117 replies to this topic

[Alek Ituin]

Rehl, on 30 October 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

mmm.... Long Tom. Speaking of mech-sized guns, are we ever gonna see the Hollander ingame?

Long Tom and the Sniper Cannon are both Artillery cannons, not Rifles.

And soon I hope, the only Light Mech that should ever be able to fit a Gauss Rifle will be fantastic...

[Tombstoner]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 30 October 2014 - 04:28 PM, said:

It's actually not. Autocannons in all lore sources are rapid-fire like the Clan UACs in MWO.

The closest thing in lore to IS ACs are giant mech-sized rifles that I forget the term for, which nobody uses anymore because they were obsoleted by autocannons.

It's not about FLD so much, its the presence of pin point convergence and group fire that creates a synergy. Many solutions have been put forth and not acted upon. Why.... its PGI's game.... PGI's rules..... it sucks because of multiple better solutions within hand reach.

[Tombstoner]

Alek Ituin, on 30 October 2014 - 09:38 PM, said:

Long Tom and the Sniper Cannon are both Artillery cannons, not Rifles.

And soon I hope, the only Light Mech that should ever be able to fit a Gauss Rifle will be fantastic...

How do you know the long tom doesn't have Rifeling... making it a rifle? The answer is not clear cut.

[Joseph Mallan]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 30 October 2014 - 12:50 PM, said:

I'm not sure what this post has to do with (e: IS) ballistics and their PPFLD?

I don't see what the OP had to do with Convergence either?

[Alek Ituin]

Tombstoner, on 31 October 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:

How do you know the long tom doesn't have Rifeling... making it a rifle?  The answer is not clear cut.

Having rifling in the barrel doesn't make something a Rifle. Unless suddenly something like a 155mm artillery piece is now a rifle.

Long Toms and Sniper Cannons are both classed as "Artillery Pieces" in lore. Not to mention Thumpers, which are basically snub-nosed field variants of a Long Tom. (FYI - Sniper Cannons are actually called "Sniper Artillery Pieces", but they're still cannons either way, same goes for Thumpers and Long Toms)

Also, the Long Tom and Sniper are technically "Guns", whereas the Thumper would be a "Howitzer". BT Lore doesn't really match up with reality too often.

Edited by Alek Ituin, 31 October 2014 - 06:03 AM.

[Haipyng]

Rehl, on 30 October 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

mmm.... Long Tom. Speaking of mech-sized guns, are we ever gonna see the Hollander ingame?

The Hollander didn't come until 3054. Basically a Gauss on legs it carried two tons of ammo and wasn't very fast at all. Backup weapons only came on variants and were all pretty weak. This one is nice in TT, but in MWO translation would actually be pretty sucky.

[Abisha]

find the gauss a crap weapon, can't really understand the fuss about it.
it's very unpractical and charge timer makes it a total useless weapon.

2xLarge Pulse Lasers deal even more ping point damage with out worry about running out of ammo or deal with people using cover right.

[Ace Selin]

If anything IS Dual Gauss need a buff, by adding more ammo per ton.

[Tombstoner]

Alek Ituin, on 31 October 2014 - 06:01 AM, said:

Having rifling in the barrel doesn't make something a Rifle. Unless suddenly something like a 155mm artillery piece is now a rifle.

Long Toms and Sniper Cannons are both classed as "Artillery Pieces" in lore. Not to mention Thumpers, which are basically snub-nosed field variants of a Long Tom. (FYI - Sniper Cannons are actually called "Sniper Artillery Pieces", but they're still cannons either way, same goes for Thumpers and Long Toms)

Also, the Long Tom and Sniper are technically "Guns", whereas the Thumper would be a "Howitzer". BT Lore doesn't really match up with reality too often.

When you rifle a barrel it becomes a rifle. rifling only maters for slow rounds. being slow makes them susceptible to drift, thus needing stabilization via rotation. like many man portable rounds
The difference between a cannon and a howitzer is barrel length.
There are 2 types of barrel limning smooth and rifled.
Part of the definition of cannon vs rifle is do the rounds explode on contact.
Smooth boars can use rounds with integrated stabilizing fins. So can riffled barrels.
Rifling also has shortens the life cycle of the barrel as the metal is worn off from use.

Technology has progressed over time blurring the distinction between types.
using exploding 22 caliber bullets doesn't make it a 22 caliber cannon.
The end result is they all function the same.

[Alek Ituin]

Tombstoner, on 31 October 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

When you rifle a barrel it becomes a rifle. rifling only maters for slow rounds. being slow makes them susceptible to drift, thus needing stabilization via rotation. like many man portable rounds
The difference between a cannon and a howitzer is barrel length.
There are 2 types of barrel limning smooth and rifled.
Part of the definition of cannon vs rifle is do the rounds explode on contact.
Smooth boars can use rounds with integrated stabilizing fins. So can riffled barrels.
Rifling also has shortens the life cycle of the barrel as the metal is worn off from use.

Technology has progressed over time blurring the distinction between types.
using exploding 22 caliber bullets doesn't make it a 22 caliber cannon.
The end result is they all function the same.

You have absolutely no idea what you're on about.

Artillery weapons are not rifles just because they have rifling. They're all considered cannons, sub-classified in to "Gun", "Howitzer", and "Mortar" based on barrel length and shell trajectory. The main gun on an MBT is not a rifle, it is a cannon, a "Gun" style direct fire artillery weapon to be precise. The defining factor for artillery cannons is that they have a longer range than standard infantry small arms, being capable of sending larger shells much further downrange.

Trebuchets and catapults both functioned as artillery, being capable of slinging massive projectiles MUCH further downrange than an archer could fire an arrow. See how that works? Weapons capable of firing projectiles further than small arms are artillery, and artillery pieces using gunpowder are cannons.


Do some basic friggin research next time.

[Kain Demos]

The rule I always followed was:

Indirect fire = artillery
Direct fire = cannon

People apply "Gun" and "cannon" to everything seemingly interchangeably though.

I don't recall artillery ever being called anything but howitzers or guns though but I've heard a nickname for 13Bs (artillerymen) that was "cannon cockers" though the one in use by us was "gun bunnies".

I like to use cannon/gun on direct fire weapons though because look at weapons systems that are described as such:

M230 Chain gun
M242 Bushmaster
M61 Vulcan
GAU 8 series
Rheinmetall L/55

Edited by Kain Thul, 31 October 2014 - 09:17 AM.

[Tombstoner]

Alek Ituin, on 31 October 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

You have absolutely no idea what you're on about.

Artillery weapons are not rifles just because they have rifling. They're all considered cannons, sub-classified in to "Gun", "Howitzer", and "Mortar" based on barrel length and shell trajectory. The main gun on an MBT is not a rifle, it is a cannon, a "Gun" style direct fire artillery weapon to be precise. The defining factor for artillery cannons is that they have a longer range than standard infantry small arms, being capable of sending larger shells much further downrange.

Trebuchets and catapults both functioned as artillery, being capable of slinging massive projectiles MUCH further downrange than an archer could fire an arrow. See how that works? Weapons capable of firing projectiles further than small arms are artillery, and artillery pieces using gunpowder are cannons.


Do some basic friggin research next time.

I did... used Google... try it yourself

Cannon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannon
Howitzer - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howitzer
Rifle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifle https://www.google.c...ox-a&channel=sb
What kind of weapon is a tank gun http://en.wikipedia....egory:Tank_guns

Makes me wonder what your referencing?

The point is over the years technology has change and obscured the difference between weapons. Then applying it to Battle tech is dum. we cant know if one weapon was rifled or not. irregardless if it was a rifle ,cannon, of howitzer

[operatorZ]

all howitzers and mortars are cannons
but not all cannons are howitzers....or mortars

rifles are fired from the human shoulder....

clear? .....as mud

Edited by operatorZ, 31 October 2014 - 12:38 PM.

[Tombstoner]

operatorZ, on 31 October 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

all howitzers and mortars are cannons
but not all cannons are howitzers....or mortars

rifles are fired from the human shoulder....

clear? .....as mud

Are all Rifles.... Rifled......?

[Tombstoner]

Kain Thul, on 31 October 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

The rule I always followed was:

Indirect fire = artillery
Direct fire = cannon

People apply "Gun" and "cannon" to everything seemingly interchangeably though.

I don't recall artillery ever being called anything but howitzers or guns though but I've heard a nickname for 13Bs (artillerymen) that was "cannon cockers" though the one in use by us was "gun bunnies".

I like to use cannon/gun on direct fire weapons though because look at weapons systems that are described as such:

M230 Chain gun
M242 Bushmaster
M61 Vulcan
GAU 8 series
Rheinmetall L/55

Exactly the definition is not always clear cut.

[CDLord HHGD]

Tombstoner, on 31 October 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

Are all Rifles.... Rifled......?

Where's mah mechmusket!

[Tombstoner]

cdlord, on 31 October 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

Where's mah mechmusket!

http://en.wikipedia....ecoilless_rifle Wikipedia calls it a type of light weight artillery.
Also its only a recoilless rifle when it has rifling.... if it doesn't have rifling its called a recoilless gun...

People its not all cut and dry......

[terrycloth]

Everything is an AK-47.

[Y E O N N E]

The failure to observe which class each term for military hardware falls under within this thread is amusing. Especially when people start telling each other to do some research when both parties are simultaneously right and wrong.

[Selene Lunaris]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 30 October 2014 - 04:28 PM, said:

It's actually not. Autocannons in all lore sources are rapid-fire like the Clan UACs in MWO.

The closest thing in lore to IS ACs are giant mech-sized rifles that I forget the term for, which nobody uses anymore because they were obsoleted by autocannons.

To put this question what rifles they were to rest and hopefully contribute to putting this thread back on the rails - the light, medium and heavy rifles. The light and medium rifles are indeed totally worthless in any scenario, with the light rifle doing only 3 damage for 3 tons - with the associated ammo consumption. Under TacOps rules, it would do absolutely no damage to mechs, while the MR did 3 damage (for 5 tons!) and the HR did 6 damage (for 8 tons). The HR was an excellent weapon outside TacOps rules, though.

Lore-wise, all autocannons did indeed burst-fire, with only the rifles, artillery weapons and a few VERY rare examples of ACs being the exceptions as far as ballistics went.

Edited by Chrona, 31 October 2014 - 03:40 PM.