6 replies to this topic

[Lazy Eye]

Instead of firing a single slug, change them to fire 5-round bursts: AC/2 over 0.5-0.75 seconds, AC/5 over 0.75-1 second.

As well as being a properly cool effect (Moar Dakka!!!), it would address some of the point-damage issues and also make them more effective against fast lights.

It would also further differentiate between the "big" ACs and the small...

[PenitentTangent]

And what Happens to the UAC/5?

also, while in the books, ACs are described as machine-gun type weapons, this isn't the defining term of Autocannon

The actual definition of autocannon is a cannon or artillery piece that automatically reloads itself. While the burst fire fits under that description, so does the version we have right now.





also, on a side note, If burst fire is introduced the AC/2 is so small that It would be considered a chaingun (an MG that is electronically cycled, instead of relying on spring action or gas operation), but I digress.

Edited by PenitentTangent, 08 August 2013 - 05:43 PM.

[Mackman]

Lazy Eye, on 08 August 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

Instead of firing a single slug, change them to fire 5-round bursts: AC/2 over 0.5-0.75 seconds, AC/5 over 0.75-1 second.

As well as being a properly cool effect (Moar Dakka!!!), it would address some of the point-damage issues and also make them more effective against fast lights.

This is the opposite of true. When people are talking of problematic pin-point damage, they aren't talking about AC/2's and 5's. AC/2's are already incapable of doing pin-point damage in any appreciable amount, and making them and 5's fire in bursts would make them absolute trash against lights (hint: Anything that requires you to keep the cursor on them for longer than it takes you to fire, is a direct nerf in every conceivable situation).

The only thing your idea would accomplish is to ensure that nobody ever used AC/2's or AC/5's again. They're already trash for brawling: Your "fix" would break them for everything else as well.

[Strum Wealh]

PenitentTangent, on 08 August 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

And what Happens to the UAC/5?

also, while in the books, ACs are described as machine-gun type weapons, this isn't the defining term of Autocannon

The actual definition of autocannon is a cannon or artillery piece that automatically reloads itself. While the burst fire fits under that description, so does the version we have right now.

also, on a side note, If burst fire is introduced the AC/2 is so small that It would be considered a chaingun (an MG that is electronically cycled, instead of relying on spring action or gas operation), but I digress.

However, BattleTech itself almost always depicts ACs as burst-fire weapons.

• The AC/20 used on the Hetzer Combat Vehicle (a Ceres Arms Crusher Super Heavy Cannon) fires a burst of ten 150mm shells.
  
• The AC/20s used on the Demolisher Combat Vehicle (twin ChemJet Guns) each fire a burst of four 185mm shells (according to Era Report: 3052).
  
• The AC/20 mounted on the Mechbuster AreoSpace Fighter (a Zeus 75) fires a four-round burst of unstated caliber.
  
• Decision at Thunder Rift states (toward the beginning of chapter 28) that the AC/5 on the SHD-2H Shadow Hawk (an Armstrong J11) is a 90mm weapon of as-yet-unknown burst size.
  
• Decision at Thunder Rift also states (around the middle of chapter 9) that the AC/5 on the MAD-3R Marauder (a GM Whirlwind) is a 120mm weapon that fires in three-round bursts.
  
• Technical Readout: 3025 states that the AC/10 on the ENF-4R Enforcer (a "Federated Autocannon/10") uses "big, ten-round clips that are easily slipped into and out of the 'Mech's back" (with the implication that each of the 10 shots in one ton is composed of 10 individual shells (that is, 10 shells/clip * 10 clips/ton), for a total of 100 shells per ton).
  
• Both Sword and Dagger and Heir to the Dragon indicate that the "Pontiac 100" (the AC/20 model used on both the VTR-9B Victor and the Yen Lo Wang) is a 100mm weapon that fires in 100-round bursts.

We also know from both rulebooks and novels that ACs are cassette/clip-based weapons (much like the RARDEN 30mm autocannon) where each unit of ammunition represents one such cassette/clip (e.g. each of the 20 units of ammo carried by the MAD-3R Marauder is a 3-round cassette/clip, which means that one ton of ammo for the GM Whirlwind consists of 60 individual 120mm shells (3 shells/cassette * 20 cassettes/ton)).


Moreover, there are BT gameplay rules that also support the notion of (nearly) all ACs as burst-fire weapons - specifically, the rules on page 100 of Tactical Operations for walking the fire from a single burst across multiple targets.

Quote

Multiple Targets: Rather than firing at a single target, any type of autocannon can be “walked” across two targets close to one another. An LB-X autocannon firing a cluster shot and Ultra and Rotary autocannons firing at multiple targets are a special case.

No matter what type of autocannon is being used, both targets must be in adjacent hexes and within range of the weapon. Determine the to-hit number for both targets and make separate to-hit rolls against each target, using the higher (more difficult) of the to-hit numbers and adding a +1 modifier for firing at multiple targets with a single shot. Note that this is not the secondary target modifier; that modifier does not apply to this type of attack unless multiple targets also are being attacked in the same phase. If the to-hit roll succeeds, the target is struck by a single hit that inflicts damage equal to half the normal damage done by the weapon (rounded down).

The more basic rules found in Total Warfare can be seen as simply assuming that all of the shells in a burst land in the same general area.
For example, if each of the shells in the Marauder's three-shell burst hits the thigh, lower leg (calf/shin), and middle of the foot, the shot "hit the leg". Likewise, having each of the shells in a Demolisher's four-shell burst hit the upper arm, elbow joint, lower arm, and hand is considered to have the entire burst "hit the arm".

As noted previously, UACs and RACs are special cases with regard to the walking fire rules.

Quote

For Ultra and Rotary autocannons, make a single to-hit roll against the highest to-hit number plus 1. Then determine whether the designated number of shots fired hit a target. If only one shot hit, it will strike one of the targets - determined at random - with a single shot that does full damage. If two, four or six shots hit, one, two or three shots will strike each target at full damage. If three or five shots hit, one or two shots will strike each target; randomly determine where the other shot lands.

This description would seem to imply that UACs and RACs have much shorter burst durations (that is, a far faster base cyclic rate) such that the individual (multi-shell) bursts don't spread (or have the capability to be "walked"), and/or that they more commonly (relative to Standard ACs) fire single shells per unit of ammo.

Thoughts?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 09 August 2013 - 05:47 AM.

[Lazy Eye]

On reflection, I agree that ALL ACs should be burst weapons, with the bigger weapons having longer burst times, something like:

2: 0.25
UAC5: 0.4
5: 0.5
10: 0.75
20: 1

The only weapons left doing point damage would be SRMs, PPCs and Gauss...

PPC & Gauss could be "fixed" by simply giving them longer cycle times, that is, because you're "less vulnerable", you have to wait longer between shots.

This would encourage people to take a mix of weapons, because if they ONLY took PPC/Gauss, they'd get completely mauled at medium range or closer...

[Alreech]

Strum Wealh, on 09 August 2013 - 05:08 AM, said:

However, BattleTech itself almost always depicts ACs as burst-fire weapons.

• The AC/20 used on the Hetzer Combat Vehicle (a Ceres Arms Crusher Super Heavy Cannon) fires a burst of ten 150mm shells.
  
• The AC/20s used on the Demolisher Combat Vehicle (twin ChemJet Guns) each fire a burst of four 185mm shells (according to Era Report: 3052).
  
• The AC/20 mounted on the Mechbuster AreoSpace Fighter (a Zeus 75) fires a four-round burst of unstated caliber.
  
• Decision at Thunder Rift states (toward the beginning of chapter 28) that the AC/5 on the SHD-2H Shadow Hawk (an Armstrong J11) is a 90mm weapon of as-yet-unknown burst size.
  
• Decision at Thunder Rift also states (around the middle of chapter 9) that the AC/5 on the MAD-3R Marauder (a GM Whirlwind) is a 120mm weapon that fires in three-round bursts.
  
• Technical Readout: 3025 states that the AC/10 on the ENF-4R Enforcer (a "Federated Autocannon/10") uses "big, ten-round clips that are easily slipped into and out of the 'Mech's back" (with the implication that each of the 10 shots in one ton is composed of 10 individual shells (that is, 10 shells/clip * 10 clips/ton), for a total of 100 shells per ton).
  
• Both Sword and Dagger and Heir to the Dragon indicate that the "Pontiac 100" (the AC/20 model used on both the VTR-9B Victor and the Yen Lo Wang) is a 100mm weapon that fires in 100-round bursts.

We also know from both rulebooks and novels that ACs are cassette/clip-based weapons (much like the RARDEN 30mm autocannon) where each unit of ammunition represents one such cassette/clip (e.g. each of the 20 units of ammo carried by the MAD-3R Marauder is a 3-round cassette/clip, which means that one ton of ammo for the GM Whirlwind consists of 60 individual 120mm shells (3 shells/cassette * 20 cassettes/ton)).


Thoughts?

All info from the novels, source books and technical readouts is fluff, not game mechanic.

At the moment MWO suffers from a syndrome called "too much PPCs and Gausrifles", and changing the damage pattern of the ACs from concentrated (like PPC) to scatter (like LBX, LRM or SRM) doesn't improve the game.

Lazy Eye, on 10 August 2013 - 03:05 AM, said:

This would encourage people to take a mix of weapons, because if they ONLY took PPC/Gauss, they'd get completely mauled at medium range or closer...

A typical fight at medium range or closer is against light, fast Mechs.
Hit a Spider or Jenner only once with a Weapon Group of 2 PPCs + 1 Gausrifle and you rip off a Leg, an Arm or a Torso.

If you use a Weapon Group with 6 Medium Lasers, you have to keep the crosshair during the whole burst duration on the Arm/Leg/Torso to achieve the same effect.
AT the moment you will get mauled if you use burst stile weapons against fast Mechs, because you can't keep them long enough under the crosshair to make the full damage.

Changing the ACs to burst will make the worse against fast moving Mechs, without any benefit...
And most ACs except the AC20 are not intended for short and medium ranges - instead they have the same range and role like a PPC or Gausrifle - at least if you take a look at the values in the Battletech Tabletop.
A Mech like the Jaegermech was never build to fight a short an medium ranges, so why do you want to convert his main Weapons to short range Weapons ?

[Strum Wealh]

Alreech, on 12 August 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

All info from the novels, source books and technical readouts is fluff, not game mechanic.

At the moment MWO suffers from a syndrome called "too much PPCs and Gausrifles", and changing the damage pattern of the ACs from concentrated (like PPC) to scatter (like LBX, LRM or SRM) doesn't improve the game.

The current dominance of PPCs and Gauss Rifles is a separate issue, albeit one that isn't unsolvable.

Additionally, in most cases, the burst length would/should be rather short; as most ACs only fire 3-10 shells per burst, a short burst length (which is not the same thing as, no would it actually have the same effect as, the scattershot effect of the missiles or LB-X cluster rounds) should allow most ACs to retain concentrated damage against most targets at range.

Though, the challenge would lie in determining appropriate burst lengths.
!n most cases, a burst length generally no longer than (and, in many cases, much shorter than) one second should suffice, with the cooldown starting at the end of the previous burst.
However, something like an "accurately"-modeled Pontiac 100, depending on how burst lengths would be determined, could present an issue; at the highest realistic revolver cannon ROFs (~33 rounds per second), it would need about 3 seconds to fire a 100-shell burst (while an "accurately"-modeled Crusher SH Cannon would only need ~0.3 seconds to fire its 10-shell burst, using the same per-shell ROF).
The alternative would be to give each class of AC a specific burst length (e.g. all AC/20s will have a burst length of "X" seconds, while all AC/10s will have a burst length of "Y" seconds, and so on), irrespective of per-burst shell count. Though, this runs into the same problem as the current system, of future-proofing against high-ROF models (that is, UAC/2, RAC/2, RAC/5, and their respective Clan-built counterparts) and likely needing slower ROFs than are currently used for the base models in order to have the high-ROF models scale properly without being ridiculous and/or OP (e.g. imagine a current-implementation AC/2, now multiply its firing rate by 6 - that's a RAC/2 ).