26 replies to this topic

[Yeach]

Hoping that this game has somewhat of a campaign like gameplay where you would need to refill on ammunition.
Just want to clarify if certain ammunition can be compatible.

In MW2: Mercs if you were able to get a Clan LBX10 autocannon, you were unable to use IS LBX10 ammo.
MW3 fixed that it had general ammunition available to use for both the Clan or IS version of the same weapon.
Of course we know that MW4 didn't have ammunition stockpiles.

I would like to see that go further where LRMs, SRMs, and MRMs come from the same stockpile.
Instead of LRM10, LRM15, LRM20 designated ammo, you would have a stockpile of LRMs
Say you have a stockpile of LRMs, you could load 120 LRMs into a LRM10 and it would give you 12 salvos, the same ammo could also be loaded onto an LRM15 and give you 8 salvos but essentially they would come from the SAME stockpile of the same type.

I would also consider autocannons to use the same similar stockpiles but that will probably be shot down.
(It would require to acknowledge that the AC20 fires a salvos that takes 4 times as much ammo as an AC5)

Basically I would like to have some more simplification for ammunition logistics... IF we have a logistics aspect in MWO.

[Cyttorak]

Yeach, on 16 November 2011 - 11:50 PM, said:

Basically I would like to have some more simplification for ammunition logistics... IF we have a logistics aspect in MWO.

IF we can have simplified ammo...IF we have ammo logistics. That's two pretty big IFs.

[Alistair Steiner]

Missile ammo makes sense. Ballistic... not so much. You're firing a BIG HONKIN' SHELL with the AC20. Not so much with the AC5. I support generalized SRM, MRM, and LRM ammo (as long as they're not Inferno/whatever rounds), but can't really agree with anything beyond that. Though the ammo for IS/Clan should be sort of generalized. I'd hate to have a DropShip full of IS AC10 MG rounds, but have them worthless if I salvage a Clan AC10 MG.

EDIT: Clans use Ultra ACs, silly. >.<

Edited by Alistair Steiner, 17 November 2011 - 12:06 AM.

[Yeach]

Alistair Steiner, on 17 November 2011 - 12:01 AM, said:

Missile ammo makes sense. Ballistic... not so much. You're firing a BIG HONKIN' SHELL with the AC20. Not so much with the AC5. I support generalized SRM, MRM, and LRM ammo (as long as they're not Inferno/whatever rounds), but can't really agree with anything beyond that. Though the ammo for IS/Clan should be sort of generalized. I'd hate to have a DropShip full of IS AC10 rounds, but have them worthless if I salvage a Clan AC10.

is there a such thing as a Clan AC10?

[Alistair Steiner]

Yeach, on 17 November 2011 - 12:03 AM, said:

is there a such thing as a Clan AC10?

*checks the interwebs* No, they use Ultras. Making a general statement, sorry about that. Changed to make sense. But kept the goof so your post still makes sense. Thanks for catching that!

Edited by Alistair Steiner, 17 November 2011 - 12:07 AM.

[UncleKulikov]

Well the missiles seem to be standardized, so I don't mind that. SRM and LRM ammo should be X missiles per ton, and the launchers fire X number of missiles per fire based on their rating.

However, for the autocannons, there are many different types for each damage class which can have different firing modes and calibers, all within a single "in game" autocannon.

Autocannons shouldn't be able to use the same ammunition, because each class is a different caliber/ clip size / fire rate and so on.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Would also be nice if for missiles we got the full range of diferent round types.

Edited by Nik Van Rhijn, 17 November 2011 - 07:23 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Yeach, on 17 November 2011 - 12:03 AM, said:

is there a such thing as a Clan AC10?

Actually there is. However it went the way of the Bow and Arrow (ie obsolete). The rule that governed this has also probably become obsolete. Standard Clan weapons weigh one ton less and one less crit than the spheroid equivalent. Exception is Med & small lasers.

This rule was in the original 3050 TRO. As for the video game... What Clanner in his right mind would use a standard AC when he can just single shot his Ultra?

For simplicity sake AC20 rounds should fit any AC20 et al.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 17 November 2011 - 07:34 AM.

[Zyllos]

I agree here that within the same weapon type, the ammunition should work across the board.

Another thing with logistics, should field restocks of ammo be allowed? Pay for the ammo after a battle?

[Joseph Mallan]

I'm going to say no Zyllos. Unless there is a field repair bay of some kind. Pay the time required in the bay and pray you don't get shot up while it's happening.

[Zyllos]

I figured the field repairs (like in MC) would be out of the question but field restock of ammo seems like a valid question as you pull up, throw in some cases in the loader, then go.

Either way, you have spoken, just figured it would be good to bring it up.

[MaddMaxx]

Zyllos, on 17 November 2011 - 07:59 AM, said:

I figured the field repairs (like in MC) would be out of the question but field restock of ammo seems like a valid question as you pull up, throw in some cases in the loader, then go.

Either way, you have spoken, just figured it would be good to bring it up.

Sort of like in the last Matrix movie where the boys ran out and loaded more ammo bins lickety split. That of course would mean an on field support presence but that might be cool to.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 17 November 2011 - 08:27 AM.

[Deliverator]

I think there should definitely be some kind of access to munitions replenishment. I vote for something related to calling in a resupply, pick a location, ship lands for say... 60 seconds? You get there, board, reload, disembark, ship takes off. I would strongly suggest a limit on these per battle, and with the 20 min combat estimation by the devs I doubt most people would even end up using this.

I am going to guess that 10 minutes of this is going to be hunt and peck missions where the scout is running around finding the enemy, the fire support is dropping indirect fire on them, and the scout is zapping them with low damage lasers to harass and maneuver them. Then there will be a coordinated attack of all the mechs dropping everything they have on the enemy to disable/destroy them as quickly as possible and voila the mission is over. I doubt a resupply will be required unless you for some reason end up with an extended confrontation. Anyway, like the idea of resupply if its done correctly, and if there is the potential of extended combat scenarios.

[Gunman5000]

To some extent certain weapons should definately use similar ammunition. The missiles of course makes sense, especially since an LRM# has always been represented as firing # missiles as opposed to larger missiles for more damage.

Battletech Wiki said:

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.

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.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Autocannon

Not saying that the above is canon and the only way to go, but it is taken from canon sources. My point being that there is nothing to say that ammo from an AC/2 won't fit into and fire from an AC/20, provided it is for the same design (10 shell burst for the AC/2 and 100 shell burst for the AC/20) from the above example.

For simplicity sake IF there is a logistics part involved in MWO where we need to stockpile ammunition, it could easily be assumed that ALL autocannons fire the same calibre round, simply more or less of them based on damage, like the canon understanding for missiles. Mechwarrior 4: Mercanaries, despite not having a logistics system, appeared to represent all the autocannons as firing bursts instead of single shells (as far as I can recall at least) with more being fired for higher damage ACs. Its been a while since I played the game though so I may be wrong.

[Gaius Cavadus]

I certainly agree that an LRM is an LRM is an LRM no matter what LRM system it's flying out of. Ditto on SRMs.

Autocannons, on the other hand, are different calibers so it would make sense that there would be 2s, 5s, 10s, and 20s in terms of round sizes. However, ACs and UACs use the same ammo type so there's commonality there.

The only odd man out is the LBX with their canister rounds but I always found it really strange that you needed an entirely different type of autocannon just to fire a canister round. TTers will likely spazz over what about I'm to propose but the game doesn't need LBX autocannons at all. Just allow the LBX rounds to be loaded into standard autocannons. As for clans with only UACs just give them regular AC rates of fire when LBX is loaded into them.

The existence of true LBX autocannons is pretty superfluous and unneeded IMO.

[Joseph Mallan]

The buckshot might ruin the Barrels rifling? That's the only reason I can even come close to making. Also the LB stands for 'Light Barrel' as far as I understood.

[KnowBuddy]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2011 - 11:42 AM, said:

The buckshot might ruin the Barrels rifling? That's the only reason I can even come close to making. Also the LB stands for 'Light Barrel' as far as I understood.

Actually, it stands for Lubalin Ballistics, as in an Lubalin Ballistics-X AutoCannon.

I can see (assuming ammo logistics is even included) AC rounds of each caliber being interchangable between CUAC, AC, and RAC weapons. But not AC vs. LBX AC ammunition.

[Rogal Dorn]

Ammo drops might be a cool feature, but will the "missions" or matches be long enough to warrant them?

[Joseph Mallan]

KnowBuddy, on 17 November 2011 - 11:58 AM, said:

Actually, it stands for Lubalin Ballistics, as in an Lubalin Ballistics-X AutoCannon.

I can see (assuming ammo logistics is even included) AC rounds of each caliber being interchangable between CUAC, AC, and RAC weapons. But not AC vs. LBX AC ammunition.

Really? Here I've played since the dawn of BattleTech (yeah post BattleDroids) and I don't ever remember seeing this! I now turn in my MechWarrior veteran's card and will report for my public flogging! Thanks KnowBuddy!

[KnowBuddy]

Cavadus, on 17 November 2011 - 11:33 AM, said:

I certainly agree that an LRM is an LRM is an LRM no matter what LRM system it's flying out of. Ditto on SRMs.

Autocannons, on the other hand, are different calibers so it would make sense that there would be 2s, 5s, 10s, and 20s in terms of round sizes. However, ACs and UACs use the same ammo type so there's commonality there.

The only odd man out is the LBX with their canister rounds but I always found it really strange that you needed an entirely different type of autocannon just to fire a canister round. TTers will likely spazz over what about I'm to propose but the game doesn't need LBX autocannons at all. Just allow the LBX rounds to be loaded into standard autocannons. As for clans with only UACs just give them regular AC rates of fire when LBX is loaded into them.

The existence of true LBX autocannons is pretty superfluous and unneeded IMO.

Actually, I see what you're saying about loading LBX ammo into standard ACs (or UACs, limiting them to single fire), but it would need to also include lowering the refire rates for balance, which is the reason LBX ACs have a lower refire rate to compensate for their increased damage (and range, in the case of LBX10s and LBX20s).

But what is gained by combining LBX ACs and ACs into one weapon? Flexibility on the battlefield? Perhaps, if field reloads are possible... but switching between LBX and normal rounds doesn't really change all that much... you're still operating in the same general ranges. All it accomplishes is giving the option between slightly more sustained dmg output with more ammo conservation vs. higher spike damage with increased ammo usage. Which do you think will be taken most of the time? Maybe 99% of the time?