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
How could a more realistic approach to the balancing of the DVs for various firearms be discussed without talking about what happens in the real world when people are hit with such weapons?
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:55 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
Uncle Fisty Group: Admin Posts: 13,891 Joined: 3-January 05 From: Next To Her Member No.: 6,928 |
ADMIN:Agreed, let's keep this along SR lines guys. We're getting a bit far a field here. Reminding me of the RL vs SR magic thread.
Edit:agh, my color-fu is weak |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 10:59 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Rgr.
".45 is way cooler, which is the only reason why it should have a DV comparable to common assault rifle calibers with Standard Ammunition." |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 11:00 PM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I don't mind the debates (although I rarely add anything constructive ;) ). I'll agree with more game in addition to the debates though. ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 5th June 2026 - 11:47 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.