Jump to content

FORUMS

Autocannons - Single Shot vs. Burst Fire


125 replies to this topic

Poll: Autocannons: Single-shot vs. Burst Fire (293 member(s) have cast votes)

How should Autocannons behave?

  1. Autocannons should fire in bursts (97 votes [33.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.11%

  2. Autocannons should always fire single shots (67 votes [22.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.87%

  3. Depending on size of AC (bursts for small ones, single-shot for large ones) (57 votes [19.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.45%

  4. Fully automatic fire (single shots with faster reload) (38 votes [12.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.97%

  5. Other (please explain) (34 votes [11.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.60%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 Carl Wrede

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 797 posts
  • LocationStockholm, Sweden

Posted 07 May 2012 - 04:37 PM

Single shot is just plain wrong from a canon perspective. Autocannons have ALWAYS shot bursts.

Single shot is the Gauss Rifle shooting.

Edited by Carl Wrede, 07 May 2012 - 04:38 PM.


#42 Mike Silva

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 04:42 PM

From a canon perspective I recall it going both ways depending on the manufacturer of the specific weapon in question. I always thought that the number classification was simply a number placed on a cannon that did a certain amount of damage at a certain range.

I don't really care either way. But from watching all of these videos it looks like they've already made this design decision.

#43 Gun Bear

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 1005 posts
  • LocationGarrison duty on some FWL Planet and itching for action.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 04:48 PM

View PostMike Silva, on 07 May 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

From a canon perspective I recall it going both ways depending on the manufacturer of the specific weapon in question. I always thought that the number classification was simply a number placed on a cannon that did a certain amount of damage at a certain range.

I don't really care either way. But from watching all of these videos it looks like they've already made this design decision.

Pretty much, they decided for balance reasons to make ACs fire a single powerful shot... live with it.

#44 Dustfang

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 12 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 07 May 2012 - 05:09 PM

Select Fire option. If a pilot's concerned with the ballistics and recoil from burst fire, as well as the ammo consumption, flip a switch and the AC is firing single shots. Another switch flip, and it can fire bursts. This way a pilot can choose to use an AC in whichever mode he or she sees fit, and, to be honest, I don't think it'd need any further balancing. If you're ballsy enough to fire in burst, be ready for the recoil, and compensate manually.

Edit: grammar

Edited by Dustfang, 07 May 2012 - 05:15 PM.


#45 Jonas

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 293 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationHot Springs Ar.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 05:48 PM

Honestly burst fire AC/? would be the Ultra models or the Rotary ( with rotary being the fastest rate )

#46 Larry Headrick

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 303 posts
  • Locationoklahoma

Posted 07 May 2012 - 07:25 PM

View PostJadeTimberwolf, on 07 May 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

Other: Different auto-cannon styles should have different firing styles. Example standard AC/s should fire like an automatic rifle with a few second delay after each shot, Ultras should fire the same but with a shorter delay, LBX should be burst fire, and Rotary should be like a machine gun. Yet if memory serves it shall be a few years yet before we encounter Rotary.

This sounds about right to me.

#47 Jericho917

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 98 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 07:49 PM

I was just looking at the total war fare tech manual... its seems like the standard AC is single shot, the Ultra fires faster, the Lb-X can fire in burst or a shotgun like cluster, and the rotary is a giant Gatling gun. (However the rotary won’t be available in 3049) so everyone can have what they want if they just buy the right style/model.

#48 Kanatta Jing

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 597 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 09:28 PM

I approve of single shot AC's.

Lasers now smear and missiles splash.

If we want to head shot at all we're going to need a double tap with an AC10.

#49 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • Legendary Founder
  • 3766 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 08 May 2012 - 03:42 PM

I support a burst firing effect for cannonical purposes, but unless autocannons concentrate damage within a single sector, they aren't very useful compared to missiles or lasers.

#50 Sven Svenson

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 09 May 2012 - 11:15 PM

It looks like the new Cicada mech artwork is for the variant with an uac5. It definitaly looks like a multi barreled weapon so maybe burst fire is in.

#51 Niftal

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts

Posted 09 May 2012 - 11:27 PM

I voted other; here's why:

Cannons, in the traditional and historical sense, are single-shot weapons that require reloading before the next shot. An Auto-Cannon, therefore, is a single-shot ballistic weapon that has an automatic reloading mechanism. With that being said, a single-shot animation and damage application makes far more sense then the "multi-projectile" single round of Mechwarrior 3.

#52 Tincan Nightmare

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 459 posts
  • LocationLas Vegas

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:22 AM

View PostNiftal, on 09 May 2012 - 11:27 PM, said:

I voted other; here's why:

Cannons, in the traditional and historical sense, are single-shot weapons that require reloading before the next shot. An Auto-Cannon, therefore, is a single-shot ballistic weapon that has an automatic reloading mechanism. With that being said, a single-shot animation and damage application makes far more sense then the "multi-projectile" single round of Mechwarrior 3.


And historically how many massive robots have been running around batlefields powered by fusion reactors and carrying energy weaponry?
I honestly would prefer AC's firing in a very quick burst and applying that damage to a single location, because that is how its been described in all the rulebooks and sourcebooks ever put out for the TT. 'An autocannon is a rapid-firing, auto-loading weapon that fires high-speed streams of high-explosive, armor-piercing shells. Light autocannons range from 30 to 90mm, and heavy autocannon may be 80 to 120mm or larger.' Page 114 of the Battletech Compendium (and pretty much repeated in every rule book ever put out.) Ultras just fire twice as fast, Rotary up to 6 times as fast, and LBX are just cooler firing and longer reaching with the option of firing a cluster round like a giant shotgun. Of course its all up to the dev's, so if they choose a single powerful shot vs a powerful burst to the same location, oh well I'm cool with it.

#53 Belisarius1

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 1412 posts
  • LocationBrisbane, Australia

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:46 AM

I think they should be burst fire. It just feels better, sorry. Sometimes aesthetics are important.

If the burst is fast and tight, they'll still concentrate damage well. Especially when their key competitor - lasers - already have duration-spread fire. You can always buff their recycle times if they turn out to be blatantly inferior.

#54 Prophanity

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 157 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:33 AM

I've always been a massive fans of the ACs in MW3, which I think is a compromise really. In essence it is a single shot, but with the animation and sound of a burst fire weapon.
Can we have this plox? :)

#55 WraithTR1

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 141 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 04:54 AM

I voted single shot. I envision an autocannon as being similar to the Navy's 5 Inch Guns, just much more compact.



#56 DontGetCrabs

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 113 posts

Posted 10 May 2012 - 05:02 AM

I voted other. I would like to see something like old magazine fed anti-aircraft guns. The auto cannons should be full auto with a small magazine something like 12 shots for the AC/5 something like 3 to 5 for a AC/20. You wouldnt be able to reload them, just fire until that magazine is empty then your mech reloads the magazine. It is a AUTOcannon for a reason.

#57 SquareSphere

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 1654 posts
  • LocationIn your clouds, stealing your thunder

Posted 10 May 2012 - 05:57 AM

AC is just a designation for large bore ballistic weapons. some are burst some are single shot, it all depends on the maker.

#58 DavidHurricane

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 419 posts
  • LocationWho wants to know 0-0

Posted 10 May 2012 - 06:32 AM

LBX Autocannons should fire in bursts, standards should fire single, Ultra should fire 2.

#59 GargoyleKDR

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 332 posts
  • LocationBlaine, WA

Posted 10 May 2012 - 06:41 AM

"Autocannon" from Sarna.net

Description

An Autocannon is a type of rapid-firing, auto-loading direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) or kinetic rounds at targets in bursts. It is, basically, a giant "machine gun" that fires predominantly cased explosive shells though models firing saboted high velocity kinetic energy penetrators or caseless ordnance do exist. Among the earliest tank/BattleMech scale weaponry produced, autocannons produce far less heat than energy weapons, but are considerably bulkier and are dependent upon limited stores of ammunition.
Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage vs armor.[1] The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors. Autocannon are grouped into the following loose damage classes: Beyond the "standard" models, variants include the shotgun-like LBX, quick-firing Ultra and the gatling-type Rotary. Light-weight variants and capital ship scale models also exist. The experimental Hypervelocity Autocannon has also entered limited production.[2][3]

Caliber

Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannon in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each "round" or burst of fire. Probable exceptions are the 185 mm [color="#ba0000"]ChemJet Gun[/color] Autocannon/20 mounted on the Demolisher combat vehicle and Monitor Surface vessel or the 203 mm Ultra Autocannon/20 on the Cauldron Born A BattleMech.

Barrel Arrangement

All Rotary Autocannon are multiple-barrel arrangements.[4] Some standard, Light, and Ultra autocannons also use a multiple-barrel arrangement, but not as frequently.

#60 Xaks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 653 posts
  • LocationFlorida-ish

Posted 10 May 2012 - 07:13 AM

The 'canon' of the novels was mostly a 3-5 shot burst, especially from the older, classic mechs. For instance, lots of Grayson Carlyle's novels described the AC/5 over the shoulder of his Shadow Hawk as a burst. Same with the Marauder he piloted later in his career, the AC/10 ammo were specifically described in clips that fired in bursts.

However, I understand why tabletop considered it a single shot (except for the ultra's, of course). Its about balance.

That's what I think they're doing here. Yes, there's plenty of tech that can point in either, or both, directions. But I think what previous games is meaningless, and in the course of balancing combat in MW:O it'll be a 'single shot'.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users