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

« Previous 10 events | 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next 10 events »| All Messages
Posted by/on
Question/AnswerMake Newest Up Sort by Descending
  13:52:24  23 April 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
Messages: 2015

---QUOTATION---
Actually in the US alot of the police services and what not are switching to the .40 calibre hollowpoint for its stopping power but still able to control and good magazine size
---END QUOTATION---



Personally i hope they all do, 40sw is a good round. Theres also a place up in michigan that is going to 45. BTW .40 has always been on the accepted calibur lists for departmental use.
  19:08:44  16 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Stiletto
(Novice)
 
On forum: 05/16/2005
Messages: 10
Pet peeve:
7.62x39 isn't any better than 5.56x45, and is arguably worse.

Even with a nice long barrel (think an SKS), the round is crazy inaccurate past about 200 meters. It'll still kill someone, but it'll be damn hard to actually plink your targets on purpose. With a full-length barrel (and even with a short-ish one, like an M4), 5.56 is at least effective out to 300m; Marines train with standard M16s out to 500.

You can't do that with an SKS or AK-47.

7x62x54, now (the traditional Russian full-power round since before WWI), is another story entirely. That's what the Mosin-Nagants use (the Finns still use them as sniper rifle bases, I think), along with the SVD, SVU, and all sorts of other general-purpose rifles.
  20:38:13  16 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
vasillij
(Novice)
 
On forum: 05/15/2005
Messages: 27
After seeing the new movie (older now though) I saw that, the stalker the goes up first takes a shot inn his left upper leg, and his @$$.

He didn't show any kinds of motion on that (maybe syntetic(?) )
But as soon as the army stalker opened full fire.. He was doomed.

Maybe not army stalker (^^)
  22:55:09  16 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
Messages: 2015

---QUOTATION---
Pet peeve:
7.62x39 isn't any better than 5.56x45, and is arguably worse.

Even with a nice long barrel (think an SKS), the round is crazy inaccurate past about 200 meters. It'll still kill someone, but it'll be damn hard to actually plink your targets on purpose. With a full-length barrel (and even with a short-ish one, like an M4), 5.56 is at least effective out to 300m; Marines train with standard M16s out to 500.

You can't do that with an SKS or AK-47.

---END QUOTATION---



THe drop characteristics and the tumble of the round also dont do nearly as much permanent crush damage. using Q3131A (its a .223 load) teh effective range of an M4 can be extended to about 600M Which is well beyond what normal engagments will be at.
  00:19:28  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Stiletto
(Novice)
 
On forum: 05/16/2005
Messages: 10

---QUOTATION---
THe drop characteristics and the tumble of the round also dont do nearly as much permanent crush damage. using Q3131A (its a .223 load) teh effective range of an M4 can be extended to about 600M Which is well beyond what normal engagments will be at.
---END QUOTATION---

Well, you're not supposed to use assault rifles past about 300m anyway, that's what main battle rifles and DMRs are for.

But at 200m, where both rounds are effective, would you rather have an accurate round (5.56) or a heavy round (7.62)? Yeah, the 7.62 will thump your target a bit harder, but it'll be a lot easier to actually hit your target in the first place with 5.56.
  01:46:43  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
Messages: 2015

---QUOTATION---
Well, you're not supposed to use assault rifles past about 300m anyway, that's what main battle rifles and DMRs are for.
---END QUOTATION---



Who the hell said that? Also assault rifles and MBR are reffered to as teh same thing. They are meaningless terms. and one mans hunting rifle is another mans DMR. Id be carful when using terminology like that. They are commonly misunderstood and misused (like in this post).


---QUOTATION---
But at 200m, where both rounds are effective, would you rather have an accurate round (5.56) or a heavy round (7.62)? Yeah, the 7.62 will thump your target a bit harder, but it'll be a lot easier to actually hit your target in the first place with 5.56.
---END QUOTATION---



Well as i said before the .223 has more wound potential than a 7.62. the XM193 and any other round are designed to fragment into a person as where the 7.62 can only create a wound channel as wide as it is tall. Again the .223 is supperior to 7.62 in every way except one. The 7.62 merely has the mass and velocity for penetration. As where the .223 can take out armoured targets, but its not as efficent.
  02:00:20  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Stiletto
(Novice)
 
On forum: 05/16/2005
Messages: 10
^^^

Near as I can tell, I used AR and MBR exactly correctly: ARs for close range operations where volume of fire is stressed, MBRs for longer-range operations where precision and individual shot power (hence heavier calibers, like 7.62x51) are stressed.

MBRs are unsuitable (or at least inappropriate) to close quarters (think Iraq), whereas ARs are unsuitable for open field (think Afghanistan).

At any rate, the terms are not interchangeable. O_o

As for body armor, I think both the 7.62x39 and 5.56 rounds do OK against personal armor, but the 7.62 does better through barriers (less likely to break up in transit).
  04:04:18  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
x5060
Resident Nobody
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 07/23/2003
 

Message edited by:
x5060
05/17/2005 4:06:44
Messages: 2015

---QUOTATION---
^^^

Near as I can tell, I used AR and MBR exactly correctly: ARs for close range operations where volume of fire is stressed, MBRs for longer-range operations where precision and individual shot power (hence heavier calibers, like 7.62x51) are stressed.
---END QUOTATION---



Not quite, seeing as to how you made the nonuniversal distinction between them. An "AR" as you put it, can easily be good out to 500M as well as some "MBR's" that are only good to 100M. And ill save the debate about the distinction between the 2 for a later time if you REALLY want to go into that.


---QUOTATION---
MBRs are unsuitable (or at least inappropriate) to close quarters (think Iraq), whereas ARs are unsuitable for open field (think Afghanistan).
---END QUOTATION---



My FAL will do JUST fine in CQB. and my AR will do just fine out to 600M . Again your putting a clearly drawn line in a murky pond.


---QUOTATION---
At any rate, the terms are not interchangeable. O_o
---END QUOTATION---



But you cant come up with a clear distintion between the 2. (not to mention the given term "Assualt Rifle" dosent actually mean anythign, neither does "Main Battle Rifle" )


---QUOTATION---
As for body armor, I think both the 7.62x39 and 5.56 rounds do OK against personal armor, but the 7.62 does better through barriers (less likely to break up in transit).
---END QUOTATION---



Thats why i said this:

---QUOTATION---
Again the .223 is supperior to 7.62 in every way except one. The 7.62 merely has the mass and velocity for penetration. As where the .223 can take out armored targets, but its not as efficent.
---END QUOTATION---



(Dont confuse armored with body armor)
(And that "breaking up in transit" is keyholing or fragmenting)

P.S. You arent the first person to make these understandable mistakes, i get scrubies comming in all the time taht think they know thier shit about weapons. Its my job, and others, to make sure they actually understand that they dont know anything. Then we tell them the reality of firearms.
  06:14:00  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Stiletto
(Novice)
 
On forum: 05/16/2005
Messages: 10
Hmm.

[url=http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2005/03/right-weapon-for-job.html]Right Weapon for the Job[/url] - Pretty much where I'm getting my definitions.

I guess I'm a bit more nebulous in using the terms than I ought to be; I'll defer to you on that.

As for FAL being suitable to CQB, sure you can do it, but the things are a meter long. If you were going in on a house-to-house op, would you rather have a FAL or a smaller, lighter-caliber/higher-capacity (controllably full-auto) carbine?

Anyhoo, if you spawn another thread, I'll join in.
  12:59:08  17 May 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Fux0r666
resident smart-ass
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 06/04/2003
Messages: 1927
The term assault rifle was coined by the good folks in nazi germany to refer to their new class of weapon that they were devising- the sturmgewehr. The word is essentially meaningful given the need for such a classification. I think it's losing it's relevence due to the fact that all armies are choosing assault rifles as their choice of infantry weapon- but, certainly, there is a meaningful difference between an m16 and an m14. They are so different that I believe that they are actually not the same thing, and therefore they need some kind of distinction.

But, then again, what is an assault rifle? A rifle that is capable of fully automatic fire? The M16A2 is not capable of it (although it is a factory option). Yet another shade of murk in the murky pond.
 
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.