CUEmu - Thread Posts

AKemper

Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Actually, it's a basic fact of physics that a sword/hammer will do more damage to a target than a bullet.

That's why Sandbags will stop a bullet, but not an arrow

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Brilyn:

You are misrepresenting the reality of this "basic fact of physics"a sword or hammer won't do more damage than a bullet. An arrow cuts through the sandbag with a tip of razorblades designed to cut. the bullet forces it's way through a targetby "mushrooming" to cause maximun tissue damage, and with several magnitudes more power than the arrow. You ever see an arrow shoot through a 1/4 inch piece of plate steel? NO? Hmm, bullets can accomplish this feat rather easily. Arrows and swords aren't used anymore because they are in no area of combat the equivalent to a bullet. They are slow, inaccurate, have terrible range, and not powerfull enough to penetrate any type of armor. The arrow willrelease several hundredFoot pounds of energy into a target where even a rather low powered bullet will dispense several Thousand Foot pounds

_________________________________________________________________________________________

It takes far more training to reach a 'basic skill' level with a sword or bow than it does with a gun.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Hmm, well I have never had any use for a sword other than to think they look cool as hell, but as far as a bow/gun I have enjoyed both. I also build guns and have about 20 years of exp dealing with ballistics and loading "bullets" not to mention competitively shooting both guns and bows, and I am here to tell you a bow is much easier to learn how to shoot than a gun. A bow is designed to use your natural body movements and rythms. A gun is designed to deliver a controled explosion to a small piece of lead.You have to position your body for the impact, and hold the weapon steady through all that to deliver the bullet on target.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying this is good or bad, or "the game would be better if........", just that your basic assumptions are incorrect.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying this is good or bad either but before you start telling people their "basic assumptions are incorrect" I would suggest you ensure YOUR basic assumptions are correct.

Kemp Alste

Bria Galaxy

Brilyn

Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:13 pm

#41

< You ever see an arrow shoot through a 1/4 inch piece of plate steel?>

No.

But I've seen an arrow punch through a car bonnet at 50m.

You can disagree all you like on the sword issue all you like, but the basic numbers don't lie.

2kg of steel moving at 100m/s (a *very* slow swing) delivers *more* kinetic energy to a target than 10g moving at 700 m/s.

Work the numbers. Show me I'm wrong.

< The arrow willrelease several hundredFoot pounds of energy into a target where even a rather low powered bullet will dispense several Thousand Foot pounds >

I have no idea what 'foot pounds' equates to. I'll use metric below.

A bullet is roughly 10 grams. Muzzle velocity is roughly 700m/s. that amounts to (0.5 x 0.01 x (700x700)) = 2450 Joules of Energy.

An Arrow is roughly 60 grams. Initial Velocity is roughly 60m/s. That amounts to (0.5 x 0.06 x (60x60)) = 108 Joules of Energy

So, fair enough. I'm wrong regarding the level of energy an arrow will deliver vs the level of energy a bullet would deliver.

I was under the impression that arrows had a *vastly* higher initial velocity than 60m/s, and weighed more than a mere 60 grams.

For the hell of it, the energy a sword will deliver at same speed:

2000 grams, Initial velocitty is 60 m/s. That amounts to (0.5 x 2 x (60x60)) = 3600 Joules of Energy, significantly more than wot a bullet can deliver (2kg is a fairly small sword).

< I would suggest you ensure YOUR basic assumptions are correct. >

Fair comment.

I'm wrong about the arrow, but correct regarding the sword.

Edit: Info on arrows taken from this website.

Message Edited by Brilyn on 08-25-2004 02:19 AM

Brilyn
Master Weaponsmith
Master Shipwright
Main vendor on Naboo, Vagabond's Rest: -1850, 2330
Secondary vendor on Talus, Kyu'mai: 250, -4680
Starsider

SinjenRandall

Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:47 pm

#42

AKemper wrote:

I also build guns and have about 20 years of exp dealing with ballistics and loading "bullets" not to mention competitively shooting both guns and bows, and I am here to tell you a bow is much easier to learn how to shoot than a gun. A bow is designed to use your natural body movements and rythms. A gun is designed to deliver a controled explosion to a small piece of lead.You have to position your body for the impact, and hold the weapon steady through all that to deliver the bullet on target.

My father used to shoot a recurve without sights. He could hit what he was shooting at every time.I never, evercould shoot it like he did. It would take mea long, long timeshooting that recurve bow before I could always hit whatever I wanted to hit with it. A recurve, or a traditional bow, has the most draw weight when the bow is at full draw, so the arrow has to be released pretty quickly before you get tired or start to shake. This takes a lot of skill to master. He has medals that he won shooting that bow.

I handed him my .357 Ruger Blackhawk and he hit the bullseye the first time he ever picked it up. Didn't take him long to learn to shoot that bad boy. Did he already know how to shoot a gun? Sure. But he didn't have to learn the feel of it. He didn't haveto know anything about it besides some simple rules.

I shoot a dual-cam compound bow with a70 lb. draw. The few people I know who can draw it can't draw and hit with an arrow nocked. They might be able to with practice, but they aren't practicing on my bow. A dry fire on a bow is pretty catastrophic.

Even with the let off of a compound bow, which means it is much easier to hold at full draw, getting the arrow back in the first place takes strength and skill (you have to hold that arrow on the rest and draw it smoothly). Then you have to really take range into account, because the drop during flightof an arrow, even with my bow, ishigh compared to a high-velocity bullet. This means that I have 5 different pins on my sights (about 20 yards up to 100 yards), so the user has to know and understand which pin to use when lining up the shot. Are we ready to shoot? Not quite. You have to hold good form the entire time you draw and aim, or your left arm is going to get hit by the string as you release. That causes a mighty large, purple welp that you really don't ever want to happen to you. You also have to practice good form so that when you line up the string and the pin, it means that the arrow is lined up with the target. Tired or intimidated yet? Okay, now you have to release the string without throwing your aim off completely, while holding the bow with your other hand steady so the violence of releasing the string doesn't throw your aim off.

Compare that to my largest, heaviest pistol, aT / C Contender with a 30-30 barrel, which can be shot by my friend in a wheelchair fairly accurately. I couldn't imagine teaching him how to shoot a bow.

I have tried many times to teach my sister how to shoot my little 30 lb. draw compound bow that I learned on as a youngster. She can't shoot it for crap. She can ping all day long with my .22 pistol and I spent about 5 minutes teaching her how to do that.

It is much, much harder to learn how to shoot abow than it is to learn to shoot a gun. If you are talking about proficiency, it is still going to take longer to learn how to shoota bow. The physical requirement alone is more than some people can deal with when using a bow, even without an insane draw weight. It takes strength, stamina, and posture far beyond that of a pistol, and orders of magnitude more than shooting a rifle.

As far as penetration is concerned, I am not a mathmatician and I am really bad at physics. But for you numbers people out there, maybe you aren't taking into account what happens when that energy meets the surface of the target; i.e. the expansion of the bullet. In order for a bullet to be effective, it has to expand. I know a lot of energy is spent on the surface of what a bullet hits in order for it to expand. Modern arrows are carbon or aluminum shafts that only take about 50ft-lbs. to penetrate cleanly through a largeanimal. They have a much smaller surface area at the point of impact, and they are designed for penetration. I have penetrated things with arrows that I only dented with .45 auto bullets, which haveabout 3 times the energy of my arrows. *shrug*

Sinjen
Elder Ticklemonster - Unlocked Pre Publish 9
Master Pilot
THE Hero of Tatooine

Dragonbanisher

Wed Aug 25, 2004 2:09 am

#43

In your physics equation you forgot surface area, max PSI per material,material density, resistence, absorbtionrateetc etc etc. Swords and other general weapons my have more general power behind them BUT they also connect with A LOT more surface area than ranged based weaponry do. Arrows in general can do more damage but many arrows lack the piercing power of AP ammunition. In ammunition it is well known that the higher the piercing the lower the damage. The most damaging are soft ammunition types like those used in most 9mm based fire arms. They lack the piercing capabilities but MAN if you aren't wearing armor your garunteed to be toast. While a round fired from most assault rifles have a good chance to pass quickly through a "soft"target leaving a small entrance and exit wound leaving a greater chance of mortal damage which then results in a higher accuracy and specific target placement apon the target to garuntee a mortal wound. But getting back to topic here...

Only reason why we keep getting our asses kicked my melee attackers is very simple. On average a melee attacker has about 3-4.3 feet in arm length with about an extra 3-4 feet in melee weapon length. That's about 6-9.2 feet in length. So how the hell does a guy with 10 feet of max range hit me at 20 meters? Converted that's 60FEET in RANGE! Meleers in this game have more range on their lunge attacks than most people do with throwing knives. And yes I have tested this using /unarmedlunge1. I could pop that squill from 20 meters away exactly. If they removed this little factor you'd see a lot less melee "pwnage" in PvP. Restrict their "lunge" range to 10 meters(EVEN this is being VERY generous giving them 30 feet in pure range with is still farther than they should every be able to reach in melee.) This probably wasn't in this in the beginning of the betas and such. I can probably guess that people said, "Unless you increase melee range, all of the melee classes are going to be gimped since ranged fighters can kite us and kill us from range."

The whole thing about melee damage is that unless they get within range they're useless. Yet somehow these guys are running around with range greater than my thrown grenades and my FT specials? That's all I have to say on this for now.

___________________________________________________

Talishar Vangaurd-SMH-Ahazi

"Life is a game of chance. The big payout wont happen unless big risks are
taken. Although big risks in the end may mean bust."

AKemper

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:59 pm

#44

Dragonbanisher:

I was in beta and if I remember correctly the lunge range was originally 5m but the meleers were getting pounded. They complained that auto-follow would only keep them in the 6m range and not even that close if there was any lag, hence, 20 range to lunge. Those were the good old days when you would see people with pistols, rifle, and carbines ( well never carbines they have always sucked) kicking hell out of MTK's however back in those days a MTK killed almost a half a town of riflemen because he used good tactics there was some serious crying on the forums about that battle.I also believe (could be wrong here) that their basic range is now anything inside 9m I could however be wrong on that point.

Anyway it all boils down to the fact the melee was prob about right in beta but they cried because they couldn't "easily" kill a rifleman, so the devs nerfed the ranged proffesions and gave all the goodies to meleers.

Kemp Alste

Bria Galaxy

Commando Archive

Thread: Science Fiction vs Fantasy. Please give an opinion.