Guest Guest Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slug88 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Remember that all US infantry have body armor. AFAIK, no Syrian unit that would use AK47's is equipped with body armor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker15 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 AK47 should be able to swiss cheese body armor anyway. I think it is due to the better optics on the M4s so more hits. Also I think Steve said that the Syrian army used HP bullets for their AK74s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matchstick Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Flanker15, the evidence I can find on the net suggest that current issue Interceptor armour with SAPI inserts *should* be able to stop a 7.62mm soviet round. Course it won't stop every round and it shouldn't be modelled as such but, if true, I think it's some way from being turned into Swiss Cheese http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/interceptor.htm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secondbrooks Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Should they have SAPI? Anyways it should cover only small area of human silhuette, so it's effect of casualites would be... 15-10%? Prone guy gets zero advantage from it, correct? If i understand that SaPI is 20x30 mm plates covering belly and possibly sides. AK should go thru vest within it's effective range of 300 meters if it doesn't hit traumplate... Well i haven't much studied the matter much, so i quess there is change that i'm wrong. It's optics i'll be telling you. US having all their weapons equipped with optics should be very serious casuality producer to enemy without optics... I'm supprised that it doesn't give US even better effectivity of fire in CMSF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splinty Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by Secondbrooks: Should they have SAPI? Anyways it should cover only small area of human silhuette, so it's effect of casualites would be... 15-10%? Prone guy gets zero advantage from it, correct? If i understand that SaPI is 20x30 mm plates covering belly and possibly sides. AK should go thru vest within it's effective range of 300 meters if it doesn't hit traumplate... Well i haven't much studied the matter much, so i quess there is change that i'm wrong. It's optics i'll be telling you. US having all their weapons equipped with optics should be very serious casuality producer to enemy without optics... I'm supprised that it doesn't give US even better effectivity of fire in CMSF. You are wrong about the SAPI, it will stop up to 7.92 mm FMJ at all but point blank range. The plates cover most of the chest and back. The plates will not stop AP rounds. The vest can handle 9mm pistol rounds without the plates. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undead reindeer cavalry Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 i don't think it should matter wether the shot penetrates the armor or not -- the guy should be out of the battle anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Why would he be out of the battle if the vest performs as it should and protects him? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Nox, Just noticed your sig. Congrats. Time to start cashing in that GI Bill and buying a house with your VA loan. Thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secondbrooks Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by Splinty: You are wrong about the SAPI, it will stop up to 7.92 mm FMJ at all but point blank range. The plates cover most of the chest and back. The plates will not stop AP rounds. The vest can handle 9mm pistol rounds without the plates. Okay, so we are discussing quite bit different system here than i thought. Thanks for the info. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by SgtMuhammed: Nox, Just noticed your sig. Congrats. Time to start cashing in that GI Bill and buying a house with your VA loan. Thanks, already have the house paid for by another soldiers' VA loan. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by SgtMuhammed: Nox, Just noticed your sig. Congrats. Time to start cashing in that GI Bill and buying a house with your VA loan. Thanks. Thats what I just did 5.5% for 30 years,no PMI 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Thoughts on testing M4s vs. AK74s... Find crews that are armed with only M4s or AK47s. This eliminates all the side effects from the SAWs and other weapons within the Squads. They might not kill, but they can suppress, affect morale, etc. unevenly. Next, make sure all the settings are the same, especially Experience. Then put them in exactly the same positions on mirrored terrain with the same Commands. This should even out many factors. However, one factor that can not be evened out is the body armor (helmet and torso) of the US soldiers. This is an extremely big factor, BTW. It's tough to say how much effect it should have, but it should be significant. The other problem with these sorts of tests is statistical chance coming into play. If you start out with 4 guys shooting 4 guys, the minute one guy goes down the testing should be stopped. Why? Because now it's a 3 on 4 situation and that skews the results in favor of whichever unit has 4 guys. Since the US units have body armor, there is a greater inherent chance that the first casualty to be scored will be on the Syrian side. Therefore, only that first casualty is valid. As I say over and over and over agin about tests... they are extremely difficult to set up so that the results are relevant to whatever hypothesis is being checked out. Rigorous thinking about outside factors, especially statistical chance, must be either eliminated or at least accounted for in some quantifiable way. And the more specific the thing it is you're looking for, generally the more rigorous the tests have to be. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by M1A1TC: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SgtMuhammed: Nox, Just noticed your sig. Congrats. Time to start cashing in that GI Bill and buying a house with your VA loan. Thanks. Thats what I just did 5.5% for 30 years,no PMI </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Thanks I am closing this friday back on topic- I am happy with small arms simulation. On the other hand, Id like to see bigger caliber doing more damage to buildings 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by Adam1: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox: Why would he be out of the battle if the vest performs as it should and protects him? They wouldn't be. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Armor and optics. Anyone who has shot iron sights while not prone and rested, then did the same with an M68 reflex sight knows that the difference is night and day. Calvicula - congrats. :cool: That ETS day was a special day for me... in good and bad ways. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlapHappy Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Originally posted by M1A1TC: Thanks I am closing this friday back on topic- I am happy with small arms simulation. On the other hand, Id like to see bigger caliber doing more damage to buildings Agreed 100%. Either 50 cal and 25 mm are doing less damage to buildings than I would expect, or the building damage model just does a poor job of feeding back info to the player. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I think it's the feedback. What we really should have (in a perfect world!) is decals on the buildings that show incremental damage. The damage modeling is more visually accurate than CMx1, but only by a little bit. This is one of those things that will likely improve over time as we can devote CPU, VRAM, and programming resources to it. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Great news Steve, and very welcome indeed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undead reindeer cavalry Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox: Why would he be out of the battle if the vest performs as it should and protects him? because of psychological factors. perhaps let him empty the mag and then leave for the rest of the battle. of course every now and then you read a story where dude x supposedly just kept on going while taking hits, at the end of the mission having 10+ holes in hist vest, but it's far more common to read how dude x leaves the battle for 20+ minutes to take care of himself after taking a hit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 If you ask me, this thread highlights one particular strength of CM over other games, and CMx2, the new engine, in particular. CM is simulating most of the basic factors of tactical ground combat at the base level (e.g. tracking each individual bullet), and is not simply creating abstract results based on pre-made expectations. It would be much simpler that way of course and we could save a lot of CPU power for pretty graphics, but without it CMSF would not be the simulation it is, and threads like this would be almost pointless. As it is, the observation mentioned here is actually very interesting, and it is a result of many other little factors coded into the game coming together. Steve and Charles didn't knowingly design it to be so; it's the outcome of all the little things that the game is simulating independently. And it's a great way to doublecheck the fidelity of the simulation as such. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Originally posted by undead reindeer cavalry: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox: Why would he be out of the battle if the vest performs as it should and protects him? because of psychological factors. perhaps let him empty the mag and then leave for the rest of the battle. of course every now and then you read a story where dude x supposedly just kept on going while taking hits, at the end of the mission having 10+ holes in hist vest, but it's far more common to read how dude x leaves the battle for 20+ minutes to take care of himself after taking a hit. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.