Even more realistic ballistics (including "damage").

User avatar
SoftShoe
Outfitter
Posts: 1165
Joined: January 10th, 2018, 1:40 pm
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Even more realistic ballistics (including "damage").

Post by SoftShoe »

Sherab86 wrote: I was thinking about this little more. And I think this might be not soley because of differences in mass, but also due to actual dimensions of a chest region...
I dont think you are giving the effect of mass enough credit. To step away from shooting metaphors lets talk about pugalism. In my youth I used to do allot of boxing. Now I'm a fairly big guy (195cm, 117kg) When I would punch someone my own size he would roll with the impact being able to absorb the energy fairly well. In contrast If I was to punch a guy 20kg lighter then me there would be a significant stagger if not go down. Why? He doesnt have the mass to absorb that energy. In some cases the guy my own size would go down as well. In boxing circles people would say he "had a glass jaw". This is the free radical I have been talking about in regards to animal toughness & by extension the critical chance you have mentioned.
Some animals just are not able to absorb much damage & the amount of damage they can absorb before they drop scales as the greater disparity between their size the incoming damage they are taking.

In game terms this can be expressed as an algorithm. Keeping it simple, a chart delineating the damage effect by caliber on game animal could be created. EG: 270win K/O chance vs Goats 30%, Mule/White/Black deer 10%, Elk 2%, Bear/Moose/Buffalo 0%.
This sort of chart could be created for caliber. I gave the goats a 30% chance which while sounds high probably isnt high enough. My only experiance with goats are the speed goats aka Pronghorn & talk about an animal that has no will to live. Im pretty sure you could knock them over with harsh language LOL

In application it would look like this. When an animal takes a hit from a 270 the game 1st checks to see the nervous system was hit. If yes the animal drops. If no the game does a critical hit check against the aforementioned arbitrary values. If it passes the animal drops. If no then the animal scampers away & the bleedout model kicks in.
There should not be a 100% chance of the animal dropping save a hit to the nervous system. Conversely even a bullet through the heart that fails the critical chance will run away. Regardless what TV shows a hit to the heart is not immediately fatal. Ive have shot several deer through the heart that have managed to run 10-50yds afterwords. They were just incredibly tough deer.
I honestly believe this as mentioned is doable in game. EW has to have some sort of algorithm already in place to account for the differant reactions the animals already have when hit. We are just looking to expand on what they already have. If anyone from EW is actually watching this thread I would be more then happy to do the grunt work for you & create these algorithms.
Sherab86 wrote: What I mean by this - if you place your shot, lets say, into lower portion of a whitetail's chest (but lets assume it is still double lung hit), this will be still closer to the spine, than in case of an elk, or a moose. Hence, by avarage, accoustic wave created by bullet's passage has greater chance to reach spine cord with enough of "force" (speaking informally - I'm not such a scientific purist as the author of linked articles ;) ) to incapacitate a deer, than it has in case of elk. Also shots through a shoulder blade naturaly bring in high trauma to a spine nad nervous system as such. So I guess, hunters having a habit to shot through scapula may notice instant drops more often, than those with shoot rather just behind a leg - perhaps.

There is also another mechanism author of reffered articles mention in his section on "A mechanics of leathal wounding":
There is another mechanism of cardiac arrest that is less well understood but which may account for the nearly instantaneous death of game animals hit with modern weapons and that is induced cardiac fibrillation and arrest. The precise mechanism for the onset of the cardiac arrest is not fully understood, but its effect is well documented. It may involve some type of local neurological or humeral communication between the heart and lungs that gets short-circuited. Alternatively, a violent wound to the lung tissue may create a tiny embolism that interrupts cardio-pulmonary function at a critical moment.

Additionally, there is some evidence to suggest that the sudden pressure resulting from the bullet's passage (through the heart?) coupled with the coincidence of the systolic peak of the blood pressure cycle may communicate up the arteries to the brain and produce, in effect, a ruptured cranial aneurysm resulting in an indirect injury to the central nervous system.
while I agree with you all of this is interesting & there is no getting around that clinical death happens after severe nervous system damage or rapid blood pressure drop we need to focus on what all that means in game terms. It is not beyond imaging that some of the animals I have dropped when shot were lying there in a state of shock or maybe even knocked unconscious by the hydrodynamic or nervous system shock until they succumbed to the physical injury to their bodies. In some cases those animals legs twitched but the fact of the matter is they expired where they landed either immediately from a critical chance (glass jaw) or as as a consequence of incapacitation & I think that is what needs to be modeled in game.

Image
User avatar
Sherab86
Hunter
Posts: 582
Joined: September 27th, 2017, 2:41 am
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: Even more realistic ballistics (including "damage").

Post by Sherab86 »

SoftShoe wrote:
Sherab86 wrote: I was thinking about this little more. And I think this might be not soley because of differences in mass, but also due to actual dimensions of a chest region...
I dont think you are giving the effect of mass enough credit. To step away from shooting metaphors lets talk about pugalism. In my youth I used to do allot of boxing. Now I'm a fairly big guy (195cm, 117kg) When I would punch someone my own size he would roll with the impact being able to absorb the energy fairly well. In contrast If I was to punch a guy 20kg lighter then me there would be a significant stagger if not go down. Why? He doesnt have the mass to absorb that energy. In some cases the guy my own size would go down as well. In boxing circles people would say he "had a glass jaw". This is the free radical I have been talking about in regards to animal toughness & by extension the critical chance you have mentioned.
Some animals just are not able to absorb much damage & the amount of damage they can absorb before they drop scales as the greater disparity between their size the incoming damage they are taking.
Yes, you are right. But please note, that I wasn't neglecting "mass effect", but rather adding to it "distance to spine" effect. ;)

I suppose we should also point out, do we still talk about accustic wave "strenght", or about projectile itself? In the later case, while projectile carries a lot of energy, due to it's shape and material properties, most of this energy is used for penetrating (partially crushing, but also cutting) through the tissues, and for projectile expansion. Just a little bit of this energy is transfered into the target in non-ellastic manner (I hope I used the term correctly - I'm paleontologist by my education, and not physicist - I've managed to forgot much from physics ;) ). People with have been shot, and survived to tell us about this, being asked what they have felt, they were speaking of a "punch". While this mostly reffer to handguns, I guess that for rifles this punch might be somewhat harder, but still it is not like being struck by the truck. ;) I write about this for clarity, because I had impression, that we both dissagree with "kinetic energy transfer" school of thinking.

So it comes to "strenght" of the accustic wave it seems. At least if we speak of hydrodynamic shock effect solely. And I admitt - I have no adequate knowledge to judge to what extend differences in mass change the final effect on central nervous system. I can only guess, that if there is more muscles, fat and organs between wave origin and central nervous system (so more mass between, but also for this reason I was speaking of distance), a wave have bigger chance to "disscharge", so to speak, before it will reach a spine. ;)

SoftShoe wrote: In game terms this can be expressed as an algorithm. Keeping it simple, a chart delineating the damage effect by caliber on game animal could be created. EG: 270win K/O chance vs Goats 30%, Mule/White/Black deer 10%, Elk 2%, Bear/Moose/Buffalo 0%.
This sort of chart could be created for caliber. I gave the goats a 30% chance which while sounds high probably isnt high enough. My only experiance with goats are the speed goats aka Pronghorn & talk about an animal that has no will to live. Im pretty sure you could knock them over with harsh language LOL

In application it would look like this. When an animal takes a hit from a 270 the game 1st checks to see the nervous system was hit. If yes the animal drops. If no the game does a critical hit check against the aforementioned arbitrary values. If it passes the animal drops. If no then the animal scampers away & the bleedout model kicks in.
There should not be a 100% chance of the animal dropping save a hit to the nervous system. Conversely even a bullet through the heart that fails the critical chance will run away. Regardless what TV shows a hit to the heart is not immediately fatal. Ive have shot several deer through the heart that have managed to run 10-50yds afterwords. They were just incredibly tough deer.
I honestly believe this as mentioned is doable in game. EW has to have some sort of algorithm already in place to account for the differant reactions the animals already have when hit. We are just looking to expand on what they already have. If anyone from EW is actually watching this thread I would be more then happy to do the grunt work for you & create these algorithms.
I I realy like your's approach. I can only hope EW would like it too. But I'm sceptic in this case I have to admitt.


SoftShoe wrote:
Sherab86 wrote: What I mean by this - if you place your shot, lets say, into lower portion of a whitetail's chest (but lets assume it is still double lung hit), this will be still closer to the spine, than in case of an elk, or a moose. Hence, by avarage, accoustic wave created by bullet's passage has greater chance to reach spine cord with enough of "force" (speaking informally - I'm not such a scientific purist as the author of linked articles ;) ) to incapacitate a deer, than it has in case of elk. Also shots through a shoulder blade naturaly bring in high trauma to a spine nad nervous system as such. So I guess, hunters having a habit to shot through scapula may notice instant drops more often, than those with shoot rather just behind a leg - perhaps.

There is also another mechanism author of reffered articles mention in his section on "A mechanics of leathal wounding":
There is another mechanism of cardiac arrest that is less well understood but which may account for the nearly instantaneous death of game animals hit with modern weapons and that is induced cardiac fibrillation and arrest. The precise mechanism for the onset of the cardiac arrest is not fully understood, but its effect is well documented. It may involve some type of local neurological or humeral communication between the heart and lungs that gets short-circuited. Alternatively, a violent wound to the lung tissue may create a tiny embolism that interrupts cardio-pulmonary function at a critical moment.

Additionally, there is some evidence to suggest that the sudden pressure resulting from the bullet's passage (through the heart?) coupled with the coincidence of the systolic peak of the blood pressure cycle may communicate up the arteries to the brain and produce, in effect, a ruptured cranial aneurysm resulting in an indirect injury to the central nervous system.
while I agree with you all of this is interesting & there is no getting around that clinical death happens after severe nervous system damage or rapid blood pressure drop we need to focus on what all that means in game terms. It is not beyond imaging that some of the animals I have dropped when shot were lying there in a state of shock or maybe even knocked unconscious by the hydrodynamic or nervous system shock until they succumbed to the physical injury to their bodies. In some cases those animals legs twitched but the fact of the matter is they expired where they landed either immediately from a critical chance (glass jaw) or as as a consequence of incapacitation & I think that is what needs to be modeled in game.
Yes, of course. From gameplay perspecive, there is of course no difference what are real world causes of instant incapacitation as long, as they finish by clinical death. Gameplay wise, we can assume that animal being struck to the ground is simply dead.

However, again in the same articles, it aslo described a story of author's colleague, with shot once a doe with had droped in her tracks. He and his friends didn't butchered her on place, but took her to the camp, and started to prepare fire, when suddenly "dead" doe stood up and started to walk away. :D But yeah, I think that for gameplay purposes, all instant-drops should be considered as deads.
User avatar
adkennedy03
Newbie
Posts: 20
Joined: September 12th, 2016, 4:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Even more realistic ballistics (including "damage").

Post by adkennedy03 »

I'm on board with the more realistic "damage" since with a bow you can drop deer, elk, or moose instantly with a heart shot. Of course the only way to drop an animal with a bow Irl is by shooting it through the shoulder, which you shouldn't, or through the spine, which you also shouldn't. With a gun I always aim for the shoulder to put the deer down, or whatever I'm shooting, since most likely the bullet hits the lungs as well, providing a decently fast and humane kill. Now I understand that the bows are high poundage and probably shooting a quite heavy fixed blade broadhead making the bows capable of punching through to the other side of the animal, or at least a deer or black bear. The way the "damage" system should work is by the blood level of the animal and if it drops instantly should be a result of shot placement and caliber and ammo used which would result in the amount of energy it hits with. Of course this would only have to work with big game. It would be stupid having to shoot a bird multiple times to drop it or a rabbit or something.
Post Reply

Return to “Weapons & Weapon Accessory Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest