[QUOTE=tokamak;419628]So while wearing kevlar you’re probably feeling more pain from JHP’s than from FMJ’s while FMJ’s will probably be more lethal and damage you more. Correct me if I’m wrong, I only know the difference from Raven Shield where JHP will do more damage but FMJ allows you to fire through doors (something which isn’t trivial as R6 is filled with doors)
[/QUOTE]
Hollowpoints will expand / shatter on the first thing they hit (within reason of course) whereas FMJs will puncture through things more readily (but will still splatter on something hard enough or be deflected by odd shapes). Now when it comes to hitting kevlar with pistol rounds the FMJ has a higher chance of puncturing but it’s still not very likely unless it’s very close range as pistol rounds generally travel fairly slowly… so both rounds are likely to simply dump their kinetic energy into the target (which is what kevlar is designed to disperse) which is how they bruise and break ribs… they basically end up being muhammed ali’s jab to the ribs if they get stopped.
If a hollowpoint hits an uprotected target then it’ll do far more damage than a FMJ because the FMJ will punch a hole through and keep going. The JHP will pancake inside and tear things up. Particularly nasty rounds are designed to splinter inside to do the most damage and be more difficult to remove.
In game terms: hollowpoints should suffer 150% the effect of armour but do 150% the damage (as a rough representation of how the different ammunition works… very rough). But I don’t think DB has an armour reduction stat at all…
When we’re talking Assault Rifles however: Then FMJ really shines because the faster speed of the bullet makes it more likely that it’ll punch through kevlar and you’re generally putting multiple rounds into a target.
The reason why the army tend to use FMJ when civilians tend to use JHP: the army aren’t trying to kill. They’re trying to wound. A wounded enemy ties up far more supply lines than a dead enemy. Wars are won on supplies. FMJ is best for this.
The army also use assault rifles (higher ballistic speeds than pistols) and such, and are normally shooting another army who are trained to wear their ballistic armour. So there’s a much higher incidence of armoured targets.
Civilians are going for stopping power and they do not want the bullet leaving their target and continuing on to hit an unintended target. Hollowpoints tend to stop in the first target or at least lose most of their momentum.
This difference perfectly illustrates the ‘incapacitate’ vs ‘damage’ function of weapons. I think it would be great if players, by selecting their classes, could make a concious decision to either focus on incapacitating, hindering a player, or going for the full damage option. The use of both is highly situational and therefore very deeply tactical.
So while an across the board push-back may be annoying. I do like it if people consider at least the possibility of certain (low damage) guns having it and other (high damage) guns do not).
hmm… it may be an interesting tactical choice to have a special effect on some weapons, but I’m not sure if the pushback / slowdown is the right effect.
While it would be interesting to see teams formed up with a guy to pin people down and another to do the damage to the pinned target I think that pinning (and almost all loss of control of the character) to be too powerful an effect.
Loss of control effects are not nice for the player losing control and super powerful for the character inducing loss of control. This is why all WoW players would complain about stunlock rogues in PVP. Loss of control is just not fun.
I agree! Arguments for realism should never prevail over arguments for gameplay. I just think this is a particular real-life example that translates to the game world in a really interesting way.
I think we should leave all trappings of realism out. Think movie physics and fun and I’m sure we’ll do fine.
In reality getting shot doesn’t cause any form of pushback. If a bullet knocked someone over when they were shot then the laws of force say that the person firing the gun should be knocked over too (equal and opposite reactions and all that)… in fact a little more since some of the energy is bled off through wind resistance and all that. The fact that the worst you get is a bit of recoil goes to show that the target would suffer almost no effect (other than a new gaping wound).
So lets stick to movie physics and ignore things like “what round would be used and how do those rounds actually affect things” and instead say things like “that gun should have a special effect for coolness” and “pushback should scale with damage because that makes game sense”.
Apparently some reputation grader thinks that discussing stopping power in a push-back threat is off-topic. 
Meh… the whole reputation score thing is really just for lols. I mostly ignore it.
