Project Reality Forums

Combatcontrol88 wrote:Ok the kid that talked about the body being 70% water is a retard. And the M16 with its dam little 5.56 aka the .22 is a piece of shit X 5. It doesnt have a selective fire switch as people may think. It is a Jam selector switch. its modes are No Feed, Double Feed, and the ever so classic SPORTS.

I'd like to know if you have ever actually used the M-16 in anger.

This is the 1 thing in Project Reality that I think would improve gameplay more than anything else. If every object had realistic bullet penetraition, realism would be improved drastically. It would also help balance out weapons that were previously "Uberweapons", as in the M-4, which would have penitration on fewer objects than the M-16, which would have less penetration than the G-3. This would also allow the M-16 and the M-4 have slightly reduced recoil due to the advatage the G-3 has over them, which is the higher bullet penetration. This would better illustrate the advantages/disadvantages of higher/lower caliber weapons. I know this is a ridiculous request, but I think that no matter how long it takes, this should be a top priority. You just cannot have a realistic firefight without realistic bullet penetration.

vanilla got bullet penetration so you should be able to mod it

If vanilla has it, itdoesn't mean it can be moded. This is called hardcodation.

a wounded soldier takes up more resources than a dead one not to mention pulling more guys out of the fight to take him out of the fight

compensation, medical treatment, etc. rather than casket + fight home

as someone posted previous a 7.62 has a higher chance of killing a enemy combatant than a 5.56 round

thats one of the main reasons weastern militarys use it

weight is also a factor

The 5.56x45mm (, .223 and 5.45x39mm, for that matter) were adopted because they allow for more effective automatic fire and allow the user to carry more ammunition. Also, with 7.62x51mm vs 5.56x45mm, 5.56x45mm weapon recivers are shorter, making them cheaper and lighter than those of the larger round.

Also, the 5.56x45mm round is designed to kill.

But its not designed to kill what its being fired at in the current conflicts. Its desinged to kill a soviet infantry man in body armour, a man in good health who is, within reason, well fed and such.

In almost all cases of 5.56x45mm not putting down the target have been when its fired at people who are not wearing body armour, and also at people who are frequently under wieght.

Of course its going to perform differently. The round is well suited to its intended victim, but currently is being used in a situation it was never intended for.

what? you have better % to survive a shoot if you dont have body armor ?

I think he means that the current round has a tendency to pass right through insurgents and alike, not knocking them down and not stopping them. While if it hit a healthy armored soviet soldier, it would knock them down, stopping them.

The thing is that body armor these days can stop those rounds anyway. Thus, they are shit against all infantry targets.

T.A.Sharps wrote:I just thought this was funny...

I'm not a fan of the small caliber at all, and granted, I do not know where you got your facts, maybe from Stoner himself...

If i remeber right, the 5.56x45 was adopted into the military about 1963, and we were in ground wars agaist Asians. Chinese with Koreans earlier, and then Vietnam when the round was in service. I don't believe they are a portly people, and the VC were known for their black pajamas, not kevlar.

I think body armor that can stop bullets wasn't standard until about the 1970's when Kevlar came out, even then probably later for the Soviets.

If I am totally ignorant let me know. It would be interresting to see the experiments from ArmaLite when they were developing their small cal. high velocity assult rifle for that specific profile you talked about. A true science, finely tunning the killing performance of a military round to a specific fat content of a specific country's male populace, and the body armor he will be wearing a decade or so later.

What will they think of next?

Ah, thats why I made the distinction between .223 and 5.56x45mm. The original 5.56x45mm round, the M193 (aka .223 remmington) was indeed adopted at the time of the Vietnam war. Aparently the original .223 (particularly with the original 1:14 rifling, rather than the 1:12 used in the M16/M16A1) was absolutly devastating against human targets, causing the "meat ax" effect (where, supposedly, it would literally blow limbs off). However, the 1:14 rifling twist made the round very unstable (the reason if inflicted such horrific wounds), which made it terribly inaccurate, which is why it was changed to a 1:12 twist in the military weapons.

Now, the current 5.56x45mm round, the SS109/M855 (used in the M16A2, minimi, L85, etc... Uses 1:9 rifling rather than 1:12) was developed by FN for the minimi SAW in the late 70s and adopted in the early 80s as NATO STANAG. This is a heavier, slower round which fragments less but penetrates more (one of the reasons for its selection was the proliferation of body armour in Warsaw Pact forces, unlike the M193 the M855 can penetrate a steel helmet at 600m). It was adopted in a time when the primary threat to NATO was a Soviet invasion of Europe, so performace against a professional soldier in body armour was considered paramount. I dare say they never expected to be using the round on "skinnies" in somalia in 1993, taliban in Afghanistan or insurgents in Iraq.

Uhm, wow! Thank you Bob_Marley (if that is your real name?) for the little history lesson, extremly interesting.

This is a prime example of why the PR community, for the most part, is so great. Real facts and knowledge vs. "I think it would be cool if..." or "We need to change x for better balance"