I'm writing a book and I've got some bandits in a stalemate with the protagonists. The bandits, being bandits, are spray-and-pray shooters who might hit once out of a hundred... clips. They're enthusiastic and trigger-happy. The protagonists have a lot more experience, finesse and tactical knowledge. It's 20 bandits verse about 4 protagonists, and I think it would be a war of attrition.
So does this example exist in either real life or in FPS games? I don't play online and I'm not in any army (I've been paintballing once though).
Well it's in every FPS game I can think of, you very rarely have a numerical advantage in them. In real life it depends on the situation, if it's open ground with no way to retreat or sneak and flank then the 20 would win unless they were about as accurate as Imperial stormtroopers.
There are many varying factors as to how it could turn out. The bandits could make a suicide dash towards them and the protags could be at a loss for words.
Well, the storm trooper effect actually is more accurate than people would think, according to what I've heard - about how most bullets miss their mark due to the mark moving about, and the terrain, and taking into account the gun.
My bandits are made of two groups, so they'd also be aggressive to each other and fight them just as much as they fight the protagonists.
I don't intend on keeping them there long. The good guys have super powers and a regenerating troll on their side who can just go nuts.
Spray and pray is a tactic IRL. It's called "suppressive fire", although the idea is that you just shower an area with bullets so the enemy wouldn't move there. you can effectively pin them in place if you deny them their exit. The chance of being hit with a bullet aren't high but it exists, especially if there is a lot of fire focused there. In fact, that's the whole reason to have automatic fire on the weapons - if you empty a whole clip in a couple of seconds, chances are you'll miss and you'll miss badly.
But on the whole, the stereotype would be legit. "Self-taught" firearms don't tend to be effective. You've seen the gangsta' pistol hold, where the gun is cocked sideways:
Google image search for "gangster gun". First page, first row.
That is incredibly inaccurate. It only looks cool but you might as well close your eyes and try to aim towards a sound - you'll have similar effectiveness. And that's it - people not given proper training will may adopt a "cool" approach. And by "cool" I mean inaccurate and ineffective. Especially if they don't tend to use the guns a lot but rather use them for intimidation and generally for waiving around.
A professional training in firearms teaches you that firearms aren't toys. Shooting more than two bullets at once is really not done a lot. Recoil is a *****.
Also, if you want some more professional touches - generally police/military are trained to shoot in the torso - the centre off the mass and bullets there have good stopping power. Shooting legs/arms is not as effective, as the target can still move without too much effort and can still be quite deadly if they have a weapon of some sort. Also, if you have to kill somebody - shoot them in the head twice. Targets still have around 5-10% chance to survive a shot to the head (although they may need medical attention) but with two shots, the chance drops to below 1%.
It would depend probably mostly on the guns, sub-machine guns (uzi/thompson/Mp44 etc.) are nicknamed spray and pray because due to their fast fire, recoil and relatively short barrel they can be highly innaccurate when used fully automatic, so if the bandits had them, and the protagonists had rifles, or any other more accurate ranged weapons, and they were a large distance away, then you could play it out as the protagonists hiding in cover, and picking the bandits off when there was a break in the gunfire. If they are standing in a Mexican standoff situation, then you could just do the Rush Hour thing where the good guys drop to the floor and shoot all the bandits while the bullets go over their heads.
In games and movies yes, in reality no.
But it all depends on the type of book you are writing, do remember that you are trying to entertain people and that this sort of situation is the least interesting one.
Why not have a couple of guys run around the back and do some interesting stuff while others provide suppressing fire, or call in MacGyver and have him build a lifelike decoy robot out of a spoon, watermelon and some gravel...
I would say most shooters were like that...If the enemy was highly accurate the player would have quite a challenge on their hands. Like in rainbow six or ghost recon.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
