Bullet Penetration In-Game

[SlimBrad]

Heya folks,

While I was banging away at Syrians holed up inside a building with an M2HB, I was wondering if the game has modeled the different penetrating-power of different calibers; I.E. the .50 cal will punch through walls more readily than 5.56mm, so guys hiding in buildings aren't necessarily covered as well as they would hope.

I know all the tracers bounce of the walls when they hit, regardless of caliber, but I'm hoping that doesn't mean ALL the rounds are bouncing off.

[Mishga]

I honestly belive that 50cal does kill thru walls. I had a syrian platoon holed up in a 3 level house and the QB picked cavalry troops in humvee's to assault.

M2 bullets smushed the squads in no time.

25mm Brad cannon done the same in a shorter space of time.

I am also sure high velocity rounds penetrate some human targets and can hurt/kill the guys behind....not 100% but pretty close.

[MikeyD]

I was curious about this too and ran a test awhile ago. The results - the little 5.56 carbine does NOT like shooting thru walls at much of any range. 7.62 gets the job done much better (U.S. mg, I didn't test the AK). No buildings walls in-game will stop a .50 cal, and 40mm grenade launcher is liable to remove the whole building facade! :eek:

[SlapHappy]

About 40mm and 25mm:

I know that you can damage troops inside buildings with these, but if anything, I feel it is undermodelled.

Some of these buildings are quite small, single level structures. If you unleashed a few salvos of these calibers into a structure with an entire squad inside, I don't think they'd last long...perhaps not even as long as they do. And I find .50 cal capabilities against these targets EXTREMELY UNDERWHELMING. There is an almost full-length video on the web I watched where they compared the results of different caliber weapons from 5.56mm and up on concrete buildings of different integrity levels. The 7.62mm was more capable than I would have imagined, and the .50 cal was just incredible in penetrating power.

However, I can bang away for quite some time with a Stryker .50 cal and not do much to a squad inside even at extremely close range.

What do some of the resident experts think?

[TheNathan]

That video sounds interesting, care to give a link?

[Flanker15]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6760530260633420235&q=firearms+training&hl=en

Bam there ya go.

[SlapHappy]

Did you see that 30mm chain gun? Wow.....

A burst of fire from that and you're not coming out of that building uninjured......

[SlimBrad]

Awesome, thanks for the input guys. I'm glad to see the different penetration is modeled to a degree, though I would admit (as some of you have) that it may be a little underwhelming.

**edit** After watching that video, and the awesome power of the .50 cal, I would shudder to think what would happen if anyone was hiding inside a structure when under fire from an M2HB. The secondary fragmentation alone would cause casualties, let alone the primary rounds.

[ September 12, 2007, 06:06 AM: Message edited by: SlimBrad ]

[Mishga]

No one really understands what it's like to be on the recieving end of 50cal...cos no one usually lives long enough afterward to report about it lol.

I heard it's like being in a steel drum while it is being beaten by the devil.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Mishga:

... no one usually lives long enough afterward to report about it lol.

lol?

Best regards,

Thomm

[Mishga]

The idea of the dead saying...yeah 50cal is a bitch...the idea made me giggle...oh well...

[Neepster]

So, after watching that video it seems that lethality of arms through buildings below 25mm is modeled too low in CMSF, although I was impressed at how much better 7.62mm is at penetrating brick and block walls than 5.56mm...

I hope BFC will get around to tweaking their modeling (particularly of .50 cal weapons) sometime soon... I also agree that it seems that I can shoot a building full of holes with the Stryker M2 and hardly hit anything.

[Huntarr]

Remember, that just because your penetrating does not mean your hitting anything other than walls and furniture. Remember the M40A1, "One Shot, One Kill"

[Neepster]

Umm... Yeah, but if I send 200 .50 cal rounds (or even 50) into a room that is about 20x20, most people will be dead or hors de combat... That part seems pretty clear.

I mean, you can look around your average urban block and you will see very few things that will even slow a .50 cal round down, much less provide cover. Spray 50 of those into an average room, and almost everyone inside will be KIA or WIA...

Personally I don't think CMSF models this that well.. however I am open to alternate arguments...

[SlapHappy]

No argument from me. I thought it seemed kind of wimpy when I first started playing the game. After re-watching the video I'm even more convinced.

[SlapHappy]

I've fired 50 cal at less than 20-30 feet into a building with troops just on the other side of the wall and not caused any casualties for MINUTES on end. That simply isn't believable.....

[thelmia]

Keep in mind most structures are tougher than that. Then remember that the bullet actually has to hit the target, and most of a building is empty space.

If they are modelling bullet paths, perhaps area fire should spray more so that the bullets don't keep going through the same hole over and over.

I think that's what is happening, since area fire seems to go straight from the muzzle towards the center of the target building. I sometimes drive around a bit to change the angle. I can't quite tell if this helps. Thoughts?

[Bigduke6]

Also, do not underestimate the human will to survive.

If you stick people in a building and tell them that sooner or later some one will shoot at them with something that can punch through the building's walls, those humans will for practical purposes always figure out ways to increase their chances of staying alive. This could include staying in bits of the building out of the LOF, piling up stuff inbetween them and the enemy shooters, digging holes, simply curling up into a very small ball, and of course the ever-popular leaving the building while it's being shot up.

Let's not forget that both the .50 caliber and the automatic cannon are old weapons that have been fielded across the world for 70 - 80 years. In war after war, these weapons have been useful, but if the task is digging infantry hiding in buildings the general tactical rule has always been either level the building with high explosive, or send in your own infantry with automatic rifles/pistols and grenaded to clear the building room by room.

As to bullet paths, they do not always stay laser-straight once they punch through bricks or mortar or something. That means ricochets and rounds flying away from where you want them to go.

Of course, supression is another matter, for this job heavy MGs and autocannon have long been the tactical tool of choice if you're talking about keeping people inside a building, from shooting at you. But supression is not the same thing as killing the guy inside.

Modern history is just crammed with examples of weapons that seemed to be super-powerful, that turned out to be less so when applied against a resourceful opponent. Although that video is impressive, it does not cancel out decades of tactical history.

[Mord]

Are there different strengths for buildings? like in CMX1? Heavy, light type structures?

Mord.

[Huntarr]

Originally posted by Huntarr:

Remember, that just because your penetrating does not mean your hitting anything other than walls and furniture. Remember the M40A1, "One Shot, One Kill"

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

Also, do not underestimate the human will to survive.

If you stick people in a building and tell them that sooner or later some one will shoot at them with something that can punch through the building's walls, those humans will for practical purposes always figure out ways to increase their chances of staying alive. This could include staying in bits of the building out of the LOF, piling up stuff inbetween them and the enemy shooters, digging holes, simply curling up into a very small ball, and of course the ever-popular leaving the building while it's being shot up.

Let's not forget that both the .50 caliber and the automatic cannon are old weapons that have been fielded across the world for 70 - 80 years. In war after war, these weapons have been useful, but if the task is digging infantry hiding in buildings the general tactical rule has always been either level the building with high explosive, or send in your own infantry with automatic rifles/pistols and grenaded to clear the building room by room.

As to bullet paths, they do not always stay laser-straight once they punch through bricks or mortar or something. That means ricochets and rounds flying away from where you want them to go.

Of course, supression is another matter, for this job heavy MGs and autocannon have long been the tactical tool of choice if you're talking about keeping people inside a building, from shooting at you. But supression is not the same thing as killing the guy inside.

Modern history is just crammed with examples of weapons that seemed to be super-powerful, that turned out to be less so when applied against a resourceful opponent. Although that video is impressive, it does not cancel out decades of tactical history.

BigDuke6, I thought I said that?

I liked yours better.

It was a very nice clean clinical test.

[Sixxkiller]

Why do people always assume that spraying a building with fire is going to kill everyone inside instantly? Hell I have been involved with fragging a room where people not only lived but werent injured until we shot them. Sometimes the bullet doesnt have your name on it.

(Dont take this post as saying spraying a room with a .50 isnt a beautiful thing, just saying nothing is 100% successful. )

[Neepster]

No one is saying that spraying a building with fire will kill everyone in it, but if you methodically spray a small sun baked brick building (or wood or even block) with 50 cal fire for two or three minutes, most of the people in side will not be combat effective after that time.

Yes, things like you describe happen, but it isn't the norm, yes? Usually if you throw frag grenades in a 10x10 room, many if not most people in the room will be badly injured or killed unless there is a lot of cover.

With a 50 cal, that goes through almost every cover a Syrian irregular (or even regular) force could conceivably have in that room, it would be even worse. With a grenade, you can duck behind a desk or a bed or something and maybe only get concussed, but a .50 round is going right through that bed or desk and spray pieces of it all around you and through you.

Like I said, I can accept the argument that sometimes you just don't get hit, but spraying a smallish room with high caliber weapons for several minutes and having NO ONE or only one or two guys in a squad get hit seems very unlikely to me. And this happens a LOT in CMSF...

[Fly Pusher]

I think the US readers also have to consider that much of the rest of the world build their houses of materials somewhat more substantial than 2x4 and plasterboard.

While probably not entirely 50 cal proof, concrete, bricks and morter certainly give the impression of considerable solidity...

[Lurker765]

Fly Pusher,

Did you watch that video posted earlier in this thread?

[SlimBrad]

As the video posted above demonstrated, the materials you describe seem to have little effect on a .50 cal round.

Also, as to what Bigduke6 said, curling up into a ball, piling up furniture and the such don't seem to be a feasible defense against high-powered rounds being poured into an occupied building. Not in my opinion, anyway. I really think that the bullet penetration effect is under modeled.