Firearms, joules and damage dice

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

What might help here would be some sort of Stun/Shock roll that the character must make when injured to continue acting. A Willpower roll for example. A "0 point" graze could do do no damage but still trigger the Stun/Shock roll. We could even determine the difficulty of the Stun/Shock roll by the damage taken. No damage would require an easy roll, some damage a normal roll, and a major wound (or location disabling) wound could require a difficult roll. 

Something like this would certainly help, but then if we can't even get weapon damage down to a single point, how do we figure a "0" point graze? And I'm certain that many many would argue "if I didn't take any damage..." blah blah blah, and I could certainly understand this for direct damage weapons. Now I seriously like your idea for explosive weapons, but thats a different thread.

SDLeary

 

[Atgxtg]

5 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

No, that wasn't the reason. Ostensibly it was due to the change in the figuring of SIZ and  the resulting increase in HP. It was odd that it didn't factor to all weapons though.

I don't believe that was the reason - since I was odd for it to factor into only one weapon. Besides, the increase in db that's to the higher SIZ more than compensated for the extra HP.

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

So can we agree on desired damages for various benchmark calibers?

For example, .22LR, 9mm Parabellum, .45 ACP, .357M, .10mm, .44M, 5.56mm, 7.62 NATO, .50BMG to get the ball rolling. 

Using your sequence: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8 (.45 and .357), 1d10 (10mm and .44), 1d8, 1d10, 2d10 is where I would stick things at a glance.

The 8 – 12 mm rounds between 7.62 and .50 would fall somewhere in the 1d12 area, perhaps with plus added lower dice (1d4, 1d6,etc). Small Spitzer type rounds would be in the 1d6 (such as 5.7 x 28), or 1d4 (4.6 x 30, .17) realm. 

Of course, there is always the ability to fudge things one way or the other. Especially with some of the odd cartridges that use a small slug and huge case.

SDLeary

Edited November 30, 2016 by SDLeary

[Questbird]

7 hours ago, g33k said:

Cue Black Knight:  "It's Just a Flesh Wound!!!"

More seriously, one could indeed argue that "minor wounds" are simply not worth treating with a "hit point" mechanic; "death of a thousand paper cuts" is a known problem with some RPG mechanics.

The problem with penalty mechanics, I think, is two-fold:  one is the risk of "death spiral" mechanics, where minor penalties make the character slightly less-effective, earning larger penalties & being much-less-effective, etc.  The other is even more key, to me:  why would a "minor wound" (no HP's of damage) cause a greater penalty than a substantive multi-HP wound?

In this context, I rather like the Ars Magica 5e system:  you can take an essentially unlimited number of minor/moderate/major injuries (but take cumulative -1/-3/-5 penalties (on a d10 + stat + skill) from ALL the wounds combined); a few of these injuries into a combat, and you are not only less-effective you become MUCH more likely to sustain more wounds, and wounds tend to be worse.  There are also "incapacitating" injuries (where you can't really take any meaningful action any more), and a "deadly" injury (yeah, you know what THAT is); while possible early-on in combat (especially facing a Cave Troll with a battle axe, or the like), incapacitation/death get more likely as the fighters begin operating under injury penalties...  A given injury CAN get worse, either by over-exertion in the field or bad medical care, or just bad luck (bad dice!). Long term, there is the risk (in healing) of not fully healing: a scar, a limp, a bad eye, etc...

There is no single "hit point" pool that you draw down from, just the injuries, and their impact on what you can do; it's very much a "death spiral" mechanic -- unapologetically so!  I am ambivalent about that, as there's a very real risk of players sliding into "I just can't do anything anymore... every roll is just more unFun than the last!"

It's not a perfect system (even aside from my ambivalence about DeathSpirals)... there is (for example) no substantial attention given to ideas like "cumulative blood loss" (leading to death), or a non-disabling but deadly gut-wound, nor other "slow effect" injuries.

But the ArM5e mechanic gives a conceptual framework of "injuries as limits to action" rather than the videogame-like "health-meter" effect of strictly HP-based mechanics.  It clearly works well with a "penalty" mechanic like MJSadique suggests above.

Occasionally, I have considered producing a fusion of RQ2/BRP "Hit Location" mechanics with ArM5 "Injuries" system...

 

I've talked about a hitpointless combat system (derived from Fire and Sword) elsewhere on this forum which is an extreme version of this: a hit either knocks you out of the fight (whether through concussion, shock, terror, or serious injury is only relevant later), or not, in which case you can keep fighting with no penalty. There's no Death Spiral and no death from a thousand cuts; conversely each hit could be the end of you -- for this fight.

[Atgxtg]

12 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Using your sequence: 1d4, 1d6, 1d8 (.45 and .357), 1d10 (10mm and .44), 1d8, 1d10, 2d10 is where I would stick things at a glance.

The 8 – 12 mm rounds between 7.62 and .50 would fall somewhere in the 1d12 area, perhaps with plus added lower dice (1d4, 1d6,etc). Small Spitzer type rounds would be in the 1d6 (such as 5.7 x 28), or 1d4 (4.6 x 30, .17) realm. 

Of course, there is always the ability to fudge things one way or the other. Especially with some of the odd cartridges that use a small slug and huge case.

SDLeary

Not too bad. My biggest differences would be that I think .44M should be higher than 10mm; I'd up the rifle rounds a bit. A 7.62 NATO round should hit harder than a 10mm; and rather than using a d12 plus a lower die I'd rather use two of the same size. (I.e. 2d8 instead of a D12 plus d6). But overall I think you and I are close, and within "1 die step" even on the stuff we differ on. Certainly workable.

And I wan't some way to up the damage a little for specials and critical so somebody could be killed outright by a .22LR.

I'll see about plugging the desired results into a table and try fitting the progression with a formula. 

 

[Atgxtg]

10 hours ago, Questbird said:

I've talked about a hitpointless combat system (derived from Fire and Sword) elsewhere on this forum which is an extreme version of this: a hit either knocks you out of the fight (whether through concussion, shock, terror, or serious injury is only relevant later), or not, in which case you can keep fighting with no penalty. There's no Death Spiral and no death from a thousand cuts; conversely each hit could be the end of you -- for this fight.

Ya know I actually did up a hitpointless combat system for BRP back in 2007! It is the downloads section, so I can prove it! You can check out BRP Eventually Fatal Results if you like. Oh, since I wrote this up before the BRP book came out, I didn't know about the difficulty rules. Otherwise I'd have made the STUN rolls easy Willpower rolls for Scratches and Minor Wounds, and difficult for Critical and Mortal Wounds.  

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Not too bad. My biggest differences would be that I think .44M should be higher than 10mm; I'd up the rifle rounds a bit. A 7.62 NATO round should hit harder than a 10mm; and rather than using a d12 plus a lower die I'd rather use two of the same size. (I.e. 2d8 instead of a D12 plus d6). But overall I think you and I are close, and within "1 die step" even on the stuff we differ on. Certainly workable.

And I wan't some way to up the damage a little for specials and critical so somebody could be killed outright by a .22LR.

I'll see about plugging the desired results into a table and try fitting the progression with a formula. 

 

Well, I am assuming they hit harder. Spitzer bullets use a lot of that in their penetration, and don't transfer as much to their targets. But as I said, it was at a glance; oh and I am still working from the perspective of Locations (hard to break RQ3 mindset).

With a .22LR, its not an insta-kill, but assuming the automatic bleeding that was mentioned before, on a Crit an average person would expire only two to three melee rounds later. 

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

But it should be possible to get an insta-kill with a .22. Not all that easy, but possible. 

 

As for bullet type, I figure we can use military ball ammo for the default value,then give modifiers for other types of ammo. That would depend on how we end up handling armor penetration. Probably something along the lines of AP round dropping down a step in damage, but getting 3 or so more points of Armor PEN.The idea would be that  the AP rounds would be better to have if the target had armor.  Conversely hollow points could raise the damage die up a step, but have 3 or so fewer points of Armor PEN. 

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

But it should be possible to get an insta-kill with a .22. Not all that easy, but possible. 

Perhaps via the shock roll mentioned? Critical hit followed by a failure (or fumble if we are being generous) of the Shock roll?

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

As for bullet type, I figure we can use military ball ammo for the default value,then give modifiers for other types of ammo. That would depend on how we end up handling armor penetration. Probably something along the lines of AP round dropping down a step in damage, but getting 3 or so more points of Armor PEN.The idea would be that  the AP rounds would be better to have if the target had armor.  Conversely hollow points could raise the damage die up a step, but have 3 or so fewer points of Armor PEN. 

I was assuming ball as well. AP dropping a step and HP/Frangable up a step sounds about right. 

As for PEN... What about using the die type as the basis. Say 1/2 max die value for ball, max die value for AP? Now I know that this puts the smaller rounds at a serious disadvantage, but I'm looking at values that essentially ignore archaic armors, and still keep ballistic vests with AP values in the realm of sanity. With this proposal, .22LR (and similar rounds) are nerfed, but do we even know if a modern small light round like this would punch through plate harness? Possibly with a jacketed round, but I would suspect not with the common soft metal round I would assume not.

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

Not sure yet. What I am thinking of doing is getting real world data for penetration of armor steel and then try to correlate thickness to a AP progression. Then see where that leads. But off the top of my head, if a .50 M2 round can penetrate 25mm of steel, and 30mm of steel is AP 28 (per the BGB), and the .50 cal does 2d12 damage then we'd be at an average damage of 13 points with 12 penetration (total 25 AP), which seems to be close.

 

 

[Questbird]

9 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Ya know I actually did up a hitpointless combat system for BRP back in 2007! It is the downloads section, so I can prove it! You can check out BRP Eventually Fatal Results if you like. Oh, since I wrote this up before the BRP book came out, I didn't know about the difficulty rules. Otherwise I'd have made the STUN rolls easy Willpower rolls for Scratches and Minor Wounds, and difficult for Critical and Mortal Wounds.  

I've downloaded it and I'll check it out 

[MJ Sadique]

On 30/11/2016 at 0:08 AM, Atgxtg said:

So can we agree on desired damages for various benchmark calibers?

For example, .22LR, 9mm Parabellum, .45 ACP, .357M, .10mm, .44M, 5.56mm, 7.62 NATO, .50BMG to get the ball rolling. 

5 Pistol : .22 LR, 9mm Parabellum, 10mm, .45 ACP, .50 S&W (more prowerfull than the .50 AE but outclass all others too much)
5 Rifle (1 to 5KJ) : 5.56mm, 7.62 Nato, .308 Win, 9mm SP5/6, .338 lapua
Anti-Material (over 10KJ)  : .50 Browning, 12.7mm, 14.5mm

We should add a Pistol & Rifle the ".40-40 winchester" (ideal in Wild Wild West, same ammo for gun and rifle) which could explicit to all that a same ammo don't have the same velocity and shooting range when shoot from a pistol or a rifle (1). It's not really a simple relation but barrel length proportionnal to range should be almost fine.

The Stopping power is linked to the momemtum of the bullet (mv) and the The Lethal power is linked to Kinetic energy (0.5 mv²) and the type of bullet (FMJ / HP). It may seem strange but for a same ammo, a heavier bullet keep the same Kinetic Energy but have a higher momemtum and lesser speed which give a better stopping power and a bit lesser lethal.
For Stopping power you can use Major General Jullian Hatche's RSP (Relative Stopping Power) which is a good approximation (not the best).
-RSP = Mass x Velocity x Surface x Bullet_Shape_factor (I'll omit the units conversions).

For Lethal power, the Kinetic energy give a good idea to compare ammunition but NOT to state the Lethality. For this we'd better use the "stretch cavity volume".
-TSC: temporary stretch cavity volume (ballistic gelatin) which is the volume of organs affected by the bullet !!!

As it's an experimental data, you can't guess it with just mass, energy and diameter of the bullet. The real difference between a Stopping / Lethal munitions is create by the type of bullet (FMJ / HP). For example we can take the 9×19mm Parabellum ammo of 7,5g.
-FMJ : Full metal Jacket is solid undeformable bullet which can pierce through 62cm of gelatin (almost 3 persons) and create a 9,1mm diameter tube and a 174cc TSC
-Silvertip (HP) : Hollow point is a deformable bullet which can pierce only 20cm of gelatin but will create a 18mm diameter (double bullet diameter) and a 274cc TSC

The worst 9mm para ammo could do a 724cc TSC with only 21% Kinetic energy more...with 1/20 of TSC to calculate max damage a 9mm para could be
-9mm FMJ 1D8+1 (174 TSC)
-9mm Silvertip 2D6+2 (274 TSC)
-9mm HydraShok 3D10+1D6 (724 TSC)

Guess why I abandon create my custom table of ammo...

(1) In french, p12, p19 http://www.eswb-sebl.org/Balistique_Projectiles_Ecully_2010_Web.pdf
(2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×19mm_Parabellum#U.S._data

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, MJ Sadique said:

-9mm FMJ 1D8+1 (174 TSC)
-9mm Silvertip 2D6+2 (274 TSC)
-9mm HydraShok 3D10+1D6 (724 TSC)

Guess why I abandon create my custom table of ammo...

 

Because you used a linear progression for damage. BRP (and pretty much all RPGs) uses a compressed scale for damage. Partialy to keep the numbers down to manageable levels and party because killing something isn't entirely about how much damage you do, but what part(s) of the body you do that damage to. 

 

 

[MJ Sadique]

14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Because you used a linear progression for damage. BRP (and pretty much all RPGs) uses a compressed scale for damage. Partialy to keep the numbers down to manageable levels and party because killing something isn't entirely about how much damage you do, but what part(s) of the body you do that damage to.

Nope man ! the problem is not with linear scale of damage. I obtain manageable, realist and simple data with linear regression (I'll share it later in xls and jpg). The problem is not in create a damage table as long as ALL BULLETS ARE FMJ. But realist ammunition aren't all armored bullet because since 1850' a lot of bullets types were made to be more lethal than the standard armored core bullet.

For my damage example I didn't use Kinetic energy, it's a TSC : a volumetric indication of flesh/organ affected. With the 9mm HydraShok affect 724 cc = Double volume of a Coca Can = 11cm diameter sphere. Which mean it will completely destroy any arm or leg or a quater of your torso... Is it realist ? YES. Is it correct with 3D10+1D6 damage ? I think yes

Where is my problem ?
-Not with linear regression as long as you do it correctly !
-Mainly with bullets types which are rarely take in account, with the true lethality of bullet (3).

(3) Translate-able with google : http://www.urgences-serveur.fr/IMG/pdf/trauma1_balistique_sfar97.pdf

[Atgxtg]

6 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

For my damage example I didn't use Kinetic energy, it's a TSC : a volumetric indication of flesh/organ affected. With the 9mm HydraShok affect 724 cc = Double volume of a Coca Can = 11cm diameter sphere. Which mean it will completely destroy any arm or leg or a quater of your torso... Is it realist ? YES.

 

I think no, as do a lot of firearm experts. Gel tests differ from actual flesh because  there aren't any bones. There are those who have used ballistic gel around a skeleton and gotten very different results. The bones tend to reinforce the gel.

On top of that most researchers consider hat ballistic gel is more elastic that actual flesh, and  have larger that the temporary wound cavities than would actually be the case, so the results are somewhat misleading. In addition most do not consider the temporary wound cavity to be a good indication of the lethality of the round. 

 

The FBI claims:

The tissue disruption caused by a handgun bullet is limited to two mechanisms. The first, or crush mechanism is the hole that the bullet makes passing through the tissue. The second, or stretch mechanism is the temporary wound cavity formed by the tissue being driven outward in a radial direction away from the path of the bullet. Of the two, the crush mechanism is the only handgun wounding mechanism that damages tissue. To cause significant injuries to a structure within the body using a handgun, the bullet must penetrate the structure. Temporary cavity has no reliable wounding effect in elastic body tissues (emphasis added). Temporary cavitation is nothing more than a stretch of the tissues, generally no larger than 10 times the bullet diameter (in handgun calibers), and elastic tissues sustain little, if any, residual damage.

 

So I doubt that the 9m is going to complete destroy any human body part the way it shreds gel. 

6 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

 

Is it correct with 3D10+1D6 damage ? I think yes

 

I think no again. 3D10+1D6 means that your 9mm round is more lethal than the bullet from an elephant gun (3D6+4) or sniper rifle (2D10+4), and is nearly the same league as the "cannon" (4D8+4). That's overkill.In game terms, the weapon has over a 50% instant kill chance with a single shot, and that's much much better than any handgun ammo has in the real world. 

 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

 

Where is my problem ?
-Not with linear regression as long as you do it correctly !

Yes if you apply it to a non-linear system, such as hit points. Someone who is SIZ 18 has twice the mass of someone who is SIZ 10, and therefore twice the volume. But he won't have twice the hit points. Likewise, a SIZ 34 Giant would have eight time the mass and volume of  a SIZ 10 person, but he wouldn't have 8 times the hit points. 

So any weapon damage has to be on a similar scale as the hit point progression to work properly and give the weapons the right lethality relative to each other. You can't just come up with new damages in a vacuum and then stick them in with the other weapons. 

 

6 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

-Mainly with bullets types which are rarely take in account, with the true lethality of bullet (3).

(3) Translate-able with google : http://www.urgences-serveur.fr/IMG/pdf/trauma1_balistique_sfar97.pdf

Rarelt taken in account in RPGs. often taken into account elsehwere.

Yes, your source document is translatable. I just don;t consider it all that reliable. Here's a different source that disagrees with your conclusions and damages. 

[sladethesniper]

In case it might be useful...Over the years I have built a complete table of weapons and damage ratings that range from fists to nuclear weapons.  The damage numbers get big, but the reason for that is that I follow a generally linear damage progression, the damage ratings can be used for BRP, D20 and Palladium (because I love Mega Damage).

I have been able to "mostly" rectify two different methods for damage determination:

1. Depth of penetration (primarily used for vehicular weapons) = 1 point of damage per 1/2" of penetration in flesh OR 1/2 mm of penetration in steel 

2. The square root of joules of energy/2.4 = weapon damage

A lot of the damage ratings end up rather high, but in my experience a lot of BRP combat lasts until someone is hit, which is rather similar to my experiences IRL combat (using a house rule wherein unconsciousness occurs at 0 HP, and death happens at -1/2 HP, and there are no "critical hits" since those are modeled by rolling high on damage). 

Also, here is a list of bullet types and damage multipliers that I use:

Dual Purpose                                                     ½  SP ½ damage if wearing armor; if no armor damage x 1.5

Armor Piercing                                                  ½  SP, ½ damage,

Wadcutter                                                          damage x 1.5, armor x 2, ½ range,

Semi‑wadcutter                                                damage x 1.25, armor x 1.5, 3/4 range,

Reverse semi‑wadcutter                               damage x 1.5, armor x 2, 3/4 range,

Full Metal Jacket                                              standard damage,

Total Metal Jacket                                           SP ‑ 1,

Solid construction                                            SP ‑ 3,

Soft Point                                                            Damage x 1.25, armor x 1.5,

Pointed Soft Point                                            Damage x 1.1, armor x 1.25,

Ballistic Tip                                                          Damage x 1.25,

High Pressure                                                    Damage x 1.1,

Very High Pressure                                          Damage x 1.25,

High Velocity                                                     Damage x 1.25, range x 1.25,

Ultra Velocity                                                     Damage x 1.5, range x 1.5,

Hollow Point                                                      Damage x 1.5, armor x 2,

Fragmenting/Frangible                                  Damage x 2, will not penetrate any armor or cover,

Ramjet ammo    AKA "Gyroc"                       Damage x 2, range x 2,  

Blended Metal Jacket                                     Damage x 1.25, armor x 1

Tungsten Core                                                   Armor x 1/3, damage x1/2

SLAP                                                                      Armor x 1/4, damage x 1/4

sabot                                                                     armor x 1/2, damage x 1/2

Tungsten Core SLAP                                        Armor x 1/5, damage x 1/2

"spoon tip" AKA Loeffelspitzung                Damage x 1.5

Segmented Bullets                                          Damage x 2, armor x 2

-STS

Edited December 8, 2016 by sladethesniper
added more text

[MJ Sadique]

On 03/12/2016 at 4:00 PM, Atgxtg said:

I think no, as do a lot of firearm experts. Gel tests differ from actual flesh because  there aren't any bones. There are those who have used ballistic gel around a skeleton and gotten very different results. The bones tend to reinforce the gel. On top of that most researchers consider hat ballistic gel is more elastic that actual flesh, and  have larger that the temporary wound cavities than would actually be the case, so the results are somewhat misleading. In addition most do not consider the temporary wound cavity to be a good indication of the lethality of the round.

Yes, your source document is translatable. I just don't consider it all that reliable. Here's a different source that disagrees with your conclusions and damages. 

First, please read all reference given to you before saying they disagree because they don't !

I http://gundata.org/images/fbi-handgun-ballistics.pdf

I've read your source (3) and I'll resume (for others) what one Fbi's agent personnal conclusion are about Lethal / Stopping power of a weapon :
-He believe that stopping power of a bullet momentum and Hydrostatic shock are a myth / ineffective. (I strongly disagree)
-He believe the temporary stretch cavity TSC cause only stopping power and no wound. (I disagree)
-He believe a person being stun by a bullet depend on Psychological/Drugs factor only. Minor or Lethal wound doesn't matter. (Partially agree)
-He believe that Hollow point / Expanding / dum-dum bullets are not efficient to stop someone. (I disagree)
-He believe that to stop someone you better use FMJ (perforating) bullet to cause internal damage and a massive blood lost. (disagree for handgun, agree for rifle)

II http://www.urgences-serveur.fr/IMG/pdf/trauma1_balistique_sfar97.pdf

Second, what my source, Urgency experts in balistic trauma speak about Wounding power (they are not weapons experts but wounds treating experts) p5-10 :
-Most trauma by bullets and explosions are short ranged : Speed is not a wounding factor because it's usually high.
-Most trauma depend less of of the speed and more on the projectile type*, compound** and stability***.
-Most Trauma Importance depend more of the what type organs receiving the impact (Dense, Humid/Dry, solid/elastic)
-Greater Damage and Kinetic energy transfer are on bones (dense, solid) with complex trauma then come abdominal full organs (dense, High-moist, low-elastic) and lower damage/kinetic transfer on light organs as lung, empty stomach or bladder (High-air, low-density, elastic).
-War-time analysis give 65% hits on legs and arms. Hits to torso are lethal in 70% of times, and 80% lethality for hits on head and neck.

III analysing the docs and comments

The two agree about (and sometimes one add extra info) deaths cause :
-Early deaths are mainly caused by heavy blood lost or destruction the central nervous system (second main factor is death by infection).
-Lethal wounds don't stop or cause instant death. Most people dies within first hours or 1-2 day.

and Wounding factor :
-Fragments of bullets (HP) are found around the stretch cavity (in the TSC) and TSC don't usually leave wound on elastic tissues (as a lung, stomach and bladder).
-Recent Rifle bullets by their instability (greater length then wide, ability to rotate) and supersonic speed (> Mach2) make greater Lesions than any handgun.

Conclusions :
1 - A Weapon Kinetic energy will cause different effects depending of the organs hits (main factor) and it's calibre (second one).
2 - Perforating bullets have a great Lethal power (if it bones, nervous systems or cause blood loss) and is always effective.
3 - Hollow point or fragmentation's ammo have the greatest wounding power without ability to causing instant death, it depend of lot of external factor.
4 - Stopping power of handgun is unmeasurable as momentum or Hydrostatic are overthrown by psychological factor.

My Consequences  : The more realist, the less "Basic" it is
1- Using Kinetic energy for Basic's damage is not realist. Damage should depend more on locations hit rolls (like in Thoan or Warhammer).
2- Round Nose / basic bullet are the most effective and simple. Treating others as special effects (like sladethesniper suggestions).
3- Wounding power (damage) of HP/dum-dum ammo is more a special effect than a basic effect BUT it cause a lot more damage.
4- Stunning effect vs Fanatic / Berserker is always a pain in reality and Basic Rules XD

Examples with 9mm data from (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×19mm_Parabellum#U.S._data)  : To be the almost realist, one could use Diameter/PC to evaluate damage; Penetration to evaluate Armor Negation. TSC to evaluate stunning effect / temporary-poisoning damage / Medical treatement malus. This way you could simple give  a 9mm caliber :
-9mm standard (roundnose) : 1D8+1 (E)
-9mm FMJ (perforating) : 1D8+1 (E) & "D8+1 armor ignore"
-9mm Silvertip : 1D8+1 (E) & Stunning/poisoning effect x2
-9mm HydraShok : 1D8+1 (E) & Stunning/poisoning effect x5

* bullet, pellets ** solid, breakable : FMJ / HP  *** can swing, toggle or rotate like a blender's blade. (E) : for Empaling or Expanding doing x2 damage. Stunning effect could be damage to FP or Roll again CON to Knock-down a not-berserker target.

Edited December 8, 2016 by MJ Sadique
Didn't see slade excellent post :p

[Atgxtg]

First off the FBI report isn't just one FBI agents personal conclusions, it is a report that was authored by that one agent based on test results done by the bureau. He's just the guy whose name happens to be on that particular report. 

I just don;t buy into your conclusions or your damage ratings. By your reasoning a 9mm Hydra-Shok round should be the superbullet, but it just doesn't have that sort of performance. I haven't seen anything that supports your belief that  a 9mm hydrashock round does more damage that a chainsaw.

 

[MJ Sadique]

On 11/12/2016 at 3:45 PM, Atgxtg said:

First off the FBI report isn't just one FBI agents personal conclusions, it is a report that was authored by that one agent based on test results done by the bureau. He's just the guy whose name happens to be on that particular report. 

Yep, but it's a 25' years old training ... and it's not because it's marked FBI that it's good. As you know, expanding bullets are forbidden in warfare since 1899 Hague Convention because it's a ominous weapon. The FBI reports say it's not a good ammunition but the US army still have and use them against others factions. US army still claim that the will only use them in case of urgency or pretend that their enemies are not a country but terrorist (like in Irak I & II) but Everybody know that they use Hollow Point bullets because their are effective to stop and mortally wounds people without bullet-proof vest.

On 11/12/2016 at 3:45 PM, Atgxtg said:

I just don;t buy into your conclusions or your damage ratings. By your reasoning a 9mm Hydra-Shok round should be the superbullet, but it just doesn't have that sort of performance. I haven't seen anything that supports your belief that  a 9mm hydrashock round does more damage that a chainsaw.

Yep, I may oftently be generous on damage. But I don't give high damage because they DO bigger damage, but I adjust them to have a more realist lethality percentiles :
If we state a human have 12HP and get a lethal hit at 6-11pts damage, Oneshot.kill at 12&+ and is Deadly in the two case (no heal ^^). -round up %-
-1 hit with 9mm standard, 1D8+1 (E with Damage x2) : Lethal : 48%, Oneshot.kill : 10%, Deadly : 58%
-1 hit with 9mm standard, 1D8+1 (E with Damage x5) : Lethal : 43%, Oneshot.kill : 18%, Deadly : 60%. (Almost double oneshot %, yeah a bit generous)

Even with Triple hits, the change is not much bigger :
-3 hits with 9mm standard, 1D8+1 (E with Damage x2) : a Lethal hit 86% / a Oneshot.kill : 27%
-3 hits with 9mm standard, 1D8+1 (E with Damage x5) : a Lethal hit 81% / a Oneshot.kill : 44%

Even with a triple shot, you don't have a Oneshot kill damage everytimes, I'm agree 44% is close to half and it's a bit generous. Even with x3 special damage you can have 39% to get one oneshot on three hits. Last thing, I found they even got a greater Wounding Power ammo than Hydrashock ...

FMJ bullet cost 20$ / 100b but Hydrashok was almost at 1$ per bullet (the most "pocket-money hurting" should be the .50 S&W...1,25$ per bullet = 60$ the pack of 50) : You hit, the enemy cry...you miss, you cry. XD

Edited December 14, 2016 by MJ Sadique
copy-past error :p

[SDLeary]

2 hours ago, MJ Sadique said:

Yep, but it's a 25' years old training ... and it's not because it's marked FBI that it's good. As you know, expanding bullets are forbidden in warfare since 1899 Hague Convention because it's a ominous weapon. The FBI reports say it's not a good ammunition but the US army still have and use them against others factions. US army still claim that the will only use them in case of urgency or pretend that their enemies are not a country but terrorist (like in Irak I & II) but Everybody know that they use Hollow Point bullets because their are effective to stop and mortally wounds people without bullet-proof vest.

Not much change has actually occurred in ammunition over the last 25 years that would invalidate the FBI study. 

I also think that you are seriously mis-informed regarding the US Military and use of expanding rounds. In general they don't, perhaps with the exception of SOF missions. The military has been increasingly looking (along with larger police forces in the US) at frangible rounds, that shatter when encountering a significant barrier. This is in an attempt to prevent civilian casualties, such as hitting a civilian because you missed your target and the round decided to penetrate two or three walls behind, and hit that family that was huddling in their bedroom.

SDLeary

Edited December 14, 2016 by SDLeary

[MJ Sadique]

3 hours ago, SDLeary said:

I also think that you are seriously mis-informed regarding the US Military and use of expanding rounds. In general they don't, perhaps with the exception of SOF missions.

LOL JOKE OF THE YEAR !!! ........."In General they don't "... sorry but do you think I am listening to FOX News ??? XD

10 seconds search on google :
-"The United States is one of few major powers that did not agree to IV,3 of the Hague Convention of 1899, and thus is able to use this kind of ammunition in warfare" *

-"Sources tell TTAG that the United States Army is switching from ball to hollow-point ammunition for its next generation handgun. ... . After making the announcement, an Army lawyer mounted the stage to mount a defense for the switch hollow-points . . .
The U.S. did not agree to a ban on expanding ammo by international treaty. And the the Army’s prepared to defend the decision in the court of international law and opinion. His core argument: countries that will denounce the use of hollow-point use the hollow points for their police forces. ... The Army said it will rely on FBI data to evaluate bids for the new ammunition. .... The question is: what about rifle ammo? We’re looking into it. Watch this space." **

Which Means : We want to use expanding bullet with our tiny gun... let us do this ... (and next time we will standardize it on any weapon openly)

-"In the past, specialized ammunition approval has been granted only if the requirement passes a legal review. This means that the military has had to get creative at times when it describes what it needs."***

Clearly, the guy know his job... As long as they can find a "creative" reason to use HP... they can use it !

-"Tier-1, special-mission units under U.S. Special Operations Command are authorized to use jacketed hollow-point bullets instead of standard ball. To do this, these elite units had to be classified as counterterrorism forces, a legal distinction that allows them to use the same hollow-point ammo used by all law enforcement agencies."

What did I said ? : " US army still claim that they will only use them in case of urgency or pretend that their enemies are not a country but terrorist (like in Irak I & II)"

SDLeary, I Thank you for this... I get my second 10 minutes of Laugh today.... thanks you very much XD

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#United_States
** http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/robert-farago/breaking-u-s-army-switching-to-hollow-point-ammunition/
*** http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/10/us-army-is-considering-hollow-point-bullets-to-go-with-new.html

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, MJ Sadique said:

LOL JOKE OF THE YEAR !!! ........."In General they don't "... sorry but do you think I am listening to FOX News ??? XD

10 seconds search on google :
-"The United States is one of few major powers that did not agree to IV,3 of the Hague Convention of 1899, and thus is able to use this kind of ammunition in warfare" *

-"Sources tell TTAG that the United States Army is switching from ball to hollow-point ammunition for its next generation handgun. ... . After making the announcement, an Army lawyer mounted the stage to mount a defense for the switch hollow-points . . .
The U.S. did not agree to a ban on expanding ammo by international treaty. And the the Army’s prepared to defend the decision in the court of international law and opinion. His core argument: countries that will denounce the use of hollow-point use the hollow points for their police forces. ... The Army said it will rely on FBI data to evaluate bids for the new ammunition. .... The question is: what about rifle ammo? We’re looking into it. Watch this space." **

Which Means : We want to use expanding bullet with our tiny gun... let us do this ... (and next time we will standardize it on any weapon openly)

-"In the past, specialized ammunition approval has been granted only if the requirement passes a legal review. This means that the military has had to get creative at times when it describes what it needs."***

Clearly, the guy know his job... As long as they can find a "creative" reason to use HP... they can use it !

-"Tier-1, special-mission units under U.S. Special Operations Command are authorized to use jacketed hollow-point bullets instead of standard ball. To do this, these elite units had to be classified as counterterrorism forces, a legal distinction that allows them to use the same hollow-point ammo used by all law enforcement agencies."

What did I said ? : " US army still claim that they will only use them in case of urgency or pretend that their enemies are not a country but terrorist (like in Irak I & II)"

SDLeary, I Thank you for this... I get my second 10 minutes of Laugh today.... thanks you very much XD

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#United_States
** http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/robert-farago/breaking-u-s-army-switching-to-hollow-point-ammunition/
*** http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/10/us-army-is-considering-hollow-point-bullets-to-go-with-new.html

So, you quote past articles about the US Army looking into the possibility of using hollow point rounds in a possible future handgun, and automatically apply it to the past?

Again, outside of SOF missions, the US has not used hollow point ammunition. 

You are right that the US did not sign the Hague Convention of 1899, but we did sign Hague II in 1907. Also from Wikipedia...

Quote

United States[edit]

The United States is one of few major powers that did not agree to IV,3 of the Hague Convention of 1899, and thus is able to use this kind of ammunition in warfare, but US ratified the second (1907) Hague Convention IV-23, which says "To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering", similar to IV-3 of the first Convention. For years the US military respected this Convention and refrained from the use of expanding ammunition, even made special FMJ .22LR ammunition for use in High Standard pistols that were issued to the OSS agents. The US Army has mentioned that it has been considering using the ammunition for sidearms, with a possible start date of 2018.^[9]

Now, despite section IV-23, we did use Chem weapons in WW I (all parties did), and the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WW II, incendiary weapons (bombs and napalm, as have other nations), and have used Shotguns in combat from WW I to the Present.

SDLeary 

[Atgxtg]

Yeah, hollow point ammo is one of the few things that the US Military does stay away from. 

 

But MJ, your damages aren't more realistic, but less. It look like you're basing your damages on by watching some od film noir movies, where everybody who gets shot conveniently drops dead. 

[MJ Sadique]

SDLeary I Perfectly agree with you this times,

We (US first) all use ban weapons and you have forgotten that Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines at The Ottawa Treaty : By using anti-tank mine which can be activate down to 55kg (~100 lbs) and I can tell you this because we have the french anti-mine division in my town.

PS : I don't think the treaty to forbade the use of MAD munition (a nuclear mine). To be honest (in us_soldier_mode), who won't use a more efficient bullet to save your ass on the battlefield... just because some rulers have written a shitty stupid rules.

20 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

But MJ, your damages aren't more realistic, but less. It look like you're basing your damages on by watching some od film noir movies, where everybody who gets shot conveniently drops dead. 

I was only try to be more close to real lethality statistic, a x3 for Hydrashok Hollow Point should be more "realistically convenient" for you ?

Thank for the noir movies ref, I wasn't thinking to them but I was making a the sundown scenarii in old west (making ol'west gun damage make me go to this forum at start XD) and I just remember the excellent Hateful 8 form Tarentino. I understand you point-of-view, I'm a teeny-tiny-bit too much generous on damage :p. Promise, I'll work on it ^^
 

Edited December 15, 2016 by MJ Sadique
a bit punctuation

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, MJ Sadique said:

 

I was only try to be more close to real lethality statistic, a x3 for Hydrashok Hollow Point should be more "realistically convenient" for you ?

But you're not closer to real world lethality stats. Its' more like you are making super weapons. Just where are you getting these really high lethality numbers from?