Damage and time to kill
Pick a hit zone and what the target is wearing. Every weapon whose calibre has a published base damage is solved against a 100 HP target and ranked by how long it takes to get there.
Ranked by time to kill
| Weapon | Calibre | Base | Damage/shot | Shots to kill | RPM | TTK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAL | .308 Win | 60 | 60.0 | 2 | 650 | 0.09 s |
| PKM | 7.62x54mm | 55 | 55.0 | 2 | 600 | 0.10 s |
| SVD | 7.62x54mm | 55 | 55.0 | 2 | 480 | 0.13 s |
| BMR-308 | .308 Win | 60 | 60.0 | 2 | 450 | 0.13 s |
| SUPER-45 | .45 ACP | 30 | 30.0 | 4 | 1,200 | 0.15 s |
| GGX 18 | 9x19mm | 22 | 22.0 | 5 | 1,200 | 0.20 s |
| M249 SAW | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 850 | 0.21 s |
| M4 | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 800 | 0.23 s |
| T-21 | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 750 | 0.24 s |
| BUSHMASTER M17S | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 700 | 0.26 s |
| A-91 | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 700 | 0.26 s |
| KH-2002 | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 700 | 0.26 s |
| AMP-9 | 9x19mm | 22 | 22.0 | 5 | 900 | 0.27 s |
| AK74 | 5.45x39mm | 26 | 26.0 | 4 | 650 | 0.28 s |
| GALIL | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 650 | 0.28 s |
| SKS | 7.62x39mm | 42 | 42.0 | 3 | 420 | 0.29 s |
| PP-19 VITYAZ | 9x19mm | 22 | 22.0 | 5 | 800 | 0.30 s |
| MP5 | 9x19mm | 22 | 22.0 | 5 | 800 | 0.30 s |
| GGX 17 | 9x19mm | 22 | 22.0 | 5 | 600 | 0.40 s |
| M1911 | .45 ACP | 30 | 30.0 | 4 | 430 | 0.42 s |
| DEAGLE | .50 AE | 49 | 49.0 | 3 | 267 | 0.45 s |
| MOSIN NAGANT | 7.62x54mm | 55 | 55.0 | 2 | 46 | 1.30 s |
| SV98 | 7.62x54mm | 55 | 55.0 | 2 | 46 | 1.30 s |
| MK22 | .308 Win | 60 | 60.0 | 2 | 46 | 1.30 s |
| SCOUT RIFLE TD | 5.56x45mm | 28 | 28.0 | 4 | 46 | 3.91 s |
No published damage
These carry a calibre with no base damage figure in any source we have, so they are left out rather than estimated: MP43, M500, AMR 50, COMPOUND BOW, JUDGE, RPG-7, 9K333 Verba, MAAWS, MGL-40.
That includes the AMR 50, which is the highest-cost weapon in the game. A guess for it would rank at the top of this table and look exactly as authoritative as the rows above it, which is the reason there is not one.
What this calculator does, and what it cannot do
The model is one line: damage per shot = base damage x hit zone multiplier x (1 - armour protection), against a 100 HP target. Base damage is a property of the round, not the gun, so two weapons firing the same calibre hit equally hard and are separated only by how fast they fire.
That is why the ranking moves when you change the zone. A high rate of fire wins at the torso, where several shots are needed; a heavy round wins at the head, where the multiplier of ×2.35 can take the count down to one or two and fire rate stops mattering.
Armour only helps where it covers
Covers the head, and the neck from tier L3 upward. Covers the torso, and the pelvis and shoulders from tier L4 upward. Shooting an unarmoured limb ignores protection entirely — which is why the lower multipliers are not always the worse option against a well-equipped target.
Two things are deliberately missing
Range falloff. Each weapon has its own falloff curve derived from game files, and no source publishes the curves. Every figure here is therefore the close-range case, before falloff reduces it.
Armour piercing and hollow point. The sources describe their modifiers as estimates made without penetration tables. Armour piercing strips part of the protection and hollow point performs worse against armour, but no published number expresses by how much, so only standard ammunition is solved.
Where the numbers come from
Base damage per calibre is the figure on our own ammunition page, and it agrees with the community calculators where they publish it. The hit zone multipliers and the 100 HP pool come from those calculators. Armour absorption is the protection percentage recorded on each item in the gear catalogue, which lines up with the tiers the model uses.
The game displays none of this in its own UI. The whole model is community work, which is why it carries the Unconfirmed tier: MetaForge ballistics, Wardogs Zone damage calculator, WardogsHub damage calculator. Treat the ordering as sound and the absolute numbers as provisional, and read the methodology for what the tier means.