Craig Steele, on 05 February 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:
Yup, the link was bad. Nice that you assumed I was making your day difficult though
Funny that BT incorporates novels as Canon. Apart from 40k or commisioned pieces I haven't heard of that. I wonder if the writers are staff? Tick a box on learnt something today anyway. I do wonder why they specify the producers of the books line by line. Are some Novels perhaps produced outside of those? That would certainly explain why he needed to differeniate. Unless I tick off every book I'll only be guessing.
In any case, I'd still recommend you take care referencing Sarna. As much as you might wish otherwise, it is not a Canon source (see the list on your link) and subject to amendment by anyone (my original post's point).
Looking forward to your arguments for the other canon weapon intepretations.
I did assume that, but at least give me credit for going back and checking it, lol!
Many of the novels were staff, technically, as they were commissioned. I couldn't tell you the book, but I distinctly remember one of the forwards talking about it. There was a "novel team" that would collaborate to make sure things stayed consistent. They worked for someone at (maybe WizKids at the time) that was in charge of it. Also, by the sound of it, there was a lot of stuff in Germany that is NOT canon specifically, so I bet there is a good backstory to that exclusion...
Your recommendation is duly noted, seriously. I have already found some "original sources" that I will try to get time to pour through and will post using that information when possible. Unfortunately, it is just SOOOOO much easier to search Sarna than a bunch of individual sources, so I can't promise I won't get lazy from time to time either!
What other canon weapon interpretations are you waiting on? I thought I hit them all - sorry if I missed one.
LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment
Posted 05 February 2014 - 07:56 PM
Cimarb, on 05 February 2014 - 07:38 PM, said:
I did assume that, but at least give me credit for going back and checking it, lol!
Many of the novels were staff, technically, as they were commissioned. I couldn't tell you the book, but I distinctly remember one of the forwards talking about it. There was a "novel team" that would collaborate to make sure things stayed consistent. They worked for someone at (maybe WizKids at the time) that was in charge of it. Also, by the sound of it, there was a lot of stuff in Germany that is NOT canon specifically, so I bet there is a good backstory to that exclusion...
Your recommendation is duly noted, seriously. I have already found some "original sources" that I will try to get time to pour through and will post using that information when possible. Unfortunately, it is just SOOOOO much easier to search Sarna than a bunch of individual sources, so I can't promise I won't get lazy from time to time either!
What other canon weapon interpretations are you waiting on? I thought I hit them all - sorry if I missed one.
PPC to DPS particularly, I have most of the Battletechnology magazines and one of those includes a short story about a pilot who used a PPC to connect an enemy mech to a power source and literally fried the mech. The guff sounded plausible, but too much for me to handle. You on the other seem to have a good grasp of the technical stuff so I'd be interested in that one.
I am also keen to find out the definition of Gauss if there is one. You indicated 4 cubic meters of ammo per ton which sounds incredibly dense to me, plus the Sarna picture and its got me thinking. I kinda like the idea of a burst Gauss now, kinda like a needler gun except not spread by the barrel. Silent death by buzz saw.
Craig Steele, on 05 February 2014 - 07:56 PM, said:
PPC to DPS particularly, I have most of the Battletechnology magazines and one of those includes a short story about a pilot who used a PPC to connect an enemy mech to a power source and literally fried the mech. The guff sounded plausible, but too much for me to handle. You on the other seem to have a good grasp of the technical stuff so I'd be interested in that one.
I am also keen to find out the definition of Gauss if there is one. You indicated 4 cubic meters of ammo per ton which sounds incredibly dense to me, plus the Sarna picture and its got me thinking. I kinda like the idea of a burst Gauss now, kinda like a needler gun except not spread by the barrel. Silent death by buzz saw.
The PPC scenario is very plausible, as both PPCs and lightning are ionized particles. PPCs have been described as "man-made lightning", and if you want to read about the whole ionization thing, go to http://science.howst...lightning2.htm. It's a pretty cool read.
One of the methods that I thought would be cool to differentiate PPCs, actually, was to make it work like lightning. The bolt would hit one section and do 5-6 damage, and then randomly hit 1-2 other areas on the mech like a lightning strike. For instance, if the beam hit the right front torso, it would do 5-6 damage to that section, as well as 2 points to the right rear torso and 2 points to the right arm, as the bolt jumps through the mech. Lots of cool ways to simulate this, actually, but hopefully you get the idea.
I don't believe I ever mentioned 4 cubic meters of ammo - you may have attributed someone else's comment to me in all the back and forth conversation. I like the needler idea - always liked that weapon - though it was designed to fire a cone of plastic flachetes from what I remember, so it would be an odd implementation. Maybe I am remembering it wrong, though. Regardless, as I said, I'm not opposed to it, but I have never read any description of Gauss that would back it up.
LocationOn your six, chipping away at your rear armour.
Posted 05 February 2014 - 11:21 PM
Just as a reference for density, a cubic meter of water weighs a ton; four cubic meters per ton is somewhere between styrofoam (0.15 kg/L) and wood (0.4 kg/L) in density.
BattleTech numbers and physics break down if you take too hard a look at them, so please have that in mind - BattleTech is not, and was never intended to be - a true-to-physics description of the universe. It's a game.
LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment
Posted 05 February 2014 - 11:47 PM
stjobe, on 05 February 2014 - 11:21 PM, said:
Just as a reference for density, a cubic meter of water weighs a ton; four cubic meters per ton is somewhere between styrofoam (0.15 kg/L) and wood (0.4 kg/L) in density.
BattleTech numbers and physics break down if you take too hard a look at them, so please have that in mind - BattleTech is not, and was never intended to be - a true-to-physics description of the universe. It's a game.
Umm, so no where near dense then? Gauss shells are slugs of fairy floss?? jk jk.
Yes on the physics, it is Sci Fi, but there is realism in Sci Fi too, and stuff breaks down if it gets out of the ball park. Half the arguments for AC's DPS all revolve around the same assumption (ie, what can we do today vs what's realistic with these givens)
Any luck on the Gauss description? Is it definitive? My copy of that I never read (damn collectors right, at least I flicked the pictures ) and has been at a mates house for 6 months or so I think.
I did assume that, but at least give me credit for going back and checking it, lol!
Many of the novels were staff, technically, as they were commissioned. I couldn't tell you the book, but I distinctly remember one of the forwards talking about it. There was a "novel team" that would collaborate to make sure things stayed consistent. They worked for someone at (maybe WizKids at the time) that was in charge of it. Also, by the sound of it, there was a lot of stuff in Germany that is NOT canon specifically, so I bet there is a good backstory to that exclusion...
Judging by Shadowrun German authors - they seemed to love adding more powergaming stuff.
truly .... i got really lost there during all that.
I will attempt to reformulate my thoughts so that maybe its easier at what im getting at.
I Think there is a few very distinctive rolls in mwo.
1) Long Range Direct Fire support. - ac2, ac5, ER Large laser, UAC5, PPC. Mostly mechs that use these tend to be medium-assault class. You can technically use them on a light mech but they tend to be less effective and ill get to that later.
2) Long Range Indirect Fire Support - LRM. Pretty self explanatory. Usually when your using them your boating so thats mostly what you have.
3) Flankers - SRM, Medium Laser, Large Laser, uac5, ac10, ac20, Machine Gun. Quick moving mechs, mediums or fast heavies that can bring alot of fire power to bear very quickly, hit and run. These mechs arent very durable and usually run xl engines.
4) Brawlers - SRM, Uac5, ac10, ac20, marchine gun, Medium laser, Large laser. Standard Engine using mechs with close in fire power that can hit hard and rely on torso twisting to disperse damage across there mechs. Usually slower then a flanker but more durable. A tradeoff.
5) Tanks - Weapons depend. Usually assualt or heavy mechs. Can bear any number of weapons, the important thing is they are using a standard engine and are absorbing damage and being the first through the breach for the team to follow up behind them. The atlas is one of the best at this. Most tanks prefer to use srm/ac20/ac10 so that they can fire a few rounds quickly them turn to absorb damage with there arms.
6) Jump Snipers - PPC, Ac20, ac10, ac5, Can range from medium to assault. Rely on torso twisting after firing to absorb damage and use cover with jump jets to avoid damage further. High FLD mech.
7) Objective Scouts - Use ER Large lasers or PPC on a light mech to snipe from a distance and then go for base caps. Dont tend to fight other mechs or flank. Usually rather squishy and die to harassment.
8) Harassing Scouts - Use medium lasers/Small Lasers and streaks. Fight other light mechs, flank assault mechs and serve as a wolf pack lance in groups.
Now with all this said. The weapons as they are currently have very unique feels and fall into these specific rolls quite nicely. If however you chance the ac2 by lowering the damage you take away form its true strength as a fire support weapon. Now I believe you stated you wanted one of these playstyles removed... explain?
Sidenote - I still dont see how this change will be a good thing as was stated above other then to make the ac20 king for no other reason then 'because'.
Then you are believing falsely. Every one of your examples I can work into a team as they are all viable tactics and fill vital roles in combat strategies. I have no desire to end that. Our Lasers are DPS. Our Missiles are RNG. Our Ballistics are mostly front loaded damage (MG and AC2 straddle the fence).
StJobe wants to turn ACs into Strictly DPS stream of damage weapons. That is a direct affront to players like me who are power players. Finesse is fine, and I can play that way, but I am a HULK SMASH enthusiast. That style of play makes me happy more than any other. I have trained, practiced and played to be the guy who neutralizes a threat quickly both in RL and gaming. My preferred style of play is just as legit as StJobes. And arguing to retain it does not in any way make his argument wrong, it is just opposed to mine.
Continue to make your case, I will continue to make mine, and what the devs settle on will be the way it is.
From a D&D example, To me StJobe is asking that Great Swords be made to do the same damage as a short sword cause Great swords are better than Short Swords. Even though by DPS both are doing the same level of damage In X seconds. One does the damage in a single swing, the other a flurry of blows. I want the choice of what style I use.
Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 February 2014 - 04:57 AM.
I agree with both Joe and StJobe. I want Joe to still have his BFG, but the current implementation of it needs fixing, because it is unbalancing. Not game-breaking, but unbalancing. I want to provide alternatives so we can see the differences between a single-slug AC20 and a Gatling-type AC20, with otherwise the exact same stats (weight, size, heat, range, etc), so we can definitively see HOW unbalancing it is and find a good fix for it. Shoot, with these alternatives in place, Joe and the people that agree with him may find that they love the Gatling-type version and switch to our side!
I have used AC2 in MW:O... I still prefer my BFG AC20. Cut the range of it to 270 meter, I'll still like it better than an AC2. If you give me a chioce between
And this
I will take the Desert Eagle!
LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.
Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:12 AM
Yeah, German novels never went through the same vetting process as the FASA/Catalyst ones. Non-canonical, but BT TT players get a lot of tasty fluff to flavor their crunch from reading something besides rulebooks that IS canon, even if wiggle occurs.
Even K-town's namesake is canon, which is what makes Lowtax's bunch so amusing to me.
LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment
Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:24 AM
wanderer, on 06 February 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:
Yeah, German novels never went through the same vetting process as the FASA/Catalyst ones. Non-canonical, but BT TT players get a lot of tasty fluff to flavor their crunch from reading something besides rulebooks that IS canon, even if wiggle occurs.
Even K-town's namesake is canon, which is what makes Lowtax's bunch so amusing to me.
I was devastated to see Battletechnology magazines on the non canon list.
I thought PPC's were the greatest.
For all those who don't know what I'm talking about, I'll look up the article and put it here
LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment
Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:31 AM
Tales of the Cobalt Coil
blurb, blurb, ra ra
"And now for the PPC. If any one drink has ever been invented that could double as an industrial degreaser, it is the Capellan March PPC. Composed of equal amounts of tequila and pure grain alcohol, it has to be the most lethal drink this side of straight arsenic or the 'fruit punch' in Class IV survival rations. At the Coil, we mix all our PPC's real strong. Some places dilute this sort of drink with a good measure of water, a drink jokingly called the Partial Projection Cannon, but not the Coil. Chubby got we he ordered"
And, it comes in variations, Kuritan, Steiner, Liao etc etc.
LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.
Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:54 AM
Craig Steele, on 06 February 2014 - 05:31 AM, said:
Tales of the Cobalt Coil
blurb, blurb, ra ra
"And now for the PPC. If any one drink has ever been invented that could double as an industrial degreaser, it is the Capellan March PPC. Composed of equal amounts of tequila and pure grain alcohol, it has to be the most lethal drink this side of straight arsenic or the 'fruit punch' in Class IV survival rations. At the Coil, we mix all our PPC's real strong. Some places dilute this sort of drink with a good measure of water, a drink jokingly called the Partial Projection Cannon, but not the Coil. Chubby got we he ordered"
And, it comes in variations, Kuritan, Steiner, Liao etc etc.
Please drink responsibly folks
PPC's, the drink are canonical. Even though they came from Battletechnology as well, they're found in the novels too.
Craig Steele, on 06 February 2014 - 06:01 AM, said:
So they are human? Who would have guessed
It was written that Clan scientists did not think to look for genes that were linked to addiction, so the eugenics program actually made Clan warriors MORE likely to have dependency issues.
MustrumRidcully, on 06 February 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:
Judging by Shadowrun German authors - they seemed to love adding more powergaming stuff.
I blame my min-maxing addiction as a teenager on my German heritage, then, not any sort of fault of my own!
Craig Steele, on 05 February 2014 - 11:47 PM, said:
Umm, so no where near dense then? Gauss shells are slugs of fairy floss?? jk jk.
Yes on the physics, it is Sci Fi, but there is realism in Sci Fi too, and stuff breaks down if it gets out of the ball park. Half the arguments for AC's DPS all revolve around the same assumption (ie, what can we do today vs what's realistic with these givens)
Any luck on the Gauss description? Is it definitive? My copy of that I never read (damn collectors right, at least I flicked the pictures ) and has been at a mates house for 6 months or so I think.
I have the Tech Manual description for it and will post it as soon as I can (it's on my home computer). Basically, though, while it does say it can "tear an enemy 'mech's head clean off at more than half a kilometer," it doesn't specifically say how the "inert nickel-ferrous projectile" does it, though the singular phrasing would lead me to believe it can do that with a single projectile, not some burst sawing approach. Screenshot incoming "soon".
EDIT: Here is the canon reference...
Joseph Mallan, on 06 February 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:
I have used AC2 in MW:O... I still prefer my BFG AC20. Cut the range of it to 270 meter, I'll still like it better than an AC2. If you give me a chioce between
And this
I will take the Desert Eagle!
I totally respect that, and I hope you see that from my posts. I also agree with StJobe, though, that something has to be done to balance the two. If that means a bigger recoil effect for larger shells, then so be it. Make that BFG kick like a BFG and knock you on your arse!
5
Craig Steele, on 05 February 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:
