SilenT AssassiNheehee reteaching him on science 8 i see lol
No, just talking a load of waffle that doesn't even apply to the discussion at hand. Maybe if his english was as good as his physics he might make some sense, but all he's doing now is grandstanding a flatulent ego. "Kinetic energy is a scalar quantity; it does not have a direction.". Nah, ya don't say? I don't recall saying otherwise, but that hasn't stopped you from fishing out the old physics text book and OCR'ing it into the debate. Along with a few other paragraphs of contextless guff. Yep, a hell of a smokescreen from Mr 'A Thick Coat Will Make You Impervious To 9mm bullets'. Along with his abusive mate who reckons he can take one in the shoulder without going down. You could take a double-act like that onto the TV. But hey, don't take any notice of me guys. Just take your physics text onto a real world battlefield and see what kind of an edge it doesn't give you. :D Meanwhile, back here a few thousand miles from cloud cuckoo land, we'll be happy to see a player in the game go down from one 9mm hit. "Gun Shop Commando"...lol. How many times have you been called that before thinking to wheel it out on your own behalf? I base my observations on direct personal experience and a bit of native wit, not a bunch of formulae and a copy of Rambo. Forums are full of guys like you, arm-chair experts with a head full of pre-conceived bollocks and a one year pass to Blockbusters. And when all else fails just fall back on the personal abuse, the ultimate sign of a real winner. Drag me to the fountain of knowledge? Let me know when the water has been turned back on and I might drop by.
SS.SGW.SiggiYep, a hell of a smokescreen from Mr 'A Thick Coat Will Make You Impervious To 9mm bullets'.. Drag me to the fountain of knowledge? Let me know when the water has been turned back on and I might drop by.
Please, do go on. Oh, you're finished? Well allow me to retort! 1) You're the one who doesn't understand kinetic energy, not me. 2) You're the mastermind who assumed I said heavy winter clothing makes you impervious, again your ego is at work. I never stated that, Mr. John Kerry. Not once. 3) The water's been flowing for years. My cup runneth over. Please, drink. I'm not stopping you, your kicking and screaming is. Get your facts right before you tell somebody they have no experience in a field you obviously have none in. http://madogre.com/Interviews/Magic_Bullets.htm Read. Learn. Shut it. One shot stops are not realism. n00b
Retort away old chap, it's hugely entertaining. Nice site too...let me guess, are you one of those guys who appear on behalf of the police arguing for bigger guns and bangier bullets on the basis of "We put ten rounds into the guy, but he just kept coming! Honest!"? Ya, most of us know the score on that one mate. I'm a layman, and I talk layman's language. But that doesn't mean I don't know enough to see through your twaddle. Bullet at rest = zero kinetic energy. Bullet in motion = a bunch of kinetic energy. Where does it get that kinetic energy from? It's mass and it's velocity. That's all I need to know for practical purposes. I don't give a rat's arse about it's "potential" or if it's rotational or linear motion. Nor do I give a toss about it's square root up it's ying-yang. All I care about is how big it is and how fast it's going, and I suspect the same goes for most everyone else reading this who's as pissed off as I am about needing half an MP40 clip to put Ivan down. And now you can tell us all...have you shot anyone, or seen anyone shot? I have. Both. And I've yet to see anyone who took a single solid hit go further than ten feet (by virtue of momentum) without being flat on their face at the end of it. But do understand me clearly; I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that it's the exception. And as the game engine doesn't do such fine nuances let's exclude exceptions and do away with Ivan's Kevlar greatcoat, eh? Drink? I don't do piss. Find a war. Learn. Shut it.
I have never shot a man (and I hope to never have to). I have seen people shot, by a 12 gauge shotgun, and it is definately not pretty... not something I like to rememer. I am the man preaching common sense. A bullet is a bullet. The damage it does is not monumental. The MP40 is by no means pissing out rounds, however you have to realize it AIN'T a rifle. I believe 3 shots should be the norm in taking somebody down. In BF you can't have somebody injured and less effective, they either die or they don't. If they take a 98k to the chest and are still moving, you can't show them on the ground gasping for air. Same for the MP40. You can't show them on the ground gaping for air. Now, a one shit kill, bam you're gone, is rare for any weapon. You have to hit the CNS or the brain stem...period. Even a heart shot you have bodily functions for UP TO 3 minutes. I'm not saying they should take half a magazine to drop somebody, but one shot is just wrong. For both gameplay and realism. I believe for law enforcemen they should carrywhat they shoot best with, regardless of caliber. Same with citizens that have a CCW permit. You're right about KE, it really is just a number. BUT it is the best calculation "we" have so far to determine how much damage on average a bullet will do. I apologize in advance of any typos. My old keyboard died and the keys on all these are stiff as hell. I keep pushing them expecting it to register and they don't. Ugh. I'm also tired.
I'm not talking about a one-shot kill, I'm talking about a man taking a solid hit from a 9mm bullet and being punched off his feet, screaming for momma and having about as much inclination to move anymore as I'd have to bottle your fountain water and call it Perrier. ;)
I guess the proof in the pudding could be this...for a million dollars would you let somebody fire a 9mm from an MP40 at you at 100m range with you wearing four Soviet greatcoats? Lol. Quite. Not even sitting in your armchair mate. :D
The game doesn't do per-polygon damage, so let's take the most likely outcome of a single solid hit from a 9mm and see Ivan go down like a sack of spuds. It might come as some suprise, but your average grunt will take a dive from a fleshie and think he's earned a ticket home, never mind a major wound. He most certainly will NOT take half a clip and run around looking for the culprit so he can return fire with Puff the Magic Dragon. :)
'Hitori janaitte yakusoku shitane': "You promised I'm not alone".
Nihongomo honde narattano? Anatano nihongo kono touronno nakamito onajikurai kudaranaikara. ;)
Aussie is right. In korea, soldiers armed with the m1 carbine often complained that the piss-ant round would not penetrate the Korean or Chineses winter uniforms. The 9mm is under powered, the PPSh is over powered. The MP40 has a ROF WAAAY slower that in real life. It was said that it fired so fast that it sounded like a piece of cloth being torn. That should help the balance, too...
There is too much "more than, faster, slower, less" etc. You guys need to post raw data and a source for it. The physics equations are nice but they are not needed here. How many feet or meters per second can each weapon fire? Raw data please so we can end this arguement.
USMA2010Aussie is right. In korea, soldiers armed with the m1 carbine often complained that the piss-ant round would not penetrate the Korean or Chineses winter uniforms. The 9mm is under powered, the PPSh is over powered. The MP40 has a ROF WAAAY slower that in real life. It was said that it fired so fast that it sounded like a piece of cloth being torn. That should help the balance, too...
I think you'll find the reality is they were firing from too great a range and missing. Or just missing. Or hitting men that were so far away they could hardly be seen. The M1 is a peashooter that likes to pretend it's a rifle and encourages it's user to take shots that most soldiers would be lucky to make with a proper rifle, but that doesn't mean it's rounds will be stopped by thick clothing at anything under a sensible range for that particular weapon. It's either that or believe the allied forces were taking dead/captured Chinese off the battlefield and going through their clothing to such an extent as to provide a credible statistical database. One that established nothing more than "Don't fire at them when they're so far away you can hardly see who's side they're on!" The range under discussion in this thread is 100m. At that range I expect my in-game target to go down from a 9mm hit (or from one from an M1). And just for interests sake I'll recount the tale of the squaddie in N.I. He was hit in the back by a round from an M-16 at a little over 1000m whilst on patrol. The round made a neat little hole, front and back, and he carried on walking thinking he'd been hit by a rioter's brick. A pissy round, that didn't tumble, at a silly range in a non-fatal area. And it still felt like a brick. If it had been a 9mm at 100m he would have been down. Thick clothing stops stray rounds that were fired at someone else, missed and took a grand tour before stumbling to a halt in someone's greatcoat. Apocryphal evidence to the contrary or otherwise. :)
USMA2010 It was said that it fired so fast that it sounded like a piece of cloth being torn. That should help the balance, too...
Wrong. It's the Mg42 that got that reputation.
RgrBouchThere is too much "more than, faster, slower, less" etc. You guys need to post raw data and a source for it. The physics equations are nice but they are not needed here. How many feet or meters per second can each weapon fire? Raw data please so we can end this arguement.
For a proper and valid test you would need more than a given round's performance. You would also need considerable data on the clothing in question, such as thickness, layers thereof, tensile strength of the fabric, etc etc. Or just apply common sense. A vest, shirt, jumper, quilted jacket and a greatcoat do not stop 9mm bullets at 100m range. They can set alight quite nicely though, until the blood pissing out of the wound underneath puts out the fire. :D