bullets fired threw objects cause more damage.

[kainhall]

when a bullet is fired threw an object, the round mushrooms a bit. thicker/denser objects means more expnsion.

however, hitting a softer thick target (2 by 4) would not slow the bullet down mutc, but expand it a little.

same speed, bigger nose = HUGE energy and a HUGE balistic cavity or what ever.

however, if the bullet slows down to a certain point (there is probly a "critical mass/speed") it will not penetrate your skin, or not go that deep, whiel if it was still pointed it would.


alos, you would need some weight retention....fireing threw a cinder block would fracture the round into a few peices....drasticly lessing the weight retention and the energy.

who had thicker copper/more tightly bonded....the germans or the russians.

i know that the balistic system in RO2 is VERY advanced......differnet thickness, materals, rounds, ETC......but i wonder if this in in the game.

if anyone knows more about the down range propertys of bullets...please speak up. im speaking on therotical knowledge and what i know.


and yes...i cant spell, and i CANT USE SPELL CHECK BECASUE I NEED TO DOWNLAOD THE PLUG IN BUT IM NO THE SCHOOLS COMPUTER AS I STILL NEED RAM,GPU,AND THE PSU FOR MY COMPUTER.

and yes....its late development....so, free patch/expansion? KF style?

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Kainhall, bullets mushrooming won't be in the game, and that simply because it is a small and insignificant factor during firefights, and it simply isn't worth the trouble because no'one will ever see it, feel it or even think about it.

The way it will work ingame is that the more powerful rounds will penetrate thicker obstacles than the less powerful ones, and if an AP variant is available for any specific round then this will naturally penetrate thicker obstacles than the regular lead filled variant. In addition to this I am sure that penetrating an obstacle ingame will reduce projectile speed as-well, so that the trajectory after penetrating an object will become affected as-well.

Anyway here's an example of three different variants of the 7.92x57mm round:

7.92mm sS (Lead core FMJBT) armor penetration at 100 meters [760 m/s]: 5 mm @ 90 deg
7.92mm SmK (Steel core FMJBT) armor penetration at 100 meters [785 m/s]: 10 mm @ 90 deg
7.92mm SmK(H) (Tungsten core FMJBT) armor penetration at 100 meters [865 m/s]: 20mm @ 90 deg

If the above three versions of the 7.92x57mm cartridge are present ingame then you can expect that they will perform accordingly.

As for the copper jacket thicknesses, it was pretty much the same for the rifle rounds of all nations.

 

[Reise]

Wait, you're saying a bullet that has hit something, and traveled through it will be going the same speed as it was before it hit that object?

Even a 2x4 would drastically slow and even alter the course of a round. If anything, penetrating rounds should do significantly LESS damage to targets behind objects.

 

[DiedTrying]

Firstly, I'm not sure what you are asking/saying. Your title says they do more damage, then in the article you say they do less. I don't even know where to start to correct you.

And your brain is the spellcheck, stop relying on technology to do your own work.

 

[Grobut]

Unus Offa is correct, this would be a ton of work, and a lot of calculations to force on the CPU every time a round penetrates something, and it would be for very little gain, most people probably woulden't even notice the feature is there, or miss it if it isen't, so there's not much reason to impliment it, we'd probably be better off if that time was spend making more maps and tanks and stuff like that instead.

 

[Sheepy]

Not a master on the architecture of the projectile's architecture, myself. But you don't need to be a master of Mechanics to realise that nearly all the objects in the game (considering the geometry), in a real-life situation, would slow the bullet down to such a degree that a hell-of-a-lot of energy would be dissipating onto the object and not the resultant target.

Factors to be taken into-account when figuring out the Kinetic energy lost: Density of material, Thickness of material, Initial velocity of round, Mass of round etc. That's just using Ek=1/2.m.v^2 and energy conservation. (Oh physics, how I love you.)

As really interesting as such a concept is; it's not really applicable to RO just yet. As the other brethrin have said.

 

[Flogger23m]

If anything, penetrating rounds should do significantly LESS damage to targets behind objects.

This. Also largely depends on what round and what object it went through.

Some basic modeling would be nice. For example, 9x19mm gets stopped by X object, but 7.62x54R can go through it.

Otherwise it is a lot of effort for not much gain.

 

[LemoN]

While it's true that a rifle round will slow down and lose energy after penetrating, it's also true that, given the correct circumstances, a rifle round already tumbling WILL do more damage than a round going clean through a body, given that it retains enough energy after penetrating. Let's say an 8x57 sS is penetrating a wooden door at 700m/s, it loses 300m/s due to the penetration of the door. It exits tumbling with a velocity of 400m/s. That's still more than enough to go clean through a body for the non-tumbling round, while the tumbling round will do significantly more damage and will dump more/all of it's energy into the target. Remember, soldiers in WW2 usually didn't wear any body armour that would easily stop a tumbling round.

Now, to correctly portray this you'd have to do some serious calculations each time a projectile is penetrating something, so it's best to simply go with the easy and (for most) logical way, that is having rounds do less damage after penetrating.

 

[DiedTrying]

What's the over and under on number of posts until someone posts the video of the US military testing bullet penetration on objects?

 

[Floyd]

I'd say....oh...about one.
YouTube - ‪Concealment does NOT equal Cover Pt 2.‬‏

And your brain is the spellcheck, stop relying on technology to think for you.

Corrected it for you.....

 

[jalex3]

Its a bad idea and will not be in.

 

[Landrik]

I love the ballistics in RO2. Angling, bullet drop, penetration, everything. It's amazing.

 

[Flogger23m]

I love the ballistics in RO2. Angling, bullet drop, penetration, everything. It's amazing.

I'm guessing you are in the beta?

 

[213]

through*

 

[Nicholas]

I want to see it where if you shoot someone in the head fragments of their skull with injure the teamates next to them.

 

[Nylle]

Poor guy, I guess we won't be seeing him around annymore
Agree with jalex3 werry much. And all you ather guys

 

[*Gasangriff*]

the question that comes to my mind when thinking of all this penetration stuff is:

Does continuous fire to the same spot (like with an MG for example) cause the material to degrate or remove itself slowly so that its possible to penetrate a thick wall or a log of wood after some time, while one single bullet would not go through it?

____________________________________________________________
The Battle for Stalingrad: Thank god its just a video game this time !

 

[kainhall]

who ever mentioned the tumbeling round thing.....that was exactly what i was thinking! jsut in a more drawn out confusing way......


i knew it would be a lot of CPU overhead and usage...especally on the mg42/34.


cover being slowly destroyed with constant fire......i THINK i heard a dev say yes....but im not sure.

small scale destroction of cover would look like BIA: hells highway (same engine)....basicly huge chunks break off, like a table. the top half falls off and then you have a sight line to shoot him.

however, i wonder if ethere would be a way to know that its shooting the same spot...like GPS style X,Y,Z points. and if it matches up every time...or is say like + or - 5 it would make the round go threw more.

it would be cool to have a ....texture?...of a round that did not penitrate...like a 8mm stuck to the side of a tank or a wall....however a bullet agnest steal would probly just fragment.

and really....the thumbing down....honistly i dont care.

 

[Landrik]

I'm guessing you are in the beta?

Nope! Just pay attention to the announcements and the fact thread.

 

[Sheepy]

While it's true that a rifle round will slow down and lose energy after penetrating, it's also true that, given the correct circumstances, a rifle round already tumbling WILL do more damage than a round going clean through a body, given that it retains enough energy after penetrating. Let's say an 8x57 sS is penetrating a wooden door at 700m/s, it loses 300m/s due to the penetration of the door. It exits tumbling with a velocity of 400m/s. That's still more than enough to go clean through a body for the non-tumbling round, while the tumbling round will do significantly more damage and will dump more/all of it's energy into the target. Remember, soldiers in WW2 usually didn't wear any body armour that would easily stop a tumbling round.

+1 for the logical example.