I have seen many a complaint about the LBX 10;
How Slug shots would make the AC10 redundant
How it spreads to much at range.
How it does not cause enough damage.
to name a few,
I have a simply solution.
Instead of firing 10 pellets in a "Buckshot style" pattern, the LBX should fire 1 "Flak style" round, which explodes when it comes close to another mech, spraying pellets over an area, causing damage to an area. (I Imagine this being in a cone 100-120 degree radius, to the front)
This Means:
The LBX would be effective upto its maximum range.
The LBX would not replace the AC10, The AC10 retains the difference of causing all damage to a single area
The LBX would still "Crit Seek" thanks to the splash damage,
The LBX could be used to Snapshot fast moving targets, as partial miss still causes damage.
Extra considerations:
The Pellet number may need to be increased to better effect the area,
If the Pellet number is increased per pellet damage may need to be reduced,
Thoughts? Suggestions? Votes?
Edit: So apparntly they are called Shrapel Shells IRL and Flak Rounds in Battle tech?
Thanks for the feed back so far guys!
I've argued this many times before. It would not only improve the weapon at long range, it would be fairly simple to implement. The explosion would have to be a cone of course so that the damage goes in a predictable direction.
The LB-X ACs have always been described as shotguns in BT (longer and more detailed explanation here), and the PGI's implementation of them as such (that is, modeling the cluster rounds as shotshells rather than Shrapnel shells) is true to the source material.
The Shrapnel shell effect should not be not part of the LB-X series, but part of the standard ACs if/when they get access to Flak rounds (which are explicitly described as using a proximity detonation shell).
"Despite having been a proven technology in ages past, flak autocannon ammunition remains uncommon today. Intended to deal with airborne combatants such as VTOLs and fighters, this ammunition uses proximity charges to detonate in mid-air. While potent against fast-moving targets susceptible to foreign object damage (FOD), flak ammo is less effective against slower-moving targets on the ground because the charges scatter their shrapnel too far and too quickly to benefit from the target’s mobility."
(Tactical Operations, pg. 352)
And we know from Ask the Devs 10 that there were/are plans for introducing alternate ammo types (including, specifically, the LB-Xs' ability to fire slug/HEAP rounds, and perhaps the standard ACs' special munitions as well)...
The problem I have with them letting LB-x using slug/HEAP rounds is.....why use an AC/10 then ? (not that they get used much now) or an ac/20 when we have the ac20LB-x ?? (they weigh less remember)
For gameplay reasons I would prefer this not to happen. I don't like weapons being "obsoleted" in a game like this.
Fair enough if this was some strategy game like the total war series or something, or a single player game.
Give the LBX different rounds, yes, but not AC rounds.
Normal ammo like now (spreads when fired), and maybe flak ammo which explodes via proximity or set ranges. Adjust both of the ammo types dmg to be balanced with each other and then you have choice.
The problem I have with them letting LB-x using slug/HEAP rounds is.....why use an AC/10 then ? (not that they get used much now) or an ac/20 when we have the ac20LB-x ?? (they weigh less remember)
For gameplay reasons I would prefer this not to happen. I don't like weapons being "obsoleted" in a game like this.
Fair enough if this was some strategy game like the total war series or something, or a single player game.
Give the LBX different rounds, yes, but not AC rounds.
Normal ammo like now (spreads when fired), and maybe flak ammo which explodes via proximity or set ranges. Adjust both of the ammo types dmg to be balanced with each other and then you have choice.
CBT are full of equipment and weapons that are obsoleted by future technology. And I am not talking about the incoming Clan weaponry either.
And the problem with changing/rebalancing weaponry to make older style weapons not obsolete to new style weapons leads to more balancing issues.
SHS to DHS is a perfect example. While I agree with PGI that DHS should not be "true" DHS, their current implementation is heavily unbalancing small engine ratings (because some of their base engine heatsinks are equipped outside the engine) and mechs that equip many engine external heatsinks. And this was only done because they wanted to balance SHS to DHS.
The LB-X ACs have always been described as shotguns in BT (longer and more detailed explanation here), and the PGI's implementation of them as such (that is, modeling the cluster rounds as shotshells rather than Shrapnel shells) is true to the source material.
You forgot the important part. A cluster round still has the enhanced range of a slug, its not meant to have enourmous spread right out of the barrel. The spread would be minimal to its effective range. It is shot-gun like, that doesn't mean they put a pump-action shotgun on it. These misconceptions are the same reason people think a Mech Machine Gun is an M249. We are talking about things of immense scale and size.
How, were then, LB-X supposedly extremely effective vs. Aircraft? If an LB-X were real, and worked as how it is currently poorly programmed/represented in this game, and if it were used against jets, it would be the worst anti-aircraft gun of all time.
Why would futury Battle Tech folks create an upgrade of an AC/10 and make it inherentily worse? That logic doesn't hold. Every Mech game ever realized a cluster round is just as effective at range as a slug round.
You also completely glossed over or chose not to understand the description of the BT Flak round, so let's look at it again:
"Flak autocannon rounds are designed to be used in anti-aircraft units like the Rifleman or Partisan tank. These rounds are designed to fragment into multiple smaller munitions, similar to the cluster round used by the LB-X Autocannon family.
However, the fragments generated by flak ammunition are too small to inflict significant damage on other combat units; it is partly the motion of the VTOL or fighter through the flak cloud that helps inflict the damage. The ineffectiveness against non-flying armored units is the reason why this type of ammunition is quite unpopular on today’s battlefield.
Similar as an LB-X cluster round is a Flak shot on a much bigger scale, designed and made specifically to destroy Mechs with ease at extended range. They are massive flak-like rounds. It was then found that it was more effective than an older Flak round against Air-Craft.
The LB 10-X in game is a spread weapon, and has received no benefit in additional damage per pellet for being as such even though LRMs and SRMs have. AND its range can't be used as an advatnage.
Judging by my posts here and here, people largely agree.
Edited by General Taskeen, 12 March 2013 - 09:56 AM.
I vote directly against this in favor of INCREASING THE DAMAGE AND PELLETS of the thing to be MORE EFFECTIVE then a gauss at close range. A Catapult loaded with LBX-10s at close range should be more effective then a gaussapult at close range. 'Nuff said.
General Taskeen, on 12 March 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
You forgot the important part. A cluster round still has the enhanced range of a slug, its not meant to have enourmous spread right out of the barrel. The spread would be minimal to its effective range. It is shot-gun like, that doesn't mean they put a pump-action shotgun on it. These misconceptions are the same reason people think a Mech Machine Gun is an M249. We are talking about things of immense scale and size.
The spread on a shotgun is controlled by a device called a choke.
The argument is that MWO has the the LB 10-X's programmed in such a way that its choke is too far "open", resulting in substantial spread - though, the Cluster Hits Table (Total Warfare, pg. 116) and 2D6 probabilities generally resulted in only six (6) of the ten sub-munitions striking the target anyway, so the gun could be considered "working as intended" even if it is only doing ~6 units of damage per cluster round.
Additionally, there is nothing in the actual description of LB-X ACs (the one in the BT rulebooks, not the one on Sarna.net) that necessarily precludes the use of an automatic "adjustable choke" (in use on real-world shotguns for the better part of a century) that would modify the spread as a function of distance to target - which would allow the cluster rounds to apply consistent damage across the range envelope while still remaining "shotgun-like".
Furthermore, assuming that any and all references to shotguns necessarily indicates a pump-action design is incorrect - semi-automatic shotguns and fully-automatic shotguns have been in use for many years (since at leastthe late 1950s and early 1970s, respectively), and the LB-X being a shotgun-like autocannon (so named for 1.) its ability to use the recoil action to to remove the spent cartridge case, **** the weapon, load a new shell, and fire again for as long as the trigger is held down and ammunition supplies last, and 2.) its bore size being within the cannon-class caliber range: 30+ mm) would necessarily make it essentially a large-scale automatic shotgun, making comparisons to pump-action models generally inaccurate.
General Taskeen, on 12 March 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
How, were then, LB-X supposedly extremely effective vs. Aircraft? If an LB-X were real, and worked as how it is currently poorly programmed/represented in this game, and if it were used against jets, it would be the worst anti-aircraft gun of all time.
Why would futury Battle Tech folks create an upgrade of an AC/10 and make it inherentily worse? That logic doesn't hold. Every Mech game ever realized a cluster round is just as effective at range as a slug round.
As noted in the actual description of flak munitions (the one I quoted from an actual BT rulebook, not the one you've quoted from Sarna), AreoSpace units in flight are highly vulnerable to FOD (a point explicitly stated in said description) by vitrue of the combined velocities of the aircraft and the projectile, and weapons with the flak modifier (including the Hyper-Assault Gauss Rifles, the LB-X ACs (when firing cluster rounds), artillery cannons (provided they're equipped with the right kind of munition), standard ACs (assuming they're using flak rounds), and the Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle) were granted a -2 to-hit modifier (signifying how the spread made it more likely that something would hit the target).
The HAGs (TechManual, pg. 219) seem to be multi-barrel assemblies in the style of volley guns, though the comparison of "rotary Gauss" has been used.
And the HAGs (which actually fire sets of small, solid projectiles from the multiple barrels) actually get a greater bonus (-3 on the to-hit) than other flak weapons.
The SB-Gauss (TacOps, pg. 314) fires "prefragmented rounds" that are incompatible with standard Gauss Rifles, and is effectively an "LB 15-X Gauss Rifle".
Also, note that a round does not necessarily have to be a "flak round" (that is, a Shrapnel shell - or the HE shell that made Shrapnel shells obsolete) to fulfill the flak role (that is, anti-aircraft warfare).
In BT canon, "flak" need not even be from a ballistic weapon - the novel The Dying Time includes a scene where two AeroSpace Fighters are struck down by a "flak trap" composed mainly - or, at least, most prominently - of LRM and PPC fire (neither of which receives the flak to-hit bonus under TT gameplay rules).
As for that bit about being "inherently worse": the LB 10-X is no more "inherently worse" than the standard AC/10 than the M4/M1014 is "inherently worse" than the M16 (both of the latter are currently in active service with the US military) - each has its place and its roles and each is the right tool for different jobs... and the wrong tool for certain jobs.
In fact, the LB-X is lighter, more compact, cooler-firing, longer-ranged (which will count more with the introduction of LB-X slugs, and a possible tightening of the choke or the implementation of an automatic choke), carry the same number of rounds per ton, and will (or, rather, is planned to) eventually be able to fire both slug and cluster rounds - if anything, the LB-X is (or should/will be) strictly superior to the AC/10 from a specifications standpoint, with its primary downside being its high acquisition cost (a factor diminished by the removal of repair & rearm costs).
General Taskeen, on 12 March 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
You also completely glossed over or chose not to understand the description of the BT Flak round, so let's look at it again:
"Flak autocannon rounds are designed to be used in anti-aircraft units like the Rifleman or Partisan tank. These rounds are designed to fragment into multiple smaller munitions, similar to the cluster round used by the LB-X Autocannon family.
However, the fragments generated by flak ammunition are too small to inflict significant damage on other combat units; it is partly the motion of the VTOL or fighter through the flak cloud that helps inflict the damage. The ineffectiveness against non-flying armored units is the reason why this type of ammunition is quite unpopular on today’s battlefield.
Similar as an LB-X cluster round is a Flak shot on a much bigger scale, designed and made specifically to destroy Mechs with ease at extended range. They are massive flak-like rounds. It was then found that it was more effective than an older Flak round against Air-Craft.
Firstly, what I quoted - and cited, moreover - in my previous post is the actual BT description of flak rounds, directly from a BT rulebook... and the actual description makes no mention of similarity to the LB-X family.
It does, however, indicate that the flak rounds both predate the LB-X cluster rounds and, while relatively unpopular, outlast the LB-X through the Succession Wars (in part because LB-X ACs evidently use Endo-Steel in their construction, and in part because the LB-X cluster rounds are evidently designed such that they only work with the LB-X ACs... which could imply that come characteristic or mechanism inherent to the gun itself may be necessary for their proper or effective functioning).
Additionally, an application of reading comprehension to the Sarna description (what you've cited as "the description of the BT Flak round") shows that the comparison to the LB-X family can be made solely from the standpoint that both ultimately fragment prior to striking the target; the Sarna description makes neither an explicit statement nor any allusion with regard to the underlying operating principles or mechanisms behind either round's functionality in that description.
By contrast, several canonical sources repeatedly describe LB-X ACs in terms and characteristics (including relatively minor yet specific and technically important characteristics, like the LB-X ACs necessarily being smoothbore weapons - a point of importance to shotguns that would have rather little importance to Shrapnel or HE shells) that indicate that they are to be considered to behave as cannon-caliber automatic shotguns capable of firing both slugs and shotshells (the latter of which, as with conventional shotguns, would generally fragment immediately (or nearly so) upon leaving the weapon's barrel), while the flak rounds used by standard ACs behave as proximity-detonated munitions in the style of Shrapnel shells or HE shells.
General Taskeen, on 12 March 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
The LB 10-X in game is a spread weapon, and has received no benefit in additional damage per pellet for being as such even though LRMs and SRMs have. AND its range can't be used as an advatnage.
Judging by my posts here and here, people largely agree.
And a substantial number of people liked/agreed with the now-(in)famous "Tolkien's post" - and we saw how that went.
That is to say, popularity (which only really applies to the first of the two linked posts, at this point) is not in and of itself necessarily indicative of merit, or vice versa.
Could the LB-X use a tightening of the choke so that it is dealing at least 6 units of damage at its stated optimal range (540 meters)?
IMO, sure.
Should the LB-X be changed such that its cluster rounds are modeled as Shrapnel shells (or BT "flak rounds") rather than shotshells?
IMO, no.
Though, the only viewpoint that really matters in the end is that of the Devs...
The key is - a shell the aproaches a target and then fires targeted submunitions at the target is what an LBX is, and is the only practical implementation that achieves both range and spread in a practical ballistic weapon.
here is basically a video that shows the concept
Here is a longer one with more info ^
Granted, this fires 1 projectile rather than 10 when it detonates, and it is intended for indirect attack/artillery style attack due to modern armor's thinner top protection. In MW/BT, obviously this weakness doesn't exist, so it is reasonable to assume direct fire and multiple sub munitions with spread to seek weak spots became the evolution of this concept.
The key is - a shell the aproaches a target and then fires targeted submunitions at the target is what an LBX is, and is the only practical implementation that achieves both range and spread in a practical ballistic weapon.
No, it isn't.
"An improvement on the common autocannon intended to expand the weapon’s role into anti-vehicle and anti-infantry work, the LB-X makes use of light, heat-dissipating alloys to reduce its weight and thermal buildup. These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, multi-munition feed mechanism, make the LB more expensive than standard autocannons. However, the slight range increase and the ability to switch between standard-style bursts and explosive cluster munitions - both specially developed for this weapon system - more than mitigate this higher cost." (TechManual, pg. 207)
"LB-X Cluster Ammunition: Cluster munitions for the LB-X AC series debuted, went extinct and were recovered at the same time as the LB-X class of ACs themselves. These munitions may only be used by LB-X class autocannons and do not benefit from targeting computer assistance because of their scattershot nature, but are effective against nearly all battlefield units, particularly vehicles and aircraft." (TechManual, pg. 208)
"Cluster Munitions: The LB-X autocannon can fire cluster munitions, which act like an anti-BattleMech shotgun in combat.
When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions.
This improves the attacker’s chances of striking a critical location but disperses total damage by spreading hits over the target area rather than concentrating the damage on one location. Cluster munitions can be used only in LB-X autocannon, not in standard or Ultra autocannon types." (Classic BattleTech Master Rules (Revised), pg. 132)
That is what an LB-X autocannon is - a cannon-caliber, anti-BattleMech automatic shotgun.
I would support a tighter grouping at max range if the shot came out at that grouping size and didn't spread any. So how big the grouping is now at, say, 75m would be the same at max range and 1m. No cone effect, but no damage after max range either.
A flak round would have to have a min range and it would not be able to descriminate against hit teamates. It would be funny to get a bunch of crits on your whole team bunched around an enemy.
Whatever you are trying to argue, Strum Wealh, the Cluster does not need enourmous spread. Regardless of what the final functionality will be (a close promimity fuse, a cylindrical spread, or a major reduction to the conical spread).
The pellets (all of them) must effectively reach the bulk of any Mech (from its center to outer torso as a measure), at its intended 'programmed' range. And its pellets need damage increased. It needs to be competitive, and there are other games that did so perfectly. That is what I meant when people largely agreed.
If it doesn not get these changes (enourmous spread reduction/damage increase) it will remain in the trash heap like MG's and Flamers as a pointless crit-seeker that can't even use range as an advantage. And arguing about what a Cluster is or isn't, is also pointless. The LB-X cannons specifically have the SAME range as a Slug, and people suggesting "Well add Slug then" is not a solution, when the cluster specifically in game is a spread weapon, like lrms, and srms, and should thus gain extra damage per pellet. There is NO specific statement in any manual/tech description that a Cluster does NOT have the same range as a Slug, so it is a moot point.
Practically every other Mech Game development realized the same consclusion. For an LB-X cluster round to be effective, the scatter shot pellets were made to reach an enhanced range (as either a stream of pellets, or a very tight cone) and the damage was increased over all to account for the spread.
Edited by General Taskeen, 13 March 2013 - 09:51 AM.
I want the gun to be effective to its stated range, it could even explode at that range, making it again differnt to the AC10
Giving it "Shrapnel Shells" as Strum Wealh called them, would do just that.
We can argue Cannon/Not Cannon all we want, but really we just want something worth taking,
Cranking up the damage just feels lazy to me, so I want to avoid that,
And tightening the spread could work but it would likley be better than the AC10 at mid to close range (less tonnage and Heat after all)
Cool posts from Strum and Tasken.
Another thing to think about is what happens to the LBX-2 when it arrives, what chance have you got to hit anything at its max range with 2 pellets?
These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, ....... the slight range increase
Er....
Wow.
Anyway, core BTech logic-failure aside, the main reason not to use proximity burst warheads in what is, fundamentally an FPS, is entirely practical. What does it use as the airburst trigger? Targetted mech? (ECM) Closest target? (Convergence, FF) Once HSR is in place, will we see these things airbursting through buildings? How will it interact with the netcode?
If you want to make any tweaks, make the scattershot a cyclinder past a couple meters. Entirely unrealistic, but it produces the effect you want (preserving long range accuracy and retaining shot spread). It'll still be terrible, but the core design is terrible (once you remove slug ammo).
If you want to make any tweaks, make the scattershot a cyclinder past a couple meters. Entirely unrealistic, but it produces the effect you want (preserving long range accuracy and retaining shot spread). It'll still be terrible, but the core design is terrible (once you remove slug ammo).
It wouldn't be terrible if the pellets were increased in damage. Other games did it, realizing for it to be effective in a real-time game, the range had to be an advantage for the cluster (very tight cone or cylindrical shot) and raised the damage. Its almost too simple, its crazy.
Promixity burst would be cool, but unrealistic due to netcode and other calculations.
1
