Of course. And personally I think they do a great job. But if the guns are to ineffective you have to try to sneak most of the time. And if you’ve beaten the game, there really is no point in playing if all you do is sneak around. Well up until now when they’ve released a DLC
I’ve been reading the comments with interest and it’s very clear the majority of players are casual and the dev’s arent going to turn away new player by making the game harder, that being said it’s very clear they have to make a survivlist difficulty to give the long serving players which includes myself a new challenge or they will move on to other games which is a shame because this game is a diamond in the rough.
I feel a lot of players would benefit from that happening, but its only in its first year and it will get better and the dev’s are trying to make it better.
Fingers crossed for 2020
@Bootie I completely agree that the regular 1-5* PVG90 is terribly underpowered in GZ. The 6* version finally feels like an anti-materiel rifle, except for the strange noise it makes.
However, if we’re gonna be comparing a game to reality, I have to object to your numbers regarding the 7.62 mm. The 7.62 NATO or .308 Winchester will not penetrate 9-12 feet (over 3 meters) of solid wood, if you could even find a tree that thick! It may not penetrate 2, 3 or 4 people either, it depends on what you hit. I hunt deer with a .30-06, which is slightly more powerful. Sometimes you can find the bullet lodged somewhere inside the animal, and that was shot at only 30 meters. A thick bone actually does a great job at slowing down a bullet, or deflecting it’s flight path (even a straw or a twig can do that), and the broad side of a bullet won’t penetrate very much. I’ll add that I have also tried shooting a pine tree with a 60 cm (2 ft.) diameter… The bullets are still inside that tree today.
I understand you have a lot of military experience. I have a little. Mandatory service that is, not career. Luckily, I knew a thing or two about how guns work and a bit about ballistics in advance, because our sergeants and officers mostly just knew the basics. Some of them even paraphrased war movie quotes to describe the effects of certain weapons and ammunition types! Anyway, I’m not aiming this directly at you, but I’m just saying that not all military personnel know what they’re talking about, but they’re wrong with confidence, I’ll give them that! And I guess that’s enough to impress the recruits… 
There’s generally a ton of misinformation out there, almost everywhere you look. Just look at the american trend of shooting watermelons compared to human (or zombie) heads. And their damned cinder blocks, that are supposed to represent “good cover”, but will actually break from a hammer stroke.
Whatever, that’s today’s rant…
In 1974 three marines were left behind by accident when the unit pulled out of a riot in Northern Ireland. They were surrounded and one of them knocked to the ground by the crowd who then started to take his rifle. The other marine fired three rounds into the crowd. There were nine dead and twenty-seven injured.
The figures I got from an Engineer officer I shared a billet with - he was obsessed by weapons, and could talk endlessly about everything from cluster bombs (lesson: don’t park your tanks on football fields) to pistols, giving explosive power in foot/pounds and muzzle velocities off the top of his head.
The Americans discovered the limitations of the 5.56 in Vietnam where they remarked that the Soviet-designed 7.62 (less powerful than the Nato round) would go through trees and hit soldiers, while the 5.56 would not in reply, which gave the Viet Cong a distinct advantage in the largely forested country.
The Nato 7.62 round (and I know you’ll want to know) strikes with a force of 3,000 ft/lbs - that is a one pound weight dropped three thousand feet with no air resistance.
Then I would object me not visibly carrying any weapons, let alone a backpack. What am I, a wizard?
And carrying an “anti-material rifle”, a rocket launcher, an AR, an SMG, another AR, thousands of rounds for all those, 30 grenades… shall I go on?
For balancing a game, comparing to reality does just this: nothing.
And don’t forget the sway of the weapons because let’s be fair most people have never fired a weapon or held one so real life reality would never work in a game otherwise the game would always win
I load and reload my own ammunition, so I understand the numbers.
I load my .30-06 with a 165 grain bullet at 2800 fps velocity that yields a force on impact of roughly 3200 ft/lbs.
According to Wikipedia, the 7,62x51mm NATO has a 147 grain bullet with a 2800 fps velocity and a force of 2559 ft/lbs.
A bit more power in my rounds, as I said, still they don’t shoot through a 2 ft tree, let alone 9 or 12 ft. Of course, a FMJ bullet has a little bit more penetration power than a hunting bullet, but at the cost of losing stopping power. But like your example from Northern Ireland, some times a bullet can cut through a lot of soft tissue without stopping. You can also try shooting into water, the bullet stops after a few feet.
I could not say this better myself…
Jomjom79
Only at supersonic - it’s the shockwave that stops it. You can shoot fish with a bow and arrow at reasonable depths.
What I do know is that the AK47 would go through trees and hit soldiers in Vietnam, and the 5.56 would not…
This was a great thread of discussion on the experimental weapons. I’m going to lock the thread since it has good information in it from a month or two ago, and we don’t want new unnecessary comments that would decrease the thread’s value since it appears the most recent comments are going off topic 
Thank you all for the great discussion!
boston_51
1 Like