Jump to content

Weapons Damage Decreases With Use


booner352

Recommended Posts

 failed to come with any scientific/mathematical reasoning about why or how I was wrong.

 

P.S. I even presented this little "argument" to one of my classes today and not a single one of my peers could understand how I was wrong in my reasoning. The only thing we couldn't pinpoint is where the extra energy of the smooth barrel system would be lost, but eventually we came up with some pretty logical reasoning. You'd have to conduct an experiment to pinpoint that.

 

Let me help you out here in simple terms so you can understand where the missing variable is. The reason you couldn't come up with where the extra energy is lost is because nothing exists in physics to accomplish that. Ignoring especially the fact that the round ball wouldn't tumble and so wouldn't lose any energy at all relevant to a bullet shape (simply losing accuracy due to the Magnus Effect and possibly a bit of momentum down the range due to having more wind resistance than a bullet shaped bullet), here is why you saw less energy from the smooth bore. I've already told you this, but since you seem to have missed this (ala the claim that I brought no evidence to the table) I'll repost it in a simpler format:

 

1) The barrels are different sizes*

2) The guns are different (this can have a host of effects on accuracy and power, can site sources if you'd like but it's common knowledge)

3) The bullets themselves were vastly different sizes**

 

 

 

*Why does this matter? You ask. Good question! Having more free space in the barrel makes the ball less accurate. Further, though, and more importantly it allows for early onset of the Magnus Effect. While this doesn't directly effect the momentum of the ball, it does make it take a longer path from point A to point B (the target). Due to longer distance traveled when viewing from a linear standpoint, by the time it gets to the target, it's going a bit slower than if it had done a straight(er) line without the influences of the Magnus Effect. Regardless of this fact, the momentum at any given time in the trajectory would be the same as one from a rifled barrel.

 

 

**This is a huge one. As you know, [f = m * a, or force = mass * acceleration], and the antithesis of that is [f/m = a] thus the higher the mass, the lower the acceleration given the force as a constant. This is why the test in the YouTube video was so hilariously inaccurate. Yes, the force was increased, but the amount of force increased (relatively small in terms of black powder) versus the amount of mass increased (relatively huge in terms of mass, probably at least triple the mass of the bullet given the bullet's flanges and much smaller caliber) means the slight increase in force was greatly outmatched.

 

 

Of course, all of this is once again ignoring the fact that we aren't actually talking about smooth bore or round shot. We're talking about a slightly dirty rifled barrel, which still puts spin on bullet shaped bullets, which still makes everything you've said thus far not relevant anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's meaningless why did you bother triple-posting to tear him down? That very last paragraph summed it up pretty succintly. Nobody wants to read 700 words when 50 will do. :P

Anyway.

Weapon degradation, yay, bladed weapons can get dull and blunt weapons can get bent out of shape or cracked. Dull bladed weapons wouldn't penetrate your enemy as far, thus making it harder to make that all-important brain damage happen. A blunt weapon with a bend or break in it might "give" a little bit every time you hit something with it, reducing the force transferred to whatever you're striking.

Guns that are used improperly should require cleaning if you don't want them to jam at a critical moment. Smooth and rifled barrels (dirty or otherwise) will both put holes in whatever you're shooting at within the relatively short distances at which we will be fighting most of our zombies. I figure it's not worth splitting hairs over that particular point when we all agree that your weapon jamming is a much bigger and more realistic concern.

Edit:
 

If I was on the apocalypse, and I miraculously got a gun. I really wouldn't fuck with it. What if I can't put it back together, or what if i do it wrong? if it's not broken don't fix it, it's my policy.


Oh man, this. I know how to handle a gun safely and I've shot them a few times in my life, but if I had to disassemble one without any instruction I'd be nervous as all hell. I figure they're made do be durable and thus wouldn't have loads of tiny parts. But anyone who's taken a pen apart only to have the spring fly off into a corner unexpectedly knows what I'm talking about.
 
I could probably figure it out but I'd also probably only attempt it in a situation where the gun was going to be useless to me anyway, like if it started to jam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's meaningless why did you bother triple-posting to tear him down? That very last paragraph summed it up pretty succintly. Nobody wants to read 700 words when 50 will do. :P

 

No tearing down took place of him. My sole purpose here is to present the facts on this debate, which I did. While the last paragraph did sum up why his overall point didn't matter in the long run, I still would like to help him and others reading this thread understand why he's wrong and how it actually works- I'm a gun fanatic and a firm believer that the truth is an important goal in any debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, please remember that it's pretty easy to get emotional context wrong here, what you say is easily taken out of context. Please be aware of the the language you use in your responses, and be lovely. That means no insults, at all, implied or no. This is a general warning, and covers everyone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So we were having this discussion (that is semi-related to this suggestion) about how right now the fighting mechanics seem a little unbalanced (too easy). My suggestion to help balance this would be to have weapon maximum damage and a weapon minimum damage. No, I do not think that you should deal a random damage between these ranges. Instead, I think as your weapon condition decreases the damage it does decreases. You wouldn't have constant damage from an axe as it is used more and more. Instead, the axe blade would begin to become dull and deal a little less damage. The only weapons I could really see this effecting much is bladed weapons. This could also have a slight (very minimal) effect on guns also, as they would build up residue and degrade over use causing the bullets to come out slightly slower. Considering blunt objects, I don't really see how they would degrade to cause less damage (but if someone can rationalize it, I'm all for it).

 

 

Link to discussion mentioned in the first sentence: http://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php/topic/7990-these-not-so-scary-zombies/page-2#entry105393

 

you know that the combat system of the moment is an placeholder ?

read all the Mondiod Blog articles

 

What he is saying is a suggestion for future versions of the combat system.

Please do not assume we all read the blog, because I can assure you we all don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So we were having this discussion (that is semi-related to this suggestion) about how right now the fighting mechanics seem a little unbalanced (too easy). My suggestion to help balance this would be to have weapon maximum damage and a weapon minimum damage. No, I do not think that you should deal a random damage between these ranges. Instead, I think as your weapon condition decreases the damage it does decreases. You wouldn't have constant damage from an axe as it is used more and more. Instead, the axe blade would begin to become dull and deal a little less damage. The only weapons I could really see this effecting much is bladed weapons. This could also have a slight (very minimal) effect on guns also, as they would build up residue and degrade over use causing the bullets to come out slightly slower. Considering blunt objects, I don't really see how they would degrade to cause less damage (but if someone can rationalize it, I'm all for it).

 

 

Link to discussion mentioned in the first sentence: http://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php/topic/7990-these-not-so-scary-zombies/page-2#entry105393

 

you know that the combat system of the moment is an placeholder ?

read all the Mondiod Blog articles

 

What he is saying is a suggestion for future versions of the combat system.

Please do not assume we all read the blog, because I can assure you we all don't.

 

 

Well... you should. I don't think I really need to explain why, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So we were having this discussion (that is semi-related to this suggestion) about how right now the fighting mechanics seem a little unbalanced (too easy). My suggestion to help balance this would be to have weapon maximum damage and a weapon minimum damage. No, I do not think that you should deal a random damage between these ranges. Instead, I think as your weapon condition decreases the damage it does decreases. You wouldn't have constant damage from an axe as it is used more and more. Instead, the axe blade would begin to become dull and deal a little less damage. The only weapons I could really see this effecting much is bladed weapons. This could also have a slight (very minimal) effect on guns also, as they would build up residue and degrade over use causing the bullets to come out slightly slower. Considering blunt objects, I don't really see how they would degrade to cause less damage (but if someone can rationalize it, I'm all for it).

 

 

Link to discussion mentioned in the first sentence: http://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php/topic/7990-these-not-so-scary-zombies/page-2#entry105393

 

you know that the combat system of the moment is an placeholder ?

read all the Mondiod Blog articles

 

What he is saying is a suggestion for future versions of the combat system.

Please do not assume we all read the blog, because I can assure you we all don't.

 

 

Well... you should. I don't think I really need to explain why, right?

 

Your holding in this conversation holds no weight, and as such is not crucial to the topic at hand. Please think before posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Your holding in this conversation holds no weight, and as such is not crucial to the topic at hand. Please think before posting.

 

Going to want to start tacking towards lovelier waters here. You're not a moderator on this forum, therefore it's probably not a good idea to try to be one. We have a report function if something bothers you -- not that that necessarily means we'll take action on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your holding in this conversation holds no weight, and as such is not crucial to the topic at hand. Please think before posting.

I guess I do have to explain after all....

This is the suggestions forum. There is a lot of material that has been suggested repeatedly.

Some of this material is already confirmed or disproved by the developers.

In order to make a avoid rehashing old material you should read the common suggestions threads.

You should read the common suggestions thread anyways to understand what the direction of the game is.

If you're not putting effort into learning what the developers are wanting you to say, why should they or anybody else put the effort into trying to understand what you are trying to say.

I will quote a member of this forum.

Without reading the common suggestions thread, (And making posts on the suggestion thread)...

Spoiler

 

Your holding in this conversation holds no weight, and as such is not crucial to the topic at hand. Please think before posting.

 

Edited by Eblanc
Cleaned up formatting -- hopefully it's right
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Your holding in this conversation holds no weight, and as such is not crucial to the topic at hand. Please think before posting.

 

Going to want to start tacking towards lovelier waters here. You're not a moderator on this forum, therefore it's probably not a good idea to try to be one. We have a report function if something bothers you -- not that that necessarily means we'll take action on it.

 

 

I think all the general ideas of this suggestion are out there and this is just being an argument now (myself very included). May I suggest locking this one down to avoid any more breaking of the golden rule(be lovely)? Thank you! (fedora)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, I think everything that's needed has been said.

 

Booner I do want to take a second to apologize if I've come off harsh- I don't mean to. I like to debate, and sometimes that means I'm a bit competitive about it, and my dissecting of points in detail can be a bit rough. I hope I didn't hurt your feelings, and if you ever have any concerns feel free to contact me or any of the others on the mod team. If you are interested at all in continuing our discourse feel free to PM me. Thanks everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...