Firearm Durability

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.

3 posts were split to a new topic: I don’t understand realism changes

Maybe for non frequently updating mods they should dev for stables instead of constantly chasing experimentals.
A lot of things change and a lot of things break pretty much weekly.

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

That’s not really how gunsmithing works. Parts interchangeability between identical weapons or weapons of families specifically designed for commonality is one thing, but you can’t just take the barrel off of a hi point and drop it into a glock and expect it to work. Same goes for common ‘consumable’ parts like the firing pins.

The most modularity you can get in weapon systems are common platform families like the AR15, with its incredible amount of aftermarket parts. For the most part, we already handle a lot of this with weapon mods for stocks, attachments, triggers, etc. We’re even more generous in a lot of regards, with more specialist parts like triggers and stocks being generic and interchangeable.

Well of course it should depend on compatibility. I don’t think there were any other thoughts there.

I was also thinking about being able to create shoddy looking weapons. Kinda how Rust has guns that are built from various junk. Of course, CDDA would have a more robust building system, and the guns wouldn’t be that reliable.

We have shoddy and scrap weapons, there’s a whole selection of pipe rifles, homemade shotguns and luty submachine guns, even a lever action that accepts stanags. I don’t think makeshift weapons are at a particular shortage, and their crafting requirements are exceptionally low, which makes sense for back of the truck level manufacturing.


Check this out. There in lies a system to dismantle guns of similar interchange-able systems in which to replace a shoddy barrel with a better one to make the dispersion a little less crap; also the other parts of the guns too.

The idea is not to craft and cobble random gun systems. But to make a game system that makes weapons, how to put it…not perfect. The idea that a gun found in a store is peak condition stands to reason. Found on a dead body in the wild= less that stellar condition. Being able to find similar weapons that you can dismantle and repair for a better condition firearm from the best parts available would be a cool thing to do.

Also adds the possible outcome of better parts from 3rd party manufacturers. Accessories(more w/ subtle buff/debuffs). Using a condition score 0-100 on all pieces of the firearm would also make for a much more ellaborate repair/customization system for the game. It could also adda positive/negative trait.

Positive trait:
Well Versed; Firearms= You know your guns. This trait adds condition knowledge of the guns(and each gun part) you examine(without dismantling them first) and provides a 5% faster repair time.

Negative trait:
Clueless; Firearms= You are clueless about firearms. Worse than the average action movie wannabe. Condition of firearms(even obvious to the average observer) is hidden from you until your marksmenship skill meets lvl 4. You also have a -5% to repairing guns and may damage them if you try. Perhaps a 5% chance of shooting player actor if the gun is still loaded when repairing?

No major comments or concerns to this aside from how this is appreciably different from allowing gunsmithing to ++ a weapon for a general performance buff to it. If you want to represent specifically high-grade parts, we have weapon mods. Expanding and adding some rigor around that system to allow “Superalloy-Lined Short 5.56 Barrel” and the appropriate restrictions for its use would get you 99% of the way there.

The real problem with this is that I’m now going to spend the next 30 hours of my gaming time playing that stalker mod :stuck_out_tongue:

Oh, hell. I thought this was about a STALKER mod for CDDA! This would be thematically perfect!