65 replies to this topic

[Zyllos]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

lovely GIF.

And if Trickshot thinks the LB-10X is currently fine, I must wonder....does he simply not use it, or is just very very easy to please?
I use it extensively for fun, and it is extremely not worth the tonnage. (Aided and abetted by the current MG heat bug, my MEch Salad is not a happy mech currently.)

Anyhow, as for not being canon, I would point out that currently neither are UAC/5s, MGs, DHS, armor..........

So I am more interested in keeping to the "Spirit" of the concept than the letter of the law. And I don't feel the CoF tightening is in and of itself enough to approach the TT level of usefulness, its pretty much a given they won't have selective ammo capability EVER, and while individually tweaking CoF, RoF and Dmg sound simple enough, I would rather change 1 thing instead, and as stated above, I am reasonably certain all the needed "info and code" is already in game between the AMS interaction capability and HSR. If the AMS can easily detect and react to missiles when they come within 90 meters of the mech, why can't the shell use the same coding for detection?

Well, AMS coding to determine if something is within a sphere volume from a specific point and determine the proximity to the target is incorrect logic. It is also much simpler logic. The AMS most likely does a trigonometric function based with distance to LRMs in the X, distance to LRMs in Y, to calculate slant range, then checks if slat range is 90m or less. If it is, deal DPS/(server ticks per second) damage to the LRM salvo then just draw the AMS firing at it. Doing this for the LBX canister does not make sense.

The LBX canister should only check it's current trajectory for any solid object within X meters (raytrace comes to mind here). If this is true, explode, if not, continue flying.

It would not make sense for you to fire the LBX to the left/right of an enemy target to hit another target behind them, but it explodes when flying by really close to the enemy your not aiming at due to being closer.

You also can not based the radius only around your selected target because then ECM will effect the LBX.

This is why it's best to just fire the LBX canister and on each server update, raytrace to determine the current distance to a solid object based on it's heading. If it calculates X meters or less, explode.

There will be two special cases:

• A solid object is less than X meters when the weapon is immediately fired
  
• A solid object runs into the flak canister without explodeing

The first case is pretty easy to handle. Just explode immedately, like how the LBX does now.

The second case would be extremely rare (and most likely happen due to lag more than by accident). In this case, I would suggest making the LBX canister do 50% to the location it hits. So, the LBX/10 would deal 5 points of damage if the canister was ran into.

Edited by Zyllos, 08 August 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

sounds good. I do think that it can hit an unintended target as sometimes a flak shell goes off and the target has moved fast enough to evade most to all.... but something else in the LoF would still be fair game to the shrapnel.

Don't think ECM would affect it, but I don't know for sure how they code that. the "real world" is using a laser/optical trigger. Obviously in "Coding land" that .... is something totally different, lol.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 August 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

the obsoleting the AC is if they were to ever implement selective fire. The cone can conceivably work, but looking at your numbers, I still don't really admittedly do math enough to full get them, I suppose. Wide enough cluster to be good for catching lights at short range, though, still seems like too far spread at long to be useful.

One method of implementing the LB-Xs' signature selective fire modes that would help to offset the advantages of the LB-X slug/HEAP rounds over the Standard ACs' HEAP rounds would be to forcibly mix the LB-X ammo bins - that is, one ton of "LB-X ammo" would consist of approximately half (e.g. 7 rounds) slug/HEAP rounds and approximately half (e.g. 8 rounds) Cluster rounds.

Doing so would prevent players from loading only slug/HEAP rounds and carrying no cluster rounds at all (where allowing such would indeed result in a "LB nn-X is a better AC/nn" scenario), while ensuring that the LB-X would be able to exercise the full range of its abilities with each ton of ammunition added.

Bishop Steiner, on 07 August 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

I don't have the math mind, I just draw pretty pictures. Fortunately, I don't need math for this one, as the projectile flies on a straight path until gravity or other outside forces affect it.


So to be able to marginally accomplish both tasks, one would need the cone of fire to be approximately along these numbers, in which case, it's still, TBH too wide at 500, and not wide enough to rabbit with effectively, at 100, But is passable at either. Presuming either a higher RoF or more damage. Otherwise one is still better served with other weapons. An AC5 is more effective at 500 meters, and the SRM 6 is better at 100. And to bet both is 11 tons. Plus ammo. Heat is a non issue overall, but for this 11 tons, you could conceivably land 17 pts at 100 meters instead of 10. And a much more useful 5 damage at 500.

Your picture essentially illustrates what I described with mathematics - the spread of the LB-X cluster round at the effective range would (should?) be an Atlas-height in diameter, while the distance at which the cluster round's damage would be so concentrated as to match the single-location damage of the same-class Standard AC shell would consistently be no more than one-sixth of the effective range for all LB-X ACs (60 meters for both the IS and Clan LB 20-X, 90 meters for both the IS and Clan LB 10-X, 105 meters for the IS LB 5-X, 120 meters for the Clan LB 5-X, 135 meters for the IS LB 2-X, and 150 meters for the Clan LB 2-X).

As such, the LB-X cluster rounds would see effective use through their entire effective range envelope (especially once the higher rates-of-fire of the smaller classes & the longer effective ranges of the LB-X family are taken into account), albeit while being unable to concentrate damage against a single location outside of relatively close range (specifically, at or closer than one-sixth of the listed effective range).
By contrast, Standard ACs firing standard shells would retain the advantage of being able to concentrate damage on a single hit location within their entire effective range envelope.
And if selective fire is implemented as I've described (that is, mandating a ~50/50 mix of slug/HEAP and cluster rounds within each one-ton increment of "LB-X ammo"), the LB-X slug/HEAP rounds would have the advantage of greater effective ranges (and, subsequently, greater fall-off ranges), while having the offsetting disadvantage of having far fewer slug/HEAP shells available per ton than the Standard AC of the same class.

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

Anyhow, as for not being canon, I would point out that currently neither are UAC/5s, MGs, DHS, armor..........

So I am more interested in keeping to the "Spirit" of the concept than the letter of the law. And I don't feel the CoF tightening is in and of itself enough to approach the TT level of usefulness, its pretty much a given they won't have selective ammo capability EVER, and while individually tweaking CoF, RoF and Dmg sound simple enough, I would rather change 1 thing instead, and as stated above, I am reasonably certain all the needed "info and code" is already in game between the AMS interaction capability and HSR. If the AMS can easily detect and react to missiles when they come within 90 meters of the mech, why can't the shell use the same coding for detection?

AMS is essentially an automated machine gun that, according to the Devs, outputs 2 units of damage per second while LRMs and SSRMs (and, presumably, standard SRMs) have one hitpoint per missile and Narc pods have two hitpoints per pod.

Host State Rewind (HSR), both in general (see here and here) and with regard to MWO specifically, deals with lag compensation, and would only be related insofar as being able to determine world state (including the desired shooter, target, and shell positions) at any given time (which it then collects and uses for entirely different purposes than what is being proposed).

By contrast, adjusting the spread by changing a single value is something that can be done without recoding the entire weapon system (which, incidentially and aside from the questionable man-hours to utility ratio, would also remake it onto something it wasn't originally intended to be, and something that is far further than the current implementation from the "spirit" of what is described in BattleTech).

(As an aside, it would be interesting to know what that "Spread 2.25 (down from 3.0)" from the May 21 patch notes actually means - what value does that "2.25" actually represent?)

[Lusankya]

I like this idea a lot. I started using LBX on my Cataphracts about a week ago and love them but they kind of feel weak even up close (although hit detection might be the culprit). Even if they had the canister fused to half the stated distance and added a module to close that distance I would be happy with that.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sug, on 06 August 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

Can't without nerfing other aspects of the weapon.

I just don't see them taking the time to program bullets that know when to explode based on how close they are to the target. What distance does it go off of? Target distance or distance at what your reticle is over? If you're leading your target it messes up the canister, and if it goes by target what happens if you shoot at something other than what you've targeted?

Which of these ranges gives the spread you'd like to see from the LBX?





I'm hitting with at least 4 pellets at and under 500m, and it doesn't look like I get 100% of the pellets to hit at anything over 200m. (What was the average number of hits in TT, 60%? They're not all supposed to hit.)

My 2nd 200m shot hit 5 different locations. Doesn't 2 or less locations over 200.

Sorry everyone but the TT purpose of the LBX was to get crits, not to do damage. Give LBX bonus crit damage on components and internals, let mechs be killed by engine crits.

Fixed.

Whenever the video gets done posting to youtube I will add it, but I did a Testing Ground on Caustic, on two targets, a Cicada at 540 meters exactly, and a Commando at about 375.

15 shots on the Cicada, 10, I believe, on the Commando.

of note, the "BOX" changes sizes at different ranges (or is it based on the different mechs?), though what the formula is, IDK, maybe Strum can tell us. But, the Commando is right about 8 meters tall as an in game model, and the box is exactly twice that height, meaning at 375 meters, that box was 16m x 16m.

Cicada is approximately 2 meters taller, and the box, at 540 meters for it was approximately 20m x 20m.

So "keeping it all in the box" is not only variable, but it's a bloody huge box.

Results? FIring a single LB-10X from my Jager, 15 rounds spread the minimal damage to the limbs with virtually no torso damage (to be expected on an expanding cone) but 4 shots out of 15 had ZERO impacts. (shots 3/4/8/14 I believe)

Ar 375 on the Commando, 1 out of 10 missed entirely at 375 meters. So out of 25 shots, 20% of "HITS" (Dead centered pinpoint zoomed aim, no convergence, etc on a stationary target) were total misses. And of course, that is on Testing Grounds where the borked hitboxes don' t generally seem to be an issue. In game? I would venture closer to 40-50% of hits "miss" on lights at any range over 200-250 meters, though hit detection is of course a different subject.

So, IDK SUG, if that is working OK, what does it take to be working badly bro?

Strum Wealh, on 08 August 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

One method of implementing the LB-Xs' signature selective fire modes that would help to offset the advantages of the LB-X slug/HEAP rounds over the Standard ACs' HEAP rounds would be to forcibly mix the LB-X ammo bins - that is, one ton of "LB-X ammo" would consist of approximately half (e.g. 7 rounds) slug/HEAP rounds and approximately half (e.g. 8 rounds) Cluster rounds.

Doing so would prevent players from loading only slug/HEAP rounds and carrying no cluster rounds at all (where allowing such would indeed result in a "LB nn-X is a better AC/nn" scenario), while ensuring that the LB-X would be able to exercise the full range of its abilities with each ton of ammunition added.

Your picture essentially illustrates what I described with mathematics - the spread of the LB-X cluster round at the effective range would (should?) be an Atlas-height in diameter, while the distance at which the cluster round's damage would be so concentrated as to match the single-location damage of the same-class Standard AC shell would consistently be no more than one-sixth of the effective range for all LB-X ACs (60 meters for both the IS and Clan LB 20-X, 90 meters for both the IS and Clan LB 10-X, 105 meters for the IS LB 5-X, 120 meters for the Clan LB 5-X, 135 meters for the IS LB 2-X, and 150 meters for the Clan LB 2-X).

As such, the LB-X cluster rounds would see effective use through their entire effective range envelope (especially once the higher rates-of-fire of the smaller classes & the longer effective ranges of the LB-X family are taken into account), albeit while being unable to concentrate damage against a single location outside of relatively close range (specifically, at or closer than one-sixth of the listed effective range).
By contrast, Standard ACs firing standard shells would retain the advantage of being able to concentrate damage on a single hit location within their entire effective range envelope.
And if selective fire is implemented as I've described (that is, mandating a ~50/50 mix of slug/HEAP and cluster rounds within each one-ton increment of "LB-X ammo"), the LB-X slug/HEAP rounds would have the advantage of greater effective ranges (and, subsequently, greater fall-off ranges), while having the offsetting disadvantage of having far fewer slug/HEAP shells available per ton than the Standard AC of the same class.

AMS is essentially an automated machine gun that, according to the Devs, outputs 2 units of damage per second while LRMs and SSRMs (and, presumably, standard SRMs) have one hitpoint per missile and Narc pods have two hitpoints per pod.

Host State Rewind (HSR), both in general (see here and here) and with regard to MWO specifically, deals with lag compensation, and would only be related insofar as being able to determine world state (including the desired shooter, target, and shell positions) at any given time (which it then collects and uses for entirely different purposes than what is being proposed).

By contrast, adjusting the spread by changing a single value is something that can be done without recoding the entire weapon system (which, incidentially and aside from the questionable man-hours to utility ratio, would also remake it onto something it wasn't originally intended to be, and something that is far further than the current implementation from the "spirit" of what is described in BattleTech).

(As an aside, it would be interesting to know what that "Spread 2.25 (down from 3.0)" from the May 21 patch notes actually means - what value does that "2.25" actually represent?)

interesting. While obviously my agenda and yours don't line up, I like the data. HSR though, to determine that, has to be able to track where everything is "supposed" to be. Hence the data is there.

[Sug]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

So, IDK SUG, if that is working OK, what does it take to be working badly bro?

Just say you want all the pellets to magically hit only torso sections at any range.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sug, on 08 August 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

[/size]

Just say you want all the pellets to magically hit only torso sections at any range.

Gee, getting sandy? My apologies, I thought we were having an empirical discussion, not a sandyvag match.

I believe, I said, that the spread, was to be expected? Hence, no, I am not expecting magic torso hits.

But a 20% complete miss rate on what should be a hit? THAT is not acceptable. And certainly wasn't the 60% of spread you mention from TT.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 08 August 2013 - 10:11 AM.

[Sug]

SAY IT

[Bishop Steiner]

Sug, on 08 August 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

SAY IT

sandy

[Sug]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

But a 20% complete miss rate on what should be a hit? THAT is not acceptable. And certainly wasn't the 60% of spread you mention from TT.

Actually that sounds like it translated well from TT.

I said 60% was the average because on the cluster hit table you're more likely to roll a 6 than anything else. You could also hit with 3 pellets.

Or you could miss entirely. 20% miss is about the equivalent of needing to roll a 4 or higher with 2 dice to get a hit. Which you wouldn't get unless everyone was standing still like 6 hexes away.

Based on the awesome chance to miss of only 20%, and the cluster hit table, not factoring in distance per TT, rounding the numbers, of 100 imaginary shots...

20 miss entirely
6 shots have 3 pellet hits
6 shots have 4 pellet hits
45 shots have 6 pellet hits
16 shots have 8 pellet hits
6 shots have 10 pellet hits
1 shot is magically rounded away...


Not actually a fan of how the LBX worked in TT either. We'd always use the HAG rules for it, where you got a bonus/penalty on the cluster hit table based on your range, and also a -/+ hit base on range.

LBX is like 99% a shot gun. It's never been a cluster round in any of the games. Many novels describe it as a shotgun shell. The 1% are the people that cling to fluff written in the 80's.

Did you know the extended range of the LBX comes from the advanced Mercury-VII targeting system they were able to add to the gun because of the weight savings from using Endo Steel?

Edit: Also the size of the mech now matters. Should the exact same number of pellets hit a Command and an Atlas at a certain distance?

Gonna try firing 100 shots at an Atlas and a Commando and checking my damage stats to see how many actually are hitting.

Edited by Sug, 08 August 2013 - 12:54 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sug, on 08 August 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

Actually that sounds like it translated well from TT.

I said 60% was the average because on the cluster hit table you're more likely to roll a 6 than anything else. You could also hit with 3 pellets.

Or you could miss entirely. 20% miss is about the equivalent of needing to roll a 4 or higher with 2 dice to get a hit. Which you wouldn't get unless everyone was standing still like 6 hexes away.

Based on the awesome chance to miss of only 20%, and the cluster hit table, not factoring in distance per TT, rounding the numbers, of 100 imaginary shots...

20 miss entirely
6 shots have 3 pellet hits
6 shots have 4 pellet hits
45 shots have 6 pellet hits
16 shots have 8 pellet hits
6 shots have 10 pellet hits
1 shot is magically rounded away...


Not actually a fan of how the LBX worked in TT either. We'd always use the HAG rules for it, where you got a bonus/penalty on the cluster hit table based on your range, and also a -/+ hit base on range.

LBX is like 99% a shot gun. It's never been a cluster round in any of the games. Many novels describe it as a shotgun shell. The 1% are the people that cling to fluff written in the 80's.

Did you know the extended range of the LBX comes from the advanced Mercury-VII targeting system they were able to add to the gun because of the weight savings from using Endo Steel?

Edit: Also the size of the mech now matters. Should the exact same number of pellets hit a Command and an Atlas at a certain distance?

Gonna try firing 100 shots at an Atlas and a Commando and checking my damage stats to see how many actually are hitting.

so...should we add an 20% random miss factor into using all weapons, whether or not one has dead aim on target? Because you see, that is what we are talking about here. You cannot have it on one weapon, then take another and say no, its not ok here, but is here. A direct fire weapon should, against an immobile target, hit with at least ONE sub munition each shot, as long as it is withing the weapons "optimal range".

The fact that it is already next to useless for it's weight, AND now, because of the vagaries of spread, LESS accurate (the idea of the cluster shot was to INCREASE accuracy (confers a -1 to hit number to all shots), hence it's "extra" (fluff) effectiveness against aerospace as it worked like "flak" according to many written sources.) than all other LOS weapons.

[Sug]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

so...should we add an 20% random miss factor into using all weapons, whether or not one has dead aim on target?

Just say you want it to magically hit at any range!! I'd be fine with that.


The 20% random miss is from the spread. The spread is random. It spreads. What does everyone say about the LBX?

"It's easy to hit with" or "It's great for hitting fast light mechs"

It get hits because of the spread. If you get rid of the spread it turns into a wider AC10 round that, can still miss completely. I've never sent an LBX round completely between the legs of a mech or right under their arm like every other ballistic weapon in the game. It's a weapon with a low skill cap because of the spread.

You said at 540 the redbox was about 20m x 20m, so a 400m square plane. There's only 10 pellets. you can't get a hit 100% of the time without magic. Either give them a fixed spread pattern (magic!) or give them the magic of SSRMs to target locations on mechs without fail.

Hell make the spread a giant X and say "That's why it's called an LB-X"

[Strum Wealh]

Actually, the -1 to-hit modifier "for attacks made with cluster munitions" (the actual wording in the BT rules - which seems to imply that the modifier also applies to cluster-type munitions other than the LB-X cluster shells) simply reflected the greater likelihood of hitting with something with the spread of the cluster round, rather than any increase in the inherent accuracy of the weapon itself or the underlying mechanics of the weapon's operation - note, in the case of the LB-X family, that the to-hit bonus applies only when using the cluster rounds, not when it is firing slug/standard rounds.

It's the same reason why an average shooter is generally more likely to hit a clay pidgeon when using shotshells than when using slugs.

Also, it should be noted that weapons specifically designated as capable of executing flak attacks (Damage Type F) get an additional -2 to-hit modifier in BT when used against airborne units (ASFs, VTOLs, and WiGE craft); the list of such weapons includes:

• LB-X ACs (when using cluster munitions),
  
• the HAGs (a coilgun-based volley gun (much like a bunch of tiny Gauss Rifles all fastened together and fired either sequentially or simultaneously) that would behave in a manner reminiscent of the MetalStorm system),
  
• the Arrow IV missile launcher (when firing Air-Defense Arrow Missiles, Non-Homing Arrow Missiles, and Cluster Arrow Missiles),
  
• the Artillery Cannons (when firing Cluster rounds or High-Explosive rounds),
  
• the Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle (which fires only fragmenting rounds, never normal Gauss Rifle slugs; as SBGR ammo does not explode when hit, it very likely does not carry any form of warhead or bursting charge, which indicates that it would fragment on muzzle-exit... like the LB-X cluster rounds), and
  
• Standard ACs (when firing Flak rounds).

Edited by Strum Wealh, 08 August 2013 - 09:33 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 08 August 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

Actually, the -1 to-hit modifier "for attacks made with cluster munitions" (the actual wording in the BT rules - which seems to imply that the modifier also applies to cluster-type munitions other than the LB-X cluster shells) simply reflected the greater likelihood of hitting with something with the spread of the cluster round, rather than any increase in the inherent accuracy of the weapon itself or the underlying mechanics of the weapon's operation - note, in the case of the LB-X family, that the to-hit bonus applies only when using the cluster rounds, not when it is firing slug/standard rounds.

It's the same reason why an average shooter is generally more likely to hit a clay pidgeon when using shotshells than when using slugs.

Also, it should be noted that weapons specifically designated as capable of executing flak attacks (Damage Type F) get an additional -2 to-hit modifier in BT when used against airborne units (ASFs, VTOLs, and WiGE craft); the list of such weapons includes:

• LB-X ACs (when using cluster munitions),
  
• the HAGs (a coilgun-based volley gun (much like a bunch of tiny Gauss Rifles all fastened together and fired either sequentially or simultaneously) that would behave in a manner reminiscent of the MetalStorm system),
  
• the Arrow IV missile launcher (when firing Air-Defense Arrow Missiles, Non-Homing Arrow Missiles, and Cluster Arrow Missiles),
  
• the Artillery Cannons (when firing Cluster rounds or High-Explosive rounds),
  
• the Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle (which fires only fragmenting rounds, never normal Gauss Rifle slugs; as SBGR ammo does not explode when hit, it very likely does not carry any form of warhead or bursting charge, which indicates that it would fragment on muzzle-exit... like the LB-X cluster rounds), and
  
• Standard ACs (when firing Flak rounds).

no gauss slug is high explosive, unless the HAG is

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

no gauss slug is high explosive, unless the HAG is

The HAGs (like other Gauss weapons) don't use explosive shells - they use lots of small-bore barrels (20 barrels for a HAG-20, 30 barrels for a HAG-30, and 40 barrels for a HAG-40) to launch a set of small projectiles as a "wall of flying metal".

"When an HAG hits a target, roll on the appropriate column of the Cluster Hits Table, but apply a +2 modifier at short range and a –2 modifier at long range. Treat a result of less than 2 as 2, and a result of greater than 12 as 12."
"When used against any airborne target, apply a –1 modifier plus the standard –2 Flak modifier to the to-hit number (for a total –3 modifier)."
(Total Warfare, pg. 136)

"Possibly inspired by reports of the Lyrans’ heavy Gauss, the Horses’ weapon is especially effective against vehicles, battle armor and aircraft - but it avoids the design flaws of Defiance Industries’ creation in firing multiple projectiles of far lighter caliber though a battery of capacitors, making up for the lack of punch with an extremely high rate of fire - sort of a 'rotary Gauss' concept."
(TechManual, pg. 219)

Essentially, the HAGs are the spiritual descendents of weapons like the mitrailleuse and the Vandenberg Volley Gun.

Mitrailleuse (French; 1866-1867)


Vandenberg Volley Gun (American; 1860)

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 09 August 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

The HAGs (like other Gauss weapons) don't use explosive shells - they use lots of small-bore barrels (20 barrels for a HAG-20, 30 barrels for a HAG-30, and 40 barrels for a HAG-40) to launch a set of small projectiles as a "wall of flying metal".

"When an HAG hits a target, roll on the appropriate column of the Cluster Hits Table, but apply a +2 modifier at short range and a –2 modifier at long range. Treat a result of less than 2 as 2, and a result of greater than 12 as 12."
"When used against any airborne target, apply a –1 modifier plus the standard –2 Flak modifier to the to-hit number (for a total –3 modifier)."
(Total Warfare, pg. 136)

"Possibly inspired by reports of the Lyrans’ heavy Gauss, the Horses’ weapon is especially effective against vehicles, battle armor and aircraft - but it avoids the design flaws of Defiance Industries’ creation in firing multiple projectiles of far lighter caliber though a battery of capacitors, making up for the lack of punch with an extremely high rate of fire - sort of a 'rotary Gauss' concept."
(TechManual, pg. 219)

Essentially, the HAGs are the spiritual descendents of weapons like the mitrailleuse and the Vandenberg Volley Gun.

Mitrailleuse (French; 1866-1867)


Vandenberg Volley Gun (American; 1860)

Not what i was trying to say. In your Silver Bullet description you posited upon the non explosive nature of the shell, implying by inference that other Gauss shells were explosive. I was saying I was unaware of any in lore that were, they were always described as solid ferrous nickel slugs. UNLESS the HAGs were, because I am unfamiliar with the rules and fluff surrounding them, as I had stop buying books, and don't like playing Battletech in that era.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 August 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

Not what i was trying to say. In your Silver Bullet description you posited upon the non explosive nature of the shell, implying by inference that other Gauss shells were explosive. I was saying I was unaware of any in lore that were, they were always described as solid ferrous nickel slugs. UNLESS the HAGs were, because I am unfamiliar with the rules and fluff surrounding them, as I had stop buying books, and don't like playing Battletech in that era.

Which part of "as SBGR ammo does not explode when hit, it very likely does not carry any form of warhead or bursting charge, which indicates that it would fragment on muzzle-exit... like the LB-X cluster rounds" implies that normal Gauss Rifle slugs (which also don't explode when hit... and by the very definition of being slugs as opposed to shells, do not carry an explosive warhead or other payload) were explosive in nature?

[Sug]

Strum Wealh, on 09 August 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

"When an HAG hits a target, roll on the appropriate column of the Cluster Hits Table, but apply a +2 modifier at short range and a –2 modifier at long range. Treat a result of less than 2 as 2, and a result of greater than 12 as 12."

Yup. We'd apply that to any LBX cluster rounds used. Makes sense that less pellets would hit at long range do to spread.

We also gave the LBX a 0/-1/-2 To Hit for s/m/l ranges to reflect that at close range the pellets spread less and it is harder to get a hit.

So more pellets hit at close range but it's harder to get a hit, and less pellets hit at long range but it's easier to get a hit.

[Bishop Steiner]

not quite sure how it is HARDER to hit with a shotgun at close range,than a solid projectile, but OK..........(just speaking as someone who is an avid target and trap shooter and kinda knows the real world mechanics of guns)

[Roland]

Up the damage per pellet of the LBX-10 to 1.5.

There. You just made the LBX-10 into a useful infighting weapon, and it took a 5 second change to an XML file.

PROBLEM SOLVED.