BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything

The problem isn't that 7.62x51 is capable of killing with one shot to the chest even through light armor.

The problem is every caliber below 7.62x51 it isn't!

The only times i don't use an EBR or FAL is to either fk around or be lighter on my feet.

7.62x39 needs a buff... 5.56 needs a slight buff...Everything else is fine.

After 530 hrs this is one of the most annoying problems. I find myself thinking
'' I guess i have to use the SVD/EBR/FAL... or the guy i'm shooting at will get cover before i can finish him off.''

**Only two things matter when it comes to guns for competitive play in this game...

1- If it can one shot an enemy.
2- Or it keeps you light on your feet.
**

If it can't do either of those things i won't touch it when i play seriously.

If you really wan't to keep everyone happy have two modes for each gametype. A high realistic damage mode and a lower damage arcade mode. But that would require a larger player base. I'm sure it would be a welcome addition on consoles.
:Turil

You realise 7.62x51 from a SCAR won't kill an unarmoured target with a shot directly through the heart, right?

You realise they stated this was intentional by design and they wouldn't be fixing it?

A coop gamemode with believable recoil and high lethality would be nothing less than fucking beautiful. And no damage reflection. Fuck that.

last edited by Whitby

oh yea that's right about the SCAR... why tf...

This keeps coming up, so I almost can't be bothered to have to write all the freaking essays of explanations just so people will understand WHY things are as they are, but I'll try to make it short and simple so you maybe get it.

  • The weapon damage in the game is 100% working as intended and based on physics. Don't argue with it.

  • The velocities of different weapons are based on what they have in real life. Don't argue with it.

  • The damage is based on projectile type (size/weight/mass/material/etc) combined with velocity. Don't argue with that either.

If two different guns have the same projectile (and caliber), but in different rounds (i.e; 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm, they both have the same "pill" aka projectile), but they move at different speeds because of the powder differences in the different rounds allow for higher velocity in theory... but the barrel-length of the firearms put them at the same velocity....

..then the projectile fired out of the gun chambered in 7.62x51mm will behave identical to the one out of the one chambered in 7.62x39mm, but the one in 7.62x51mm will still have more powder that gets ignited but not able to burn it up quickly enough before the projectile leaves the barrel..... then that extra powder will just net you more recoil instead, but have the same ballistics as the 7.62x39mm once in flight.

Look at the velocities. AKM & SCAR-H have roughly the same velocity, and same same projectiles in the casings. Meaning the SCAR-H will "underperform" ballistically compared to other 7.62x51mm chambered firearms with longer barrels and higher velocities.

so..
All the ballistic performances of weapons in the game are working as intended. Do not argue with it. They don't need buffs, nerfs..
The only time you can start to complain, is when it comes to things not performing as they should..
For instance, if one gun fires 5.56x45mm NATO normal ammo, another fires 5.56x45mm NATO Armor Piercing ammo but both have the same velocity.. and the normal (non-AP) 5.56 one penetrates more than the armor piercing one (as you can see by the "PP"-stat, which is pilodyn penetration - a density & penetration standard), then there is a problem.

Velocity, material, mass, etc, are taken into account for pilodyn penetration.
If the PP is higher, then it'll penetrate better, if penetration is no problem, it's just down to pure damage on target from the physics of the impact (and round-type varying the hydrostatic pressure & cavitation ability on flesh).

Damage and such is working as intended, you're just not used to it because you're used to other video games that don't do it right.

last edited by Mainfold

Cannot tell if an elaborate troll or serious...

@whitby Probably just unaware, possibly too used to CoD or Battlefield games

So, I think that this was in response to me asking for the FAL damage to be rationalised and brought on par with other weapons in it's caliber, since the FAL essentially acts as a pocket sniper by one shotting light armour (while every other gun at or near its caliber takes 2 shots).

A few points need to be made:-

  1. Light armor exists and needs to be viable. Having every caliber one shot light armour would make the light armour useless.
  2. The FAL is part of the most common pool of weapons and thus very widely available. It therefore has a much greater impact on the utility of light armour when compared to, say the SVD or moisin.
  3. The FAL literally has a better damage profile than any other primary weapon available to the rifleman/observer/commander/demolitions class. Nothing else within their pool of weapons can one shot through light armour.
  4. The FAL's muzzle velocity already acts as a pretty substantial buff for the weapon, even without the additional damage. Add to this the greater RoF and faster reloads than it's supposed alternative (the G3) and it's just an all round better weapon.
  5. If indeed the muzzle velocity can not be deviated from, there's also variants of the FAL with lower muzzle velocities which could be used instead.

The viability of light armor itself is less an issue of light armour not doing much and more an issue of no armour doing too much. The shots to kill for light armour (apart from the FAL) are fine, but what isn't fine is that no armour gives nearly equivalent performance and allows the player to not be killed in a single shot. As pointed out elsewhere in the forums, running around unarmoured need to be penalised more, and should be a one shot kill from just about all weapons.

@mainfold

The only other game I've been playing in the past couple years is Insurgency. The only game I've been playing since Sandstorm was released is Sandstorm. 90% of my 540 hrs is in competitive and more recently in DGL pugs.

Listen. Forget your PP penetration for a minute.

What i'm saying is there is a clear meta** because of weapon damage. EBR/somthing comparable or a gun under 20% weight. Anything else is situational at best.

The current damage model is damn close. If they made vital hit boxes it would work fine.

But at the moment it just creates a meta where everyone uses the same guns.

@Mainfold nah, too used to Ins2014 and DoI. Although since the gunplay in Call of Duty Modern Warfare is demonstrably more lethal than Sandstorm which is hilariously masquerading as "high lethality", naturally, I'm not a fan.

The only relevant stat is shots to kill on various areas at various ranges. Having an elaborate damage calculation which is unrealistic and shit for gameplay is not good just because the calculation is elaborate.

It's unrealistic because rifle rounds at zero yards into the heart and/or lungs from the entire AR/AK/G36 platforms and also the SCAR don't prevent people from continuing to bunnyhop around and run around an open space like a prick.

It's shit for gameplay because the game's lethality is less than Call of Duty, but more than Counter Strike. Ins2014 and DoI are among the most lethal titles you can buy and the gameplay on them is fucking amazing, immersive and delightful.

@cool_lad
Hi, yea this was a response to your post.

The FAL is the insurgents less powerful version of the EBR. The G3 compares more closely to the SVD practically speaking.

The FAL does not one shot unarmored targets past roughly 50m. Where the EBR has much greater 1 shot range.

The FAL is not the problem here. The problem is lower calibers not getting a 1 shot kill in the vitals. ( yea yea i understand its possible to get shot in a vital organ and still fight for a short period) But unless they add a bleed out mechanic my suggestion to buff 7.62x39 and 5.56 is the only other practical option.

Nerfing anything at this point would just bring the game closer in line with every other arcade fps out there.

I would be very hesitant to make any significant changes to armor, it could easily create a new meta where everyone runs armor and lowering the time to kill.

I agree that armor isn't perfect. But because i don't use it i can't go into detail of what should be done about it.

The game is already in-line with shitty arcade FPS.

Buff everything.

@turyl said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

What i'm saying is there is a clear meta

Have you considered trying to meta-break and use velocity-variating weaponry of the same calibers you complain about? Maybe some other that use bullet-hosing to compensate? L86 is probably my go-to for 5.56x45mm overall (940m/s speed, so it really does the job well), MP7 is a nice "bullet-hose" with AP rounds if you're struggling, but the current "go-to meta" is the SVD.

But remember, there are new guns coming right around the corner that they have already announced are in the works, so don't fret, just wait until they come.. also, .50cal rifles are coming, lol can't wait for the 50 meta sigh

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

This keeps coming up, so I almost can't be bothered to have to write all the freaking essays of explanations just so people will understand WHY things are as they are, but I'll try to make it short and simple so you maybe get it.

  • The weapon damage in the game is 100% working as intended and based on physics. Don't argue with it.

  • The velocities of different weapons are based on what they have in real life. Don't argue with it.

  • The damage is based on projectile type (size/weight/mass/material/etc) combined with velocity. Don't argue with that either.

If two different guns have the same projectile (and caliber), but in different rounds (i.e; 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm, they both have the same "pill" aka projectile), but they move at different speeds because of the powder differences in the different rounds allow for higher velocity in theory... but the barrel-length of the firearms put them at the same velocity....

..then the projectile fired out of the gun chambered in 7.62x51mm will behave identical to the one out of the one chambered in 7.62x39mm, but the one in 7.62x51mm will still have more powder that gets ignited but not able to burn it up quickly enough before the projectile leaves the barrel..... then that extra powder will just net you more recoil instead, but have the same ballistics as the 7.62x39mm once in flight.

Look at the velocities. AKM & SCAR-H have roughly the same velocity, and same same projectiles in the casings. Meaning the SCAR-H will "underperform" ballistically compared to other 7.62x51mm chambered firearms with longer barrels and higher velocities.

so..
All the ballistic performances of weapons in the game are working as intended. Do not argue with it. They don't need buffs, nerfs..
The only time you can start to complain, is when it comes to things not performing as they should..
For instance, if one gun fires 5.56x45mm NATO normal ammo, another fires 5.56x45mm NATO Armor Piercing ammo but both have the same velocity.. and the normal (non-AP) 5.56 one penetrates more than the armor piercing one (as you can see by the "PP"-stat, which is pilodyn penetration - a density & penetration standard), then there is a problem.

Velocity, material, mass, etc, are taken into account for pilodyn penetration.
If the PP is higher, then it'll penetrate better, if penetration is no problem, it's just down to pure damage on target from the physics of the impact (and round-type varying the hydrostatic pressure & cavitation ability on flesh).

Damage and such is working as intended, you're just not used to it because you're used to other video games that don't do it right.

So basically what you're saying here is that the .50 AE since it's moving at a grandma pace: ~450 ms, it shouldn't deal such damage. I'm pretty sure there are a few dead bodies with missing limbs (if not heads) that'd testify otherwise.
"Oh no no no, .50 AE won't hurt too much, it's not moving fast enough, it's okay"
When you get hit by a car driving at 50 km/h (13.8 ms) that won't kill you either right? I mean it's not moving fast.

I can't wait for your explanation when NWI releases a weak ass M82 Barrett that sometimes kill with limbs falling off, but there's that chance that you hit someone and he'll survive and keep running like nothing ever happened.

You tried very hard to make your post sound rational by including a lot of factors, but the fact of the matter is that you don't know what's textbook and what's in real life.
All bullets were designed to kill or severly incapacitate, not ask you nicely to maybe please put the gun down and give your enemy a hug. The reason some bullets do not kill on first shot is because technology advanced.

@mainfold Yea the MP7 is great but situational, and working fine right now imo. There aren't any AP rounds in the game atm though. (maybe that could fix the problem??)

The absolute best weapon in the game hands down is the MK14 EBR, nothing but the FAL comes close to its capabilities when it comes to being able to switch from long range to room clearing on the fly. Due to firerate and 1-2 shot range.

I'm pumped for the new weapons but it won't fix the problem. An M4 or L86 in game more closely compares to an (MP7) practically speaking in the way it can actually be used in game.

The single and only point i'm trying to make is. Because weapons exist in game that are absolutely hands down better than any of the 5.56 or 7.62x39 weapons. This forces you to use them whenever possible.

last edited by Turyl

@turyl said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

The problem isn't that 7.62x51 is capable of killing with one shot to the chest even through light armor.

The problem is every caliber below 7.62x51 it isn't!

The only times i don't use an EBR or FAL is to either fk around or be lighter on my feet.

7.62x39 needs a buff... 5.56 needs a slight buff...Everything else is fine.

After 530 hrs this is one of the most annoying problems. I find myself thinking
'' I guess i have to use the SVD/EBR/FAL... or the guy i'm shooting at will get cover before i can finish him off.''

**Only two things matter when it comes to guns for competitive play in this game...

1- If it can one shot an enemy.
2- Or it keeps you light on your feet.
**

If it can't do either of those things i won't touch it when i play seriously.

If you really wan't to keep everyone happy have two modes for each gametype. A high realistic damage mode and a lower damage arcade mode. But that would require a larger player base. I'm sure it would be a welcome addition on consoles.
:Turil

Personally, I don't really agree with your proposed solution, but I'll definitely talk about the problem.

First of all, in terms of the damage model; in most cases, your equipped weapon will have basically the same shots to kill as another weapon. Every single firearm in Sandstorm, in CQB, kills in 1-3 shots, with about 75% of Sandstorm's firearms always being 2-3 shots to kill.

Also, these shots-to-kill stats I'm talking about? That takes into account all armor types; no, Light, and Heavy Armor have virtually no effect on shots to kill.

I'm not gonna talk about how Light Armor is OP or anything because it's not. It's actually complete horseshit. Hell, even Heavy barely does anything unless you're in a battle-rifle lobby, and even then you can pretty much forget it if you're Security as there are five Insurgents who can use an SVD in Push and Skirmish.

The main problem is the fact that every soldier in Sandstorm is a fuckin bodybuilder or something. About 25% of Sandstorm's weapons can take down a player with one torso shot who isn't wearing any armor. Out of those guns (which adds to eleven, I believe; M24, Mosin, SVD, M14 EBR, G3, FAL, M240B, MG3, PKM, TOZ, R870), eight of them one-shot Heavy Armor as well (the only three that don't are the battle rifles).

To compare, in Ins2014, every single firearm in the game could one-shot an unarmored player to the torso at close range (and basically any range in that game lmao). 9mm would have to hit the upper chest to one-shot; everything else simply required a hit somewhere on the torso. This is when using standard FMJ ammo; HP and AP are not used here.

@whitby said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

You realise 7.62x51 from a SCAR won't kill an unarmoured target with a shot directly through the heart, right?

You realise they stated this was intentional by design and they wouldn't be fixing it?

A coop gamemode with believable recoil and high lethality would be nothing less than fucking beautiful. And no damage reflection. Fuck that.

I would refuse to believe you about the SCAR-H, but I actually got into an argument with one of the mods on the NWI Official Discord about this. It went something like:

Max: The SCAR-H is essentially a reskin of the AKM.
Mod: Actually, it does much more damage.
Max: Yeah, but that doesn't matter since it's still always a two-shot kill.
Mod: Yeah, the SCAR-H does 96 damage (which is more than the AKM, I'm assuming).
Max: So in other words, it's a two-shot kill?

Granted, I'm not hating on him or anything since he's not actually a Dev, but this better not be by fucking design.

Also, you probably know my opinion on damage reflection. I've started a petition on the Forums about that shit.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

The weapon damage in the game is 100% working as intended and based on physics. Don't argue with it.

So physics dictate that a .308 battle rifle can't put down a target with no armor in one shot, but a shotgun slug can take down a target with Heavy Armor with a single shot?

I swear this is the dumbest shit I've read in a while.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

The velocities of different weapons are based on what they have in real life. Don't argue with it.

Remind me again how a P226 and a Glock 17 have better bullet velocities than an MP5A4?

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

The damage is based on projectile type (size/weight/mass/material/etc) combined with velocity. Don't argue with that either.

So, again, remind me how a .308 can't one-shot a player with no armor. Seriously, this makes no fucking sense regardless of how you look at it.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

If two different guns have the same projectile (and caliber), but in different rounds (i.e; 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51mm, they both have the same "pill" aka projectile), but they move at different speeds because of the powder differences in the different rounds allow for higher velocity in theory... but the barrel-length of the firearms put them at the same velocity....

As long as all the power burns, there's honestly not a huge difference in velocity when it comes to barrel length. Obviously, it has an effect on velocity, but a few inches doesn't make that big of a firepower change.

Also, you seemed to completely forget that bullets have something called "grain" to them. A .308 weighs a bit more than a 7.62x39 last time I checked. This really fucks with your argument since a heavier bullet moving at the same speed as a lighter bullet would make the heavier one do more damage.

If you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, you should just stop.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

AKM & SCAR-H have roughly the same velocity

Yeah, according to the Sandstorm stats chart, which is completely reliable. Both guns even have the same penetration power which makes zero fucking sense.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

The only time you can start to complain, is when it comes to things not performing as they should..

So, in order words, exactly what he's talking about? NANI?

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

Maybe some other that use bullet-hosing to compensate?

So in order words, the current meta of this game in Competitive (MP5, MP7, M4A1). Yeah. that dumb shit is annoying and not like Ins2014 gameplay at all, which involves single-tapping and firing in short bursts. That's all you needed in Source.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

L86 is probably my go-to for 5.56x45mm overall.

This is actually a worse bullet-hose weapon since it has less firerate than other 5.56 options.

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

50cal rifles are coming, lol can't wait for the 50 meta sigh

My assumption is that they're gonna be Marksman-only, and I am also kind of assuming they'll be armed with APIT (Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer) rounds, which would add more firepower but make the shooter easier to spot to balance it.

@turyl said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

There aren't any AP rounds in the game atm though. (maybe that could fix the problem??)

There are some guns that have AP as a standard. The MP7 has AP, as well, but you can basically ignore it since it's essentially a full-auto Makarov with slightly better range/consistency.

last edited by MarksmanMax

Allow me to present 2 simple changes for everyone's consideration.

  1. The FAL be made a 2 shot kill on light armour like the G3, AKM and SCAR H. This at least means that the most commonly available weapons aren't 1 shot killing through armour and makes light armor a little more viable, especially since there's a 1 shot kill has greater value over a 2 shot than a 2 shot does over a 3 shot (since RoF doesn't even come into play for a 1 shot kill).
  2. That wearing no armour mean a 1 shot kill from at least all primaries (or even all calibers), since you're essentially wearing nothing. This once again helps light armour, since the big problem for it IMO isn't that it's not stopping enough, it's that it's not offering all that much over just not taking any armour.

An additional, optional change is restricting the SVD and only permitting the marksman to use it instead of granting it to advisors. This could be easily compensated by allowing advisors to take more basic snipers such as the bolt actions instead, or by giving them some other weapons in the future.

@marksmanmax
THANK YOU so much for actually going into detail about this! I don't have the patience to go point to point correcting people.

The calibers simply need to be modeled better in general.

@cool_lad Well, what even is light armor in this game? is it kevlar? if so that won't stop a 7.62x51. Even if it somehow did the impact alone could still kill you. (breakig ribs and puncturing organs)

I think light armor should be kevlar. So it can stop pistol rounds but not rifle rounds.

I would have to test more but i think heavy armor is already ok.

@cool_lad said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

wearing no armour mean a 1 shot kill from at least all primaries (or even all calibers), since you're essentially wearing nothing.

Absolutely.

@sgt-kanyo With the .50 AE example you're moving into kinetic energy calculations, you're trying to twist an argument into having weight but you don't even know the physics for why it deals the damage it does.. smdh

Ek = 1/2 mv^2

A .50 AE is a heavy projectile (high mass) moving at a relatively high velocity but not rifle-velocity because of the short barrels of the Desert Eagle (that's often the ones used for the measurements of it) but it is such a heavy round that it still has between 1900 to 2200+ joules of energy. That's almost double that of a 5.56x45mm NATO.. so you should be able to understand exactly why that is such a "heavy hitter" for PRETTY OBVIOUS REASONS.

The .50cal rifles (Barrett M82 & Zijiang M99, one being .50BMG/12.7x99mm and the other firing the Russian 12.7x108mm) have rounds moving in the range of 800-900m/s with kinetic energy ranging from 16-20KJ, not even remotely comparable.. There is zero chance IW releases them doing "gracing" hits...

The way you try to argue makes it seem like you're not particularly familiar with ballistics nor physics in general. Do you call yourself "Sgt." just because you like the sound of it?
Some of us on here have actually served and used a plethora of the weapons in the game, and have countless rounds fired in each of them.... but I don't expect everyone to have in-depth knowledge about firearms or have served (or even have much knowledge about firearms even if they HAVE served), but if you're going to try to be a smart-ass..... at least just google some basics about ballistics.

I tried to simplify it so people could get the gist of it without having to know a vast amount about the topic, but you just had to come and be snarky..

_

@turyl Yeah the long over due implementation of AP rounds for it was needed, and makes it feel a bit more "right" now

_

@marksmanmax A 12gauge slug has equal or greater energy than a 7.62x51mm/.308 (usually close to 50% more), and you wonder why it can more effectively kill than a .308? lol
Glock 17 doesn't have better velocity than the MP5's, it has lower, but some pistols (like the P226) have different twist-rates etc, and get better velocities, but you have to remember one thing when it comes to pistol-calibers... a LOT of the problems with it is, the ammo is often optimized for pistol use and not carbine use, so it's a high burn-rate powder that is meant to burn up completely before exiting a pistol-barrel, and when you then put it into a longer barrel it might underperform velocity-wise (but it varries). Granted, they seemed to have used SIG's numbers for the P226/L106A1 for upper limit to velocity when using +P ammo in it, as the standard velocity for some reason (whereas SIG lists it as upper limit for safe ammo lol), but the MP5 for instance loses some velocity due to it's heavier mechanism it has to move when also being "blockback"-recoil driven, whereas a gas-operated pistol-caliber carbine would have more velocity usually. The numbers are still technically "correct", just them choosing the P226's ammo will be +P ammo.. and your point about "as all the powder burns", well it doesn't on the SCAR-H for instance, round leaves the barrel before then, so its short barrel lands the round's velocity at that of the AKM by the time both have had their projectiles leave the barrel, those are the very same numbers as they have in real life. You can probably google it and see it being the case. It makes perfect sense they have the same penetration when they have the same projectile moving at the same speed.. that's literally how it works.
Things are working as they should.. your OPINION being that it should be performing better doesn't detract from it working as it does in real life and that's why it's based on the numbers they use. The reason I go to the L86 is the velocity and control, amazing hipfire allowing for use of a magnified optic always etc.

last edited by Mainfold

@mainfold said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:

@sgt-kanyo With the .50 AE example you're moving into kinetic energy calculations, you're trying to twist an argument into having weight but you don't even know the physics for why it deals the damage it does.. smdh

Ek = 1/2 mv^2

A .50 AE is a heavy projectile (high mass) moving at a relatively high velocity but not rifle-velocity because of the short barrels of the Desert Eagle (that's often the ones used for the measurements of it) but it is such a heavy round that it still has between 1900 to 2200+ joules of energy. That's almost double that of a 5.56x45mm NATO.. so you should be able to understand exactly why that is such a "heavy hitter" for PRETTY OBVIOUS REASONS.

The .50cal rifles (Barrett M82 & Zijiang M99, one being .50BMG/12.7x99mm and the other firing the Russian 12.7x108mm) have rounds moving in the range of 800-900m/s with kinetic energy ranging from 16-20KJ, not even remotely comparable.. There is zero chance IW releases them doing "gracing" hits...

The way you try to argue makes it seem like you're not particularly familiar with ballistics nor physics in general. Do you call yourself "Sgt." just because you like the sound of it?
Some of us on here have actually served and used a plethora of the weapons in the game, and have countless rounds fired in each of them.... but I don't expect everyone to have in-depth knowledge about firearms or have served (or even have much knowledge about firearms even if they HAVE served), but if you're going to try to be a smart-ass..... at least just google some basics about ballistics.

I tried to simplify it so people could get the gist of it without having to know a vast amount about the topic, but you just had to come and be snarky..

_

@turyl Yeah the long over due implementation of AP rounds for it was needed, and makes it feel a bit more "right" now

_

@marksmanmax A 12gauge slug has equal or greater energy than a 7.62x51mm/.308 (usually close to 50% more), and you wonder why it can more effectively kill than a .308? lol
Glock 17 doesn't have better velocity than the MP5's, it has lower, but some pistols (like the P226) have different twist-rates etc, and get better velocities, but you have to remember one thing when it comes to pistol-calibers... a LOT of the problems with it is, the ammo is often optimized for pistol use and not carbine use, so it's a high burn-rate powder that is meant to burn up completely before exiting a pistol-barrel, and when you then put it into a longer barrel it might underperform velocity-wise (but it varries). Granted, they seemed to have used SIG's numbers for the P226/L106A1 for upper limit to velocity when using +P ammo in it, as the standard velocity for some reason (whereas SIG lists it as upper limit for safe ammo lol), but the MP5 for instance loses some velocity due to it's heavier mechanism it has to move when also being "blockback"-recoil driven, whereas a gas-operated pistol-caliber carbine would have more velocity usually. The numbers are still technically "correct", just them choosing the P226's ammo will be +P ammo.. and your point about "as all the powder burns", well it doesn't on the SCAR-H for instance, round leaves the barrel before then, so its short barrel lands the round's velocity at that of the AKM by the time both have had their projectiles leave the barrel, those are the very same numbers as they have in real life. You can probably google it and see it being the case. It makes perfect sense they have the same penetration when they have the same projectile moving at the same speed.. that's literally how it works.
Things are working as they should.. your OPINION being that it should be performing better doesn't detract from it working as it does in real life and that's why it's based on the numbers they use. The reason I go to the L86 is the velocity and control, amazing hipfire allowing for use of a magnified optic always etc.

You served --> You're a weapon's expert and physics professor

Got it!

Once again let me just bring up the SCAR-H:
US Army: Right folks we need a new AR, since our 5.56 based M4s don't always kill with 1 shot.
FN Herstal: Sure man, here's an AR that is just as "bad" in killing term as the M4, but at least it only has a 20 round mag and weighs a lot more.
US Army: That's amazing, we'll take it.

Also I love how you applied high school physics here lol. Human anatomy and ballistics physics is a "bit" more complicated then that 🙂
It's so complicated that I won't pretend I know anything about it, and you shouldn't either.
You need to take into consideration how the bullet deforms on impact, how it travels through your body, if it travels through or stays in there, how it's higher weight carries more energy, how much of this energy is spread across the human body, how big in diameter it is and some stuff I can't even think of, since I'm not an expert. But I've seen videos / read in articles where these bullets kill, where they tear off arms if they hit your arm socket. Please do not argue with actual evidence.

Once again textbook is not always the same as real life. This can be said for anything.

last edited by Sgt.Kanyo

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.