87 replies to this topic

[MacKenzie Wolf]

WulfMackenzie, on 30 November 2011 - 11:30 PM, said:

Assuming the devs and the coders were in sync at some point in time, I went back and watched the released video of the duel between the Atlas and the Warhammer again. The video clearly shows the Atlas' AC/20 firing CONSISTENTLY in a timed pattern. Similar to a fire - delay - fire - delay - fire. This is not to say that its not to say the pilot is not holding the trigger but that the video shows a clear delay between each shell firing perhaps to account for the next shell to feed. I personally see the AC as a revolver with the "clip" being the wheel of the gun. a shot is fired the wheel rotates a new shell is home it fires and the process continues. That being said your ROF (rate of fire) is still dictated by how fast your wheel spins and generally speaking smaller shells such as the AC/2's are easier and faster to handle due to sheer size. It is possible that an AC/2 could APPEAR to be fully automatic firing such as a current era MG when in reality the loader is just moving very quickly. On the other hand the loader on an AC/20 would be FAR more laborious and thus would fire with a more semi-automatic appearance despite the fact that the trigger is never released. On a side note I find it Hilarious that there is another iteration of "Wulf Mackenzie" out there as I have been using the name for characters since my TT days and have had pilots in Battltech, Robotech, Rifts, and a few other games to carry the moniker Oh and to add my MW2 Overpowered mech of the year.... My chosen strategy for the Trials was to grab the biggest chasis I have and cram as many LRM's into as I could with 1 ton of ammo each. one target lock and the enemy mech was a smoldering hunk of missle riddled death. Saved me the effort of closing the range to use the OP Auto cannons.

Well said. Not sure why you're surprised about the name though. Mackenzie Wolf is a canon character.

[WulfMackenzie]

ChaosTicket, on 30 November 2011 - 11:22 PM, said:

well yes, in rate of fire, small ACs would underrepresented in turn-based combat. there is a major difference between say, a 40mm ac-2 and a 150mm ac-20.

the videogame ACs represent ACs somewhat better. small ACs are quite a bit weaker but faster than large ones.
-------------------------
I dont think many weapons can be considered fully automatic if they take too long to reload. a weapon with a .1-1 second reload would be fully automatic, but if it was something like an ac-20 and took 10-20 seconds to reload there would be too long pause between shots.
--------------------------------


he mentioned headshots, the ac-2 can still be very useful, just keep it from close range. a mech with an ac-20 could be "pecked" to death by an ac-2 based on range.

MacKenzie Wolf, on 30 November 2011 - 11:32 PM, said:

Don't kid yourself.

It is technically possible to do this... however unlikely... you have to factor in the speed of both mechs and your ability to stay WELL out of the larger mech's capable range. You also have to figure in what other armaments both mechs are carrying your AC/2 or LBX/2 since it had longer range is going to be useless if your opponent has an LRM20 on its side of the fight.

And someone correct me if I am wrong but in the table top didn't we roll AC damage in 5 point groups (4 rolls for the AC/20) because the LBX fired Slug and/or Shot gun rounds? Thus negating this whole conversation. If the LBX used slugs or shot gun rounds that means the ACs used a constant ROF per "salvo" of shells. and then we have our answer as to whether or not the AC is continuous fire or clip fed.

[ChaosTicket]

MacKenzie Im not contradicting you, as it would actually be possible. Based on turn-based rules and the no-armor rules, a 40mm firing fast enough would have the same damage as a 150mm.

in real life a 40mm would be ineffective for anti-armor warfare based on the need for firing velocity requiring extending the barrel to extreme lengths. a 40mm for need around 30-40 feet of barrel to equal a 150mm with decent length barrel.

low caliber weapons firing in huge furious swarms like machinegun could be an ac-20.

150mm firings like a machinegun is ridiculous, but a 40mm firing rapidly on full auto isnt. I just havent heard of any 40mms being used to represent an ac-20.
------------------------
its like this big, slow, short barreled but high caliber weapons represent higher AC ratings, and smaller ones represent high velocity, long range.

that makes sense when the ac-20s is short range, heavy, low ammo compared to the ac-2 which is long range, low damage with plenty of ammo.

if low caliber but extremely fast firing low caliber weapons represented higher ACs it would be interesting.
---------------------------

Edited by ChaosTicket, 30 November 2011 - 11:52 PM.

[ChaosTicket]

and Wulf, lets say for arguments both mechs had same speed and weight, the short range mech would need to close the gap and keep it, and the opposite for the long range mech.

There are alot of short range high power mechs, and they have problems against long range mechs. a Berserker would have alot of trouble against a Kit Fox, let alone 3 for the same tonnage.

This is just a range vs power argument. Im always on range, as the most powerful mech in the game loaded with ACs, such as the Annihilator or King Crab can easily be "plinked" to death by long range mechs, especially ones that are much faster. the best they have in return is something like an LRM which isnt anything balanced.

[MacKenzie Wolf]

ChaosTicket, on 30 November 2011 - 11:45 PM, said:

------------------------
its like this big, slow, short barreled but high caliber weapons represent higher AC ratings, and smaller ones represent high velocity, long range.

that makes sense when the ac-20s is short range, heavy, low ammo compared to the ac-2 which is long range, low damage with plenty of ammo.

if low caliber but extremely fast firing low caliber weapons represented higher ACs it would be interesting.
----------------------------

Totally agree. Thought we were just splitting hairs for a while there.

[MacKenzie Wolf]

ChaosTicket, on 30 November 2011 - 11:52 PM, said:

This is just a range vs power argument.

If that argument is to be settled on the battlefield, the AC-2 is the last form of support I would want for that argument.

[WulfMackenzie]

ChaosTicket, on 30 November 2011 - 11:52 PM, said:

and Wulf, lets say for arguments both mechs had same speed and weight, the short range mech would need to close the gap and keep it, and the opposite for the long range mech.

There are alot of short range high power mechs, and they have problems against long range mechs. a Berserker would have alot of trouble against a Kit Fox, let alone 3 for the same tonnage.

This is just a range vs power argument. Im always on range, as the most powerful mech in the game loaded with ACs, such as the Annihilator or King Crab can easily be "plinked" to death by long range mechs, especially ones that are much faster. the best they have in return is something like an LRM which isnt anything balanced.

Which is why in theory mechs work in Lances or Stars depending on your faction.

[ChaosTicket]

I would just prefer a Timber Wolf over say, an Annihilator. the Timber wolf is all range, mainly long, and Annihilator is short.

range isnt everything but its alot. for small mechs, it keeps them from closing to "instant death range", and for longe range mechs it means half the fight it over before the enemy can even fire the first shot.
-----------------
I personally love gauss rifles, even if they suck on weight, ammunition and space, they arent limited to close range like an ac-20.
--------------------------
One thing is that you can use multiple AC-2s for the same space and weight as an ac-20s.

[WulfMackenzie]

ChaosTicket, on 01 December 2011 - 12:08 AM, said:

I would just prefer a Timber Wolf over say, an Annihilator. the Timber wolf is all range, mainly long, and Annihilator is short.

range isnt everything but its alot. for small mechs, it keeps them from closing to "instant death range", and for longe range mechs it means half the fight it over before the enemy can even fire the first shot.
-----------------
I personally love gauss rifles, even if they suck on weight, ammunition and space, they arent limited to close range like an ac-20.
--------------------------
One thing is that you can use multiple AC-2s for the same space and weight as an ac-20s.

Your neglecting one very important factor in all of this, and that is TERRAIN. Inside a city environment Gauss cannons are neigh useless since they have a minimum range to be effective. Secondly there is the cover factor of whats between you and the target for the target to hide behind. Personally I like a good well rounded mech like the Mad Cat you used as an example but when push comes to shove I'll take an Atlas every day of the week and twice on Sunday for city fighting... That big AC/20 will make a lot of difference close in. Before you go off half cocked.. No, I am not disagreeing with you.. your point is sound, all I am saying is environmental details make a mechs load out better and worse depending on the factors faced. Remember your not measuring this on a mech on mech basis. You have to deal with the pilot, the mech and the terrain. And while my Atlas might be slow and clumsy at long range versus your speed demon giving the right strategy either side can win. Hell I modded an Atlas with Jump jets back in the day and put it on top of a level 3 hardened building and waited until a wasp came by and then DFA'ed him in a convention ages and ages ago. I've never seen a more shocked game master or a more horrified player as when hes told a 100 tons just fell on top of his mech. In the end the mech is only a limited portion of the battle and how you use what you have is probably far more important.

And I now return the soap box lol!

[ChaosTicket]

there wont be any minimum range of weapons. Its an unexplained rule that doesnt relate to a videogame.
---------------------------
well thats another problem, close range ACs would require clear line of sight, a long range weapon could snipe pieces off its target and more easily fire, then return to cover.

But here, which is better a slow close range mech with token long range, like an LRM-10s or a more balanced mech with something like several streak srm-6s, ER PPCs, and a Gauss Rifle.

The close range mech would have a large weak zone, but the long range mech would have greater firepower the closer it gets. Key difference is one must get close, the other can run, or "kite" the target by keeping distance.
---------------------
How would you get the range of an AC-2/5 with an AC-20?

Edited by ChaosTicket, 01 December 2011 - 12:28 AM.

[WulfMackenzie]

it comes down to Environment, I've already said that... your looking at this form the perspective of a video game and I'm looking at it from the perspective of there is someone else on the other end of those controls who can make decisions and adapt to your tactics. What are you going to do if he goes to ground and doesn't come back out? Your also assuming that your opposing mech is capable of being seen/detected/tracked. What if he disappears off your scanners? or better yet what if your targeting systems and scanners are damaged? There are far to many variables to do the kind of black and white straight up mech on mech comparison your trying to do.

[EDMW CSN]

Anyway just to add on a few examples

The AC-20 of a Mechbuster is 4 x hyper-velocity depleted uranium armor penetrators (HDUAP) of questionable size. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/MechBuster

The AC-20 of a Hetzer is 10 x 150mm rounds in rapid succession.
http://www.sarna.net...usher_SH_Cannon

While the AC-20 on a Demolisher fires 1x 185mm Chemjet shell.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Demolisher

I seriously do not mind if AC were classed as rapid firing, burst or single though (with rotaries and Ultras firing even faster !)
As long the DPS remains the same. It also keeps people guessing all the time.

However burst fire and rapid fire ACs kinda lose the 1 shot big hurtin damage ability, maybe they should be better in keeping the enemy rocking.

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 01 December 2011 - 12:53 AM.

[ChaosTicket]

yeah people do because alot of MW is science fiction or science future at the least.

the 150mm cannon on the hetzer firing fast is pretty much impossible. the shells for a 150mm cannon weight like 50lbs if I remember, and even with some autoloading system, simple ammunition size would disallow "rapid fire". With a strong autoloading mechanism and caseless shells you could get rate of fire up to maybe 3 shots per minute.

the 185mm Chemjet isnt explained, all conventional weapons use chemical propellant.

Edited by ChaosTicket, 01 December 2011 - 01:17 AM.

[Haeso]

Psydotek, on 30 November 2011 - 07:11 PM, said:

An option someone mentioned was to have a variety of different autocannons of the same class. One model AC/20 would fire a single slug with a longer reload time while another model AC/20 would fire a burst of smaller rounds or simply have a high cyclic rate. Both would deal the same DPS but allow players to have access to different play styles.

The backstory/fluff from the tabletop rules does support this and simply uses the same rules for all autocannons of the same class for simplicity.

Faster weapons need to have an advantage, be it constantly more DPS, rocking your opponents view, more damage/ton of ammo, whatever it is. Burst damage will be king otherwise, shoot once every few seconds, turn away to not expose yourself, turn back to shoot once, rather than actually staying on target which exposes your important bits to damage.

[Dlardrageth]

[EDMW]CSN, on 01 December 2011 - 12:47 AM, said:

[...]
However burst fire and rapid fire ACs kinda lose the 1 shot big hurtin damage ability, maybe they should be better in keeping the enemy rocking.

A "burst" can be a lot of things, matter of definition IMHO. Take this model as an example:

AC20 - 1 round "burst"
UAC20 - 2 round "burst"
XAC20 - 1 round "burst"
AC10 - 2 round "burst"
UAC10 - 4 round "burst"
XAC 10 - 2 round "burst"
AC5 - 3 round burst
UAC 5 - 6 round burst
XAC5- 3 round burst
AC2 - 5 round burst
UAC2 - 10 round burst
XAC2 - 5 round burst

Thus here you'd retain the "canon" burst quality of the ACs while still keeping the AC20 a one-shell-wonder heavy hitter. The pure (sound) effect and "fluff" description can actually be totally independent of the damage model applied. Because it does not necessarily matter to the damage location/grouping/accuracy if you fired a burst or a single shell (in game).

And rotaries... seriously guys, those are 3062 tech, so by what the devs stipulated, game time starting in 3049 and advancing parallel to real time that would be a matter for... 2025 real time? Seems a really pressing matter, that...

[ChaosTicket]

I thought the game was 3017.

We are arguing about principle. The only ACs available way before the clan invasions are just ACs, none of the bariants have been made, no Rotary, ultra havent been rediscovered, Hyper Velocity is non-existant.

But can we agree it is POSSIBLE to have rapid fire small caliber weapons represent the higher ACs? so long as MW has no-armor rules small caliber weapons wouldnt have to worry about armor penetration just damage.

Edited by ChaosTicket, 01 December 2011 - 01:24 AM.

[Dlardrageth]

Yeah, well, if PGI keeps faithful to the announced timeline (aka starting 3049), most UACs and XACs are not really far off. Two variants are in fact available already, UAC/5 is as early available as 3035 according to canon, as well as the XAC/10.

[EDMW CSN]

ChaosTicket, on 01 December 2011 - 01:09 AM, said:

yeah people do because alot of MW is science fiction or science future at the least. the 150mm cannon on the hetzer firing fast is pretty much impossible. the shells for a 150mm cannon weight like 50lbs if I remember, and even with some autoloading system, simple ammunition size would disallow "rapid fire". With a strong autoloading mechanism and caseless shells you could get rate of fire up to maybe 3-4 shots per minute. the 185mm Chemjet isnt explained, all conventional weapons use chemical propellant.

In battletech an AC20 "shot" weighs 200 kilograms. Each 150mm shell is basically 20 kilograms with propellant and all. As for the Chemjet gun it is further explained in the TRO 3026, the information has being truncated by Sarna for length reasons.

As Battletech rounds take place in 10 seconds. It is plausible that the 1st 2 seconds go to targeting and firing, the Crusher SH cannon will then fire 10 rounds over a span of 3 seconds and last 5 seconds for reloading.


As Battletech is over 1000 years in the future with advanced weapons and systems, what is impossible for us might not be too hard for them. After all in Battletech they have Radium Sniper rifles that kill the target by injecting him with radiation at range......And smart helmets with detection systems that weigh only a little more than modern day Kelvar helmets.


If you are gonna use Aerotech, things get drastically crazier as each round last only 2.5 seconds, so you can have the targeting and firing phase at 0.5 seconds, 10 shells in 1 second and 1 second reloads.........

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 01 December 2011 - 01:52 AM.

[ChaosTicket]

well Ultra AC 2 and Ultra 5 will be available, but Ultra AC 10 and Ultra ac-20 were reverse engineered from clan invasion.

Hyper velocity ACs 3059
Rotary 3062
Light 3068

I think the LBX series may be Davion exclusive, as it was Lostech.
--------------------
Will autocannons and LBX ACs be able to use the different kinds of ammo?
-------------------------
Unless metal no longer has weight, large ammunition will still heavy, bulky, and controlled by laws of gravity.

Edited by ChaosTicket, 01 December 2011 - 01:59 AM.

[Phades]

3 Things.

1)For the sake of cross weapon balance basic AC weapons should be limited burst fire. They should not be large single slug shot weapons like a gauss rifle. Ultra AC weapons should be able to put out twice the damage potentially with slightly longer bursts of fire, but not too long as the perk of extra rounds going off will be lost to terrain and constant aim/lead/shake issues. Rotary auto canons and machine guns should be the closes thing to fully automatic as you can get, with the rotary getting similar treatment to increased damage per shot as the ultras, but nothing too drastic (talking + or - 1 pt per round fired to retain parity of DOT in similar up time shooing time frames, with the benefits of higher DOT outpacing the others through their controlled down time sequences).

2)Lasers should be a beam dealing damage over time, pulse lasers should be a short burst of beams and a PPC be some combination there of.

3) Missiles should be streams of shots firing off in smaller salvo clusters requiring a similar, but different combination of skills requiring ballistic lead and steady on target aim over time.

In this way damage front loading will be less of an issue overall.

Edited by Phades, 01 December 2011 - 06:12 PM.