209 replies to this topic

[theta123]

Brody319, on 07 November 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

"Autocannon" Implies that is an "Automatic cannon" Currently only Clanners are like that.
In other mechwarrior games both Clan and regular ACs fire in bursts,

wow buddy.. an automatic cannon is a cannon that fires and reloads completly on itself... If a 203mm howitzer fires 6 rounds per minute by holding down the trigger and nobody doing a thing, then that cannon becomes an autocannon. So yeah, IS cannons are autocannons

also a machinegun and autocannon classification is difficult to say when . but generally it is agreed that BELOW 15mm, we are dealing with a machinegun

[Roland]

TimePeriod, on 07 November 2014 - 01:35 PM, said:

Imo, IS should have the option to select between burst-fire and single-shot. Inner Sphere 'Mechs is all about customization, why not allow us this option?

Because only imbeciles who have no idea how the game works would voluntarily choose for them to not be single shot.

[Sjorpha]

I like the single shot mechanic, it creates a difference in flavor from the clans and is the only thing that currently motivates the heavier weights for IS.

"Autocannon" for IS can be interpreted as a main cannon with automated loading, like on certain tanks.

The clan UACs need a slight buff though, as they aren't attractive enough on mechs that can't boat them. The IS AC2 also needs a buff, or a rollback of previous nerfs perhaps.

[Ultimax]

Krivvan, on 09 November 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

Which is one of the best decisions they've made in the entire game ever. It actually does help balance out Clantech.

For pure gameplay reasons, why would anyone want burst fire for god's sake?

As I asked before, which UACs are used competitively on builds that are not the Dire Wolf?

"Never/Rarely used" =/= "Balanced"

Edited by Ultimatum X, 09 November 2014 - 04:56 PM.

[Mainhunter]

Autocanon means you do not need to manually load it, doesnt say how long it takes.

[stjobe]

Mainhunter, on 09 November 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

Autocanon means you do not need to manually load it, doesnt say how long it takes.

Even our contemporary autocannons are described as "rapid-fire"; the wikipedia page on autocannons uses the British 30mm Rarden with its 90 rounds/minute as one end of the scale and the GIAT 30 with its 2,500 rpm as the other (and notes that multiple-barrel autocannons fire even more rapidly).

So just going with those rates, that's burst sizes of 15 - 417 rounds per BT turn - compared to the description of autocannons in BT lore, where the burst sizes range from 3 - 100 rounds per turn.

Of course, BT autocannons aren't comparable to our contemporary autocannons, as they are developments of the Rifle family of weapons, which in turn were developed from our contemporary MBT guns - but they are described (Tech Manual, page 207) as "rapid-firing, auto-loading, heavy ballistic weaponry - gigantic machine guns, in other words. With calibers ranging from 30 to 90 millimeters at the lighter end, to as much as 203 millimeters or more at the heaviest" (emphasis mine).

So yeah, it doesn't say how long it takes, but it does say that autocannon are rapid-fire. I.e. they're not just automatically loaded, they're firing fast as well.

[Joseph Mallan]

theta123, on 09 November 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

wow buddy.. an automatic cannon is a cannon that fires and reloads completly on itself... If a 203mm howitzer fires 6 rounds per minute by holding down the trigger and nobody doing a thing, then that cannon becomes an autocannon. So yeah, IS cannons are autocannons

also a machinegun and autocannon classification is difficult to say when . but generally it is agreed that BELOW 15mm, we are dealing with a machinegun

AutoCannon also fire Shells

Machine Guns fire Bullets.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 10 November 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

Even our contemporary autocannons are described as "rapid-fire"; the wikipedia page on autocannons uses the British 30mm Rarden with its 90 rounds/minute as one end of the scale and the GIAT 30 with its 2,500 rpm as the other (and notes that multiple-barrel autocannons fire even more rapidly).

So just going with those rates, that's burst sizes of 15 - 417 rounds per BT turn - compared to the description of autocannons in BT lore, where the burst sizes range from 3 - 100 rounds per turn.

Of course, BT autocannons aren't comparable to our contemporary autocannons, as they are developments of the Rifle family of weapons, which in turn were developed from our contemporary MBT guns - but they are described (Tech Manual, page 207) as "rapid-firing, auto-loading, heavy ballistic weaponry - gigantic machine guns, in other words. With calibers ranging from 30 to 90 millimeters at the lighter end, to as much as 203 millimeters or more at the heaviest" (emphasis mine).

So yeah, it doesn't say how long it takes, but it does say that autocannon are rapid-fire. I.e. they're not just automatically loaded, they're firing fast as well.

And what you are quoting is merely Fluff St. The proof is in the game mechanics not the Fluff. IF AutoCannons would have burst damage like LRMs and SRMs instead of single point location they would be firing like modern ACs. mantra of the CBT Line Directors, "Fluff does not make the rules."

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 10 November 2014 - 12:04 PM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

And what you are quoting is merely Fluff St. The proof is in the game mechanics not the Fluff. OF AutoCannons would have burst damage like LRMs and SRMs instead of single point location. mantra of the Line Directors, "Fluff does not rules make."

Since you seem to have missed it, here's a post I made back on page 4:

stjobe, on 08 November 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

What you call "fluff" is the unifying "truth" of the BattleTech Universe - rule interpretations of the fluff change, but the fluff stays the same.

Nobody wants to roll 100 to-hit rolls for a single shot with a Pontiac 100 AC, so it was simplified for the board game to one roll per cassette.

Now though, in a computer game with the computer more than able to roll separate to-hit rolls for each individual shell in a 100-shell burst, there's no point to sticking with the simplification of a single to-hit roll. Or, rather, for the game to track each shell individually from muzzle to impact, seeing as we don't use to-hit rolls in the first place.

The TT rules are adaptations and interpretations of the fluff optimized for a board game; the main design criteria is to be able to finish playing in no more than a few hours, and for the game to fit on an average kitchen or dinner-room table.

MWO has a different set of adaptations and interpretations of the fluff that is (or at least should be) optimized for a computer game - there's no longer a kitchen-table size limit, for instance, and the limit on how many "rolls" one can make is only limited by simulation speed and server and client CPU frequencies.

Holding the TT rules above the BT fluff in a discussion about MWO is nonsensical, and I'd wish you'd understand this, Joe. It's putting the cart before the horse in the worst way, and it makes a lot of your arguments hard to follow, and - to be perfectly honest - bass-ackwards.

TT rules are not the definition of BattleTech; they're just interpretations of BT lore for a table-top board game.

In short - the fluff is the truth; game mechanics vary, and so do rules. The fluff does not.

[Bhael Fire]

theta123, on 09 November 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

also a machinegun and autocannon classification is difficult to say when . but generally it is agreed that BELOW 15mm, we are dealing with a machinegun

Joe beat me to it, but yeah...Auto-Cannons fire explosive shells (HEAP), whereas machine guns fire bullets.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 10 November 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

Since you seem to have missed it, here's a post I made back on page 4:


In short - the fluff is the truth; game mechanics vary, and so do rules. The fluff does not.

Who did you quote in that post StJobe?

I'm just wondering cause as it has been laid out by the DEVs of CBT:
Core Rules
Sourcebooks
Fluff
Non Cannon Supplements.(ie Magazines)
...
...
...
...
House Rules
in that order.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 10 November 2014 - 12:15 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

SaltBeef, on 09 November 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

All Should be burst except LBX models. Lore wise.

Ryoken, on 09 November 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

Actually even LBX models are burst firing cannons just that every shell will fall into several clusters at a certain distance from the target. This is why the number of LBX clusters hitting a target mech is not modified by range. So the LBX autocannons as we have them now are wrong in two ways:
1) they fire a single shot, where it should be a burst
2) the fired shot immidiately clusters instead of clustering at a certain distance to the target mech, making them useless at range

SaltBeef, on 09 November 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

I thought the Lbx was a single shell that fragmented separated on the way to target not a buckshot weapon. In this game it is cannister buckshot.

The current behavior of the LB-X cluster round in MWO is correct with regard to how it is consistently described in BattleTech - that is, the LB-X ACs have always been described as behaving like "anti-BattleMech shotguns", mirroring both shotshells and the canister rounds used by modern MBTs (like the M1028 Canister round used by the Abrams) in that they fragment as muzzle-exit.

TRO 2750 (in which the LB-X was originally introduced) uses the shotgun comparison (on pg. 08).
"In addition to firing the standard Dual-Purpose Armor-Defeating Rounds, the weapon may also fire a special Cluster Round that acts much like an anti-'Mech shotgun. After being fired, the round breaks up into several smaller submunitions."
Use of the phrase "after being fired" rather than something to the effect of "prior to impact" indicates that the fragmentation/break-up phase happens early in the firing cycle (e.g. "at muzzle exit").

The shotgun analogy is also used in the CBT Master Rules (pg. 132), as follows:
"The LB-X autocannon can fire cluster munitions, which act like an anti-BattleMech shotgun in combat. When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions. This improves the attacker’s chances of striking a critical location but disperses total damage by spreading hits over the target area rather than concentrating the damage on one location. Cluster munitions can be used only in LB-X autocannon, not in standard or Ultra autocannon types."
Note that the CBTMR description specifically says, "When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions" - indicating that the shell fragments at muzzle exit, much like its real-world counterpart (the aforementioned M1028).

It's also supported, albeit indirectly, by TechManual (pg. 207):
"An improvement on the common autocannon intended to expand the weapon’s role into anti-vehicle and anti-infantry work, the LB-X makes use of light, heat-dissipating alloys to reduce its weight and thermal buildup. These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, multi-munition feed mechanism, make the LB more expensive than standard autocannons. However, the slight range increase and the ability to switch between standard-style bursts and explosive cluster munitions - both specially developed for this weapon system - more than mitigate this higher cost."
LB-X ACs are also specifically described as smoothbore weapons ("These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, multi-munition feed mechanism, make the LB more expensive than standard autocannons."), a descriptor that is used in such a way as to indicate contrast with other AC types... and one which is only significant or relevant specifically because rifled barrels, due to the effect rifling has on spread, are generally unsuitable for firing shotshells, an issue that would not exist with Shrapnel shells.

Most recently, the "LB-X as shotgun" motif is supported directly by Era Report: 2750 (pg. 98).
"A highly advanced weapon system, the LB-X could switch between ammunition like standard autocannon rounds or fire a shotgun style round that would split into hundreds of explosive sub-munitions. This style of submunition was particularly effective against vehicles, but also proved effective for short-range anti-aircraft flak, and for dispersing attacking infantry."

Moreover, many (if not all) of the novels in which they appear explicitly refer to LB-X ACs and their specialty shells as "'Mech-sized shotguns", "glorified shotguns", and so on...

"Natasha's laugh survived computer modulation intact. "Of course. Would you prefer that they use a strategy that makes them comfortable or uncomfortable?"
"Point taken. This LBX autocannon has Cluster loads."
"Shotgun shells. It'll sand all the armor off a foe. Once you've softened him up, your lasers ought to cut him to ribbons."
Phelan nodded to himself and studied the auxiliary monitor. "Gauss rifle in my left arm?"
"Great weapon. It uses magnetic currents to launch a ball of ferrous metal about the diameter of a melon. Generates next to no heat and packs one hell of a wallop. The only problem is that its power requirements are fairly heavy. If you try to shoot it and the lasers at the same time, the computer will have to cycle and allocate power, so it will take a bit longer to get your salvo off."" - Natasha Kerensky & Phelan Kell, Blood Legacy, chapter 19

"Shunting plasma flow from the fusion engine into his jump jet reaction chambers, Doles guided the Emperor into a ninety-meter spinning flight that landed him directly behind the Marauder. Realizing his error the Periphery warrior tried to turn into the attack, but too late. Lasers flared ruby energy into its already-weakened rear torso and sides, evaporating any remaining armor it might have claimed and then carving deep into internal support structure. The autocannon hammered its shotgun-like ammunition into the breaches, each fragmenting piece ricocheting deeper than the one before in search of critical components." - battle between Colonel Warner Doles' Emperor (firing a LB 10-X) and a Taurian Concordat Marauder, The Killing Fields, chapter 36

"As he ran, Jake saw Petra bring her Stormcrow forward and to the right, closing in on the second Avatar to bring her autocannon into play. Her opponent took a few steps back and launched a double-salvo of LRMs from its shoulders, following it up with a shotgun-like blast from its right-arm autocannon. Her speed made her a difficult enough target that the cannon shot went wide, but her Stormcrow weathered a spread of twenty long-range missiles before she raised her 'Mech's left arm and let rip with the autocannon." - battle between MechWarrior Petra's Ryoken B and a DCMS Avatar Prime firing a LB 10-X, Test of Vengeance, chapter 13

As such, PGI's "shotgun-esque" implementation of the LB-X cluster rounds is in fact "correct" in that it is true to the descriptions and portrayal of the weapon's descriptions & portrayals in the source material, and reimplementing them as proximity- or timer-detonated Shrapnel shells would be antithetical to that the LB-X is supposed to be.

With regard to the LB-X's ability to utilize its improved effective range while firing cluster rounds:
Real-world shotguns can control the degree of spread over distance through the use of a choke system, with variable-setting chokes (see here & here) having been in real-world use for the better part of a century; the LB-X ACs' having servo-driven adjustable chokes slaved to the 'Mech's targeting system (such that it can be set to "fully-open" when firing normal rounds, and set to optimize spread as a function of range-to-target & target size when firing cluster rounds) is a plausible explanation that (unlike the proximity-detonation proposal) also maintains the long-established character of the LB-X as "an anti-BattleMech shotgun".

Moreover, LB-X cluster rounds should not be conflated with the "Flan rounds" & "Flechette rounds" fired by Standard ACs (and, later, Light ACs).
"Despite having been a proven technology in ages past, flak autocannon ammunition remains uncommon today. Intended to deal with airborne combatants such as VTOLs and fighters, this ammunition uses proximity charges to detonate in mid-air. While potent against fast-moving targets susceptible to foreign object damage (FOD), flak ammo is less effective against slower-moving targets on the ground because the charges scatter their shrapnel too far and too quickly to benefit from the target’s mobility." - Tactical Operations, pg. 352
"Flechette rounds are similar to LB-X cluster rounds, except they release a shower of metal slivers instead of shotgun-like flak. Designed to combat unarmored infantry, these rounds are ineffective against armored targets." - Classic BattleTech Master Rules (Revised), pg. 133

Only the Flak rounds used by Standard ACs (along with the Flechette artillery shells used only by Artillery Cannons & the Airburst shells used only by 'Mech Mortars) are described as using proximity-detonators; in fact, the word "proximity" appears in Total Warfare only in relation to the flight speeds of aerodyne craft (pg. 80) & the Proximity Damage rules (pg. 88) and in TechManual with regard to wing-in-ground-effect vehicles (on pg. 115), while virtually every rulebook, sourcebook, and novel where the LB-X cluster rounds are mentioned describes them as behaving like shotshells ("When fired, the ammunition fragments into several smaller submunitions." - CBTMRr).
LB-X cluster rounds and Flechette rounds are both described as "shotgun style" & "shotgun-like" in contrast to the Flak rounds, the LB-X cluster rounds receive an additional to-hit bonus where Flak & Flechette rounds do not, LB-X rounds do not halve their damage against most targets like Flechette & Flak rounds do, and only the LB-X cluster rounds are explicitly stated to not benefit from Targeting Computers & lose the ability to make Aimed Shots.

To summarize, BattleTech canon/lore indicates & supports the following:

• LB-X AC cluster rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with explosive submunitions (like bomblets or grenades, rather than simple buckshot/grapeshot)
  
• Standard/Light AC Flechette rounds = canister-round/shotshell (fragments at muzzle exit) with non-explosive shrapnel
  
• Standard/Light AC Flak rounds = proximity-detonated shrapnel shell or HE shell with non-explosive shrapnel

Edited by Strum Wealh, 10 November 2014 - 01:09 PM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 12:11 PM, said:

Who did you quote in that post StJobe?

Two of my best friends, Common Sense and Logic. You should meet them, we should totally set that up

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 12:11 PM, said:

I'm just wondering cause as it has been laid out by the DEVs of CBT:
Core Rules
Sourcebooks
Fluff
Non Cannon Supplements.(ie Magazines)
...
...
...
...
House Rules
in that order.

Yes, for playing (Classic) BattleTech the board game, that's certainly true. That's the pecking order of the rules for that game.

But we're not talking about the rules for CBT the board game, are we? We're talking about a completely different game called MWO, and we're talking about how that game should be implementing the rules and lore of the BT universe in general.

And for that, it makes no sense to put the CBT rules on top, because they're chock full of simplifications and limitations that depend on the format of a kitchen-table sized game meant to be played in a couple of hours.

So we have to fall back on the non-rules, the lore, to see how things really work.

An autocannon in the BT universe is basically a "giant machine-gun" (even by your definition, since that's in the Tech Manual, page 207) firing bursts of 3 - 100 projectiles per "shot", "round", "cassette", whatever you want to call it, in 10 seconds.

This is implemented in the rules for CBT the board game as a single to-hit roll, because we don't want to spend all night rolling autocannon to-hit rolls, we'd rather get on with the actual game play.

That single roll, though, represents a burst of anything from 3 - 100 individual rounds, because that's what the lore says an autocannon fires. It does not mean that autocannons fire a single projectile!

And with computers doing the heavy lifting, there's simply no sense in keeping a simplification made for the board game - computers are fast enough to do several thousand to-hit rolls in the same time you or I can make a single one.

There. Common Sense and Logic, meet Joe Mallan, an old and stubborn gamer. Joe, meet Common Sense and Logic, two of my best friends. I'm sure you three will get on like a house on fire!

[General Taskeen]

Those dug deep in PGI world online and "isms" seem to forget the previous games. AC's were burst fire in those games and I don't remember complaints about it. It was just a "cool" thing, coolness factor extreme - sounds good and looked "neat." I guess they followed BT better in real-time, since all damage board-game in real-time don't make sense yo. I don't know folks, maybe fire up the old games and let the coolness flow through you in the land before annoying F2P.

Edited by General Taskeen, 10 November 2014 - 12:56 PM.

[Tombstoner]

Bhael Fire, on 10 November 2014 - 12:07 PM, said:

Joe beat me to it, but yeah...Auto-Cannons fire explosive shells (HEAP), whereas machine guns fire bullets.

UM....http://en.wikipedia..../Raufoss_Mk_211 wouldn't this qualify......It's a 50 cal bullet that's armor piercing explosive and incendiary.... so whats the difference between a shell and a bullet.... bullets do the same thing as shells must be size. No reason Auto-cannons can't fire sabot rounds, incendiary, HE. In fact i would expect them to use squash heads.... but most of you don't know what whose are.....http://en.wikipedia....ive_squash_head
The point is we don't know exactly how 31 century mech armor or autocannon function except for fluf stories. stick to fluff and leave real world examples out.

In short PGI got it wrong or made a design choice without considering the clans. an egregious mistake IMO.

Single shot vs. burst fire was mentioned REPEATEDLY since 2011.
Funny how it worked as the forum thought. personally i think the clans should have gotten single shot ac's in place of any damage increase and it justified the range advantage.

[Roland]

Bhael Fire, on 10 November 2014 - 12:07 PM, said:

Joe beat me to it, but yeah...Auto-Cannons fire explosive shells (HEAP), whereas machine guns fire bullets.

This is mistaken.

There's nothing different between a weapon which fires a shell and a weapon which fires a "bullet", because both of them operate basically identically from the perspective of the weapon firing them... the only difference between the two things you are thinking about is with what's inside the projectile that's fired.... with small arms it's generally just a solid slug of metal (although, really, this isn't even true... as you can get all kinds of crazy bullets for small arms that contain stuff other than a metal slug in the projectile), and with weapons designed for use against armored targets, the projectile contains some kind of penetrator plus potentially other things like HE or Incindiary materials.

Again, there's nothing special about a "canon" vs. a "machine gun" within the context of the conversation here.

And basically every argument presented here for why MG's must suck in MWO is just a regurgitation of idiotic arguments which were totally disproven YEARS ago.

For instance, the laughable notion that MG's in battletech were just meant for anti-infantry weapons. This is clearly false, since machine guns predate the existence of infantry units in the battletech ruleset.

In battletech, Machine Guns are AC2's, with extremely limited range. The do exactly the same type of damage to mechs. Period. If you believe otherwise, you are wrong.

[Water Bear]

Just a fun point to add to this thread: As far as I know, the main gun on the Abrams main battle tank, which is to the best of my knowledge still America's front line battle tank, is loaded by hand. The men who load shells on those tanks are, I have been told by a Nat'l guard recruiter, quite muscular.

Making a modern tank load 40-50 lbs shells into itself automatically is IIRC not impossible, but it is a non-trivial feat. Don't underestimate the technical achievement of a huge canon that loads itself without jamming, even if slowly.

[Strum Wealh]

Tombstoner, on 10 November 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

UM....http://en.wikipedia..../Raufoss_Mk_211 wouldn't this qualify......It's a 50 cal bullet that's armor piercing explosive and incendiary.... so whats the difference between a shell and a bullet.... bullets do the same thing as shells must be size. No reason Auto-cannons can't fire sabot rounds, incendiary, HE. In fact i would expect them to use squash heads.... but most of you don't know what whose are.....http://en.wikipedia....ive_squash_head
The point is we don't know exactly how 31 century mech armor or autocannon function except for fluf stories. stick to fluff and leave real world examples out.

In short PGI got it wrong or made a design choice without considering the clans. an egregious mistake IMO.

Single shot vs. burst fire was mentioned REPEATEDLY since 2011.
Funny how it worked as the forum thought. personally i think the clans should have gotten single shot ac's in place of any damage increase and it justified the range advantage.

The difference is that "bullets" & "slugs" are solid projectiles with no internal payloads, while "shells" are not solid throughout & contain explosives or other payloads.
Any of the three may be combined with other components to compose a "cartridge".

The standard ACs (and their lightweight cousins, canonically due in the late 3050s) normally fire high-explosive armor-piercing (HEAP/APHE) shells, while also having access to a variety of special munitions (though, most of those don't canonically appear until the mid-to-late 3050s).

• Armor-piercing (AP) munitions (as distinct from the "standard" (HEAP) munitions) were prototyped by the FedSuns in 3053, and went into production in 3059.
  
• Caseless munitions were put into production by the FedSuns in 3055.
  
• Flak munitions were produced in 2310 for anti-air duty and have been available since, but were only occasionally popular (due to the superior anti-'Mech capabilities of the cluster rounds used by the LB-X series... when they were in production and available).
  
• Flechette munitions were put into production by the FedSuns in 3055.
  
• Precision munitions were put into production by the FedSuns in 3062.
  
• Tracer munitions were produced in 2300 and have been available since.

What would be canonically available for Standard ACs as of 3050: Standard (HEAP), Flak, and Tracer rounds.

It should be noted at the links above that while each of the special munitions offers a unique advantage or capability (increased damage or storage or effectiveness against certain types of targets), each also comes with a disadvantage (increased likelihood of jamming, reduction in ammo capacity or precision) as well.

Canonically, neither LB-X nor Ultra autocannons can use special munitions (nor can the Rotary or Hyper-Velocity ACs).

The LB-X ACs can fire both standard (HEAP/APHE) and specialized (LB-X only) cluster rounds at slightly longer ranges than standard ACs, at the cost of having to carry both and the time needed to switch the ammo feeds from one to the other.

The Ultra ACs (and RACs, and HVACs) can only fire standard (HEAP/APHE) rounds.

[Tombstoner]

Strum Wealh, on 10 November 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

The difference is that "bullets" & "slugs" are solid projectiles with no internal payloads, while "shells" are not solid throughout & contain explosives or other payloads.
Any of the three may be combined with other components to compose a "cartridge".

Thank you

[stjobe]

Just to show that it's not as easy as "(machine)guns fire bullets, (auto)cannons fire shells", here's a picture of a .22LR shell: