Has anyone ever done the Ballistics Math?
Like this gun does this amount of damage per hit and its rate of fire is 10 rounds a second.
some of the sub machine guns take 14 hits to kill someone.
also, I know distance is a factor with the shotgun, is it also a factor with the machine guns?
Yes. Quite a few people, in fact. This spreadsheet is probably the best, and I beleive is still maintained by @ArsonistCow but he isn’t around here much.
@MisterBadmin said:
Yes. Quite a few people, in fact. This spreadsheet is probably the best, and I beleive is still maintained by @ArsonistCow but he isn’t around here much.
Well then, so this is DB’s SlothSquadron?
Wow. So the damage per second on all of the guns are pretty close. It does not feel like it’s so even.
http://dirtybomb.gamepedia.com/Weapons
@Major_Slapnuts said:
Wow. So the damage per second on all of the guns are pretty close. It does not feel like it’s so even.
This perception is due to the lack of average accuracy in these sheets. These are vacuum calculations assuming 100% accuracy.
I showed in another thread that average accuracy changes things quite a bit, namely sniper rifles. If you take these numbers and multiply them by the average accuracy, you will see the disparity you feel.
For example, I tend to have about 70% accuracy with shotguns and 35% with automatic rifles.
Hollunds = 139.3 DPS * .70 = 97.51 DPS
Crotzni = 130 DPS * .35 = 45.5 DPS
With this model, shotguns seem way stronger than they are in a vacuum. Take note, though, that shotguns damage is based on the number of pellets you hit the opponent with.
Ahnuld = 7x11 pellets
Hollunds = 8x11 pellets
Remburg = 8x12 pellets
To actually do 88 damage to the body, you have to hit it with all pellets. But, your accuracy counts a hit as any one pellet hitting the opponent. So, the 97.51 number is even still a bit skewed, but you get the point I’m trying to illustrate.