293 replies to this topic

[Rippthrough]

MG ammo explosion usually kills a light mech outright...

And yes, they can take the top spot, if they work their arse off and are lucky JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER MECH

[Chaosdrive]

I'd just like to point out that (eventually) we will have collisions back in the game, when that happens the machine guns will be a very difficult to use weapon when mounted on lighter mech's without getting bowled over by one mech or another, at which point that light may as well be dead - Unless people don't take advantage of a helpless light, in which case you will be the one messing up.

As for other chassis that can boat machine guns, they only do full damage at 120 meters and after 240 no damage at all, the only weapons with a shorter range are flamers and both types of small lasers - Neither of which should be the main weapon on a mech outside of (potentially) light mech's.

In short, kill them before they get close to you and in the case for MG spider's, bowl them over when collisions come back in or when HSR actually works better on them, at which point you will chew through him before he even gets within optimum range.

Machine guns are still niche weapons, they spray damage everywhere, will be countered easier on light mech when we eventually get knockdowns back, do near nothing against armour unless you allow them to sit there pelting you without firing back and they also force you to expose your CT whenever you want to fire.

I'ma do a list, because we all love lists:

Pro's:
High internal damage
Low weight
High ammo count per ton
Instant travel time weapon (So I've read on the forums somewhere)
Only uses 1 slot per MG
Knocks out weapons quickly once the armour is gone

Con's:
Inaccurate
Very short range
Requires ammo
High CT exposure rate
Low DPS against armour
Needs at the very least two to be semi-effective, ideally four or more
Takes up a very precious ballistic slot on heavier mech's


Did I miss anything? Because that is an awful lot of disadvantages for a crit seeking weapon. As for getting the top damage spot with machine guns, you can do exactly the same with nothing but 8 flamers on a game that goes your way to, or small lasers, or large lasers, or PPC's, or gauss, or AC/20's.
I don't see why mech's that revolve around machine guns shouldn't be able to do well on a good/lucky/both game in the hands of a good/lucky/both pilot.

Edited by Chaosdrive, 15 August 2013 - 10:32 AM.

[StealthAssassin]

This thread is more non-sensical whine. Machine guns aren't that bad, 9/10 deaths will be from something besides machine guns. That one time you die from machine gun spiders trolling you, or jagermech 6x machine gun build... it's your fault for losing your armor and becoming vulnerable in the first place, and if it wasn't machine guns, it would've been something else that killed you.

[Tombstoner]

Eldagore, on 11 August 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

LOL, this thread.

My favorite part of any MG thread is when the hardcore gun bois come in salivating with their links to real life guns and try to explain how things should work because cliber blah blah and it does this against a tank FOR A GAME ABOUT GIANT ROBOTS WITH PLASTIC MUSCLES THAT MOVE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A SPACE HELMET ON AND A FIGHTER PLANE JOYSTICK.

Reality is stranger then fiction....


https://www.google.c...542%3B650%3B366

https://www.google.c...arm%3B620%3B384


http://www.militaryp...AF-AFSWC-Beetle

[Bad Andy]

MG'S are fine

[Koniving]

Jason Radick, on 10 August 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

Uh huh. Riiiiiight. That DU round from the GAU-8 Avenger would be closer to what the AC/2 would fire. However, this is after all non cannon and PGI is well within their rights to take something and blow it totally out of proportion lol.

Just a side note: The current MWO version of an AC/2 is actually the "physical" size of an 120mm cannon akin to those fitted on the A1 Abrams. http://en.wikipedia....tall_120_mm_gun Barrel size on some mechs actually supports this. Barrel size on the Blackjack is a bit small, though, but an AC/20 mounted there looks like an AC/5 on any other mech.

However, according to Sarna, as defined by the Crusher Super Heavy Autocannon 20, which fires 10 shots of 2 damage each, from a 150mm barrel, the AC/2 should be a "150mm" cannon as it also deals 2 damage per shot and thus must be the same size.

Edited by Koniving, 16 August 2013 - 10:30 AM.

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 15 August 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

Just a side note: The current MWO version of an AC/2 is actually the size of an 120mm cannon akin to those fitted on the A1 Abrams. http://en.wikipedia....tall_120_mm_gun Barrel size on some mechs actually supports this. Barrel size on the Blackjack is a bit small, though, but an AC/20 mounted there looks like an AC/5 on any other mech.

BattleTech Autocannons are according to lore a development of the Rifle class of weapons, who in turn were a development of our modern-day guns like the Rheinmetall 120mm smooth-bore you link above. The Rifles were largely abandoned since they had a hard time damaging the armour of 'mechs and vehicles (the Light Rifle couldn't damage them at all, and the Medium and Heavy Rifle both had reduced damage against them).

Koniving, on 15 August 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

However, according to Sarna, as defined by the Crusher Super Heavy Autocannon 20, which fires 10 shots of 2 damage each, from a 150mm barrel, the AC/2 should be a "150mm" cannon as it also deals 2 damage per shot and thus must be the same size.

From the page you linked to: "Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings".

Damage over a BT turn is what defines an autocannon, not size, calibre, or rate of fire. Here's what the Sarna page on Autocannon says:

Quote

Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage vs armor.The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors.

Quote

Caliber

Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannon in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each "round" or burst of fire. Probable exceptions are the 185 mm ChemJet Gun Autocannon/20 mounted on the Demolisher combat vehicle and Monitor Surface vessel or the 203 mm Ultra Autocannon/20 on the Cauldron Born A BattleMech.

Barrel Arrangement
All Rotary Autocannon are multiple-barrel arrangements. Some standard, Light, and Ultra autocannons also use a multiple-barrel arrangement, but not as frequently.

In short, there's no way of knowing what size, rate of fire, calibre, or even number of barrels a certain autocannon has, unless it's been specified in the fluff somewhere, which none of the AC/2s have.

[Koniving]

stjobe, on 15 August 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

From the page you linked to: "Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings".

On the same page:
An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round".

As an AC/20, it fires 10 shots. That means those 10 shots deal 2 damage. Therefore those 2 damage single shots must be the same as an AC/2 dealing 2 damage single shots.

In this video, I use AC/2s to recreate the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon AC/20 in MWO.
The difference in range from an AC/20 versus an AC/2, by the same page's definition, is "recoil."

[Zordicron]

Tombstoner, on 15 August 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Reality is stranger then fiction....


https://www.google.c...542%3B650%3B366

https://www.google.c...arm%3B620%3B384


http://www.militaryp...AF-AFSWC-Beetle

Not really. Servo motors and hydraulics are fairly simple. I work on servo controled multi axis robotics every day where I work. but they dont move because I put a space helmet on and manipulate their plastic muscles. They move because I set up the program for their servo motors to follow using set points set in distance the robot can follow by having a rotory encoder so it can track distance in MM.

Sometimes I wish though I could put on a space helmet to control them. it would make establishing a program much easier and faster

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 15 August 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

On the same page:
An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round".

As an AC/20, it fires 10 shots. That means those 10 shots deal 2 damage.

Yes.

Koniving, on 15 August 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

Therefore those 2 damage single shots must be the same as an AC/2 dealing 2 damage single shots.

No, that does not follow. There's no fluff about any of the AC/2s, so we cannot say it only fires one shot.

That was what I was trying to point out; there's only a few ACs (of heavier ratings) fluffed with rate of fire, and none of the AC/2s. You assume that the AC/2 fires one shot, but it may just as likely fire 100 from six barrels to achieve that 2 damage.

And even if it does fire a single shot, it does not follow that it's the same round as the 150mm Crusher; it may as well be a smaller but higher-velocity shot that delivers the same damage.

Edited by stjobe, 15 August 2013 - 10:54 PM.

[Hotthedd]

stjobe, on 15 August 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

Yes.


No, that does not follow. There's no fluff about any of the AC/2s, so we cannot say it only fires one shot.

That was what I was trying to point out; there's only a few ACs (of heavier ratings) fluffed with rate of fire, and none of the AC/2s. You assume that the AC/2 fires one shot, but it may just as likely fire 100 from six barrels to achieve that 2 damage.

And even if it does fire a single shot, it does not follow that it's the same round as the 150mm Crusher; it may as well be a smaller but higher-velocity shot that delivers the same damage.

Based on the range differences alone, I would have to agree. If they were the same caliber rounds, they would behave similarly with range, right?

[Chrithu]

SirSmokes, on 10 August 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

NO just no MGs are good now. They are fine and not Oped so can it.

This.

I still laugh at anything that packs MGs except for a spider. Which for me clearly shows that the spider and it's problems with hit/damage registration are the problem and not the MG.

[Tombstoner]

Eldagore, on 15 August 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

Not really. Servo motors and hydraulics are fairly simple. I work on servo controled multi axis robotics every day where I work. but they dont move because I put a space helmet on and manipulate their plastic muscles. They move because I set up the program for their servo motors to follow using set points set in distance the robot can follow by having a rotory encoder so it can track distance in MM.

Sometimes I wish though I could put on a space helmet to control them. it would make establishing a program much easier and faster

Yes reality is stranger then fiction

note the neural "cap" on the pilot


http://www.cbsnews.c...-flying-robots/

[Koniving]

stjobe, on 15 August 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

Yes.


No, that does not follow. There's no fluff about any of the AC/2s, so we cannot say it only fires one shot.

That was what I was trying to point out; there's only a few ACs (of heavier ratings) fluffed with rate of fire, and none of the AC/2s. You assume that the AC/2 fires one shot, but it may just as likely fire 100 from six barrels to achieve that 2 damage.

And even if it does fire a single shot, it does not follow that it's the same round as the 150mm Crusher; it may as well be a smaller but higher-velocity shot that delivers the same damage.

You're forgetting MWO has a single shot AC/2. Therefore, it's identical to the same caliber of the AC/20 that fires 10 shots which deal 2 damage each.

There's also reasonable fluff to be found that a different AC/2 could fire shots that deal 1 damage per bullet. You could also go through and stand to reason from another AC/20's description, "an AC/2 that fires 10 shots to do 2 damage of the same caliber would require 100 shots to do 20 damage."

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Autocannon
Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage vs armor.[1] The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors. Autocannon are grouped into the following loose damage classes:

There is sufficient fluff. It's just not located directly on the AC/2s because no one sat down and typed it out.
From that, you can take that if an AC/20 Crusher Super Heavy Autocannon pumps 10 shots of 2 damage each is a 150mm cannon, then an AC/2 that does 1 shot to do 1 2 damage each is therefore also an 150mm cannon.

But yes, it's also reasonable to assess that it could be a smaller round fired farther, but seriously look at that thing. It's not much different than the size of an AC/5 round in MWO.

---------------

Though if you want to know where PGI truly failed us... look at UACs. There are, in theory, two kinds of UACs.

• Automatic belt-fed UACs with an Ultra mode to fire at double the rate. (These are smaller caliber UACs). The ammo count difference in this instance is due to the added weight of the belt and the space it consumes. A jam occurs when the belt gets delinked prematurely or breaks prior to cycling properly.
  
• And dual-cache (magazine, chamber depending on the caliber) where a secondary breach can fire rounds down range while the main cache or breach is reloading. (These are high caliber UACs). The difficulty here is that since they typically share the same feeding tube through the barrel, the secondary one can jam in the mechanism where it switches back and forth to take ammunition from one or the other.

In both cases, they are defined by fluff as always being smaller caliber, which requires them to be generally smaller. The round is twice as large as the barrels and missile shaped.

In both cases, a jam is supposed to be permanent for the battle until you can return to the mechbay for repairs. I liked the manual clear as it took more time but macro users abused that.

(Edit: typo'd 1 instead of 2.)

Edited by Koniving, 16 August 2013 - 06:43 AM.

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 16 August 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

You're forgetting MWO has a single shot AC/2. Therefore, it's identical to the same caliber of the AC/20 that fires 10 shots which deal 2 damage each.

1. MWO is apocryphal.
2. There's no fluff about rate of fire being tied to calibre.
3. There's no fluff about projectile speeds.
4. Therefore, nothing. There's not enough fluff to support your hypothesis.

Koniving, on 16 August 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

There is sufficient fluff.

No, there isn't.

What fluff do we know about autocannons?
* They range from 25mm to 203 mm in calibre
* May have a single barrel or multiple barrels
* No standard calibre has been set for any of the classes of autocannon
* No standard number of shells per round has been set for all autocannons
* No autocannon has been fluffed to a single round (although the ChemJet 185mm and the 203mm on the Cauldron Born A could be construed as such)
* The Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm AC/20 firing ten shells per round
* The Chemjet Gun is a 185mm AC/20 firing "much slower"

From these fluff "facts" you cannot infer that an AC/2 is a certain calibre, that it fires a certain number of rounds, or that each round does a certain number of damage points; there's not enough known variables.

The only thing the different makes of autocannon in a class need to have in common is damage per 10s, heat per 10s, weight, size in crit slots, and ammunition capacity (in "rounds", which is fluffed as "cassettes" containing enough projectiles to reach the damage output of the class over 10 seconds). Everything else, especially rate of fire, damage per projectile, and projectile speed, is unknown.

For all we know, some autocannons may be a steady stream of projectiles while others are burst-fire.

[Koniving]

stjobe, on 16 August 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

What fluff do we know about autocannons?
* They range from 25mm to 203 mm in calibre
* May have a single barrel or multiple barrels
* No standard calibre has been set for any of the classes of autocannon
* No standard number of shells per round has been set for all autocannons
* No autocannon has been fluffed to a single round (although the ChemJet 185mm and the 203mm on the Cauldron Born A could be construed as such)
* The Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm AC/20 firing ten shells per round at 2 damage each.
* The Chemjet Gun is a 185mm AC/20 firing "much slower."

First, all Battletech fluff is apocryphal. 90% of it is thrown into the books at random or found in manuals developed by different companies who contradict themselves. So if you want to argue fluff there isn't any point, as it's all apocryphal.

Now that said.. In MWO, a single shot AC/2 does 2 damage. In any form of game or reality, a weapon with a damage rating of 2 that fires a single shot before reloading, must do 2 damage. Compare that the fact that "a gun with the exact same caliber that does 20 damage with x shots, can do 2 damage with x shots / 10," then it likely is the same gun. After all the limiting factor is recoil. Recoil won't affect the single shot, so its range can't change, and since there's no other way of going about it, in an apocryphal environment with apocryphal fluff made up by dozens of different writers between the books and the manuals, the MWO AC/2 must be the same caliber as the Crusher AC/20.

If you go to individual mechs that have these, you will find the information that you seek. For example the Devastator AC/20 isn't listed on the main page for AC/20s, but it's listed on the King Crab as "the only single shot AC/20." You can therefore find that according to the fluff, there is only one single shot AC/20. It is the Devastator. From another fluff source (books, yay) you could also deduce that it's impossible to mount the Devastator on humanoid mechs because of their vertical nature and high difficulty in maintaining balance while firing the weapon without stopping dead and bracing yourself. Thus you could deduce that the single shot AC/20 on a Jagermech in MWO is lore breaking. But fluff is fluff and it's all apocryphal.

Chemjet Guns are generally accepted as being a 3 round burst.



O.o;


So it all depends. But, for all intents and purposes, using the fluff and lore we have, the AC/2 in MWO's current implementation is 150mm, and all the available fluff supports it.

And yes. There are variants with steady MG styles, some that fire bursts, and some that fire single shots. It's pretty given with the fluff we have. The rest is up to interpretation in an apocryphal environment with apocryphal fluff from multiple sources that are both apocryphal and official at the same time.

Much in the same sense that some books say you can't fire 2 ER PPCs at the same time, and some that say you can. All of it ultimately conflicts with itself in the end, so there isn't any point in arguing.

[Mazzyplz]

here is something for you to ponder on and on about.

the machinegun jagermech with some support weapons actually kills mechs faster now than the ac2/ac5 dakka build and even ac40. try it out, you'll see i'm not making this up

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 16 August 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

First, all Battletech fluff is apocryphal. 90% of it is thrown into the books at random or found in manuals developed by different companies who contradict themselves. So if you want to argue fluff there isn't any point, as it's all apocryphal.

Any fluff in the rule books, TROs etc is canon, as are (most of) the novels. Being canon is decidedly not apocryphal.

Koniving, on 16 August 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

For example the Devastator AC/20 isn't listed on the main page for AC/20s, but it's listed on the King Crab as "the only single shot AC/20."

I cannot find that statement anywhere on the linked page, or anywhere else I've looked. In fact, the only thing google turns up on a search of "king crab devastator single shot" is one of your posts on these forums.

Koniving, on 16 August 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

So it all depends. But, for all intents and purposes, using the fluff and lore we have, the AC/2 in MWO's current implementation is 150mm, and all the available fluff supports it.

I still can't see that this is the case. You're basing your assertion on apocryphal fluff that isn't supported by canon, and on some spurious logic about calibre being tied to damage delivered without taking projectile speeds into account.

Either way, as you say it doesn't matter, so let's just agree to disagree. I don't think you'll be able to persuade me, nor I you.

Thanks for geeking out with me on lore though

[Koniving]

stjobe, on 16 August 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

Any fluff in the rule books, TROs etc is canon, as are (most of) the novels. Being canon is decidedly not apocryphal.

I cannot find that statement anywhere on the linked page, or anywhere else I've looked. In fact, the only thing google turns up on a search of "king crab devastator single shot" is one of your posts on these forums.
I still can't see that this is the case. You're basing your assertion on apocryphal fluff that isn't supported by canon, and on some spurious logic about calibre being tied to damage delivered without taking projectile speeds into account.

Either way, as you say it doesn't matter, so let's just agree to disagree. I don't think you'll be able to persuade me, nor I you.

Thanks for geeking out with me on lore though

Projectile speeds aren't define in canon, which means nothing can be defined by canon in that sense.

It's supported by the canon which is available. Is the Crusher not canon? It generates 10 shots. The result is 20 damage. 20 / 10 = 2. Each shot does 2 damage. So long as the Crusher is canon, then the assertion is supported by canon unless more canon information is given to the contrary. Which -- given the limitation of range is identical in every situation, an AC/2 that does a single damage shot must have the same range as smaller calibers that do identical damage, or higher calibers which fire single shots and do identical damage. However if they are larger and fire slower, could it have the same range? It can't, because it'd have to divide the damage by less than 1. It can't do that, as that means you'd have to fire less than 1 bullet to get the same result.

The whole "velocity" logic breaks down at that point, as the larger shot would really need more velocity to reach the same range yet to do identical damage it needs to be slower.

So long as it's a single-shot AC/2, there is only one caliber that can accomplish it and have the same range. You can have smaller bullets going faster, but it takes more bullets to do it. You can't have larger bullets going slower, as it doesn't work for range. You can't have larger bullets going faster, as it doesn't work for damage.

Therefore, the assessment, by a proposition given by canon -- If one weapon requires does x damage with y shots, when compared to another weapon which shoots 10 times y shots to do 10 times x damage but with much less range due to recoil is therefore of the same caliber. Unless you can give me identical range with a larger caliber bullet going slower, there isn't debating room when it comes to velocity. Once you hit a single-shot weapon, getting identical results with a larger shot is impossible. Since the condition is we're talking about MWO's AC/2, a single shot weapon, we're at the dead end. You can't use more shots and smaller calibers. You can't use a bigger shot and get identical results, unless you start firing higher in the air. The caliber argument's essentially gone.

Canon, of course, can contradict itself at any given turn and it often does.

You are correct about the Devastator though. For some reason it is not listed there. In fact they are called DeathGivers now? That's not right. Has this been edited? The King Crab page just three weeks ago specifically stated they were 203mm Luxor Devastators. Deathgiver's belong on the Atlas. *Sigh.*

I recall the information also came from one of Lordred's books, a TRO 3015 or 3025. He said it listed the Devastator so I was curious. It lists the Devastator, describes it as a single shot AC/20 at 203mm, and states it is mounted in the King Crab. Specifically it is the Luxor Devastator/20. It's listed there as being used by the King Crab. However, on Sarna just now I found it as being mounted on the Axman which should not be possible as there was a book that specifically said Devastators can't be mounted on humanoid mechs due to the insane recoil. So again, fluff contradicts itself all the time. Canon or otherwise.

On a similar note, the UAC/20s on the Hunchback II-C are depicted with 6 barrels typically, indicating it cannot be a single shot. Meanwhile the UAC/20 on the Cauldron Born is stated as "At close range, the MechWarrior can switch to a 203mm Ultra Autocannon/20 that carries a fair amount of ammunition."

I'm at the point where I haven't got much faith left in anything canon. They keep changing it. Pretty soon they'll probably say the Cauldron Born uses twin Ultra AC/20s of the 27mm variety.

Edited by Koniving, 16 August 2013 - 11:49 AM.

[Gremlich Johns]

Mazzyplz, on 16 August 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

here is something for you to ponder on and on about.

the machinegun jagermech with some support weapons actually kills mechs faster now than the ac2/ac5 dakka build and even ac40. try it out, you'll see i'm not making this up

At 90m