Project Reality Forums

lucky.BOY wrote:Well, i think, according to physics, that bullet will give you the same punch (generally) as it gives to the guy that is firing it.
The problem might be that the guy on the recieving and is not expecting it (unlike the guy in that video), so he might have problems withstanding the punch

The problem with that logic is that the guy firing is holding a firearm in his hands in a stance ready to fire. The forces are absorbed by his arms & shoulder. When being hit in the torso, your body takes the full impact.

I wouldn't fear holding a piece of body armor in my hands, out in front of me and having someone fire at it. But, I'm not willing to strap that thing to my chest and let someone shoot me. My ribs and internal organs are much worse at stopping forces than my extended arms.

Wakain wrote:eh, slightly off-topic, but OP: you do know that pipi means "piss" in quite some languages? though with piepie you probably mean two pies, it's for some european languages like dutch and german the phonetical way to write pipi.

other use of pipi: je doit faire pipi (fr/be), pipi machen(ger.), pipi doen(du/be), meaning I need to take a leak in french and to take a leak in german and dutch.
don't mean to disrespect but this makes piepieonline quite hilarical, just that you know

I think that's just you. I didn't associate that name with this in the least. When, in an English speaking forum, I read the word "pie", I immediately think of, well, "pie". And I'd pronounce it that way, too. I don't think too many people would think of urine the instant they read "piepie"

Edit: @badmojo:

I wouldn't fear holding a piece of body armor in my hands, out in front of me and having someone fire at it. But, I'm not willing to strap that thing to my chest and let someone shoot me. My ribs and internal organs are much worse at stopping forces than my extended arms.

I would NOT want to hold a piece of body armour in my hands and have someone shoot at it. Too much I'd fear that I'd lose grip of it at the moment of impact and have the piece of body armour plus bullet coming towards me at a high speed.
Fact is, there was a video up there showing what appears to indeed be a rifle firing a 7.62mm NATO round (although it could've been JHP or sth to decrease likelyhood of penetration) at a target wearing body armour, and the target doesn't instantly go down. Now, that armour is likely of higher quality, but unless we can find better sources, the discussion is not only off topic but also rather pointless, because it's not based on empirical research but simply opinions and hearsay.

TheComedian wrote:Why is this always the start of threads?

Because of Jigsaw!

lol

The search function rarely works for me and everytime I post a topic it gets locked for being posted already... But like seriously... I search for it but I can never find anything about the topic!

badmojo420 wrote: I wouldn't fear holding a piece of body armor in my hands, out in front of me and having someone fire at it. But, I'm not willing to strap that thing to my chest and let someone shoot me. My ribs and internal organs are much worse at stopping forces than my extended arms.

I believe this is a bigger impact on your organs than a 7.62, yet some guys survive a high G crash too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XK0OvKFv88

The problem about this discussion is that there are NO correct answer to the question.
There is to many variables coming in to play.
the type and quality of the armor.
the type and quality of the round.
the type and quality of the weapon.
the angle the round hits from.
the distance
the mental preparedness of the recieving end
the amount of adrenaline.
acute stress reaction

For you interested in reading more about adrenaline and acute stress reaction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrenaline_Rush
Acute stress reaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spec_Operator wrote:I would NOT want to hold a piece of body armour in my hands and have someone shoot at it. Too much I'd fear that I'd lose grip of it at the moment of impact and have the piece of body armour plus bullet coming towards me at a high speed.

Really? Why not just understand the point i was trying to make and not get all caught up on weather or not one could grip body armor. Would it help if i said I'd wear gloves woven into the body armor, so there was no possibility of it slipping?

Spec_Operator wrote:Fact is, there was a video up there showing what appears to indeed be a rifle firing a 7.62mm NATO round (although it could've been JHP or sth to decrease likelyhood of penetration) at a target wearing body armour, and the target doesn't instantly go down. Now, that armour is likely of higher quality, but unless we can find better sources, the discussion is not only off topic but also rather pointless, because it's not based on empirical research but simply opinions and hearsay.

Yeah, you guys showed a video from 1986 where the guy selling the body armor setup a test to show how it doesn't knock you over. I didn't imply that it would knock you over from the force, I said you would be "rolling around on the ground in pain". The going down part might not always happen, but you will know when you get hit. You're not going to be firing back in a calm collected manner like you can in PR.

And the fact that the guy had to put a large stack of magazines between him and the armor helps to prove the point. Should I post pictures of nasty looking bruises from soldiers who've been shot? Would that help? I doubt any of us have been shot, but most of us have gotten big ugly bruises from taking a blow to the body, and it's not like that type of thing happens without you noticing.

rakettsau wrote:I believe this is a bigger impact on your organs than a 7.62, yet some guys survive a high G crash too.

Okay, sure. But, I'm not saying people can't survive with body armor. I'm saying that even with body armor,(the ones portrayed in PR) you'll notice and feel the pain of getting shot. It's not like wearing body armor turns you into a Terminator that can walk into a hail of bullets without even flinching.

Nebsif wrote:Russian youtube video

I don't speak Russian, what happened in that video? Did the guy actually get shot?

Edit: Never mind, I read that he got shot in the arm. LOL

badmojo420 wrote: Okay, sure. But, I'm not saying people can't survive with body armor. I'm saying that even with body armor,(the ones portrayed in PR) you'll notice and feel the pain of getting shot. It's not like wearing body armor turns you into a Terminator that can walk into a hail of bullets without even flinching.

And I am not saying people always survive with body armor. I am not saying that you don't get hurt. All I am saying is that acute stress syndrom can pump your system with adrenaline, raising your treshold for pain, and setting your body in high gear. thats how soldiers have been running around for hours after taking hits in armor and flesh by 7.62 without noticing.

Acute stress syndrom at all times? Seems a little overpowered. And do any of the real accounts include point blank pistol shots being ignored?

Most mainstream video games actually try to direct your fire with a visual indicator of which direction you're being hit from. Pair that with nerfed weaponry and you have lots of situations where the person who fires(and lands hits) first, isn't the one winning the firefight. Which just seems unrealistic to me.

Hardcore modes and mods like PR minimize the discomfort of this, but then when you have to deal with small caliber pistols at point blank range, it becomes apparent again. When it takes 3+ hits to kill someone, you notice that they seem to ignore being hit. To the guy firing the pistol, it looks like the guy being hit is getting knocked around by the bullets, but we know from experience that in PR the guy being hit maintains "perfect" control of his weapon and eyes.

Really? Why not just understand the point i was trying to make and not get all caught up on weather or not one could grip body armor. Would it help if i said I'd wear gloves woven into the body armor, so there was no possibility of it slipping?

I did understand your point and didn't even citicize the essence of it. Yes, having some distance between you and the armour is better. Air as extra padding, if you will. I agree. Sorry about getting a bit cynical, if I was, it was no bad intention.

Yeah, you guys showed a video from 1986 where the guy selling the body armor setup a test to show how it doesn't knock you over. I didn't imply that it would knock you over from the force, I said you would be "rolling around on the ground in pain". The going down part might not always happen, but you will know when you get hit. You're not going to be firing back in a calm collected manner like you can in PR.

And the fact that the guy had to put a large stack of magazines between him and the armor helps to prove the point. Should I post pictures of nasty looking bruises from soldiers who've been shot? Would that help? I doubt any of us have been shot, but most of us have gotten big ugly bruises from taking a blow to the body, and it's not like that type of thing happens without you noticing.

I didn't show any video. I actually do believe that it probably isn't a very good example, I'm just not comfortable not being able to provide any counter example and yet supporting a contrary point of view.

I would have thought that the consequences of taking a bullet to the body armour would be rather harsh, too. But the thing is, we're discussing something off-topic without any proper sources to back things up. Don't get me wrong, I'm generally on "your side" regarding the protection capabilities of modern body armour, but this is the wrong thread and we'd need proper sourcing etc.

Although, as for noticing the wound, there's always the combat stress stuff... But bleh, my last post on this topic, don't want to derail the thread further.

This is about the Makarov's ingame qualities.

The thread is about the Makarov, and I'm saying I don't think the problem we (the OP and I) are having is actually due to the amount of health points the pistol projectile removes per hit. I think it has more to do with having to put a number of shots into a target who doesn't seem to react at all to losing health points. Until they fall dead.

Well, I see.

But we do have the extreme bleeding effect (which, according to Chuc, might be toned down a little for the next version) already to impair the vision of someone who is hit with pretty much anything; the engine doesn't allow directly messing with your deviation when shot, sadly.

if i may

Spec_Operator wrote: Edit: @badmojo:



I would NOT want to hold a piece of body armour in my hands and have someone shoot at it. Too much I'd fear that I'd lose grip of it at the moment of impact and have the piece of body armour plus bullet coming towards me at a high speed.
Fact is, there was a video up there showing what appears to indeed be a rifle firing a 7.62mm NATO round (although it could've been JHP or sth to decrease likelyhood of penetration) at a target wearing body armour, and the target doesn't instantly go down. Now, that armour is likely of higher quality, but unless we can find better sources, the discussion is not only off topic but also rather pointless, because it's not based on empirical research but simply opinions and hearsay.

lets say the armour has prolly around 9 kilos.
the bullet is moving at 700 m/s wheighs 8.00 g (wikipedia)
so a simple calculation brings you to this:

W(round) = W(armour+round) <--- W=energy
(m(round)*v(round)^2)/2 = (m(armour+round)*v(armour+round)^2)/2 <--- m=mass, v=velocity

which means to get to the speed of the armour when hit:

v(armour+round) = sqrt((m(round)*v(round)^2)/2)/m(armour+round)

and this brings you:

v(armour+round) = sqrt(1960J/9.008kg)
v(armour+round) = sqrt(217.xyz m^2/s^2)
v(armour+round) = 14.75 m/s

and 14 m/s is one hell of a lot slower than 700 m/s and even though the energy stays the same you will feel much less force or the armour might even fall to the ground before it hits you.

native archers if i recall poisoned the tips of their arrows because in the heat of battle a man could still fight with 6 arrows in his body.

With or without body armor men running on an adrenalin high and who have gotten used to the pain of battle will likely not notice any minor or sometimes even fatal injuries until after the battle or when they are told. this depends highly on the tempo of the moment and how experienced the fighter is. I assure you if i were hit in the most advanced of armor in the most heated moment of a battle i would go down fast. however if you take some of my instructors who've been overseas on many tours, they'd probably keep running even without armor and finish the job before they realize they ran out of blood a few hours ago.

that adrenalin rush can last forever if the action remains forever. I did some urban ops last year with simunition (paint pellets fired from a real rifle) Once the battle started in the mock village and my heart rate spiked i barely even noticed the round that hit me in the upper inner thigh where i had no padding and i barely flinched as i continued up the stairs. I did not wind down till the debrief at the end of the day. it may be safe to assume that the high will stay so long as the stimulation from your environment continues to be present and you have the energy to sustain it. Of course waiting for a soldier to run out of that energy might take an entire day and at which point he wont just lose the effects, he will just cease to function and pass out. Thus within the time frame of a single round in game we can factor out the energy limit a person may have.

it would be nice for use to lose accuracy when we get hit but for now i think we're fine the way it is since that cannot be done

as for the weak power of any particular weapon as i mentioned before, aim for the thighs.

piepieonline wrote:And probably all pistols, but yea, are they too weak?
I'm sure I've seen a topic on this before, but I can't find it in search.

Pretty much, decided to snipe a little on Kokan over the last two days, and I have found that they seem to be really too weak. I'm firing 7 or so shots, point blank (about 1m), and the only time that they die is if one bullet hits their head. What? Surely that many shots would put a soldier out of action, even with armour?

Please don't go off topic raging about sniper usage on that small map, both times were in cache defense (sniping pilots on landing for the win ), and had SL permission

Takes about 3 chest shots with full body armor to kill with a Makarov.

I'd like to remind you about the size of the rounds;

http://bcraig.net/hosting/rifle/bullets/9mm%20ammo.jpg
as compared to
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _scale.png

Doc.Pock wrote:if i may


lets say the armour has prolly around 9 kilos.
the bullet is moving at 700 m/s wheighs 8.00 g (wikipedia)
so a simple calculation brings you to this:

W(round) = W(armour+round) <--- W=energy
(m(round)*v(round)^2)/2 = (m(armour+round)*v(armour+round)^2)/2 <--- m=mass, v=velocity

which means to get to the speed of the armour when hit:

v(armour+round) = sqrt((m(round)*v(round)^2)/2)/m(armour+round)

and this brings you:

v(armour+round) = sqrt(1960J/9.008kg)
v(armour+round) = sqrt(217.xyz m^2/s^2)
v(armour+round) = 14.75 m/s

and 14 m/s is one hell of a lot slower than 700 m/s and even though the energy stays the same you will feel much less force or the armour might even fall to the ground before it hits you.

You don't take into account that the armour piece might turn, flip and otherwise behave in an unpredicted manner upon being hit, thus not absorbing all of the kinetic energy of the projectile. It's true, if the piece of armour always is in front of the bullet during the entire flight, it'd probably slow the bullet down, but I'd be more afraid of both items simply behaving in much less easily predictable ways and, for instance, the armour falling down as the bullet takes a slightly different path and hits me elsewhere at not full, but still dangerously high speed. You could probably go ahead and mathematically analyse a lot of possible situations, but I don't know how much effort you want to put into disproving an argument of mine that wasn't relevant in the first place

Edit: Ah, I understand the reason for this misunderstanding. My bad. I misinterpreted "piece of body armour" as a small piece for some reason. A full set of body armour in front of me most likely would not be affected too much by the bullet, indeed. Your calculation assumes 7kg of body armour, I was thinking more like 500g. My bad, move on

(Ignoring that I didn't want to comment on this topic anymore, it's just too tempting )