Honestly, let’s stop here. The book has already explained it very clearly. I have nothing more to say about anti-intellectualism; you win.
1/4" against trucks.
Unless WW2 was fought between optimus prime and decepticons
Im fairly sorry to inform you but such requirement as full penetration of 6mm steel from shrapnell is highly outdated
( IF at all ever even considered requirement against living targets )
Just like the silly requirements of ww2 era rifles requiring to penetrate certain amount of wood to be considered good against humans.
With just quick googling the blast zone that is technically a guaranteed kill from 250kg bomb is larger than your shrapnell logic.
Here’s how to kill a truck with a. 30 carbine gun
If you go and look through the book, you’ll find that it categorizes different lethality levels, with CASUALTIES 1/8 in MILD STEEL and 1/4 in MILD STEEL representing different threat levels. Oh my god, please don’t reply with such foolish things anymore. I can’t take it
idk says here on your own book.
“Has been superseded by wounding criteria”
1/8 is effective against grounded airplanes
1/4 is effective against trucks
1/2 is effective against light armored vehicles
Is it really strange that the kinetic energy causing damage to airplanes, cars, and people is similar? Seriously, don’t argue with the textbook anymore; it’s too foolish.
Im more intrested of where exactly it states a 6mm penetration of steel is considered as requirement to kill human.
Do highlight it for me, regardless how outdated your “sources” are im fairly sure they knew by that time the requirement of penning 6mm steel is absolutely ridiculous.
That’s enough. Just leave it at that. If you were willing to learn or read… you wouldn’t be an anti-intellectual
then read again
- so RED 10 is 10% chance of soldier getting incapacitated while in prone. RED 10 for mk82 is 250m. while in game there is 90% chance that you will survive if bomb lands 20-30m from you and you go prone.
- secondary fragmentation dont travel as far as primary fragrents, nor with such high velocity
- game shows maximum radius where fragment can end up from bomb, not that all fragments will end up there. if you check documentation. as mentioned above, lethal area in those papers is defined as certain number of fragments per x square meter. that doesnt mean that there will be no lethal fragments above that point, it just means that they ignore fragments past that area cause they are too spread out.
here:
if anything bombs in game are even nerfed compared to reality.
Just highlight the line where it states a penetration of 6mm steel plate is the requirement against living targets.
At least it indicates the power of the fragments; even when using the CASUALTIES standard charts, the range of the lethal zone won’t be much larger.
lethal zone≠lethal fragments.
lethal zone is defined as at least 1 fragment per 10sq feet. lethal fragments can be found well behind lethal zone.
btw it is assumed that target soldier has 0.5m sq(or 5 sq feet) of surface so that means there is ~50% hit percentage for prone soldier in lethal zone.
I know Im late to the party, but I will leave my own opinion anyway.
I believe that bombs and rockets are fine as they are. In urban battlefields even the TU2s, JU-188 and P-47 D can usually only do little damage, however in open maps such as most of Tunisia, Moscow, Bulge maps and many Normandy maps, there is no cover blocking the shrapnel thus these rockets and bombs can wipe squads too easily. This is extremely problematic in open objectives.
Because suspended armament is not necessarily over powered in every situation, I believe that the size or number of bombs/rockets should be reduced instead on certain maps.
Lets say that
dense urban maps: no limit
mix of urban and open areas (Normandy villages for example): 750 kg limit, 6 rockets max.
open maps with little cover (Quarry or Gorge map): 500 kg limit, 4 rockets max.
Im pretty sure fragments aren’t the only thing deadly about bombs - I remember reading about how there were mortar shells that were designed to explode a couple of meters above the ground - creating a shockwave that had a surprisingly big lethality range, because the concussion scrambled the lungs of soldiers standing too close to the explosion.
I bet a 500 KG bomb would guaranteed blast soldiers to kingdom come in multiple meters distance - even without shrapnel.
1 Like
You’re right. Other games don’t calculate bomb damage this way. It’s quite counterintuitive.
I’m not sure if my measurements are correct. I feel that the lethal zone of the MK82 is similar to that of the M64. There’s even a chart here showing the probability of lethality（The blue color indicates a lethality rate of 0.）. I still think the range in the game is much larger.
The incapacitation in RED may not be suitable as a reference for the kill range in games.（on a prone male soldier in winter clothing being physically unable to respond to an assault for a 5-minute period after the attack）
Here, I overlaid the images, and the 100% lethal zone of the MK82 is 32 meters, equivalent to 104.99 feet. The M64 uses the CASUALTIES standard.
Considering the 40-year gap between them, the lethal zone of the MK82 is only slightly larger.
The range in the game is still too exaggerated, isn’t it?
This is the effect of all the overlaid images. The red color represents the range in the game.
In high BR battles, players controlling infantry are constantly tormented by bombs and rockets. In the worst case, the open combat zone will be turned into the surface of the moon by a continuous stream of bombs, and all infantry who come to support will be killed within seconds. The computer screen will continue to shake and flicker for nearly ten minutes or even longer. This experience is very bad, and the intense and sustained visual impact also makes people want to vomit.
I think it’s reasonable to make some adjustments to the bombs and rockets, but I still don’t have a good solution yet. Thank you for everything you’ve done. I hope developers can see this.
That red area is where shrapnells still kill you if you are unlucky enough to get hit by one.
Not the ~15-30m blast zone which is pretty much guaranteed killzone. Except in this game where the area is significantly smaller.
And technically even smaller if you prone.
and this is your mistake. you are comparing apples and oranges. you are under impression that 100% of fragments will end up on max range as “lethal zone”, instead of being distributed with whathever bomb model they are using.
lethal bomb fragments exist outside “lethal zone”. if we used army definition of lethal zone, then in game lethal zone would be 20-30m from bomb cause you can easily survive most bombs if you just go prone.
idk how else to explain this to you. you are simply mixing max range game has for lethal fragmentation damage with “lethal zone” defined by army which is basically zone where soldier has more chance to die than to live(aka 50%)
40 year gap? you know that mk82 is in use since 50s?