180 replies to this topic

[Karl Streiger]

Vodrin Thales, on 25 November 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

The gauss in table top was described to accelerate it's projectile all the way to the target on a projected magnetic beam/rail. It was stated that the projectile was moving too slow to damage mech armor at ranges under 60 m.



That's exactly how it was described in some of the TT fluff.

First time that i hear something similar.
I believe i have read about a concept that uses a laser - to vaporize particles before an 2AM" or "plasma" emitter fires its projectile - but i never heard from a projected beam - that accelerates the projectile - sounds like a weapon that is derived from the PPC.
Well in this case - we NEED MORE heat for the Gauss...and a light damage PPC discharge instead of the charge

[Vodrin Thales]

Karl Streiger, on 25 November 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

First time that i hear something similar.
I believe i have read about a concept that uses a laser - to vaporize particles before an 2AM" or "plasma" emitter fires its projectile - but i never heard from a projected beam - that accelerates the projectile - sounds like a weapon that is derived from the PPC.
Well in this case - we NEED MORE heat for the Gauss...and a light damage PPC discharge instead of the charge

Gauss was always a very low heat weapon in TT as the charge coils were fragile but very efficient with almost no heat loss. It's very much a space age weapon with no similarity to anything that exists in todays technology. It does need a minimum range mechanic though.

[Bishop Steiner]

Vodrin Thales, on 25 November 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

Gauss was always a very low heat weapon in TT as the charge coils were fragile but very efficient with almost no heat loss. It's very much a space age weapon with no similarity to anything that exists in todays technology. It does need a minimum range mechanic though.

and yet, the big issue with gauss today is the plasma generated has a habit of melting the launch rails. Doesn't sound very low heat to me. And coilguns cannot achieve the charge synchronicity to achieve the desired velocity, as yet. And still would have to deal with the plasma discharge. Huge electrical (as in electromagnetic) discharge and massive friction do not a low heat weapon make.

Still waiting on that fluff description, btw.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

and yet, the big issue with gauss today is the plasma generated has a habit of melting the launch rails. Doesn't sound very low heat to me. And coilguns cannot achieve the charge synchronicity to achieve the desired velocity, as yet. And still would have to deal with the plasma discharge. Huge electrical (as in electromagnetic) discharge and massive friction do not a low heat weapon make.

Still waiting on that fluff description, btw.

Gauss

[color=#000000]Unlike most traditional ballistic weapons, the Gauss Rifle does not use combustible propellant, so its firing generates very little heat. [/color]

[Mystere]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 November 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

Can a projectile get faster after its ballistic charge has spent itself? I'm not a physics major so I just don't see how a projectile will get faster the longer it travels.

I can think of one way this can be achieved: the (massive) projectile is fired from space onto a surface target.

Of course it does not (hopefully ) apply to us.

[Cimarb]

After reading through this, I have come to the realization that no one complaining about pop tarts has actually ever TRIED pop tarting. Sandpit has made several really good points, so I won't repeat them.

My first assault was an HGN and my first hero was a Heavy Metal - I loved them back before the jump shake. While it is still very possible to jump snipe with them, it takes a lot more skill now than it used to, since you have much less time to squeeze off a good targeted shot and that shot is always on the downward drop now. That combined with the Gauss change made the costs far outweigh the benefits for me, so I switched to other mechs for my fun.

I used to think that jump jets were the bees knees, and couldn't understand how people survived without them. Having "grown up", I now rarely even use my jump jets on mechs that have them - I don't think I even have a single mech with max jump jets in my mech bay, actually. I have learned how to play without them, and aside from a bit of convenience on some maps, they are more of a hindrance to me now, as they cost weight and crit slots that I could otherwise be equipping more weapons with.

Heavy and assault mechs, while able to sustain more damage while pop tarting, also move much slower and have lower arcs while jumping because of that. Max jump jets will help, I admit, but maxing out the jump jets also means another 2/4/6 tons of weight being used up, so it is a compromise. Regardless, they still move slower and are visible for longer because of that.

If you are not paying attention and moving yourself, though, it won't matter whether they are pop tarting or just walking around a corner - you deserve to get pounded for standing still and not paying attention! If you were moving, it makes it immensely more difficult for the pop tarts to find and hit you mid-jump, but that should be obvious. If you are watching for them, even glancing them with a laser will make them duck for cover and stay down while they reposition.

Basically, the people complaining about pop tarts (post-shake, that is) are the same type of people complaining about LRM boats. Play that style a few times to understand it, then counter it with the knowledge you gained and move on after you realize it isn't their fault for being good - it's your fault for having been bad.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mystere, on 25 November 2013 - 09:00 AM, said:

I can think of one way this can be achieved: the (massive) projectile is fired from space onto a surface target.

Of course it does not (hopefully ) apply to us.

I hadn't thought of that one! Thank You!

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

Gauss

[color=#000000]Unlike most traditional ballistic weapons, the Gauss Rifle does not use combustible propellant, so its firing generates very little heat. [/color]

you do realize, combustible propellant is only one source of heat, yes? (And I have access to Sarna too). Lasers and PPCs don't use combustibles, either. They do however, use a massive power surge, stored into capacitors, then dumped, like a Gauss rifle, except that according to lore, the Gauss uses MORE energy. That discharge causes heat. The sabots contacting the lands in the barrel causes friction which causes heat, and the super heated air from the projectiles velocity, aka plasma causes heat. All of which doesn't magically disappear

that look low heat to anyone else?

Yes the rules call it a low heat weapon, and so, in magic space dust land it is. But trying to argue it to be in reality is just silly.

And still waiting for the fluff where it says that the Gauss projects "magic space dust...er magnetic rails...between the weapon and the target that cause unicorns..er projectiles to magically keep accelerating" AFTER being freer from outside forces..

Cimarb, on 25 November 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

After reading through this, I have come to the realization that no one complaining about pop tarts has actually ever TRIED pop tarting. Sandpit has made several really good points, so I won't repeat them.

My first assault was an HGN and my first hero was a Heavy Metal - I loved them back before the jump shake. While it is still very possible to jump snipe with them, it takes a lot more skill now than it used to, since you have much less time to squeeze off a good targeted shot and that shot is always on the downward drop now. That combined with the Gauss change made the costs far outweigh the benefits for me, so I switched to other mechs for my fun.

I used to think that jump jets were the bees knees, and couldn't understand how people survived without them. Having "grown up", I now rarely even use my jump jets on mechs that have them - I don't think I even have a single mech with max jump jets in my mech bay, actually. I have learned how to play without them, and aside from a bit of convenience on some maps, they are more of a hindrance to me now, as they cost weight and crit slots that I could otherwise be equipping more weapons with.

Heavy and assault mechs, while able to sustain more damage while pop tarting, also move much slower and have lower arcs while jumping because of that. Max jump jets will help, I admit, but maxing out the jump jets also means another 2/4/6 tons of weight being used up, so it is a compromise. Regardless, they still move slower and are visible for longer because of that.

If you are not paying attention and moving yourself, though, it won't matter whether they are pop tarting or just walking around a corner - you deserve to get pounded for standing still and not paying attention! If you were moving, it makes it immensely more difficult for the pop tarts to find and hit you mid-jump, but that should be obvious. If you are watching for them, even glancing them with a laser will make them duck for cover and stay down while they reposition.

Basically, the people complaining about pop tarts (post-shake, that is) are the same type of people complaining about LRM boats. Play that style a few times to understand it, then counter it with the knowledge you gained and move on after you realize it isn't their fault for being good - it's your fault for having been bad.

thank god I use my Max JJS (on a Victor... they are bloody ridiculous on a HGN!!!!) to do anything but poptart. I might occasionally jump snipe, but that is usually because I am already in the air when I spot a target and really see no reason to delay killing it.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

you do realize, combustible propellant is only one source of heat, yes? (And I have access to Sarna too). Lasers and PPCs don't use combustibles, either. They do however, use a massive power surge, stored into capacitors, then dumped, like a Gauss rifle, except that according to lore, the Gauss uses MORE energy. That discharge causes heat. The sabots contacting the lands in the barrel causes friction which causes heat, and the super heated air from the projectiles velocity, aka plasma causes heat. All of which doesn't magically disappear

that look low heat to anyone else?

Yes the rules call it a low heat weapon, and so, in magic space dust land it is. But trying to argue it to be in reality is just silly.

And still waiting for the fluff where it says that the Gauss projects "magic space dust...er magnetic rails...between the weapon and the target that cause unicorns..er projectiles to magically keep accelerating" AFTER being freer from outside forces..

I thought you were asking for the fluff on gauss lol

I thought everyone realized this was a sci-fi game. Trying to make everything in it abide by the laws of real-world physics is never going to work

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

I thought you were asking for the fluff on gauss lol

I thought everyone realized this was a sci-fi game. Trying to make everything in it abide by the laws of real-world physics is never going to work

Naw man, just calling Vordin Thales out on his argument that the gauss works a certain way because "it says so in fluff", and was wanting to see the actual citation that described it as he did.

This is battletech, where coilguns are somehow preferable to rail guns, Machine guns weigh more than chain guns, autocannons fire full auto dozens of 120mm and larger projectiles and fusion reactors stackpole if you look at em funny.

I'm just saying if one is gonna use "battñletech facts" to prove a point, get em right, ya know?

[Marmon Rzohr]

I believe (correct me if i'm wrong) the TT min range on the Gauss resulted in a To-Hit penalty (not a damage penalty) because hey, it's a big, heavy gun with a long barrel so it's hard to maneouver quickly, especailly in close quarters. Such fine realism would be hard to simulate in MWO, so we have the charge up mechanic.

As for the sabot... even if the Gauss used one, the min range with reduced damage (I'm not sure what kind of difference would it make to the anti-armor ability of the round if the sabot was still attached, I don't think the difference would be very noticable) would have to be really small. Like 20 m or something like that.

Judging by these two images found via google:
http://t2.gstatic.co...P8rZ8NBqBOK6i_w

http://www.fprado.co...Danger-Zone.png

Edited by Marmon Rzohr, 25 November 2013 - 10:52 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

Coil Guns use electromagnetically charged rings to pull and push a projectile through the cylinder. Rail Guns operate in a similar way but more akin to a sling shot in that it actually has base upon which the round sits and the magnetics push that through the cylinder (hence the sling shot analogy). There were a few scientists that were working with pulse lasers to push satellites into space which may have been what oen of the prior posters was thinking as a means to project the round.

Bask to the discussion at hand, anyone can jump snipe. The difference is massive, though, between those that are good at it and those that try and luck up. Its a lot like comparing someone that is deadly using normal SRMs against 150-170kph targets and those that suck outright and use Streaks (btw, Streak users are the worst ilk in this game cause they downright blow at targetting - not their fault but rather PGI's for making them so damned simplistic that children can use them). This effect is simply exaggerated when you're dealing with someone piloting a 90 ton Highlander that is sporting several PPCs and UAC5s and whose teammates are piloting the same thing in coordination. You can avoid and flank **** poor jump shooters because they have no concept of map vision. But, it is extremely difficult to near impossible to do so again a team of 8-12 players who have been doing this for months and know exactly how to defend themselves. So, once again, MW:O suffers, in degree, because of the combination of individual elements and not because of those elements alone in a vaccuum.

[Bishop Steiner]

Marmon Rzohr, on 25 November 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

I believe (correct me if i'm wrong) the TT min range on the Gauss resulted in a To-Hit penalty (not a damage penalty) because hey, it's a big, heavy gun with a long barrel so it's hard to maneouver quickly, especailly in close quarters. Such fine realism would be hard to simulate in MWO, so we have the charge up mechanic.

As for the sabot... even if the Gauss used one, the min range with reduced damage (I'm not sure what kind of difference would it make to the anti-armor ability of the round if the sabot was still attached, I don't think the difference would be very noticable) would have to be really small. Like 20 m or something like that.

Judging by these two images found via google:
http://t2.gstatic.co...P8rZ8NBqBOK6i_w

http://www.fprado.co...Danger-Zone.png

stop using sense!!!

[Trauglodyte]

Now, talking about Sabot rounds, it uses simple physics to enhance the kinetic energy and reduce friction on the round. The full round is 120m but, once it leaves the barrel, the impact of the atmosphere allows for the shell to be shed and the much smaller round continues to the target much less impeded. When you fire a round from a rifle, the reason it drops and does less damage at its maximal range is because air density slows it down and gravity pulls it to the earth. Sabot rounds get around this by reducing the drag coefficient and having the much lighter round be much more impacted by the explosive compound sending it out of the barrel. Its like taking a normal person and swinging a baseball bat at your head. It'll hurt like Hell but the force is only nominal cause its a normal person swinging it and the surface area of the bat means that the energy is spread out over a wide area. Now, if you took a professional baseball player and had him swing a putter, you'd be applying much more speed and force in a much smaller area meaning much greater damage done.

Applying that to MW:O, you'd simply have the GR do like 5 damage less within the 20m where the shell splits and the sabot emerges. It makes sense but I'm afraid that people would winge like crazy even if it is only on targets under 20m which is melee range. Though, I think PGI might do it after they labled the weapon as a pure "sniper" tool.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 25 November 2013 - 11:09 AM.

[Vodrin Thales]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

Naw man, just calling Vordin Thales out on his argument that the gauss works a certain way because "it says so in fluff", and was wanting to see the actual citation that described it as he did.

This is battletech, where coilguns are somehow preferable to rail guns, Machine guns weigh more than chain guns, autocannons fire full auto dozens of 120mm and larger projectiles and fusion reactors stackpole if you look at em funny.

I'm just saying if one is gonna use "battñletech facts" to prove a point, get em right, ya know?

It was the explanation in technical readout 2750 which I do not have an online link for. But the way the gun worked in game there was no friction heat, and the process of accelerating the slug did not generate the same heat as a PPC or laser (nowhere near it in fact). Does it make sense that the gauss had a minimum range and generates no heat while a laser generates a boatload of heat? Not really, but to balance those weapons that is precisely what they did in game.

It also makes no sense that a heavy autocannon can only do damage out to 270m while a lighter one has a much greater effective range. And that is only the beginning of what logically does not add up in battletech, so stop trying to say what a gauss should be by thinking what our current understanding of physics state it should be.

By the way, nowhere in any of the battletech fluff I have found does it ever say that a gauss or any autocannon uses sabot rounds. The gauss is stated to fire solid metal slugs as stated in the sarna reference. Anyways I hope this helps clarify what I was saying. Personally I could care less if the in game gauss makes sense from a logical perspective when so many elements of battletech universally defy logic. Just make it fun to use and relatively balanced with other weapons.

[Joseph Mallan]

Vodrin Thales, on 25 November 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

It was the explanation in technical readout 2750 which I do not have an online link for. But the way the gun worked in game there was no friction heat, and the process of accelerating the slug did not generate the same heat as a PPC or laser (nowhere near it in fact). Does it make sense that the gauss had a minimum range and generates no heat while a laser generates a boatload of heat? Not really, but to balance those weapons that is precisely what they did in game.

It also makes no sense that a heavy autocannon can only do damage out to 270m while a lighter one has a much greater effective range. And that is only the beginning of what logically does not add up in battletech, so stop trying to say what a gauss should be by thinking what our current understanding of physics state it should be.

By the way, nowhere in any of the battletech fluff I have found does it ever say that a gauss or any autocannon uses sabot rounds. The gauss is stated to fire solid metal slugs as stated in the sarna reference. Anyways I hope this helps clarify what I was saying. Personally I could care less if the in game gauss makes sense from a logical perspective when so many elements of battletech universally defy logic. Just make it fun to use and relatively balanced with other weapons.

I alsosem to remember something about the Gauss slugs being formed in space as zero gravity made better spheres... I have no source to quote as this was about 28 years ago... and I was partying as hard as I was playing BattleTech.

[Bishop Steiner]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 November 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

I alsosem to remember something about the Gauss slugs being formed in space as zero gravity made better spheres... I have no source to quote as this was about 28 years ago... and I was partying as hard as I was playing BattleTech.

Zero gravity was actually from the reference to endo steel manufacturing, from the 2750 TRO. (Which I happen to have).
http://www.lski.org/...dout%202750.pdf The Basic gauss is indeed a sphere in lore (though I believe the silver bullet gauss used a penetrator). The Highlander was the Sole mech with one in the TRO though several vehicles and Warships also had them.




As for it all making sense, well, 2 words. Mike Stackpole.

[Joseph Mallan]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

Zero gravity was actually from the reference to endo steel manufacturing, from the 2750 TRO. (Which I happen to have).
http://www.lski.org/...dout%202750.pdf The Basic gauss is indeed a sphere in lore (though I believe the silver bullet gauss used a penetrator). The Highlander was the Sole mech with one in the TRO though several vehicles and Warships also had them.




As for it all making sense, well, 2 words. Mike Stackpole.

6 words for him...
Do you want fries with that?

[Trauglodyte]

Funny that the tier 2 juggernaut weapon, the Gauss Rifle, is nothing more than a fancy Victorian era canon.

[Marmon Rzohr]

Trauglodyte, on 25 November 2013 - 11:56 AM, said:

Funny that the tier 2 juggernaut weapon, the Gauss Rifle, is nothing more than a fancy Victorian era canon.

In the same way a nuclear powerplant is a fancy steam engine
You gotta love battle tech. Don't know about you but I'm just a sucker for the whole forgotten tech thing.

P.S. Did anyone notice how the qualitiy of this thread seems to increase with it's distance to the original post ?