ProjectsWhat's NewDownloadsCommunitySupportCompany
Forum Index » S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl Forum » Gameplay & Balance
READ & LEARN: Damage, Target Neutralization, Energy, and Caliber

1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12 | Next 10 events »| All Messages
Posted by/on
Question/AnswerMake Newest Up Sort by Descending
  21:45:43  19 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Zig
Ye Oulde Zigge
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 11/21/2003
Messages: 315
READ & LEARN: Damage, Target Neutralization, Energy, and Caliber

It seems to me that many here have misconceptions about what it takes to kill or incapacitate a human being. I've seen statements that the .45 is superior to the 9mm, or that "if i had to carry a gun it would definitely be a .45 because the 9mm doesn't do shit." A lot of know-nothing bullshit like that. So I'm here to shed a little light.

Generally speaking, when you shoot a person in a combat situation, you want to get them out of the fight as soon as possible. How they go out of the fight is not important. In a combat situation you need to stop the attacker as soon as possible, before the damages you or a person you are trying to protect. The quickest way to stop them is to put a bullet in their brain. The effect of simply shooting a person might not be enough. Now not only must you put the smackdown on a person as fast as possible, you must also do it under adverse conditions. Your heart will be pumping blood at an increased rate, you will be getting swamped by adrenaline, you will be fixating on your target, you will be scared and you could be injured, basically your fine motor skills will be going to hell in a handbasket. You are moving and your target is moving. All of this adds up to it being difficult to shoot what you are aiming at. So somthing as simple as "hitting them in the head" isn't. It is generally considered a good practice to shoot the person in whats called the "center mass". This is basically from the bottom of the ribcage to the bottom of the throat. This is also a 2 sided target. While you won't turn him off as quick as a headshot, it is an easier target to hit. It is bigger than a head, and it moves less. Heads are damn quick targets. Putting a bullet in a persons "center mass" will allow you access to a large selections of possible targets. Firstly there are the lungs. A bullet wound in these can be nasty. Not only can you cause internal bleeding which will eventually dorwn your target, it can also cause a lung to collapse by inflating the chest cavity. Not nice, but it will put him out of the fight eventually. You can't think or move if you can't breathe. Then you have the heart. This will obviously work quicker than the lungs, as the heart does all the work. Putting a hole in it will cuase the blood to stop flowing where it is needed, and will cause the target to bleed out. Destroying the heart will be quicker, as the bloodflow stops almost instantly. Again, not nice, but it will keep you alive. This is the reason we are shooting remember? Then you get all the other internal organs. If you miss a bit with the "center mass" shot there is still a chance your bullet will hit somthing vital. A spine shot can immobalise your target, a hip shot can make it impossible for him to stand, a stomach/liver/kidney shot can lead to faster bleedouts. The whole idea here is to damage the person so they can't attack you any more. Not to kill them. If you shoot and miss totally and they run away, good for them. Now while you are doing all of this above, you need a firearm that will actually DAMAGE what you hit.

This is where the 9mm minimum comes in. The "9mm" will provide enough damage to proved a fairly safe margin that you can use for reliable knockdowns. It is more or less effective for one shot hits to remove the target as a threat. HOWEVER, it is once again, the MINIMUM acceptable level of energy. There have been cases of people taking multiple 9mm hits and not stopping. And infact cases where the target soaked up over 30 9mm hits and killed the person they were attacking.

The 9mm also allows fast second shots, and high magazine counts. This means iof your first shot doesn't do the trick, it is easy enough to get the gun back on target and fire again. And you can do this again and again and again.

However, there are some better tools that you can use. Which would you prefer to use to drill holes in a brick wall? A Black and Decker 800W Hammer drill or a hand cranked drill? You can do it with the hand cranked one, but there are better tools available.

Something like a 12 guage shotgun or a 5.56mm rifle will do the same job as a pistol, but will do it better. A pistols only advantage is it is easier to carry around in the street with you. When you are inside your own house, and you don't have any size restrictions, why not use a tool that isn't limited?

Each firearm has a precise application. I would use a hand cranked drill to drill through glass, not the hammer drill.

Yes the .50 Action Express will do more damage than a 9x19mm bullet, but it will also generate too much recoil for fast shooting. It doesn't matter how much damage your bullet can do if you miss. Misses only count with Thermonuclear weapons. If I miss with my Glock, I can get the sights aligned quicker and shoot again i could with a Desert Eagle.

One of the most ridiculous things I've read yet at this forum is the statement that "a bigger round is always better." The 5.56 round is .223 caliber. The 9mm and .45 are invariably MUCH larger in diameter. Yet, a FMJ (solid, non-expanding round) 5.56 hit at close range will do MUCH more damage than a 9mm or .45 hit of the same kind, at the same range. Why? Good question.

A 5.56 or .223 round is smaller than a 9mm or .45, but is traveling at 3 or 3.5 times the velocity of either round. It has MORE ENERGY. A .223 round will actually EXPLODE inside the target because it has so much energy that it will take itself apart (fragment) and cause a lot more tissue damage than a 9mm or .45 round will. Now some of you will argue that a 9mm or .45 JHP (Jacketed Hollowpoint) or JSP (Jacketed Softpoint) will do more damage. This is because these rounds are designed to squash and/or expand inside the target. If you take a .223 JHP or JSP round, it will literally obliterate a considerable amount of a target's insides because the .223's greater energy will cause a more abrupt expansion and much more trauma.

Yes, a smaller round, going faster than a big, fat pistol round, can do much, much more damage.

Now take a 7.62 x 51mm round (NATO standard). This round is .308 caliber, not much larger than .223, and still much smaller than .45. Yet, this round is still traveling SO much faster than the .45, and with its slightly larger size, it can do more damage than the .223 in certain situations. The .308's design, mass, and typical energy will cause it to "tumble" inside the target. This is to say that it will stop going straight and start turning inside. It will start to go sideways. Now you can compare it this way: you can have your friend throw a softball at your chest, or you can have a major league pitcher throw a golf ball at your chest. The smaller, faster round will do more damage.

That's all for now. I hope everyone can learn a little. If anyone has further questions about this stuff, please go ahead and ask.
  12:59:16  20 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Brainpr0n
(Novice)
 
On forum: 12/18/2004
Messages: 3
<-- learned something. Thanks.
  13:56:14  20 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
Messages: 2015
Very comprehensive guide to intro ballistics. This is why my carry weapon is 9mm. A Springfield XD-9. Although I will say htat a .45 round tends to have a better expansion than a 9mm, but thats why i carry hydrashoks.
  18:11:16  20 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Doc Jones
Older than before
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 10/09/2003
Messages: 2008

---QUOTATION---
5.56 or .223 round is smaller than a 9mm or .45, but is traveling at 3 or 3.5 times the velocity of either round. It has MORE ENERGY.
---END QUOTATION---



Yup, you can't mess with physics. F=.5mv^2
  05:34:48  21 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Zig
Ye Oulde Zigge
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 11/21/2003
Messages: 315

---QUOTATION---
Very comprehensive guide to intro ballistics. This is why my carry weapon is 9mm. A Springfield XD-9. Although I will say htat a .45 round tends to have a better expansion than a 9mm, but thats why i carry hydrashoks.
---END QUOTATION---



if only we could use them in the military, we wouldn't have all this complaining about the 5.56...

here's a good example of what we SHOULD be using but are not allowed to use: [link]http://www.rifleshootermag.com/gun_accessories/RSswift_1125A.jpg[/link]
  09:42:36  21 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Mus
(Senior)
 
On forum: 06/13/2004
 

Message edited by:
Mus
12/21/2004 9:46:49
Messages: 100

---QUOTATION---
One of the most ridiculous things I've read yet at this forum is the statement that "a bigger round is always better."
---END QUOTATION---



That was in regard to handgun wounding factors. Absent high velocity wounding mechanisms like fragmentation or temporary cavities violent enough to do permenent damage, and provided both projectiles are capable of penetrating to the vitals, bigger IS always better.

You cant honestly compare high velocity rifle rounds to pistol rounds as a way to disprove that statement.

The statement was taken from Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness writting by Patrick Urey of the FBI Firearms Training Unit. Despite being 15 years old it remains one of the best sources for basic information on handgun wounding factors according to experts in the field of wound ballistics:

[link]http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm[/link]
  11:55:02  21 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Fux0r666
resident smart-ass
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 06/04/2003
Messages: 1927

---QUOTATION---
One of the most ridiculous things I've read yet at this forum is the statement that "a bigger round is always better."

That was in regard to handgun wounding factors. Absent high velocity wounding mechanisms like fragmentation or temporary cavities violent enough to do permenent damage, and provided both projectiles are capable of penetrating to the vitals, bigger IS always better.

You cant honestly compare high velocity rifle rounds to pistol rounds as a way to disprove that statement.

The statement was taken from Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness writting by Patrick Urey of the FBI Firearms Training Unit. Despite being 15 years old it remains one of the best sources for basic information on handgun wounding factors according to experts in the field of wound ballistics:

[link]http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm[/link]
---END QUOTATION---



Yes, I believe that that statement was in response to a discussion on pistol ammunition, rifle ammunition notwithstanding.
  14:07:44  21 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
 

Message edited by:
x5060
12/21/2004 14:09:48
Messages: 2015

---QUOTATION---

if only we could use them in the military, we wouldn't have all this complaining about the 5.56...

here's a good example of what we SHOULD be using but are not allowed to use: [link]http://www.rifleshootermag.com/gun_accessories/RSswift_1125A.jpg[/link]
---END QUOTATION---



Yeah i know, Ive been hearing stories of some hadji out in iraq taking 2-3 round to put down. This is why i would hate having to use ball. I say if your enemy isnt fighting per the Geneva Convention, we shouldent have to either. Hollowpoints, Hydrashoks, and EFMJs all around.


---QUOTATION---

That was in regard to handgun wounding factors. Absent high velocity wounding mechanisms like fragmentation or temporary cavities violent enough to do permenent damage, and provided both projectiles are capable of penetrating to the vitals, bigger IS always better.

You cant honestly compare high velocity rifle rounds to pistol rounds as a way to disprove that statement.

The statement was taken from Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness writting by Patrick Urey of the FBI Firearms Training Unit. Despite being 15 years old it remains one of the best sources for basic information on handgun wounding factors according to experts in the field of wound ballistics:

[link]http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm[/link]
---END QUOTATION---



Rifle rounds rely on velocity for thier energy quotient.
Pistol rounds rely on weight for kinetic energy.
  22:59:51  21 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
baff
Senior Resident
 

 
On forum: 04/16/2004
Messages: 708

---QUOTATION---
I say if your enemy isnt fighting per the Geneva Convention, we shouldent have to either. Hollowpoints, Hydrashoks, and EFMJs all around.
---END QUOTATION---



and if your enemies army is answerable to a free or democratic society, should yours be?


thats just loser talk.
how the enemy behaves shouldn't control how we behave. the opposite is true. think like a winner, act like a winner. win.
the iniative is ours.


the idea is to set the standard other societies strive to reach.

i understand that when your back is against the wall, you must do whatever it takes to win, however brutal, but my country hasn't been invaded for the last 1,000 years. my back isn't against the wall, hasn't been, and is showning no sign of being for many years to come.

when we fight, we fight as invaders.
treat people as you wish to be treated, not as they treat you.
it's not about reciprocal love, it's about personal honour.

we are strong enough to act with compassion. it's a battlefield weakness, perhaps, but if it is, it's one we can afford. the most dangerous part of modern war for a country such as my own, is not the damage that the enemy can inflict, it's the loss of humanity, and noble spirit.
we lose more soldiers from post traumatic stress disorder than ever we do from battle.


and then theres another reason.
while undefeated for 1,000 years (not exactly true, but it sounds good), is a great track record militarily, having been involved on so many fights, we have come to realise, that one day, it will be our turn to utterly, humiliatingly and totally, be crushed. it happens.
at this point, we do not want to be remembered as those guys who tortured us, broke the geneva convention against us, prosecuted our national leaders for war crimes and then hung them, etc. etc. etc.

we would like to be remembered as those guys who fought with honour and to a strict code, that minimised collateral damage, that confined the war to the enemy leadership, that did not victimise them afterwards, keep order took over with justice and sensitivity etc. etc. etc. (longer battles are exchanged for shorter wars).

in short, respect your enemies. war doesn't have to be the most depraved horror a society has to offer, it may also be it's finest hour.
a masterful demonstration of restraint, power and order in the face of absolute chaos.

i should likely feel entirely differently if i was losing to the point where my country was being invaded, and i expect those in the same circumstances to feel the same. (unless they are civilised in the extreme beyond normal human capabilities like the french perhaps)

the geneva convention is not a pact signed between enemies, it is a pact signed between "civilisations". if you wished to be considered civilised by the other signitories you must honour it.
it's a gentlemans club, you can leave at anytime. you don't have to wait until it's circumstancially unhelpful towards you.
  04:06:05  22 December 2004
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Zig
Ye Oulde Zigge
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 11/21/2003
 

Message edited by:
Zig
12/22/2004 4:10:58
Messages: 315

---QUOTATION---
You cant honestly compare high velocity rifle rounds to pistol rounds as a way to disprove that statement.
---END QUOTATION---



There are pistols in .223 and .17 HMR.

(also you're not the only person ever to have said bigger is better, at these forums... the Desert Eagle types need to learn too)
 
Each word should be at least 3 characters long.
Search:    
Search conditions:    - spaces as AND    - spaces as OR   
 
Forum Index » S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl Forum » Gameplay & Balance
 

All short dates are in Month-Day-Year format.


 

Copyright © 1995-2019 GSC Game World. All rights reserved.
This site is best viewed in Internet Explorer 4.xx and up and Javascript enabled. Webmaster.
Opera Software products are not supported.
If any problem concerning the site functioning under Opera Software appears apply
to Opera Software technical support service.