Firearm Durability

This game wants to stretch toward realism? Is that a singular goal? Or will that fall by the wayside to ‘nerf gameplay’ if something seems too easy?

I ask this because I can offer a simple data point on firearm maintenance. I grew up on a farm, and from 14yo to 18yo I put over 20,000 rounds of the cheap ‘Thunderbolt Lightning’ .22 ammunition through my old pump action rifle, which I drug over our 80 acres in the snow, rain, dusty summers, etc. Not once did I ever clean it. It has sat in my gun cabinet for over 20 years now. I get it out from time to time to take care of a skunk or opossum that won’t stay out of trouble. I have still yet to clean it. It has never misfired, failed to feed, etc.

I’m not asking for any changes, or asking for feedback on different types of guns. This is just a data point. Thanks.

1 Like

inb4 “anecdotal evidence”.


The game is only difficult in the beginning where low skills mean you can’t do basic interactions. Like make arrows or sling ammo or rock crossbows because reasons.

The difficulty falls off a cliff after you find a knife and manage to not starve, or find a gun with ammo.

It’s really a problem of z’s being less threatening and loot tables.
Common army z spawns on overworld with M4s and SAWs w/ 100s of 5.56 ammo, crashed planes etc.

I find CDDA really has only 2 modes of difficulty: instant death (turret shot), or trivial (kiting and grinding easier opponents, because it’s either this or instaded).

1 Like

I have a deathmobile. Play this a lot. Challenge is what you make of it. Just because you find a mini-nuke doesn’t mean you have to use it.

I will re-itterate: this is only a data point for the ‘realism’.

As for ‘anecdotal’, no, I bought a ‘brick’ of ammo more often than once a month. 500 rounds times 48 months. I rounded down, just to be in a safe zone. I was an avid plinker. If you would prefer to run this test yourself to ‘confirm it’, then get off you butt and do it.

I don’t keep it pretty. This is my childhood. I will leave it as is.

Edit: After reading this… I guess I should think about handing this down to my son pretty quick…but it hurts to think of parting with it. Maybe I should look for a replacement to help nurse me through.


1 Like

One image per post? How convenient.

And replying too quick. lol.

Also, I have been a software Engineer for 18 years now. I work in C# (w/ HTML and Javascript). I did C++ in college. Heck, I started my career on RPG, and took a while to get out of that and into C#, lol. Not sure if I want to delve into C. I’m kicking around the idea of working on the code, I’m just pretty busy.

Another note. I’m barely past being a ‘3 gun’ person, so I don’t have a lot of input on this topic. That is why I say this is a data POINT, not a rule of thumb. I have put less than 500 rounds through my 45, 12 gauge, and 4/10 (this was for starling control, yes it is a weird one to own) combined. My .22 is a different story.

One thing that would be cool would be to add a new parameter screen where the player is offered a ‘switch’ to decide what points they would like to be ‘more real’ in the game. Have a bool for ‘food won’t spoil’, ‘guns won’t degrade’, ‘simplify non-vehicle batteries’ (only one universal size for tools), etc.

You can have two descriptions for items. 1) main basic description. simplified version. 2) a more complex description that would show up if the user opts to use that object’s complex version.

When we design a product we like to make a lot of it parameter driven so the user can customize their experience, allowing us to reach the widest user base without having to constantly change the code base.

This would allow a player to ‘turn off’ things that they feel ‘hurt the game experience’ for themselves, without alienating other users by requesting a change. Honestly, I would like simplified handheld batteries. I would like to imagine a future where some large entity dominated the market in some way and created a unified battery design. Only ‘C’ batteries exist. You just load more in. Smaller items have internal rechargeable batteries that break down into whatever on disassembly. Larger items use vehicle batteries or have custom internal rechargeable batteries. Just day dreaming.

We handle the configurability you describe in a data driven way whenever possible. E.g. guns have reliability data associated with them that can be overridden in a mod, or in even more extreme situations, the generic guns mod replaces all the guns with a streamlined selection of guns.

1 Like

I love this old gun! I only got to shoot a few times as a child, and would have loved something like yours. I may even just get one now in case we all revert to needing small game rifles for getting squirrel meat for taco tuesdays… :smiley:

This being said – what your describing with your experience is exactly anecdotal. i.e. you aren’t performing a study with many guns and many conditions. You have yourself a perfect example of a well-built gun that has amazing tolerances and longevity. It could be that the literal guns off the line before and after yours had some flaws or differences that caused them to fail after 5, 10, 1000 rounds, while yours is still going strong.


Yes, I believe I did call it a ‘data POINT’. And no, that isn’t what ‘anecdotal’ means:

  1. (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.

I’m not ‘accounting’ false memories. I simply listed my purchase habits, which I had to work for to be allowed. So I know the exact model, conditions, type of and number of ammunition used. I’m not saying ‘man, I had a gun when I was a kid and I bet I shot thousands of rounds through it… don’t recall what kind it was sonny.’

What you would then do is add that data POINT into other accounts, thus covering many guns. You build a base of data off of actual use. The only other option is, unrealistically, to buy 50 of each gun, from a wide timeline of production, and test each with hand loaded rounds using precision powder measurements and bullet grains (because you can’t soil your hard data by relying on the possibility of defects in the factory ammunition) and also blind testing random samples of the powder and primers to make sure they all perform correctly. So, what do we think is more likely easier and probable to happen? That? Or adding up user data points? There is a reason I didn’t ask for any changes. I don’t have enough information to warrant that. I’m not really sure why people on forums are so dismissive of others giving them valuable data. You know the conditions I listed, I showed you the model, and I listed the ammunition used. I also showed you the rusty and dirty condition of the gun in question. This kind of response is what makes people not contribute.

People troll on here by calling their targets trolls. The folks on here are umm…whimsical.

1 Like

I don’t think that it is what they meant. It’s more that only one case of experience doesn’t make a point.

For example: A computer power supply has an avarage life expectancy of 8 years if in heavy use. I have a gaming computer and - since I work from home as a freelancer - I use it daily almost aound the clock (I turn it off when I go to sleep and on when I wake up).
I’ve upgraded some parts over the years, but I’ve never changed the power supply. It runs fine since 15 years with no issues concerning the power supply.
I don’t have a surge protection at the socket. I plug it out after I shut the computer down. Those things do stress the power supply unnecessarily and I still don’t have any problems.

However, in the same PC, I’ve had the hard drive that came with it make a head crash half a year into ownership.

My grandmother across the street has these old light bulbs in her living room lamp. Since she moved in, about 18 years ago, she did not have to replace them. Meanwhile, my lamp ate about 1.5 energy saving lamp bulbs a year.

Those are all real life examples that go against common knowledge. I hope you see what I’m trying to say here: Just one experience does not invalidate other data.

As for the gun fouling, I would assume that that data was taken from average data available on the internet or in books. And yes, it was probably avaraged (or extrapolated) across all guns, which is not good, but there has to be a point where time wasted on researching and coding it for every gun, as you probably know from your own projects, gets too large to validate the small gain of realism from doing so.

So, to change that, we would need either a source that, like you said, bought 50 guns of the same type and fired every one without cleaning for enough time to gather reliable data, or find 50 people with the same gun, same gun usage and who also never cleaned it. I doubt that you’ll find these 50 people here in the forum.
The third way would be to check in with the manufacturer, as they usually run these tests and offer an average.

Also, while you state that you’re not asking for any change, it looks like you do imply it by asking “This game wants to stretch toward realism?”… which sounds like “This game is not realistic, because … I had different experiences”.

On an other note…

I’m actually worked/working on that. I’ve tried to add this as an option (decay rate, so you can increase or decrease the rotting speed (or prevent it completely) like the item spawn rate) in build version 0.C-7307 (no, I’m not kidding you), along with some other options.
However, when I’ve coded it up and tested it, the changes on food freezing hit and I had to redo most of it.
Then I went on a testing spree which took close to a year, and when I was ready to fix code collisions on github, the feature freeze for 0.E hit.

And now, when I finally could work on a pull request, I don’t have the time, since I’m stuck between running errands for my family (as I’m the only one without a precondition which would put me at the risk of dying for leaving the house), work which I’ve procrastinate to much about and a court case with someone from a different country who owes me money and wants to fight over it (or just delay it, who knows) :confounded:

Just wait a year or two and I’ll get there… maybe :laughing: .


@kevin.granade - yeah, I understand the mods angle. Using lots of them. I simply meant an interface on the main game itself. Just an idea. I have seen many people ‘bitch’ about how they ‘hate change X, which was put in for scof “realisim”!’ and was just pointing out it might help make the community user base more cohesive if the game readily adapted to play styles without having to rely on mods for everything, which can get messy. I have had to ‘fix’ countless bits of data in the json files as I update the game which then breaks the mods. It would just be a better user experience. This isn’t exactly a ‘casual gamer’ type game. But adding some basic parms could help with that. The bigger the user base, the better!

And, another data point for you: I love this game. I will play it until I’m sick of it, and then come back a year later and do it again! Of course, this is with a caveat. If there is something I don’t like I simply create my own objects or recipes, tile images, etc. And that is my point in the parms options. Not every player can do that. They would just stop playing out of frustration or whatever.

An example is I created a ‘Hauling Freezer’ out of the ‘hauling space’ and mini-fridge objects. Tweaked the recipe to require more insulation from ‘plastic’ (the best option for insulation right now I guess), higher power draw, etc. I based the requirements off a refrigerated semi unit divided down to what would be accounted for by ‘one tile’ in the game. I love that I can do that. But it isn’t simple. I ported over ‘armored headlights’ and ‘armored security cameras’ creations from playing a few years ago. I had to massively change several parts of the recipes, item defs, etc, so they would work with the current format the code expects to read in. I just feel for the non tech players I see getting stuck.

1 Like

It would IMO do the opposite, if we tried to appease everyone, it would perversely invite more complaints because then we’ve demonstrated that complaining works. I don’t add features to the game because people complain. I add features to the game because someone has convinced me that it’s a good idea to have it in the game.

I completely disagree with this, I’m making the best version of the game I can, and that includes enabling people to adjust and extend the game, but I’m not chasing popularity, that’s an amazingly effective way to ruin your game.

Feel free to publish an endless series of mods to try to make them all happy then.


lol, yeah, there you go. That is what I was talking about.

What about a quality value of a weapon that determines the durability of a weapon? Basically how Rimworld does it.

Ideally quality/durability would be applied to every single part of the weapon, but for starters it could be for the whole weapon.

Unless there is a quality stat that I must have missed.


Well, in case it wasn’t clear (it apparently was not) that was preventive sarcasm at people outright denying your data point as irrelevant because it is a *single* data point. Seems insane to even assume such thing possible, I know, but I’ve seen it done before, and I was here for just a little more than half a year.

Seems reasonable to assume a gun system for customization could improve how we perceive firearms in game. People with guns like MeanRat do misfire and can even explode. Would be interesting to have to take items apart to clean them. Also interesting to have parts from different guns with parts in better shape than others. Conjoin them into a peak condition item. Maybe custom parts to give small buffs to internal workings and weight?

I think a modular weapon part system is in need of here. And considering we have a lot of guns in the game, categorizing all weapon parts would be one heck of a job.

But yes, ideally you should be able to cannibalize weapons for weapon parts to fix/create your weapon of choice.

Perhaps like how you can make a deathmobile, you could create your god weapon.