Edsel Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 A disturbing trend (as far as gaming is concerned) that I see is the effectiveness of modern body armor. Many of the standard guns that are out on the street are no match for state-of-the-art body armor. This is even reflected in the Dark Champions book. For instance a street thug manages to get some AP bullets for his 9mm Glock. Using the Dark Champions table on page 218 we can see that this will be a 1d6 RKA AP attack. Along comes vigilante boy wearing his Level III-A Spectra body armor with 9 PD. Even with his armor value halved, due to the AP, the gun that is shooting him will need to roll sixes on the damage dice to do even a single point of damage. In the real world I saw a demo the other day on a news program. The test subject is wearing what looks like a light brown leather jacket. In fact this is disguised body armor (IIF). He actually allows a fellow to shoot him in the stomach with a .357 Magnum revolver at point blank range (about 1' away). The jacket suffer a powder burn and a small hole in the outer layer. The man wearing the jacket is not even knocked by the shot and suffers no injury whatsoever. He even commented that it did not hurt at all! This jacket had no trauma plates of any sort in it! If you want to convert that into Hero rules that is a 1 1/2d6 RKA into the stomach (x4 STUN) and no BODY or STUN manages to penetrate the target's defences! From a gaming standpoint, it really is starting to look like armor has won the battle of guns vs. armor. Unless you are willing to introduce cinematic rules, like Deadly Blow, into a "realistic" campaign, the characters are going to blaze away ieffectually at each other and have to resolve their differences with a slap fight. Am I just being too negative? Has modern body armor made the vigilante in a "realistic" campaign darn near invunerable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox1 Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I haven't kept up with modern advances in body armor as much as I'd like, but I've kept up enough to know that it is impressive. It's still rare in full coverage useage, but the PCs in DC will want and likely should have access to it. And it's getting worse, a sneak look at some of the stuff DARPA has in the works is... amazing. I think the best way of dealing with the problem is to set your game in a slightly different time/place where: 1) the armor isn't as effective as today’s OR 2) Just set it today and forget about effective body armor. Not realistic, but it works. OR 3) Set in the near future were new common place weapons have countered the trend. Some of these exist today, but are unlikely to find their way into the hands of your street gangs. For an example of the latter, see the new FN Five seVen Pistol (and related P90 SMG). A weapon created for the express purpose of defeating today's body armor. Don't use AP for these weapons, use the piercing power with 9 pts resistant piercing instead. In fact, drop the AP advantage period. Piercing is a better representation all around and I hardly ever use AP these days. My typical AP ammo thus has 4-6 points of resistant piercing even for common cartridges of today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greymankle Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I'm glad you brought this up. I was wondering the same thing. The game I'm planning it for has a much higher tech level so I can change guns and armor up a notch hopefully even them out. For real world: Remember that most armor is only bullet-proof in the chest/stomach and back area where the plates are. And the helmet is bullet-proof too. The rest is there for shrapnel for explosions and such. And even that doesn't cover arms or legs. Supposedly they are coming out with some kevlar pants but they won't have plates in them. Sure a bullet in the leg may not kill right away but it sure would wound a guy. The kevlar, I believe, can stop up to a 9mm bullet without the plates. But if your heros are running around in Lvl 3 your villians should have access to something more than a pea-shooter. I think the 9 PD from the book is with plates in. in the area without plates it should be more like 5 or so. Maybe you can lower the acitvation roll on your armor or divide it up more specifically with hit locations. That's a bit more paper work but it depends on what you want. Or you could add in more realistic injuries/ bleeding. DC talks about it a little. Just a couple of thoughts. -Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HewhoisMatt Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I would really like know the name of the company you saw the demo for. I want to see if they will send me a video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eosin Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Since cutting edge body armor is available, it only makes sense that cutting edge weapons (such as defunt CAWS systems with flichettes or as Fox1 mentioned some of the DARPA stuff (I have only read up on the armor and envriomental systems) ---- They have a whole force of one thing going on that is science fiction stuff). We can tinker once we start to play but 9 points armor is a little too high even with the increased damage weapons that we use (IMO). I think 6 points works well with EOD garbage falling into the 8-12 point range but offer significant penalties to movement and dex based stuff, irrespective of STR and encumberance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox1 Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Did some research. Seems next year the leading maker of military level armor is going to ship a new vest able to defeat even the 7.62x51mm SLAP round over multiple hits. It's only in vest form, so hits elsewhere are still a problem. Even so, just plain wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor This is something I've been considering... to the point where I do feel that pistols are being relegated to a more "real" aspect of last chance weapon. You don't go into a gunfight with a side-arm... you do it with a long gun at least. 9mm is now the zip gun of the fifties. A threat, but not a big one if you are really prepared. I don't know about this mythical leather jacket... but as greymankle pointed out above, most of the "bulletproof" stuff is factoring a plate hit. 7.62 or 5.56 rounds will go through the non-plate like butter. Granted, this may change, but I don't know. The fact is, armor is not 100% coverage, nor 100% effective when it does cover, which is something the game doesn't cover. There is also armor that is great against a .357 and might as well be tissue paper vs. a rifle round. Yes... this concern is real (from a gaming POV) but I also think that issue with explosive, h-v rounds, etc., will change things. I don't think armor will ever outstrip offensive capability for long. If the 9mm and .45 are soon to be relegated to the realm of the cap & ball, well that's because PDW type weapons have become much more common. We'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor This is something I've been considering... to the point where I do feel that pistols are being relegated to a more "real" aspect of last chance weapon. You don't go into a gunfight with a side-arm... you do it with a long gun at least. 9mm is now the zip gun of the fifties. A threat, but not a big one if you are really prepared. I don't know about this mythical leather jacket... but as greymankle pointed out above, most of the "bulletproof" stuff is factoring a plate hit. 7.62 or 5.56 rounds will go through the non-plate like butter. Granted, this may change, but I don't know. The fact is, armor is not 100% coverage, nor 100% effective when it does cover, which is something the game doesn't cover. There is also armor that is great against a .357 and might as well be tissue paper vs. a rifle round. Yes... this concern is real (from a gaming POV) but I also think that issue with explosive, h-v rounds, etc., will change things. I don't think armor will ever outstrip offensive capability for long. If the 9mm and .45 are soon to be relegated to the realm of the cap & ball, well that's because PDW type weapons have become much more common. We'll see. I would second a notion to wait and see. Much armor works great in controlled tests but in the field its performance is less. The .45ACP (I routinely use a Kimber .45 and Thompson 1927A1 submachine gun [semi-auto]) is STILL a great round to stop a person. The 230 grain FMJ round at about 800 feet per second will stop most people cold. A person with armor will still be "stunned" by the impact of the heavy round even if it does not penetrate the armor. A article my wife read about the .45ACP pointed out most body armor does NOT cover the leg areas. A .45ACP hitting the femur would likely shatter the bone, and the target will go down! If the person is not in shock he for sure can not run and would have a hard time even crawling. Body armor is not perfect. The Hero hit location chart will help in factoring this. Make sure armor has the limitation that it only covers certian hit locations and this should simulate this. Just my two cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor It would also help to know what kind of ammunition was used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edsel Posted April 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I don't know about this mythical leather jacket... but as greymankle pointed out above, most of the "bulletproof" stuff is factoring a plate hit. 7.62 or 5.56 rounds will go through the non-plate like butter. Yeah I wish I could remember more about it. It was one of those things you just happen across on TV, have a chance to go "wow" and then they are on to something else. A "leather" jacket can conceal many layers of kevlar and still have room for some good padding. If the wearing is expecting the shot and tensed up for it... Well you get the picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdoc Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Actually, if you recall the ENG footage from the Bank of America robbery in North Hollywood back in 1997 (I think), what you are describing is exactly what happened. The robbers wore body armour on their legs and arms as well as vest and they were peppered by literally thousands of rounds from 9 mm Berrettas, plus slugs from 18G. shotguns broken out from a local gun store. I don't know how many of those hit, but it was a hell of a lot. All it did was knock them back a few steps: they weren't even knocked down. They were eventually taken out by head shots since they weren't wearing helmets, but the three robbers stood off more than 200 police officers and wounded 15 of them, before being brought down (one killed himself, one was shot at point blank range when the cops rushed him - that was ballsy - and one was taken out by a Swat team member as he tried to escape). It was similar in Richardson in Dallas in 2004, except there some of the cops had SIG .357s (which also failed to do any real damage). It's safe to say that yeah, right now body armour has outpaced handguns at least, and at medium range offers good to very good protection vs most assault rifles. cheers,Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Actually, if you recall the ENG footage from the Bank of America robbery in North Hollywood back in 1997 (I think), what you are describing is exactly what happened. The robbers wore body armour on their legs and arms as well as vest and they were peppered by literally thousands of rounds from 9 mm Berrettas, plus slugs from 18G. shotguns broken out from a local gun store. I don't know how many of those hit, but it was a hell of a lot. All it did was knock them back a few steps: they weren't even knocked down. They were eventually taken out by head shots since they weren't wearing helmets, but the three robbers stood off more than 200 police officers and wounded 15 of them, before being brought down (one killed himself, one was shot at point blank range when the cops rushed him - that was ballsy - and one was taken out by a Swat team member as he tried to escape). It was similar in Richardson in Dallas in 2004, except there some of the cops had SIG .357s (which also failed to do any real damage). It's safe to say that yeah, right now body armour has outpaced handguns at least, and at medium range offers good to very good protection vs most assault rifles. cheers,Mark What is even more interesting about that North Hollywood shootout, is that autopsy showed that the guy who killed himself had already taken at least two 9mm hits that would have eventually proved lethal (one through the throat and chipping the spinal column, IIRC) but the shot did NOTHING to stop him in the heat of battle. That is another aspect of combat that NO system has effectively emulated. And I will state again, in agreement with Markdoc, that body armor HAS outstripped handguns... so what you have in a game environment is clashing genres. One guy wants to play "The Gun Pedant!" who knows everything about weapons and balistics and the right armor to wear. Another guy wants to play "Look At Me I'm John Wu Man!" who wants to acrobatically dive around and mow down mooks with a couple of Browning High Powers. Here is where genre and rules don't match. Conflicting play styles happen, etc. I don't think modern body armor has negated the vigilante crime fighter... but modern technology, modern information that negates cinematic feel... all of that HAS to be considered in depth by a GM, before a campaign starts. This forces the GM to be more of an expert than the game rules probably provide. Not insurmountable, but a challenge. In Hero... you also have the damage compression issue. Not enough disparate damage between a .38 Special and 7.62 Nato round to really show how different they are. Body armor that is flat "damage reducing" rather than "stops X attack, does less vs. Y attack, and does nothing vs. Z attack" which is more realistic. For a cyber/SF type game, where high tech armor needs to be countered by even higher tech weapons, this can take a lot of "pre-build" work on the part of GM. Are the guns just flat out more powerful, which suddenly makes them insanely lethal with just one hit... or does every gun/ammunition have a pre-build against known armors/defenses... so that while an .445 PDW with light AP is hellish vs. soft armor/no armor types... it is completely worthless vs. a plate hit... and plast-steel armor will barely be scratched. The "how'' of this can happen a lot of different ways in Hero, and can take a lot of work to figure out what best fits the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I would second a notion to wait and see. Much armor works great in controlled tests but in the field its performance is less. The .45ACP (I routinely use a Kimber .45 and Thompson 1927A1 submachine gun [semi-auto]) is STILL a great round to stop a person. The 230 grain FMJ round at about 800 feet per second will stop most people cold. A person with armor will still be "stunned" by the impact of the heavy round even if it does not penetrate the armor. A article my wife read about the .45ACP pointed out most body armor does NOT cover the leg areas. A .45ACP hitting the femur would likely shatter the bone, and the target will go down! If the person is not in shock he for sure can not run and would have a hard time even crawling. Body armor is not perfect. The Hero hit location chart will help in factoring this. Make sure armor has the limitation that it only covers certian hit locations and this should simulate this. Just my two cents. Great post, and a good segue into the gaming aspect of this. While armor may be really good (when it works) to stop a round... the other part of this is that Hero really downplays the effects of a wound, lethal or not. Player 1: "Oh, hit me in the leg? I take four body? Yeah, whatever... I've got 12 more." can be a typical response. Players can look at the game statistically and recognize that "in game" they have a very small chance of really being hurt... and do stupid things. What do you do against this? My first thought is to make sure wounds are taken seriously. Not just bleeding rules... but "That body is only the initial damage. If you continue moving around, it get's worse. You could permanently cripple your character... as it stands you will be weeks out of combat after this... Dex and Con are draining permanently until it heals, etc." This then, goes against the OTHER common issue... that of cinematic damage, where the "hero" just shrugs it off with the "it is just a flesh wound" type of feel. Players want their cake and to eat it, too. They want the "realistic" top of the line body armor that makes 'em invulnerable... but the do NOT want the "realistic" horror of bullet wounds (especially larger caliber rifle wounds) that would "realistically" take away use of their limbs, permanent stat reduction, chronic pain... all after intense months of recouperation. It is a very important discussion to have with players UP FRONT. What style of game will determine what level of armor and gun damage is appropriate (along with bleeding, incapacitation, crippling rules, etc.) Oh... and just a though... while I totally agree that the Hit Location chart is good for "armor coverage" I think that if you players demand the realistic bit... there should also be an activation on that hit location. ie. - Level 3 Body armor covers Hit Locations 9-13 (Shoulders through groin), but there is a 12- activation on the 9 spot... 14- activation on the 10-12 spot... 11- activation on the 13 spot. This gets insanely crunchy and detailed... maybe more than it is worth for game play... but it better reflects that armor is not perfect... there are folds and flaps and gaps that can get hit, etc. If nothing else, if your players are demanding "realistic"... let 'em know what that REALLY means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdoc Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor What is even more interesting about that North Hollywood shootout' date=' is that autopsy showed that the guy who killed himself had already taken at least two 9mm hits that would have eventually proved lethal (one through the throat and chipping the spinal column, IIRC) but the shot did NOTHING to stop him in the heat of battle. That is another aspect of combat that NO system has effectively emulated.[/quote'] Hero does! That was a hit that did plenty of BOD and a 1 on the Stun Modifier. The thing is damage (in real life) scales very arbitrarily. I'm speaking here as someone who has both been on the receiving end of a bullet as well as having killed a fairish number of large animals with them. Here's an example of what I mean. On my second deer-hunting trip I shot two deer. Both were location 5 (neck). Deer #1 took the bullet (9 mm hipower copperhead) right in the spine. Dead before he knew it, basically. Just dropped without even trying to run. The second one got the same kind of bullet about 2 miserable inches lower. Went right through the neck without stopping although it surely left a big hole. Deer #2 took off and ran like a bastard - up the streambed, over the ridge and right down into the next valley - a good 3 miles or 5 kilometres before finally succumbing. Had it been two inches lower again, or if I had been using steel points, he might have survived. The degree of granularity needed to model that is probably unplayable. The thing that bugs *me* about roleplaying damage is the way that it's instant. You get shot and either you're bleeding to death and will go out in a few short seconds or you're basically OK (even if you use impairing rules). It actually never happens like that: usually you get hit, suffer fatal damage and then die anywhere from a few hours to a few days later, with varying degrees of incapacity. Of course that's more realism than I actually need in a game. It just bugs me, is all. cheers, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor What you have is gamers clashing with reality in a lot of cases. Gamer's see toys in books and their character just have to have them. How many people in the real world (aside from cops and soldiers) wear body armor of any sort, let alone external class III vests and piecemiel armor on their limbs? The North Hollyood shoot out was as sensational and stunning as it was exactly because its not what you normally see. If you average bank robber wore a full-suit of heavy body armor and toted assault weapons around the average police officer would be equiped with more than a medium ballistic vest, a 9mm and shotgon, and a belt of non-lethal weapons. He'd be eqully armed because that was the opposition he was expected to run into. As it is, the police who were outgunned in North Hollywood generally outgun every criminal they run into. And external, obvious armor is conspicuous - and creates a great deal of alarm. Why? Because its so out of the ordinary that when people see it their survival alarms go off because something very bad is about to happen. Somehow, however, even when its not a military combat mission or the swat team being called in, gamers just have to have the stuff. 'Cause its so cool. I don't think the North Hollywood shootout is really germain to the original post, either. The original post discusses a inobvious piece of thinnish armor that stopped a .357 round, not a heavy ballistic vest worn externally that will stop everything short of a rifle bullet. There are some very good light and medium vests on the market, most of which can counter most handguns, but a light vest that can stop the higher powered handgun rounds would be something new. Only an idiot relies on a handgun. One of the first things we were told in the police acadamy was: if you expect trouble, your shoulder arm is your primary weapon. A handgun is an "in case of emergency break class" weapon. And shotguns have never been very good against body armor. In most cases, the effect a shotgun will have on an armored person is staggering them, or wild pellets hitting something exposed. All of this brings us to the rifle. Without the metal or ceramic plates heavy body armor is still rifle bait. A medium to high powered rifle round will cut through a standard Class III vest like butter; and even if it didn't, the internal bruising and broken bones it would cause can prove equally lethal, though more time will pass before they die. With the plates there is a bigger problem. We have reached a point where the plates can stop most bullets, but that doesn't mean the wearer gets off scot free when his armor stops a bullet. And what's more; outside of military (when they can get them) and swat teams, who walks around in heavy external armor with solid plates? Its not only expensive, but hot, heavy, an impediment to movement, and conspicious as hell. It just doesn't happen on a day in and day out basis unless you are in a role playing game. If gamers understood heavy body armor in plates equaled: Distinctive Features: concealable with effort (probably under a conspicous trenchcoat mafia get-up), Always noticed and creates a major reaction; AND Penalty: -2 DCV They might realize just how weird their modus operandi really is; or plan differently. If they're going for realism, unless they're the police, they'll end up like the North Hollywood robbers. Don't get me wrong, its fun to play storm the bastille with guns blazing, but in most situations, even in most game situations, its not very realistic. If a van stops and four guys in bodyarmor with assault rifles hop out and cross the street heading for a bank, someone will call the police before they even get to the front door. How much more so if he's wearing a Bat-Suit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ki-rin Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Great post on all points Von D-Man. I also think that it's important to remember that historically any defensive or offensive edge is countered sooner or later. Armor (defense) may have an edge now, but weapons will 2x and 4x their momentum (I've seen write ups on military rifles with 5000fps muzzle velocities) and make up for it soon enough. Or someone will come up with a completely different weapon that current Armor is not designed for (just imagine how poorly RW modern Armor would protect against the kind of high-tech weaponry based on Sonics, Gravitons, EBs, etc that we take for granted in-game.) Sad commentary on The Nature of Man that we've been in a perpetual arms race for our entire history as a species. Game-wise, I wouldn't worry too much about it and I'd enforce the old rules of thumb that avg defense on the avg character should be ~2x the damage of avg attack. Then I'd describe it narratively whatever way makes people happy. IOW, I'd treat it as sfx but make sure the underlying game mechanics allow everyone to have a good time (Except the Rules Rapists and Munchkins. I don't feel obligated to make them happy.) Side note: My Latin is ruusstty, and my Greek is non-existant. What's "Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?" mean in English? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Side note: My Latin is ruusstty, and my Greek is non-existant. What's "Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?" mean in English? How much wood would a wood chuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ki-rin Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor "Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?" How much wood would a wood chuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? LOL, *uses Yosemite Sam accent* "Well why didn't you just SAY so son?" Definite proof that presentation can improve a message... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox1 Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Check on something called Blended Metal Technology Bullets. Company behind it is called Le Mas Ltd. The idea is a composite metal design that allows it to blow through armor, but fragment inside a victim with horrific results. See: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/milstory.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edsel Posted April 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor The History channel just aired a program about bullets. History, etc. During the last part of the show one of the things they covered were these blended metal bullets. Cutting-edge technology and very impressive if all they claimed and demonstrated is true. The bullets are manufactured from a blend of seven different metals. They are in effect a form of memory metal. When the bullet strikes something that is cool, or that takes heat from the bullet, it hardens and maintains its shape. For instance metal plates and the fabrics used in body armor actually suck heat out of the bullet so it hardens and punches through. If the bullet interacts with something that is warm, or imparts heat to the bullet the metal become super frangible and literally explodes. Intrestingly drywall imparts a lot of heat to a bullet due to texture and will cause the bullet to come appart. That makes it act a bit like a glaser safety slug in that it won't pass through most interior walls and accidentally hit an unintented victim. Ballistic gelatin tests are not very effective since they lack body heat and the bullet will not fragment. However when used against warm haunch of raw meat (to simulate body temprature) it blows it apart. You effectively have a 5.56mm round that will punch through armor. But once it hits warm flesh it explodes and is incredibly lethal. And it won't blow through your intended target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gewing Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor I've met the counder of the company. I have some faith that they work, but don't buy the idea that "heat" is why. I'm guessing different strengths in linear longitudinal and radial/lateral modes. The History channel just aired a program about bullets. History, etc. During the last part of the show one of the things they covered were these blended metal bullets. Cutting-edge technology and very impressive if all they claimed and demonstrated is true. The bullets are manufactured from a blend of seven different metals. They are in effect a form of memory metal. When the bullet strikes something that is cool, or that takes heat from the bullet, it hardens and maintains its shape. For instance metal plates and the fabrics used in body armor actually suck heat out of the bullet so it hardens and punches through. If the bullet interacts with something that is warm, or imparts heat to the bullet the metal become super frangible and literally explodes. Intrestingly drywall imparts a lot of heat to a bullet due to texture and will cause the bullet to come appart. That makes it act a bit like a glaser safety slug in that it won't pass through most interior walls and accidentally hit an unintented victim. Ballistic gelatin tests are not very effective since they lack body heat and the bullet will not fragment. However when used against warm haunch of raw meat (to simulate body temprature) it blows it apart. You effectively have a 5.56mm round that will punch through armor. But once it hits warm flesh it explodes and is incredibly lethal. And it won't blow through your intended target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest voodoo54 Posted May 15, 2005 Report Share Posted May 15, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Did some research. Seems next year the leading maker of military level armor is going to ship a new vest able to defeat even the 7.62x51mm SLAP round over multiple hits. It's only in vest form, so hits elsewhere are still a problem. Even so, just plain wow. We carry plates in our Interceptor Body Armor now designed specificaly to defeat 7.62x39mm armor piercing rounds. Of course the IBA w/ plates, 7 full magazines, 2 hand grenades, M4 carbine, and MICH helmet can get quite cumbersome. Takes time to get used to. And yeah it only protects the torso front and back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gewing Posted May 15, 2005 Report Share Posted May 15, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor We carry plates in our Interceptor Body Armor now designed specificaly to defeat 7.62x39mm armor piercing rounds. Of course the IBA w/ plates' date=' 7 full magazines, 2 hand grenades, M4 carbine, and MICH helmet can get quite cumbersome. Takes time to get used to. And yeah it only protects the torso front and back.[/quote'] The armor is getting better and better. I've seen 7.62mm SLAP rated at penetrating 33 mm of steel at 100 meters. That is a new level of protection, if possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inu Posted May 17, 2005 Report Share Posted May 17, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor Additional way of coping: Accept that body armour will render some guys invulnerable in particular hit locations. The PC who decides to armour up gets to survive hails of gunfire somewhat reliably. I wouldn't want to depend on it, however. John Woo Guy buys combat luck - prolly less rPD than the armour guy, but it covers all over and doesn't give him DCV/REC penalties. He also doesn't stand out and can get that defence all the time. SAy, on the street, when heavy-armour-dude has to wear concealable vests. Most bad guys, as said, will have very little armour. It makes things scary when you come up against, say, heavily-armoured SWAT troopers. My main problem with armour is that most movies portray it as useless. Seriously, you get either the cop movie 'wow, glad I was wearing my vest' or you get nothing. I've seen SWAT dudes (generally in John Woo genre) get shot in the chest with light pistols and get killed. Related, in fantasy genre, I have rarely seen platemail stop ANYTHING in films. This kind of thing creates an impression in players that they should be getting one-shot kills on everything. They shoot it, it's dead! A good exception: in the recent Assault on Precinct 13, the armoured bad guys generally took a lotta bullets before going down, with the exception of one who got surprised and took a point-blank shot to the unarmoured back of the neck. Another good exception: In Hostage, virtually no-one is killed by a single bullet (until the final shootout, in which the film takes a break from its thriller genre and becomes standard action fare). People on both sides take three, four, five bullets and... well, they usually go down, but they don't generally die immediately. It is, frankly, a lot more shocking to see someone crawling 50m down a road trailing blood than it is to see them die cleanly and without mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest voodoo54 Posted May 18, 2005 Report Share Posted May 18, 2005 Re: Guns vs. Armor The armor is getting better and better. I've seen 7.62mm SLAP rated at penetrating 33 mm of steel at 100 meters. That is a new level of protection, if possible. Fortunatley nobody in my unit recieved a hit in the torso so I couldn't tell you how effective the claim is. The plates also don't say at what range they protect. All the casualties we suffered were in the limbs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.