Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Modding, Customising, Editing » v1.13 Weapon & Item Refinement » Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair
Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273842] Thu, 17 February 2011 19:18 Go to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
I have implemented a couple of new weapons. While stuff like weight, range, impact, handeling, or recoil is rather simple to translate into the JA values, I have no idea how to properly define the rather abstract values "accurancy", "reliability" and "repair ease".

With "proper implementation" I mean some kind of rule/formular that allows to define a weapons accurancy or reliability with that of similar weapons, or "repair ease" compared to other weapons, out of its values - with some room for +/- when the weapons was known to particulary good or bad in this or that.

I am wondering how others do this kind of fine-tuning?
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273878] Fri, 18 February 2011 12:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Starwalker

 
Messages:769
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany
Accuracy for basic 1.13:

Pistols as the baseline have an accuracy of 0.
Guns held in two hands, but without a shoulderstock, have an accuracy of 2.
Guns held in two hands with a shoulderstock have an accuracy of 5.
Guns that are not autoloaders gain a bonus of up to 5.

All of this can be modified by shoddy (-1 to -3) or expert (+1 to +3) workmanship.


Reliability is hard, as we will probably never get realworld MTBF-values for all our guns.
Basically, it is set by reputation, and should not get below -4 or over +4, because otherwise funky things can happen.

Repair ease is set considering how complicated the mechanics of the gun are. Revolvers should be easy to repair, whereas some of the more modern guns with non-standard mechanical innards (like the G11) should be harder to repair.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273883] Fri, 18 February 2011 14:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Starwalker
Accuracy for basic 1.13:

Pistols as the baseline have an accuracy of 0.
Guns held in two hands, but without a shoulderstock, have an accuracy of 2.
Guns held in two hands with a shoulderstock have an accuracy of 5.
Guns that are not autoloaders gain a bonus of up to 5.

All of this can be modified by shoddy (-1 to -3) or expert (+1 to +3) workmanship.
Thank you very much! I thought 1.13 was using something with the sights of the gun. I am realy happy that that's not the case because I am not required to throw about the system I had been using in order to keep it balanced within the exisiting weapons.

Quote:
Reliability is hard, as we will probably never get realworld MTBF-values for all our guns.
Basically, it is set by reputation, and should not get below -4 or over +4, because otherwise funky things can happen.
Yes, that's a problem. Most weapons are described as very reliable in one or the other place, save for some "notorious" candidates. I think I give all LMGs a higher reliability because now they often start jamming after the first 100 rounds, what is not so much in larger battles, or when you have to fight several battles in a row.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273887] Fri, 18 February 2011 19:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Thinking further about it, and fiddiling around a bit with values, a possible approach to define these abstract values from the data of the gun could be:

Accuracy is influenced by the weapon's type (one-handed, two-handed, automatic or manuel re-chambering) and the barrel-length; assuming that an otherwise identical weapon with a longer barrel makes the bullet to fly faster and that way a bit more accurate. This would result in carbine versions of rifles being less accurate than the long parent-rifle, even when shooting within carbine range. Otherwise the carbine would always be the better weapon in game (unless using a high-end scope) because of its lower handling costs.

such as:
One-handed weapons would have a base accuracy of 1
Two-handed weapons would have a base accuracy of 5
Blot-action weapons would have a base accuracy of 7

The weapon's accuracy could be calculated by the % of its barrel length to the average barrel length of the weapons of its class. For example, I have an average barrel length of 640 for all bolt-action rifles in my mod. The Karabiner 98K has a barrel of 600, gives it the normal accuracy in this class of 7, the Mosin-Nagant 1891/30 has a barrel of 730, gives 8 accuracy, the SMLE No.5 has a barrel of 478, makes 5 accuracy.

ACCURACY = BarrelLength/(CAverageBarrelLength*CBaseAccuracy)

A possible default-modificator could be weapons with side-mounted magazines (such as the Sten SMG) have a modificator of -1 to their accuracy.

Weapons that otherwise were notorious for being exceptional accurate or inaccurate would get a +/- modificator to their calculated accuracy.


Reliability. In game reliability defines how much the weapon degrades from firing. Means reliability mostly defines how much the weapon can resist damage from being fired. This could be calculated by comparing the damage-value of the weapon (assuming that the same ammount of energy goes the other way into the weapon) with its mass, i.e. weight:

RELIABILITY = WEIGHT/(DAMM*100)

Imagine a Glock being chambered in 7.62NATO and a FN MAG being chambered in 9x19. The Glock would fall apart latest whith the second shot, while the FN MAG could fire pistol ammo up to eternity without its mechanisms taken noticable dammage.

In the result most rifles and pistols have a comparably low reliability while most MGs and the heavyer SMGs have a high reliability. In game this would be relative because you hardly shoot more than 10 or so rounds out of a non-fullautomatic weapon during a single battle, while shooting 50 or more rounds out of a MG or SMG would happen quite frequently.

A default modificator could be: Guns that feed from top-magazines, such as BREN MGs, get a +1. And of course +/- for those (in)famous in this category.


Repair Ease. There is nor formular for repaitr ease, but in general: the more functions a weapon has the more complicated it becomes. Such as,

Revolvers have a default Repair Ease of 2
Bolt-action rifles and Shotguns have a default Repair Ease of 1
Semi-automatic weapons (including pistols) and fullauto-only weapons 0
Selective fire weapons -1


what do you think?
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273888] Fri, 18 February 2011 19:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cell

 
Messages:671
Registered:February 2011
User deleted
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273891] Fri, 18 February 2011 20:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SpaceViking

 
Messages:762
Registered:January 2004
Location: Rochester, Minnesota, USA
There are guns of similar sizes and types where one gun is just inherently more accurate than the other due to whatever reasons.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273976] Sun, 20 February 2011 15:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Cell
i think accuracy is a part of the person who shoots and which shape the barrel is.
also if a scope, reflex sight etcetera is mounted on.
and which distance you shoot. so accuracy should be affect by shape, distance, and mounted items and if you cant get enough of reality of the person himself.
Accuracy in JA is a flat value that always is the same regardless who shoots, on what distances, and indepently of scopes mounted.

SpaceViking
There are guns of similar sizes and types where one gun is just inherently more accurate than the other due to whatever reasons.
Some weapons are famed for their accuracy (or in-accuracy), even though these kind of informations need to be handled with care because you need to know compared to what other weapon this particular gun is considered very accurate - and by whom.

For example the Russian SVT-40 semi-automatic rifle is considered rather inaccurate, but that is compared to the extremly accurate Mosin-Nagant is was intended to replace. Compared to similar weapons, like the M1 Garand or the Gewehr 43, there was nothing dramatically wrong with the SVT-40.

Another rather tricky vlaue is quality of fit and finish. In particular for me, doing WWII weapons, this isn't very helpfull because during wartime many weapons were built with a rather sloppy quality. Or from the post-war periode, take a weapon like the AK-47 that is built in thousands of places always with different qualities. In this case you would need to specify whether the AK in game is a high-quality East German industrial made model or home-made somewhere in the African bush.

That's why I am trying to derive these values out of the general data as much as possible.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273977] Sun, 20 February 2011 16:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cell

 
Messages:671
Registered:February 2011
User deleted
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273978] Sun, 20 February 2011 16:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3740
Registered:July 2009
Cell
in other words accuracy is more a theoretically value.
in the end it depends on the shooter how good his eyes are how good he could raise his weapon in addiction to his stamina level how much luck he have and so on how good he could handle stress and so on ... etc. pp. as far as i now headrocks HAM 4.0 is based on some of those values.


Accuracy is not your chance to hit. It has nothing to do with the shooter.
If you bolt a gun to a table and fire it X times at a target Y meters away, the shot's can be covered with a circle of radius Z. You can then calculate how much the bullets deviated and get the accuracy of a gun, usually measured in moa (minutes of angle).

However, within the game engine, 'range' is significantly more important than 'accuracy' to the point that accuracy is just of minor concern (it's a flat bonus, but applied before a sh*tload of other modifiers).So in OCTH, it's more like a general modifier how well a gun can be aimed, NCTH has a more direct connection to the real value. But it's still an inherent attribute of the gun itself and can't be influenced by the shooter!


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273980] Sun, 20 February 2011 17:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cell

 
Messages:671
Registered:February 2011
User deleted
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273981] Sun, 20 February 2011 17:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
DepressivesBrot
So in OCTH, it's more like a general modifier how well a gun can be aimed, NCTH has a more direct connection to the real value.


Except that there's something seriously crazy-funky going on in NCTH...

[Updated on: Sun, 20 February 2011 20:31] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #273987] Sun, 20 February 2011 18:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Cell
sure "DepressivesBrot". but how will you handle that ingame???
i cant image that we could find out how accurate each weapon is. that was the point.
The question is how good is gun A hitting something within its range compared to gun B within the same range. The only thing I can think of that could give a hint out of the weapon's data would be the barrel length, assuming a longer barrel makes a bullet of the same caliber faster and that way less prone to drift due to wind.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274121] Mon, 21 February 2011 20:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Starwalker

 
Messages:769
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany
Buns
I thought 1.13 was using something with the sights of the gun. I am realy happy that that's not the case because I am not required to throw about the system I had been using in order to keep it balanced within the exisiting weapons.

No, I did not use sight length for this reason: If the sight was changed (like mounting a scope), then accuracy would need to be changed as well, and giving the scope a flat accuracy modifier would not fit well on guns with different accuracy. Mounting a scope on a long gun should not change accuracy as much as mounting it onto a shorter gun.
Therefore I decided to leave sights out of the accuracy-data.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274123] Mon, 21 February 2011 20:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Starwalker

 
Messages:769
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany
Buns
Accuracy is influenced by the weapon's type (one-handed, two-handed, automatic or manuel re-chambering) and the barrel-length;

I would not use barrel length for accuracy, even when a longer barrel is more accurate and I even have all the data needed for it.
The reason is, that barrel length is already used to determine the effective range of the gun: A longer barrel effects a longer range, and due to longer range the range penalties do not add up as early as they would do for a shorter barrel (and therefore shorter range). Thus barrel length does already have some kind of inherent accuracy, via range.
Using it twice (for range /and/ accuracy) would value barrel length too much, IMO.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274187] Tue, 22 February 2011 13:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Starwalker
No, I did not use sight length for this reason: If the sight was changed (like mounting a scope), then accuracy would need to be changed as well, and giving the scope a flat accuracy modifier would not fit well on guns with different accuracy. Mounting a scope on a long gun should not change accuracy as much as mounting it onto a shorter gun. Therefore I decided to leave sights out of the accuracy-data.
Yes, that's a problem I run into too when trying to do something with sights. Some guns require sights to be removed to have a scope mounted. This applies to most sniper rifles from WWII, like the Springfield 1903A4. This gun should then have 0 to 1 accuracy but the bonus of a sniper scope. Certainly not what I had been looking for.


Starwalker
I would not use barrel length for accuracy, even when a longer barrel is more accurate and I even have all the data needed for it. The reason is, that barrel length is already used to determine the effective range of the gun: A longer barrel effects a longer range, and due to longer range the range penalties do not add up as early as they would do for a shorter barrel (and therefore shorter range). Thus barrel length does already have some kind of inherent accuracy, via range. Using it twice (for range /and/ accuracy) would value barrel length too much, IMO.
Yes, I see.

Finding different accuracies probably mainly is a problem in my weapon mod because all weapons either use rifle- or pistol-ammunition, lacking the huge block of weapons that shoot intermediate ammo from 1.13. Means even the smallest rifles, like the SMLE No.5, shoot well beyond 40 tiles. In this case using long rifles, like the SMLe No.4, would be pointless in game because you would hardly ever be able to make use of the plus 10 to 20 tiles range these weapons can give you, in return for the much higher handling costs.

[Updated on: Tue, 22 February 2011 13:32] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274385] Thu, 24 February 2011 09:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dinglehopper

 
Messages:134
Registered:January 2008
The accuracy of a gun I would say is determined mostly by the quality of the parts and workmanship. Machined receivers, for example, are typically more accurate than stamped metal receivers.

But really, there is no formula you can go by. For example, ever since the ja2 demo we had to play over and over for what seemed like forever until ja2 came out, was unleashed I had a fond curiosity for the dragunov rifle found therein. Over the years I have managed to collect two real dragunov (known as svd in 1.13) and one psl, which is a Romanian dragunov with a stamped instead of Machined receiver. Of the three one svd is most accurate, the psl is surprisingly close at like .1 moa off, but the other svd even though by looks it is identical to the first is way off. Of course I know why, it was a war trophy someone brought back from Iraq and then for whatever reason decided to sell it, and serious neglect has forever ruined its insides.

Also, as someone who has done a decent amount of gunsmithing, revolvers are actually usually much harder than semi autos to repair. Often they are impossible to fix. They might be more reliable, but when something does go wrong it is bad news. It is most often related to the cylinder not fully rotating, so it doesn't line up the two barrels correctly. A real tough one to fix. Or it is something in the trigger to hammer action, but revolvers don't usually allow easy access to those parts. On the other hand, on say a glock, it is always the feeder ramp, slider rails, or a spring; all are easy to get to and fix.

Dh
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274441] Thu, 24 February 2011 15:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
dinglehopper
The accuracy of a gun I would say is determined mostly by the quality of the parts and workmanship. Machined receivers, for example, are typically more accurate than stamped metal receivers. But really, there is no formula you can go by.
But that's the problem. For the purpose of giving absoulte numerical values in JA you need to have some kind of formular, latest when it comes to implement some more exotical weapons, or when dealing with weapons that would have built in different places in with different qualities.

[Updated on: Thu, 24 February 2011 15:14] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274451] Thu, 24 February 2011 16:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dinglehopper

 
Messages:134
Registered:January 2008
Probably the best system would be one based on who and where it is manufactured. If it is a reputable armsmith like FN, H&K, S&W, Glock, etc then it should get a small bonus. If is made by multiple manufacturers in multiple countries it should be penalized. If any of those countries are third world it should be penalized more. If the majority are third world, like the ak47, then it should get the max penalty. if you don't know then just go with 0, or whatever the base for the weapon type is.

But there is a much larger problem, to many people have played favorites when adding guns to the items xml. And some guns have gotten a bad wrap in there for some reason. For example I own a luger, and I shoot it occasionally. It is far from my favorite gun, but it is way better than the wrap it gets in 1.13. Its range is currently set to 105 and accuracy is 0. For comparison the Glock 17 which I also have is 115 and 0 and the Beretta 92f which I have fired a bunch is 120 and 0. In real life these are almost backwards. The Beretta is a lousy gun, people just like it cause movies and TV popularized it in the 80s and 90s. It is made by the Italians who are not exactly known for their gun making skills for crying out loud. Every beretta I have fired, and there have been more than a few, has been so bad that its effective range is cut short. So I would put its range at 105 and give it an accuracy of -1 still on top of that. The Glock is actually really good as handguns go, and it probably should have a range of 120 and accuracy of 0. The luger is maybe slightly better than the glock. Because the germans, especially at that time loved to make everything with exacting percision, the luger benefited from this. Now if you don't keep it real clean it will jam on you faster than most other guns, way faster. But it is extremely accurate and has the same range as the glock 17, so in game it should be range 120 with accuracy 1, but a low reliability.

Now lets talk about the absurd. The mk23 socom is in the xml files with range 125 and accuracy 1. This makes me laugh hysterically. It is a .45! There is no .45acp on planet earth that can out range even the weakest 9mm. It is impossible! This is even true for the SMGs with their range of 190 to 200. They would have slightly more range than a pistol, but the .45acp is a subsonic round, and it is heavy. They go not far and then literally fall to the ground. And I am talking most have a real hard time making it past 50 feet (no, I am not exaggerating, anything past that and you have to shoot real high angle and hope the round falls on the target, seriously). The .45 is fun to shoot because you can actually see almost every round as the shooter due to its slow speed and large size. But due to it's size the round will do a ton of damage to anything it hits before it's max range; more damage than a 9mm, about the same to slightly less than a .40 (speed plays some part in the damage equation). So the trade off when the round was standardized was range for damage. No .45 pistol should have a range greater than 100, and no .45 smg should have a range greater than 120 (which is probably even pushing it). And yes I know saying this will tick off a bunch of .45 fanboys, but it is the truth as it is a simple matter of the physics of the round. If any one who has a mk23 socom disagrees they can come visit me and we can go to the range I built in my backyard and I will show them which deserves a range of 105 and which 125 between the luger and the mk23.

Meanwhile we have .357 and 10mm with range of 110, both of those rounds more resemble rifle rounds than pistol rounds. They are huge rounds with large bullets and tons of powder behind them, and always outrange 9mm and .40cal rounds, to say they have less range than a .45 is nothing short of absurd. Also, the one .40 smg has a range of 170 I think, which is probably accurate, but to say a .45 smg outranges it is again absurd.

Once I am done with my XML project I was thinking of seeing if we could put together a comity of actual shooters to go through and fix all the ranges and other attributes of the guns. By using a comity, we will hopefully avoid the favorites aspect that has messed things up so far.

DH
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274457] Thu, 24 February 2011 17:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
dinglehopper
But there is a much larger problem, to many people have played favorites when adding guns to the items xml. And some guns have gotten a bad wrap in there for some reason.
That's what I am talking about: there need to be identical formulars used to define the stats of all guns. For example, in 1.13 the Mauser 98K has a accurcay of just 5, the Springfield 1903 one of 9, and the Mosin-Nagant 1891/30 even a full 10. uh? The Springfield also has the highest range of the three, despite shooting the weakest round out of the shortest barrel in this trio.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274637] Sun, 27 February 2011 17:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Headhunter

 
Messages:268
Registered:November 2009
Location: Sweden
A (near) complete rebalancing of the guns in 1.13 sounds very reasonable to me.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274638] Sun, 27 February 2011 18:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Badbru

 
Messages:63
Registered:January 2008
Location: Perth Australia
Buns
dinglehopper
But there is a much larger problem, to many people have played favorites when adding guns to the items xml. And some guns have gotten a bad wrap in there for some reason.
That's what I am talking about: there need to be identical formulars used to define the stats of all guns. For example, in 1.13 the Mauser 98K has a accurcay of just 5, the Springfield 1903 one of 9, and the Mosin-Nagant 1891/30 even a full 10. uh? The Springfield also has the highest range of the three, despite shooting the weakest round out of the shortest barrel in this trio.


30-06 the weakest round, how do you figure that?
A two minute google search netted me these cartridge dimensions;
30-06 = 7.62mm x 63mm
8mm Mauser = 7.92mm x 57mm
Nagant = 7.62mm x 54mm

If anything the weakest round is probaly the 8mm Mauser as it's only 3mm longer in the case than the Nagant round to push a fatter, and thus likely, heavier bullet. The 30-06 case is 6mm longer than the Mauser round.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274647] Sun, 27 February 2011 19:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MikeJahn

 
Messages:53
Registered:June 2010
In terms of Joules the Mauser cartridge and the .30-06 are approximately the same.

Weapon accuracy should probably be modeled using tested MOA values ; however, if we got on that there would be an issue - Dragunov performs equal to or better than many bolt actions, it's precision is approximately that of a M24. If we used real values then semi's would be overall more desirable for anything but the longest shots and even then that job would likely be better for anti-material rifles.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274649] Sun, 27 February 2011 20:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2810
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Another cause for discrepancies, at least on my part, is just simply being overwhelmed by the number of items that have to be arranged against each other along multiple dimentions. For a long time now, I have been trying to portray .45ACP with shorter range than equivalent weapons in 9x19mm, but still found a few days ago that the Beretta PX4 in .45ACP had the same range as the other two PX4's (9x19mm and .40 S&W). This one at least I can chalk up to laziness instead of any bias.

After several attempts at working out range and damage values on my own, I'd be happy for some kind of guide for generic ammunition + weapon class combinations.

[Updated on: Sun, 27 February 2011 20:33] by Moderator



Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274652] Sun, 27 February 2011 20:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MikeJahn

 
Messages:53
Registered:June 2010
Isn't the optimal range of a .45 like 50 m? So 5 squares in game?

Then the funky problem would be that many houses have longer halls than a .45 can shoot accurately through.

[Updated on: Sun, 27 February 2011 20:46] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274658] Sun, 27 February 2011 21:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2810
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Another area where I ignore 1 tile = 10m for the sake of my own sanity when trying to work out proper stats. Like I said, a rough guide, perhaps a sortable spreadsheet, for "the generic x round" when fired from the "generic" pistol, SMG, SBR, Carbine, and rifle. Something that can give at least the relationship between different ammos/weapon classes so that the while not accurate, the experience feels "real" while still being "fun."

[Updated on: Sun, 27 February 2011 21:03] by Moderator



Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274707] Mon, 28 February 2011 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Badbru
30-06 the weakest round, how do you figure that?

.30-06
v0: 835
Muzzle Energy: 3390 jule

7.62x54R
v0: 860
Muzzle Energy: 3587 jule

7.92 Mauser
v0: 854
Muzzle Energy: 3640 jule


EDIT:
wil473
After several attempts at working out range and damage values on my own, I'd be happy for some kind of guide for generic ammunition + weapon class combinations.
You need a "0-weapon", means a weapon that has the right stats in your opinion and create formulars from which you get from the weapon-data to the values in JA2. After that you apply the same formulars for the other weapons of that class.







[Updated on: Mon, 28 February 2011 14:55] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274816] Tue, 01 March 2011 23:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MikeJahn

 
Messages:53
Registered:June 2010
If a weapon's accuracy is meant to represent the weapon's deviation with each shot then I think it'd be best to devise a way in which at some range each weapon's precision is matched up to its precision in real life (approximately). So each accuracy # corresponds to an approximate MOA neighborhood.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274819] Tue, 01 March 2011 23:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie

 
Messages:3965
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
Give your idea some more thought and let us know what you come up with .
Thanks . Smile


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274845] Wed, 02 March 2011 07:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dinglehopper

 
Messages:134
Registered:January 2008
A little known fact is the 7.62 x 54R is not actually that size. It is quite a bit larger. A other little known fact is it's often referred to as the Russian .30-06.

When you see one next to a 7.62 NATO round, the size difference becomes apparent.

As to the problem of semi auto sniper rifles being better, I think that is solved by coolness. Semi autos tend to be better in real life for the non sniper calibers with newer guns. The psg1 is semi auto and is one of the better snipers for its round. So, it should probably go bolt then semi then exotic sniper only round guns, which tend to be bolt.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274856] Wed, 02 March 2011 10:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1580
Registered:December 2008
The projectile for 7.62x54mmR is 7.92mm which is 0.312 inches. For 7.62x51mm it is 7.82mm which is 0.308 inches, and for 7.62x39mm it is actually 7.62mm which is 0.300 inches.

Common heaviest projectiles for 7.62x54mmR are 181 grain at 2,640 feet per second, for 7.62x51mm we have 174 grain at 2,600 ft/sec, and for 7.62x39mm we have 154 grain at about 2,100 ft/sec.

Not sure what better means, in the game for me better means more damage with less APs, in real life better may mean more accurate (e.g. when hunting). From what people tell me is that bolt action rifles tend to be more accurate, but that is really too general of a statement and won't be always true.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274930] Wed, 02 March 2011 21:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Starwalker

 
Messages:769
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany
Buns
That's what I am talking about: there need to be identical formulars used to define the stats of all guns. For example, in 1.13 the Mauser 98K has a accurcay of just 5, the Springfield 1903 one of 9, and the Mosin-Nagant 1891/30 even a full 10.

In the basic 1.13 weapons.xml, the Mauser 98k has an accuracy of 6, not 5. It's description says that it is from a later production run (after 1942), which warrants a lower accuracy than for a more precisely made model.
The Springfield 1903 is not included in basic 1.13.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274946] Thu, 03 March 2011 01:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MikeJahn

 
Messages:53
Registered:June 2010
lockie
Give your idea some more thought and let us know what you come up with .
Thanks . Smile


Id like to give it a go as I do have some experience in statistics, but id want to know what sort of information we can get from the game. What do you all know about how accuracy is calculated? Can you produce multiple tests and results of the shot distribution? Basically what amount of detail do you have which I could work with?

Dieter
The projectile for 7.62x54mmR is 7.92mm which is 0.312 inches. For 7.62x51mm it is 7.82mm which is 0.308 inches, and for 7.62x39mm it is actually 7.62mm which is 0.300 inches.

Common heaviest projectiles for 7.62x54mmR are 181 grain at 2,640 feet per second, for 7.62x51mm we have 174 grain at 2,600 ft/sec, and for 7.62x39mm we have 154 grain at about 2,100 ft/sec.

Not sure what better means, in the game for me better means more damage with less APs, in real life better may mean more accurate (e.g. when hunting). From what people tell me is that bolt action rifles tend to be more accurate, but that is really too general of a statement and won't be always true.

Yeah it isn't, as I said before the PSG-1 and Dragunov (they're about the same in terms of accuracy) beat out or at least perform as good as a lot of older bolt actions (which includes what the majority of US snipers use)

[Updated on: Thu, 03 March 2011 01:24] by Moderator

Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #274972] Thu, 03 March 2011 14:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
Starwalker
In the basic 1.13 weapons.xml, the Mauser 98k has an accuracy of 6, not 5. It's description says that it is from a later production run (after 1942), which warrants a lower accuracy than for a more precisely made model. The Springfield 1903 is not included in basic 1.13.
My bad, I was reading that from the XMLs on my PC, which are AIM.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #275397] Wed, 09 March 2011 06:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1580
Registered:December 2008
Buns
Starwalker
In the basic 1.13 weapons.xml, the Mauser 98k has an accuracy of 6, not 5. It's description says that it is from a later production run (after 1942), which warrants a lower accuracy than for a more precisely made model. The Springfield 1903 is not included in basic 1.13.
My bad, I was reading that from the XMLs on my PC, which are AIM.


The Karabiner 98k started production in 1935 and (through some intermediate steps) was based on the Gewehr 98, which started production in 1898.

The 98 had an overall length of about 49 inches, while the slightly shorter versions like the 98a and 98k, had an overall length of about 43 inches.


Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #275407] Wed, 09 March 2011 14:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Buns

 
Messages:677
Registered:September 2010
The Gewehr 98 is about identical to the Mosin-Nagant M1891/30, that's the version in game (barrel length 730 and 740 respectivly). The Karabiner 98K is about identical to the Springfield 1903 (b.l. 600 and 610). Given that the bullet speed of all three calibers does not differ dramatically (range 835 to 860), a Gewehr 98 should have about the same range as the M1891/30 (for example 70), while the 98K would have about the same range as the 1903 (can be 60). But the 98K and Springfield can not have a higher range than the Mosin-Nagant.
Re: Weapon stats: Accurancy, reliability and repair[message #276231] Sun, 20 March 2011 20:47 Go to previous message
Kellomies

 
Messages:51
Registered:October 2010
Now my firearms knowledge is rather theoretical (as in, "based on reading too much") but from what I know of it your understanding of the influence of barrel lenght on accuracy is a wee bit flawed Buns. It is true that longer barrels allow more of the propellant to add pressure behind the bullet and hence contribute to more energy and hence range and, for that matter, that much heavier impact on anything hit. As a side effect they also help cut down on the muzzle blast (which is after all mostly propellant burning up after leaving the barrel), the flipside being the notorious problem with excessive flash and noise that all carbines struggle with. (Curio detail: suppressors in fact act as barrel extenders and since their whole point is to trap the propellant gases and burn them out in a controlled fashion, they actually tend to *add* slightly to a bullet's muzzle velocity. This is only as regards the more common "baffle" type though; the "wiper" type physically slows down the bullet...)

But AFAIK as long as the barrel lenght is more or less appropriate to the characteristics of the round it is firing, as in "not too short", exact lenght is largely inconsequential for the practical ballistics.

Where longer (and nigh invariably hence also *heavier*) barrels contribute to accuracy is above all *inertia* - it simply takes more effort to move them, which also means they are stabler to aim and that much less prone to all kinds of minor swaying and whatnot stemming from the shooter's assorted unconscious movements.
Obviously also something of a polar opposite of the quick and nimble handling desirable in CQB weapons...
Previous Topic: Perhaps I could be of some help.
Next Topic: Replacement for platinum watch
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue May 30 10:13:54 EEST 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01150 seconds