Jump to content

[Suggestion] Lb-X Airbursting


10 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you support airbursting LBX AC shells (12 member(s) have cast votes)

Airbursting LBX Shells?

  1. Yes (8 votes [66.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 66.67%

  2. No (3 votes [25.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  3. Abstain (1 votes [8.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Gryphorim

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 382 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 02:32 AM

So, I've been meaning to post this for a while now, so here goes...
LB-X AC's don't get full use of their range as things stand right now. Lore wise they are meant to be LONGER ranged than standard AC's, yet still spray a target with frag....
To me the best way to realise this system is with an airbursting frag warhead with proximity fuse.
That is to say, the round travels most of the way to a target as a solid shell, (assuming we are firing at max range here), then about 90m from the target, the shell explodes, throwing a cone of frag at the target.
Works with LBX's of all calibers, just scale max range, detonation distance-to-target, and cone spread.
Obviously if fired from point-blank range,(as in, inside the distance to taget the shell would normally burst at), the shell bursts as it leaves the barrel, and we get what we see now with the LBX10.

Small edit: Changed "Abstain" to "Other" in the poll. If you do choose "Other", put a comment below, I'd like to hear other ideas.

Edited by Egomane, 12 April 2013 - 12:11 PM.
Changed third answer to "Abstain"


#2 lorrylemming

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:01 AM

I abstained because although I understand the LBX needs some improvement, I think that airburst would be a good option as a special ammunition but have a minimum arming range, and have slugs and buck as other options.

Also would the round be able to distinguish between enemies and friendlies? Would it be affected by ECM?

#3 Victor Morson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 6,370 posts
  • LocationAnder's Moon

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:24 AM

Been saying this for ages. I'd love to see it. It should be more like a flechette round than buckshot, basically.

#4 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:39 AM

So to be effective that weapon need to have a lock on...or at least a target to shoot at. Because you need to configure the fuze based on range to target.
Or has the pilot to do this things. (like in Arma II OFP2? where you have to calibrate your sniper rifle)

#5 Bobzilla

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 2,003 posts
  • LocationEarth

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:39 AM

Just have it leave at a set size grouping and not spread. Same size grouping at 0m as it is at 540m.

Then new ammo's, if introduced, can spread or burst, or be a slug.

#6 Gryphorim

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 382 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:45 AM

I think people may have misunderstood me a little, what i mean is when the round comes within X-distance, (I stated 90m, but whatever balances), from impact with ANY surface, ie: X-distance from the end of it's flightpath, it detonates into a cone of frag. from there it is treated as per the LBX we currently have, a shotgun spread of frag that hits nigh on everything in the cone-of-effect. No further user input required.

Example: I have a target at 450m and a building behind him at 510m. I fire my LBX10, (let's suppose the devs have set the burst distance at 180m), my aim is way off and the round sails toward the building. 500m till impact, 400m, 300m, 200m, 180m BOOM! 180m from the face of the building, my shell bursts, hailing the face of the building with the same spray of hot metal the LBX of old fired at 180m.

Edited by Gryphorim, 11 April 2013 - 03:51 AM.


#7 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:49 AM

View PostGryphorim, on 11 April 2013 - 03:45 AM, said:

I think people may have misunderstood me a little, what i mean is when the round comes within X-distance, (I stated 90m, but whatever balances), from impact with ANY surface, ie: X-distance from the end of it's flightpath, it detonates into a cone of frag. from there it is treated as per the LBX we currently have, a shotgun spread of frag that hits nigh on everything in the cone-of-effect.

As far as i can remember that fuze will use the doppler effect...
But didn't that means that obstacles near the flight path will cause unwanted early detonations?

Would be a nice side effect however

Edited by Karl Streiger, 11 April 2013 - 03:50 AM.


#8 Gryphorim

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 382 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:10 AM

Game engine only needs to concern itself with the point coordinates directly ahead of the shell, so where the shell would have impacted. Isn't this inherent in the trajectory calculation anyway? Either way, I think over-sensitivity in the detector would be a real world concern, but hey, we're talking about a game set in 3050, who knows what hardware they can jam in an AC warhead!

#9 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:18 AM

View PostGryphorim, on 11 April 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

Game engine only needs to concern itself with the point coordinates directly ahead of the shell, so where the shell would have impacted. Isn't this inherent in the trajectory calculation anyway? Either way, I think over-sensitivity in the detector would be a real world concern, but hey, we're talking about a game set in 3050, who knows what hardware they can jam in an AC warhead!

Look at the Desintegrator LB 20 -X of the Barghest that thing is big enough to fire Commandos.
But you are right - game mechanics don't have to care about obstacles... All that are accounting for is the target at whom the LBX round was fired.

However...a LB 10-X round consisting of a burst of shots like in MW3 will cause more concentrated damage for each shot but also some spread damage because there isn't just a single bullet.

#10 ManDaisy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,272 posts
  • LocationKing Of Flower Beds

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:57 AM

Hell yes, this should have been the way it was from the start.

#11 General Taskeen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,737 posts
  • LocationCircinus

Posted 11 April 2013 - 06:30 AM

I have a feeling PGI would have trouble with this and their netcode, which I am not too confident about. It would be cool, obviously.

With that in mind, that is why I have constantly suggested PGI change the spread drastically so all pellets hit at the intended, enhanced range and change it so each pellet does more damage to account for the spread nature or burst mechanics that every Mech Warrior game has done. That is the possibly easiest fix they could do without overhauling any mechanics.

MW:LL has the perfect balance for all of their LB-X guns included in their game, by having the spread reduced as I have said PGI should do. In that game all the pellets will reliably hit at their enhanced range AND they do much increased damage. In order to differentiate them from regular autocannons, so both are still competitive, LB-X are slow firing, high damage, and AC's are fast firing, slightly lower damage.

Example of their AC/20 and LB 20-X:

AC/20 - 30 Rounds Per Minute - 819 Kinetic/Frag Damage - Range 350M (24,000 Kinetic/Frag Damage Per Minute)
LB 20-X - 10 Rounds Per Minute - 20x81.3 Kinetic Damage (1626 Damage on target within range envelope) - Range 450M (16,000 Kinetic Damage Per Minute)

Damage is dealt different in that game, but its easy to get the jist of it.

Edited by General Taskeen, 11 April 2013 - 07:07 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users