Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
you really think i would count missed shots as shots needed to kill? arma's ballistics are a joke anyways, ace should have been in the default game from the start.
try hitting csat infantry at 800m see how many shots it takes, of course all of this is irrelevant when not using ace since the default ballistics are so simple you can 360 no-scope headshot anyone within a 1km range.
All the arma ballistics model is bullet drop really (ofcourse it models other things aswell but those arent relevant), and it doesnt really do it any better than lets say battlefield. its just point and shoot, not only is this a shame because it hurts the 'realism' aspect of the game but it also causes major balancing issues. High caliber rifles with high powered optics are just so overpowered because its just too easy to hit someone at longer ranges.
The ballistics model has different calibers penning diferent objects, including armored vehicles. As you said, theres bullet drop. Angle of your gun when fired. It is far better than battfield. I also dont see how other things included in the ballistics model which make it superior to other vanilla games isn't relevent.
because none of the things you named are relevant when it comes to longrange shooting. again as i said, when using the default ballistics the shots to kill goes down significantly because you be so extremely accurate. you have to keep in mind that when using more advanced ballistics you cant aim for that tiny gap in their armour or get perfect center of mass shots all the time.
the damage model is ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up, but so are the ballistics, in the vanilla game these cancel out in certain areas (not in all, making the game unbalanced). The moment you make either one of them actually realistic it fails miserably.
Yes the damage model has its problems, but i've personally never played a game with a better damage model. Nor have I played with better ballistics (in the base game).
However for rifles, 7.62 were one shot kills against any helmet, except the highest tier which took 1-2. as was 6.5, but I did get one instance that took 3 shots. The 5.56 was a two shot against any helmet.
Keep in mind I did this all in about 15 minutes, so it won't be completely accurate. But it is a general representation of how the game usually works
Just throwing this out there, but A3, at least vanilla A3, doesnt model the angling of your gun when firing rounds. As long as your sights are on a thing you will hit that thing at any distance regardless of what angle the rifle is at (there used to be people that complained about this back in beta, though I havent seen any of that in a while).
Which is bizzare, since angling is modelled on grenades launched from UGLs. I am assuming because the grenades are actually physically simulated in the world and the bullets are not, but I dont know.
I have yet to see a game truly tackle terminal ballistics beyond a basic health points=100 subtract bullet damage of 20 =80 health.
Arma 3 does this but adds in modifiers based on distance(most games do), angle of impact( head on against body/armor vs a shallow graze), and even velocity( velocity is part of what causes the impact damage, alongside bullet mass. but game does it simply)
It ignores terminal ballistics such as penetration depth, fragmentation (part of what makes a .223/5.56 bullet so damaging within its designed envelope) and even over-penetration( being able to strike one target, bullet passes through, strikes the unit directly behind)
It also doesn't model wind drift( this is why sniping is OP). Other than drop, the bullet is almost a promised hit. As to gun firing angle, as long as your muzzle is pointed in a direction, that's exactly where the bullet flies. It is a straight tube, with a bullet spinning to stabilize flight. The UGLs are all fired on parabolic arcs, even at the lowest/closest zeroing, so the arc is now toward the leaning angle, with the drop following gravity.
Hell, UGL and GMG grenades aren't even affected by wind. To be fair, neither were helicopters until the adbvanced flight modelling, but airplanes, drones,and everything else in the game totally ignores it.
Extra note merely because I like the 6.5 Grendel round in real life: One of the major benefits to it is the velocity it carries to longer ranges vs 5.56, allowing consistent terminal ballistics and fragmentation. Another is it's high sectional density/ballistic coefficient. That is what helps the real life Grendel stay closer to target vs the 5.56 at longer range. Of course neither of those major benefits are modelled in game, despite being almost the entire purpose of the caliber.
Fascinating how the topic has sort of encompassed so much in terms of ballistics discussions!
Well done A3 community?
Bullets also fly on parabolic arcs, that is why when you line your sight on something if the rifle is not at the angle the sights were zeroed for you will drift one way or another (because the parabolic arc ideally goes up through your LOS and then back down through it, tilt the rifle and this becomes sideways motion). Thats why keeping your rifle straight is one of the fundemantals.
That being said though, does wind/heat and such still not effect your shots in this game? I dont snipe much myself (weak eyesight :D) but I thought that was one of features of the marksmen DLC.
If not, what exactly was the point of that DLC :D.
Really? Dyslecxsi's famous video on terminal ballstics in Arma 3 would seem to directly contradict some of those assertions.
This is quite true, but for all intents and purposes, they fly straight. Barring the ASP-1 Kir's gigantor bullets. I suppose I should have been more exact in my statements. While I haven't fired bullets at farther distances in real life, I haven't noticed this issue in my shooting. The arc is quite a shallow one. Perhaps that's why it doesn't get modelled? I'll admit this is actually beyond my knowledge.
And no. Nothing other than distance affects your shot via velocity. Barrel length plays a part, but it's obviously for guns that come in marksman/DMR/CQB variants.
One barrel length means nothing to compare to.( I am unsure if Arma 3 makes each gun do its own firing velocity/energy, or if it's now solely barrel length.)
An example of that previous statement: The TRG-21 vs the MK20. The stats are different, but of course the same caliber, and generally same barrel lengths in CQB/rifle lengths. I'm unsure if one fires the 5.56 bullet faster/farther, or if now it's solely up to the barrel legnth to do that work.
The DLC gave us some new camo for snipers, the assorted scopes, the new marksman guns. A lot of things like firign from vehicles( FFV from now on) were just general updates released at the same time.