Jump to content

A Simple "fix" For The Lb-10X Proposal


65 replies to this topic

Poll: LB-10X (60 member(s) have cast votes)

Like the idea? No? VOTE!

  1. Yes (47 votes [78.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 78.33%

  2. No (13 votes [21.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.67%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 08:52 AM

I totally dig the canister shot idea someone proposed. Instead of a shotty, which kinda doesn't make sense, have it fire a solid projectile which then detonate via proximity fuse like 10-20 meters from the enemy mech (HSR should be able to handle this, as the whole point of it is to know where things are supposed to be), spreading the sub-munitions into the current CoF.

The LB-X is supposed to have LONGER range than the AC10, which is one of the number one reasons it fails in the shotgun version, because in TT, one could conceivably land all 10 sub-munition on target 540 meters.

To balance it vs the AC/10, instead of outright obsoleting it, leave it's current rate of fire alone, and damage and heat, and simply extend the range to where it should be. As a further "balancer" for being cooler, and lighter, whereas most ballistics can hit at 3x their range, have the canister detonate when it hits 540 and follow the current CoF mechanics shown. This gives it half or less the theoretical maximum range of the AC/10, and yet vastly increases it's usefulness and allows it to fulfill most of it's TT functions.

I'm pretty sure we will NEVER see alternate munition capability, but this gives it at least some of the usefulness back, and should be comparably easy to implement, whereas most other proposals still leave it ridiculously range nerfed from it;s intended form.

And since Paul likes his chalkboard so much, to make sure this is EASY to understand, like Heat Escalation......
Posted Image

Also, th poll is a simple yes or no. PERIOD. Not asking about other tweaks and factors, simply if the players feel that this particular tweak would HELP solve some of the issues with the LB-10X. There are other topics about select fire, damage boosts and CoF already. This poll is PURELY about the canister shot.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 06 August 2013 - 08:55 AM.


#2 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 09:35 AM

A few differing ways that proximity fuzes work (and there are lots more, just radar and acoustical and magnetic would be easily defeated for this purpose)

The German proximity fuze in development by Rheinmetall Borsig A.G. had the following characteristics:[6][7]
The fuze was based on electrostatic principles. The nose of the shell was electrically insulated and isolated from the rest of the shell. The program was halted in 1940, restarted in early 1944 and then terminated again when the factories were overrun by the Allies.
Initial fuze testing demonstrated a sensitivity of 1–2 meters and a reliability of 80% when fired against a metal cable target. A circuit adjustment yielded an increase to 3–4 meters and a reliability of close to 95%. Further work showed a 10-15 meter sensitivity. This was with 88 mm cannon shells. The shell was for all intents and purposes ready for production.[citation needed] The shell probably could not have been easily degraded by jamming or chaff, unlike the Allied shell.[citation needed]

Optical sensing[edit source | editbeta]

Optical sensing was developed in 1935, and patented in Great Britain in 1936, by a Swedish inventor, probably Edward W. Brandt, using a petoscope. It was first tested as a part of a detonation device for bombs that were to be dropped over bomber aircraft, part of the UK's Air Ministry's "bombs on bombers" concept. It was considered (and later patented by Brandt) for use with anti-aircraft missiles fired from the ground. It used then a toroidal lens, that concentrated all light out of a plane perpendicular to the missile's main axis onto a photo cell. When the cell current changed a certain amount in a certain time interval, the detonation was triggered.
Some modern air-to-air missiles use lasers. They project narrow beams of laser light perpendicular to the flight of the missile. As the missile cruises towards the target the laser energy simply beams out into space. As the missile passes its target some of the energy strikes the target and is reflected back to the missile where detectors sense it and detonate the warhead.

hence, if TAG can defeat ECM, so can a simple laser triggered proximity fuze. Remember, what the laser does for the Fuze is far simpler than relaying constant info to a self correcting missile.

#3 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 09:48 AM

It would be better if it just fired in a cylinder shape instead of a cone shape. a cylinder shape would not lose accuracy over range.

#4 Zyllos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,818 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 09:51 AM

View PostKhobai, on 06 August 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

It would be better if it just fired in a cylinder shape instead of a cone shape. a cylinder shape would not lose accuracy over range.


It would make the weapon look odd and you couldn't get some pellets past terrain/trees/ect.

This is a very easy implementation to do to the LBX and makes it follow the established lore behind the weapon.

It also puts the LBX style weapons as extended ranged autocannons at lower RoF and spray. It also makes the weapon extremely unique when compared to any other weapon in the game.

#5 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:04 AM

View PostZyllos, on 06 August 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:


It would make the weapon look odd and you couldn't get some pellets past terrain/trees/ect.

This is a very easy implementation to do to the LBX and makes it follow the established lore behind the weapon.

It also puts the LBX style weapons as extended ranged autocannons at lower RoF and spray. It also makes the weapon extremely unique when compared to any other weapon in the game.

knew I could trust a Steiner to get the Germanic engineering efficiency behind the proposal.... =P

#6 Bhael Fire

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,002 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThe Outback wastes of planet Outreach.

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:07 AM

The simplest fix would be to reduce cooldown time to 1.5 instead of 2.5.

#7 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:13 AM

View PostBhael Fire, on 06 August 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

The simplest fix would be to reduce cooldown time to 1.5 instead of 2.5.

and it would still in no way resemble the canon lore LB-X and be useless beyond 200 meters or so. Yay to fast SRM5!!!

And also, if you read the post, this OP is about THIS proposal.

#8 Bhael Fire

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,002 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThe Outback wastes of planet Outreach.

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:23 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 06 August 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

And also, if you read the post, this OP is about THIS proposal.


...Yes I read it. And I voted No. I will admit that the shot pattern needs to be tightened up, however. But it should start spreading out sooner than 500+ meters.

At any rate, the LB-X should have a faster rate of fire, simply for the fact that its damage is spread out. The fast rate of fire would make it more intimidating on the field and actually make it useful.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 06 August 2013 - 11:09 AM.


#9 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:45 AM

View PostBhael Fire, on 06 August 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:


...Yes I read it. And I voted No. I will admit that the shot pattern needs to be tightened up, however. But it should start spreading out sooner than 500+ meters.

At any rate, the LB-X should have a faster rate of fire, simply for the fact that its damage is spread out. The fast rate of fire would make it more intimidating on the field and actually make it useful.

You did not read it well, then. As the post mentions a proximity fuze. Hence the mech is 200 meters out, the fuze detonates the shell at 180. Mech at 500? Shell blows at 480. Mech is PAST 540? Shell blows at 540 no matter what. The LB-10X is SUPPOSED to have a range of 18 mexes, aka 540 meters with either cluster OR solid shell. Since the game will never allow solid shot in this gun, that part is a non issue. What is an issue is the simplistics shotgun implementation of the weapon removes the actual range of the gun.

Could care less if you voted against, we are all allowed our opinions, but your post shows you did not comprehend what was proposed.

#10 Bhael Fire

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,002 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThe Outback wastes of planet Outreach.

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:53 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 06 August 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

Could care less if you voted against, we are all allowed our opinions, but your post shows you did not comprehend what was proposed.


Apologies. I did overlook that part. Sounds like a good idea. ;)

However, I'd still like to see its cooldown reduced to help make up for the fact that it spreads damage around.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 06 August 2013 - 10:55 AM.


#11 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 10:55 AM

View PostBhael Fire, on 06 August 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:


Apologies. I did overlook that part. Sounds like a good idea. ;)

well, apologies on my part too, if I got too defensive. Am used to people reading part fo a post, forming an opinion, then mindlesly defending that opinion even after they see the rest.

*Shrugs* Like I said, it doesn't perfectly fix everything (nor do I expect everyone toagree, some folks LOVE the MW4 shotties), but I think it would give a good start to recapturing the feel of the weapon. Then tweaking damage per pellet, cooldown and CoF could be taken from there.

#12 Bhael Fire

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,002 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThe Outback wastes of planet Outreach.

Posted 06 August 2013 - 11:06 AM

This idea would put it more in line with a flak cannon instead of a shotgun, which is cool with me since it would give it a much more effective range. The key feature of the LB-X, canonically speaking, is its effectiveness against fast-moving smaller vehicles and mechs, as well as infantry. This would accomplish that.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 06 August 2013 - 11:07 AM.


#13 William Chase Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 136 posts
  • LocationBuffalo, NY

Posted 06 August 2013 - 11:07 AM

This idea could make the LBX a lot more useful.

#14 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 11:08 AM

View PostBhael Fire, on 06 August 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

This idea would put it more in line with a flak cannon instead of a shotgun, which is cool with me since it would give it a much more effective range. The key feature of the LB-X, canonically speaking, is its effectiveness against fast-moving smaller vehicles and mechs, as well as infantry. This would accomplish that.

and I would be happy with a either a cooldown reduction, or a per pellet damage boost. But I think my idea would fix the CoF and range issue. Either faster firing or higher pellet damage would, IMO complete the picture.

#15 Black Templar

    Com Guard

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 300 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 06 August 2013 - 12:02 PM

i would like to see this tested on the PBE ;)

#16 Corvus Antaka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 8,310 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationInner Sphere

Posted 06 August 2013 - 12:05 PM

cooldown reduction, more damage per pellet.

#17 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 12:18 PM

View PostColonel Pada Vinson, on 06 August 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

cooldown reduction, more damage per pellet.

again, it does nothing to return the LB-X to what it is supposed to be, which is a weapon with a range the same as a PPC. Short of increasing the Damage to Gauss or AC20 damage, those in and of themselves do nothing to make it worth the 11 tons plus ammo.

Also, for all those wanting to see if fire real fast and do more damage, lets keep in mind we are also talking about an actual FIX, not a bandage, one which everyone will QQ to have changed once the Clans bring in the LB-20X. I sincerely doubt people will be singing the same tune when those are kicking out more damage than an AC20, faster, even if you have to face hug.

Just my opinion, but i feel those who think those 2 things in themselves will fix the LB-X really have not thought it ALL the way through to the endgame.

#18 DegeneratePervert

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • LocationKansas

Posted 06 August 2013 - 12:23 PM

I like this idea, especially because it makes the LBX closer to cannon, no pun intended.

However, in the interests of this game, I would simply prefer an ammo increase and ROF increase, which would be easier to implement and probably wouldn't break the game.

#19 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 06 August 2013 - 06:00 PM

LB-X ACs were always described as "BattleMech-scale shotguns", with the cluster munitions being consistently represented as shotshell rounds (which fragment immediately upon leaving the weapon's barrel) rather than proximity-detonation "Shrapnel shell" rounds (the latter of which most people tend to refer to as "flak rounds" and/or conflate with actual canister shot rounds (which, as it happens, are closer to shotshells than Shrapnel shells, in that they typically fragment upon exiting the weapon's muzzle)).

The LB-Xs' dual ammo system mirrors that of (dual-feed/dual-tube) shotguns (to which the LB-X is consistently compared in the BattleTech source materials), as well as the ammunition systems used by real-world tanks (the LB 10-X would essentially be firing an advanced form of the M1028 canister round used in the Abrams MBT (with something more like a bomblet or grenade than a tungsten ball as the submunition) as its cluster round, and an advanced form of the M830 or M830A1 as its standard/slug round).

Even TRO 2750 (in which the LB-X was introduced) uses the shotgun comparison (on pg. 08).
"In addition to firing the standard Dual-Purpose Armor-Defeating Rounds, the weapon may also fire a special Cluster Round that acts much like an anti-'Mech shotgun. After being fired, the round breaks up into several smaller submunitions."
Use of the phrase "after being fired" rather than something to the effect of "prior to impact" indicates that the fragmentation/break-up phase happens early in the firing cycle (e.g. "at muzzle exit").

The shotgun analogy is also used in the CBT Master Rules (pg. 132), as follows:
"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."
Note that the CBTMR description specifically says, "When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions" - indicating that the shell fragments at muzzle exit, much like its real-world counterpart (the aforementioned M1028).

It also shows up again in TechManual (pg. 207):
"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."

Traditionally, the LB-X family of autocannons are known for their ability to fire a standard high-explosive, armor-piercing (HEAP) shell as well as a shotshell-like cluster rounds (filled with a number of explosive submunitions equal to the number in the gun's designation) from the same gun - in addition to being lighter (essentially built from Endo Steel), cooler-running, longer-ranged, and very expensive.
However, the trade-off was that the LB-X was limited only to these two types of ammunition, while the Standard ACs had access to a wider variety of special munitions, in addition to being cheaper to acquire and maintain.

By contrast, the oddly-named "flak round" (described on pg. 352 of Tactical Operations) that is fired by Standard ACs - and not the LB-X family - is what behaves as Bishop's proposal describes.
"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."

Further compounding the issue is the flechette rounds, also available to Standard ACs and is directly compared to the LB-X cluster rounds.
From CBTMR, pg. 133:
"Flechette rounds are similar to LB-X cluster rounds, except they release a shower of metal slivers instead of shotgun-like flak. Designed to combat unarmored infantry, these rounds are ineffective against armored targets."
And from TechManual, pg. 208:
"Developed by the FedSuns in 3055 for standard ACs, flechette munitions deliver a shotgun-like blast of metal shards rather than a stream of shells. Intended for use against infantry, flechette rounds can wipe out entire platoons of conventional troops in seconds and can even ravage battle-armored squads, but this ammo type loses effectiveness against armored targets such as vehicles and ‘Mechs."
(In other words, the BT flechette shell is a more direct descendant of the Abrams' M1028 canister shell.)

To reiterate (and summarize):
LB-X cluster rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with explosive submunitions
Standard AC flechette rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with non-explosive shrapnel
Standard AC flak rounds = proximity-detonated Shrapnel shell or HE shell with non-explosive shrapnel

The current "LB-X as shotgun" implementation, while in need of its ability to fire standard shells and a minor adjustment to its choke setting, is demonstratably more "correct" in terms of BT canon than the Shrapnel shell concept being proposed, and should thus have that aspect remain unchanged.

#20 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 06 August 2013 - 06:10 PM

View PostStrum Wealh, on 06 August 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

LB-X ACs were always described as "BattleMech-scale shotguns", with the cluster munitions being consistently represented as shotshell rounds (which fragment immediately upon leaving the weapon's barrel) rather than proximity-detonation "Shrapnel shell" rounds (the latter of which most people tend to refer to as "flak rounds" and/or conflate with actual canister shot rounds (which, as it happens, are closer to shotshells than Shrapnel shells, in that they typically fragment upon exiting the weapon's muzzle)).

The LB-Xs' dual ammo system mirrors that of (dual-feed/dual-tube) shotguns (to which the LB-X is consistently compared in the BattleTech source materials), as well as the ammunition systems used by real-world tanks (the LB 10-X would essentially be firing an advanced form of the M1028 canister round used in the Abrams MBT (with something more like a bomblet or grenade than a tungsten ball as the submunition) as its cluster round, and an advanced form of the M830 or M830A1 as its standard/slug round).

Even TRO 2750 (in which the LB-X was introduced) uses the shotgun comparison (on pg. 08).
"In addition to firing the standard Dual-Purpose Armor-Defeating Rounds, the weapon may also fire a special Cluster Round that acts much like an anti-'Mech shotgun. After being fired, the round breaks up into several smaller submunitions."
Use of the phrase "after being fired" rather than something to the effect of "prior to impact" indicates that the fragmentation/break-up phase happens early in the firing cycle (e.g. "at muzzle exit").

The shotgun analogy is also used in the CBT Master Rules (pg. 132), as follows:
"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."
Note that the CBTMR description specifically says, "When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions" - indicating that the shell fragments at muzzle exit, much like its real-world counterpart (the aforementioned M1028).

It also shows up again in TechManual (pg. 207):
"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."

Traditionally, the LB-X family of autocannons are known for their ability to fire a standard high-explosive, armor-piercing (HEAP) shell as well as a shotshell-like cluster rounds (filled with a number of explosive submunitions equal to the number in the gun's designation) from the same gun - in addition to being lighter (essentially built from Endo Steel), cooler-running, longer-ranged, and very expensive.
However, the trade-off was that the LB-X was limited only to these two types of ammunition, while the Standard ACs had access to a wider variety of special munitions, in addition to being cheaper to acquire and maintain.

By contrast, the oddly-named "flak round" (described on pg. 352 of Tactical Operations) that is fired by Standard ACs - and not the LB-X family - is what behaves as Bishop's proposal describes.
"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."

Further compounding the issue is the flechette rounds, also available to Standard ACs and is directly compared to the LB-X cluster rounds.
From CBTMR, pg. 133:
"Flechette rounds are similar to LB-X cluster rounds, except they release a shower of metal slivers instead of shotgun-like flak. Designed to combat unarmored infantry, these rounds are ineffective against armored targets."
And from TechManual, pg. 208:
"Developed by the FedSuns in 3055 for standard ACs, flechette munitions deliver a shotgun-like blast of metal shards rather than a stream of shells. Intended for use against infantry, flechette rounds can wipe out entire platoons of conventional troops in seconds and can even ravage battle-armored squads, but this ammo type loses effectiveness against armored targets such as vehicles and ‘Mechs."
(In other words, the BT flechette shell is a more direct descendant of the Abrams' M1028 canister shell.)

To reiterate (and summarize):
LB-X cluster rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with explosive submunitions
Standard AC flechette rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with non-explosive shrapnel
Standard AC flak rounds = proximity-detonated Shrapnel shell or HE shell with non-explosive shrapnel

The current "LB-X as shotgun" implementation, while in need of its ability to fire standard shells and a minor adjustment to its choke setting, is demonstratably more "correct" in terms of BT canon than the Shrapnel shell concept being proposed, and should thus have that aspect remain unchanged.

Yes, I am aware of that. However, one cannot have a cone of fire and an effective range of 540. CAN'T. Hence, I offer a fix. When canon doesn't actually translate, canon needs to be abandoned.

We have been essentially told no select fire. And choking won't be enough. This proposal would be pretty simple.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users