209 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Bhael Fire, on 07 November 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

Because they didn't want ACs to be heavier and ammo dependent versions of lasers.

and because unlike TT clans here were supposed to be sidegrades

[CocoaJin]

CrockdaddyAoD, on 07 November 2014 - 11:30 PM, said:

and no one actually cares. It is a definition, make it what you want.

By definition, a definition sort of implies you can't just make it what you want...or else it wouldnt be clearly defined.

In terms of use, MGs tend to be anti-personal weapons with limited viability against soft vehicles(vehicles can include aircraft). Cannons tend to be strictly anti-vehicular, both soft and/or armored depending on the round. It terms of the rounds, MGs tend to go up to .50cal and can more or less be carried and operated by infantry...cannons start at more or less 20mm and are static emplacements, towed or mounted on vehicles.

This convention is apparently also followed by BT...at least that's implied by Sarna.

[Kiiyor]

Captain Stiffy, on 07 November 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

Shouldn't they all be like the clan ones? Why did they start down that path for IS to begin with?

Well, in the Lore, they varied tremendously between manufacturer and model. Some appeared to fire single shells, some appeared to fire streams of dakka instead.

I actually enjoy the difference in MWO. The Clans do more damage, over a longer time. The IS tend to do less, but in more concentrated bursts. It lends a distinct flavour to each faction, and it's thematic also; the Clans feel more high tech, whereas the IS tech seems more venerable and ancient. Like modern assault rifles vs huge blackpowder cannons.

There are many that have issue with the IS autocannons, thinking they should be burst also, but my gut feeling is that these feelings would disperse if we had pure faction vs faction warfare.

The Clan lasers are better than the IS equivalents, but the IS have better dakka. I think that if the IS didn't have the autocannon advantage, they wouldn't stand a chance in CW.

[mindwarp]

Way, way back, before closed beta, the same people screaming now were all screaming about "hitscan weapons" and how if autocannons fired in burst they'd be low skill noob weapons that would break the game.

[RedDragon]

Kiiyor, on 08 November 2014 - 12:34 AM, said:

Well, in the Lore, they varied tremendously between manufacturer and model. Some appeared to fire single shells, some appeared to fire streams of dakka instead.

Nope, there's not a single mentioning of single-fire autocannons in lore. I'm still waiting for someone to actually quote the source material from which that claim stems. At best they are able to point to that obscure part on Sarna where it is claimed that the AC on the Couldron Born is single-shot, but there's also no source for that.

The reasoning is simple. An author reads "autocannon" and he knows that it is burst-fire. Simple as that. No need to get into technicalities like people do it here.

There is only one reason ACs are single shot in MWO, and that is because PGI made them so.

Even the argument that in TT, ACs only hit one location, doesn't hold water, because that is also true for lasers, which are DoT here in MWO.

[Kiiyor]

RedDragon, on 08 November 2014 - 02:15 AM, said:

Nope, there's not a single mentioning of single-fire autocannons in lore. I'm still waiting for someone to actually quote the source material from which that claim stems. At best they are able to point to that obscure part on Sarna where it is claimed that the AC on the Couldron Born is single-shot, but there's also no source for that.

The reasoning is simple. An author reads "autocannon" and he knows that it is burst-fire. Simple as that. No need to get into technicalities like people do it here.

There is only one reason ACs are single shot in MWO, and that is because PGI made them so.

Even the argument that in TT, ACs only hit one location, doesn't hold water, because that is also true for lasers, which are DoT here in MWO.

One of the Grey Death novels mentioned one of the autocannons firing an 120mm shell. TO MY BOOKSHELF.

[CocoaJin]

Kiiyor, on 08 November 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

One of the Grey Death novels mentioned one of the autocannons firing an 120mm shell. TO MY BOOKSHELF.

Edited by CocoaJin, 08 November 2014 - 02:40 AM.

[RedDragon]

Kiiyor, on 08 November 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

One of the Grey Death novels mentioned one of the autocannons firing an 120mm shell. TO MY BOOKSHELF.

If that is true, I'll gladly relativize my statement - I'd be happy to have a source for this at last

But even then it would be a one in a million find. Not to mention that even the game rules say that ACs are burst fire (for purposes of "walking" shots from one target to another and damaging infantry - you can kill more infantrymen with ACs than with a Gauss in one shot because they fire bursts).

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Kiiyor, on 08 November 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

One of the Grey Death novels mentioned one of the autocannons firing an 120mm shell. TO MY BOOKSHELF.

RedDragon, on 08 November 2014 - 02:30 AM, said:

If that is true, I'll gladly relativize my statement - I'd be happy to have a source for this at last

But even then it would be a one in a million find. Not to mention that even the game rules say that ACs are burst fire (for purposes of "walking" shots from one target to another and damaging infantry - you can kill more infantrymen with ACs than with a Gauss in one shot because they fire bursts).

Generally that sort of number stands for the diameter of the barrel/projectile and the shell.

Here's this list too:


Such damage from various shells types also depends on their velocity and what they may be packing in their warhead(s) in relation to the target they are hitting.

So the problem is also determining the involved variables for weapon fire rate, and used warhead payloads to determine an appropriate damage value, which is why the various AC Classes were used for the board game. It's generally assumed to be HEAP, (High Explosive Armor Piecing) for ammo used in Battlemechs.

Therefore, we have a foundation from BT rules and then we have examples from novels (examples that might not utilize specific enough time frames, where there still is room for interpretation as to what each shell actually does to armor and internal structures).

but it should be a reasonable point to begin with, to create better AC variety in the future!

[mike29tw]

FupDup, on 07 November 2014 - 07:28 PM, said:

If IS ACs were burst, there's a good chance that they would be rendered inferior to lasers (yes, even IS lasers) unless compensatory buffs were applied at the same time. Of course, most people supporting burst-fire IS ACs don't propose such compensation buffs...

I do.

Also, quirks.
25% tighter burst for all ACs.

Edited by mike29tw, 08 November 2014 - 06:13 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

mindwarp, on 08 November 2014 - 02:00 AM, said:

Way, way back, before closed beta, the same people screaming now were all screaming about "hitscan weapons" and how if autocannons fired in burst they'd be low skill noob weapons that would break the game.

Those are any weapon the person talking doesnt like, like LRMs

[Joseph Mallan]

Viktor Drake, on 07 November 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

Well that depends. If you read the novels, ACs actually fire a stream of shells.

FLUFF is not game Mechanics. Otherwise AC rules would match the fiuff.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 08 November 2014 - 06:41 AM.

[RedDragon]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 November 2014 - 06:41 AM, said:

FLUFF is not game Mechanics. Otherwise AC rules would match the fiuff.

RedDragon, on 08 November 2014 - 02:30 AM, said:

Not to mention that even the game rules say that ACs are burst fire (for purposes of "walking" shots from one target to another and damaging infantry - you can kill more infantrymen with ACs than with a Gauss in one shot because they fire bursts).

Btw for all of you who state that ACs should be single shot because the rules in TT say they only hit one location: What about MGs? They also hit only one location, does that mean they are also single shot? Or flamers?

Edited by RedDragon, 08 November 2014 - 06:49 AM.

[Creovex]

Viktor Drake, on 07 November 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

Well that depends. If you read the novels, ACs actually fire a stream of shells.

2 years late to that discussion ace... This has been rehashed plenty of times since CB.... just accept how they are and move past it

Edited by Creovex, 08 November 2014 - 06:53 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

RedDragon, on 08 November 2014 - 06:47 AM, said:

Btw for all of you who state that ACs should be single shot because the rules in TT say they only hit one location: What about MGs? They also hit only one location, does that mean they are also single shot? Or flamers?

MGs could be single point damage locations IF PGI chose to do so. The best answer was given. It allows from more than one way to do damage and inflict harm.

Be the guy making a game/ running a game. Do you let the players determine the rules or do you run your game how you want it run?

[TimePeriod]

Wouldn't it be a pretty quick fix to just lower the amount of heat generated from burst-fire then PPFLD-IS single shot version?

Wouldn't it just be smarter to give us options to select the number of shells fired? Like a 2/5/10/20 round burst?

[Joseph Mallan]

TimePeriod, on 08 November 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

Wouldn't it be a pretty quick fix to just lower the amount of heat generated from burst-fire then PPFLD-IS single shot version?

Wouldn't it just be smarter to give us options to select the number of shells fired? Like a 2/5/10/20 round burst?

don't forget 1. I like firing one bullet/shell per trigger pull.

[Captain Stiffy]

I really didn't mean for this thread to go so far.

Edited by Captain Stiffy, 08 November 2014 - 07:16 AM.

[Escef]

TimePeriod, on 08 November 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

Wouldn't it just be smarter to give us options to select the number of shells fired? Like a 2/5/10/20 round burst?

Dude, I would laugh my ass off at people trying to aim while pinging them with 20 round burst. People cry hard enough about screen shake against C-UAC5s and chained LRMs.

[Joseph Mallan]

OPs rarely do Cap'n.