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
^^^ People that use "logic" like this are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ idiots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPQ1Sp0huLk
Plus, .50 is also able to penetrate bullet proof glass, which is prety damn impressive.. but then again, It's bloody .50 calibers..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fCZvOHd5dg
Point being, the U.S Army may not have Power Armor yet, but I think It'd be able to at least put a hole in power armor
'Hull' of a tank? Which part? Because a tank is not evenly armored all the way around. Shooting through the side of the tank, between the tread wheels is not impressive. Shooting through the front strike plate is.
M2/3's made more Iraqi tank kills with their 25mm autocannons than the M-1 did.
The difference is a half inch of RHA and over half meter of ceramic composite armor backed by depleted Uranium (for modern Western tanks - not 20-40 year old Soviet second-handers).
And 'bullet-proof glass' is not some magical material that is proof against bullets. Its simply a block of transparent plastic that is strong and *thick enough* to provide protection up to a single strike from a specified caliber. Those vision slits and sensor covers? Are usuall proof against 7.62 mm ball with a few set up to be able to handle a hit or two from .50BMG. But pretty much none of them will survive multiple hits. Fire enough 5.56x45 and you'll chew through them.
Most of our light armored vehicles are able to handle up to 7.62 mm ball - again, not multiple strikes in the same place (but that's hard to do anyway).
BUUUUUUUUUUUT - we're talking about a videogame weapon being critiqued by people who've never even *seen* the real-world equivalents being compared to other weapons that don't exist in the real world being used against mobs that have HP and DR and DT and not flesh and blood and vital organs.
IRL it doesn't take you 5 critical hits to kill someone with a .22LR.
According to the wiki, T-51 provides 2,500 Joules of kinetic protection - that corresponds to providing protection against (up to) 7.62 NATO ball. So your .50 cal should blow holes in armor everytime it hits - but the game doesn't model that, it models hitpoints.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Power_armor_specs
As for why they didn't add an "Anti-Material Rifle". Gauss rifle probably really seems to have filled the role as one in this timeline, the hits from it look quite "painful" as I've said for some reason lol.
:)
Bullet-proof glass in that video was never made to protect from anti-material rounds anyway.Also, 50 BMG's aren't capable of ripping through the hull of a modern tank unless done so in ridiculous volumes. Heck, a 50 BMG armor piercing round couldn't go halfway through an inch of AR550 steel plating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjVrcr3VXjk
You forgot about breaking the sound barrier.
@OP:
Video game math logic doesn't apply to real life examples. In Fallout 4, when you shoot a 50 cal rifle at an enemy, you're only depleting X amount of health from the target's health threshold (a number). RL variables of tissue, organ, shock, etc aren't applied.
They both fire so slow the mobs will literally move out of the way before impact.
The projectile has a BIG collision frame on it meaning it constantly hits something OTHER than your target.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKHa9Df0bCk
But of course the .50 mod for the hunting rifle has to make it a anti material rifle