209 replies to this topic

[Krasnovian]

I personally like the differentiation between IS and clan A/Cs but in order to add a balancing factor I'd like to see IS A/Cs become burst BUT an extremely short burst maybe 10 rds per .1 sec to start and use the burst length to selectively nerf/buff different A/Cs. So damage could be spread across a moving or twisting target but not enough to lose much, if any, damage on target.

[Lucian Nostra]

Yeonne Greene, on 07 November 2014 - 11:32 PM, said:

That is exactly how automatic weapons, or any other kind of conventional firearms, work. How do you think the round gets in there? Round gets fired, gases or recoil (usually, sometimes this is electrically operated) push the bolt back to open the breech and eject the spent cartridge, and then when those forces subside a spring pushes the bolt back into position, stripping a new round from the magazine and locking it into the breech for firing.

And that is not how a Tank cannon with an autoloader functions.

Quote

Automatic simply means a gun fires as long as the trigger is held. That's it. There's nothing saying it has to have a high rate of fire. And, if you dig a little deeper, you'll find that the original definition for the term "automatic" as it relates to firearms means that the piece is self-loading (like an M1911 pistol in .45 ACP...which stands for Automatic Colt Pistol), not that it keeps firing if the trigger is held.

actually if YOU dig a bit deeper you'd notice that ACP is on the ROUND not the GUN. It was used to distinguish the round as rimless for use in a pistol vs rimmed rounds used in revolvers.. It has nothing to do with the guns being automatic, the 1911 is and has always been classified as semi-automatic. ALSO YES the very definition of an automatic weapon is that it keeps firing when the trigger is held!

Quote

A 40mm Bofors is an autocannon. A 20mm Hispano is an autocannon. A 30 mm Bushmaster is an autocannon. If a 200 mm gun loads itself and fires again as long as the trigger is held...it is an autocannon.

None of the guns you mention (bofors, hispano, bushmaster) require the breach to be opened so a new round can be fired, thus they are autocannons. I also like how you tell me automatic weapons aren't weapons that fire continuously when its about the pistol but here the definition is a gun that fires over and over..

Removing the man loading a breach fired weapon with a mechanical piece does not make a weapon automatic. A bolt action rifle with a motorized gear that cycles the bolt does not stop it from being bolt action and suddenly turn it into an automatic weapon

Im not debating weither or not IS ACs are autocannons or not this is about the examples given.

Edited by Lucian Nostra, 08 November 2014 - 08:27 AM.

[TimePeriod]

Lucian Nostra, on 08 November 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

Removing the man loading a breach fired weapon with a mechanical piece does not make a weapon automatic. A bolt action rifle with a motorized gear that cycles the bolt does not stop it from being bolt action

But wouldn't it just be simpler (and cheaper) just to use a standard bolt cycle- gas operated?

[stjobe]

SaltBeef, on 07 November 2014 - 10:56 PM, said:

Auto loaders, Ruskies and French use them,..they are unreliable and fire at a slower rate than manned loaders.

Sorry, but the fastest-firing MBT gun in the world is the French auto-loading GIAT CN120 gun on the LeClerc tank. It can fire 12 rounds/minute compared to the 10 rounds/minute max of the hand-loaded M256 gun of the M1A2.

As to burst-fire ACs:

I can quote you chapter and verse (and I have, numerous times on these forums) about how BT autocannons are burst- or continuous-fire. Just a few examples:

Here's all excerpts from Thunder Rift mentioning the word "autocannon" (hint: it's a lot of "long rolling bursts") and an excerpt from the Tech Manual plainly describing ACs as "basically giant machine-guns".

Here's me admitting single-shot ACs are technically possible in the BT Universe, but they'd need to be firing 200 kg rounds (as a reference, current-day 203mm shells weigh roughly 100 kg). Nobody has put forth a properly sourced description of a single shot AC from BT lore to this day, whereas descriptions of them as burst- or continuous-fire are a dime a dozen.

There's really no discussion to be had, the matter is settled: BT autocannons are burst- or continuous-fire. The single-shot myth is simply a misunderstanding of the simplifications made for the TT game where you really didn't want to make a to-hit roll for every individual shell in a burst of 3-100 (actual burst sizes described in lore).

So yes, IS ACs should really be burst-fire like the Clan; to differentiate them from and balance them against Clan weaponry you can fiddle with burst size, burst length, cool down, and projectile speeds.

[Lucian Nostra]

TimePeriod, on 08 November 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

But wouldn't it just be simpler (and cheaper) just to use a standard bolt cycle- gas operated?

and more efficient? yeah that's why we didn't develop stuff that cycles guns bolts for us and and moved into the realms of semi-auto and full auto weaponry using gas to cycle the bolt

It's just to clarify a point.. Removing the Human loading a tank cannon with an auto-loader doesn't turn that tank cannon into an autocannon as it still requires the breach to be opened and a new round loaded.. the autoloader isn't just stripping in a new round from a magazine as it cycles the bolt

Just like putting a gear on a bolt action wouldn't stop it from being a bolt action with an autoloader.

Edited by Lucian Nostra, 08 November 2014 - 08:35 AM.

[TimePeriod]

#Howautoloaderswork
#Howbreachloadedcannonswork
#Howboltactionrifleswork

[Barantor]

I would be fine with IS ACs firing multiple rounds.... .

Only if there were different manufacturers.

Then there could be an AC/20 that fires 4 shots at a really high velocity, one that fires 2 shots at moderate velocity, and the one we have now, but at about half the velocity. This would give IS options on which type they wanted. If you wanted to do more hit and run you might want the higher velocity, but if you know you are going to be facehugging brawling something you might take the lower velocity to do it all in one big thump.

This makes stock mechs neat too as you might get a different manufacturers cannon on a different mech. Different cannons could have their costs adjusted as well and maybe even the modules you equip would affect them differently.

This would be a big change to the game though and I don't see it happening till way after CW has settled down. The one thing I liked about mw:tactics was that the manufacturers were on the weapons.

I wish equipment was linked to CW a little bit more so folks have more pride in their faction if they aren't mercs.

[RazorbeastFXK3]

I still remember back when I played Mechwarrior 3 online the 'mechs with dual ac20 were able to cause other 'mechs to experience a gyro-overload. I'm kind of glad mwomercs removed that feature 'cause I don't remember simply crashing into another 'mech to cause them to fall over.

[Strum Wealh]

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

The specific reference is in regard to the MAD-3R Marauder's "GM Whirlwind" AC/5... which fires a three-shell burst of 120mm shells.

"And ammunition. The infantry was down to a few tens of rounds per man for some weapons. Just after a major battle, special rounds such as inferno warheads were vanishingly scarce. The shortage ran right up to the projectile weapons of the various 'Mechs. Grayson himself had fired fourteen "rounds" of a hundred 120mm shells each. That left him with eleven ammo cassettes — enough, if he conserved his shots, for one battle. He had already checked with Davis McCall and found that the Bannockburn, the Scotsman's Rifleman, was down to six cassette rounds — 600 shells — for each of its autocannons. And the way a Rifleman went through AC ammo . . ." - The Price of Glory, ch. 13

"Colin MacLaren suddenly seemed to get another idea. His Marauder lunged out of the line toward a concentration of the Davion infantry. Like a beast of prey, the alien shape of the BattleMech stalked forward. With blistering laserfire emanating from its blocky forearms, it sought among the entrenchments for its victims.
The Feds held their ground until MacLaren opened up with the 120mm autocannon. Its snout ranged back and forth above the 'Mech's carapace, spitting explosive death at the infantry. The destruction so wrought was enough for the Feds. They broke.
MacLaren declined to pursue. They were just ground-pounders after all. The Marauder returned to its place in the formation." - Wolves on the Border, ch. 31

That's right - the humble AC/5 is a burst-mode version of the Abrams MBT main gun...

[FupDup]

LordKnightFandragon, on 07 November 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

Or would the entire point be to nerf the ACs in a more lore-ish way? While also nerfing PPFLD and maybe making energy builds a tiny bit more viable. Besides, even in a short burst kinda way, the IS ACs still dont jam+spread damage all over the place....or spread damage all over the place with an LBX. They would just spread the damage a bit more, or have a chance to do so. My only proposal is to spread IS ACs into 2 shots instead of 1, with very little distance between shots, even less so then what the clans have now. Refire rate on them is fairly quick already. Wouldnt be to much reason to buff it. Besides, there are CD modules....Make them useful and kinda wanted if you want to specialize in your ACs roF...

If I made any buff, it would be the reduction in unlock cost of modules, by about 50% in both XP and Cbill...

For Clans, energy builds are already superior to ballistic builds excluding the Dire Wolf outlier. Clan UACs have the benefits of lower tonnage, longer range, fewer critical slots, and double-tapping...and yet they're inferior to lasers, because lasers are even lighter, even smaller, do more damage per ton, have infinite ammo, and have a much lower skill floor due to being hitscan.

IS ACs are heavier, bulkier, shorter ranged, and have lower DPS. If the seemingly advantaged Clan ballistics ended up inferior to lasers in spite of their advantages, then IS ACs would be guaranteed to share their fate. I don't want high-tonnage weapons that require ammo and shot-leading to be inferior to low-tonnage weapons with high damage and hitscan speeds.


Contrary to popular belief, lasers are actually viable and effective weapons outside of the few crappy ones like Small Lasers. Medium and Large lasers, and their ER versions, however, are quite effective guns. Maybe even their Pulse equivalents might be kind of worth it after the patch (the Clan LPL was always decent). Possibly even Small Pulse Lasers.

[Livewyr]

Because PGI.

I used to not care that much because it was a balancing factor between Clan UACs and IS ACs.

Now, though, they should be burst. AC20 on a Hunchie is like a UAC20 with no jamming an PPFLD.

[Joseph Mallan]

Livewyr, on 08 November 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

Because PGI.

I used to not care that much because it was a balancing factor between Clan UACs and IS ACs.

Now, though, they should be burst. AC20 on a Hunchie is like a UAC20 with no jamming an PPFLD.

Now??? They have always been front loaded death against 1/2 as much armor for the majority of THEN, and still to this day!

[Strum Wealh]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 November 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

Now??? They have always been front loaded death against 1/2 as much armor for the majority of THEN, and still to this day!

Incorrect - BT ACs were always burst-mode weapons that (along with every member of the laser family) were abstracted into looking like they behaved like front-loaded-damage weapons for simplicity-of-gameplay purposes.

Many - perhaps even most - standard ACs fire in ~10-round bursts, with the extremes being three-round bursts (like the "GM Whirlwind" AC/5 on the Marauder) or four-round bursts (like the "ChemJet Gun" AC/20s on the Demolisher or the "Zeus 75" AC/20 on the MechBuster) at the low end, to as many as 100-round bursts (like the "Pontiac 100" AC/20 on the Victor) at the high end.

"Ardan ran a hurried check on his Victor's main armament The right arm Pontiac 100 autocannon had the best chance of scoring a crippling hit on the Thunderbolt, but he was afraid that his swim in the mud might have fouled its feed mechanism. The autocannon was a devastating weapon. It fired high-speed, rapid-fire streams of explosive, armor-piercing shells from cassettes or carousels fed into the gun one at a time by a complex and occasionally balky autoloader mechanism. Each cassette held 100 shells, and by a widespread but commonly accepted looseness of terminology, each cassette was itself considered to be one round. One cassette round was already loaded. Nineteen more were stored in the autoloader chamber high up in his Victor's right torso. He would have to use that single round carefully, because if the loader jammed, he would not get another chance.

-----

He steadied the crosshairs of his HUD and triggered the autocannon.
The weapon bucked and roared, jolting Ardan against his seat. The stream of high explosive chopped and slashed at the Thunderbolt's chest armor, smashed across its left shoulder, and turned the LRM launcher into a tangled, black-smoking ruin. It took six seconds for the autocannon to cycle through the cassette, and then the dull thud of a loader failure echoed through the Victor. He checked his console. As he'd feared, the mechanism was jammed." - The Sword and the Dagger, ch. 13

THAT is what BT ACs are, and what they have always been - burst-firing, cassette/magazine-fed, automatic weapons.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 08 November 2014 - 10:22 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Strum Wealh, on 08 November 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

Incorrect - BT ACs were always burst-mode weapons that (along with every member of the laser family) were abstracted into looking like they behaved like front-loaded-damage weapons for simplicity-of-gameplay purposes.

Many - perhaps even most - standard ACs fire in ~10-round bursts, with the extremes being three-round bursts (like the "GM Whirlwind" AC/5 on the Marauder) or four-round bursts (like the "ChemJet Gun" AC/20s on the Demolisher or the "Zeus 75" AC/20 on the MechBuster) at the low end, to as many as 100-round bursts (like the "Pontiac 100" AC/20 on the Victor) at the high end.

"Ardan ran a hurried check on his Victor's main armament The right arm Pontiac 100 autocannon had the best chance of scoring a crippling hit on the Thunderbolt, but he was afraid that his swim in the mud might have fouled its feed mechanism. The autocannon was a devastating weapon. It fired high-speed, rapid-fire streams of explosive, armor-piercing shells from cassettes or carousels fed into the gun one at a time by a complex and occasionally balky autoloader mechanism. Each cassette held 100 shells, and by a widespread but commonly accepted looseness of terminology, each cassette was itself considered to be one round. One cassette round was already loaded. Nineteen more were stored in the autoloader chamber high up in his Victor's right torso. He would have to use that single round carefully, because if the loader jammed, he would not get another chance.

-----

He steadied the crosshairs of his HUD and triggered the autocannon.
The weapon bucked and roared, jolting Ardan against his seat. The stream of high explosive chopped and slashed at the Thunderbolt's chest armor, smashed across its left shoulder, and turned the LRM launcher into a tangled, black-smoking ruin. It took six seconds for the autocannon to cycle through the cassette, and then the dull thud of a loader failure echoed through the Victor. He checked his console. As he'd feared, the mechanism was jammed." - The Sword and the Dagger, ch. 13

THAT is what BT ACs are, and what they have always been - burst-firing, cassette/magazine-fed, automatic weapons.

(Just reread this... its sounds more angry than is/was written.)
Don't quote me FLUFF. And that is all the books are is fluff. hard fact, the game mechanics applied the damage in front loaded single hit locations. IF they were as fluff wrote then we would be rolling multiple hit locations for ACs.

Fluff= Light sabers kill Stormtroopers and other Imperial troops in one slice. Game... light sabers are not that effective. Fluff v Game Mechanics.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 08 November 2014 - 11:02 AM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 November 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

(Just reread this... its sounds more angry than is/was written.)
Don't quote me FLUFF. And that is all the books are is fluff. hard fact, the game mechanics applied the damage in front loaded single hit locations. IF they were as fluff wrote then we would be rolling multiple hit locations for ACs.

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.

[Odanan]

LauLiao, on 07 November 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

IS autocannons have always been pinpoint, single shell. It stems from TT rules that had all AC damage going to single locations.

Yes. In TT the damage is done in one location, but, strangely, the lore describes the weapons as a stream of fire. AC/20 = magazine of 20 shots.

[stjobe]

Odanan, on 08 November 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

AC/20 = magazine of 20 shots.

No. ACs are burst-fire weaponry firing anything from 3-100 individual projectiles per "cassette" or "round" or "shot".

The number actually stands for "kilograms of ammo fired per second", so an AC/2 fires 2 kg/s, an AC/5 fire 5 kg/s, and so on up to the AC/20 that fires 20 kg/s downrange.

20 kg/s is 200 kg/10s, which is one "cassette", "round", or "shot". Five of those make up a ton of AC/20 ammo (in TT).

[RedDragon]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 November 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

(Just reread this... its sounds more angry than is/was written.)
Don't quote me FLUFF. And that is all the books are is fluff. hard fact, the game mechanics applied the damage in front loaded single hit locations. IF they were as fluff wrote then we would be rolling multiple hit locations for ACs.

Again, since, you basically ignored it last time, burst fire is right there in the rules (although, given, only in the advance rule sets). You won't deny that MGs are burst fire, or would you? That is the best proof at hand that TT just doesn't have incorporated game mechanics for burst fire and handles it as though all shots would hit a single location. But that doesn't magically make MGs and ACs single shot as you'd like it to be.

Whether it makes sense to have all ACs burst firing in MWO is a whole other question. The problem is that people try to justify PGI's decision based on the lore, and that has to fail because there is absolutely no evidence for single-shell ACs in lore.

People need to accept that it was a conscious decision by PGI to deviate from lore in this and nothing more.
Again, there is no reason outside game balance why ACs should be single shot. Lasers are pinpoint in TT, they aren't in MWO. Flamers are pinpoint in TT, they aren't in MWO. Only ACs are, and that's vice versa how it should be.

[Escef]

RedDragon, on 08 November 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

People need to accept that it was a conscious decision by PGI to deviate from lore in this and nothing more.
Again, there is no reason outside game balance why ACs should be single shot. Lasers are pinpoint in TT, they aren't in MWO. Flamers are pinpoint in TT, they aren't in MWO. Only ACs are, and that's vice versa how it should be.

So, you think the light weapons with infinite ammo should be pin-point damage dealers, and the stupid heavy weapons that do significantly less damage per ton should not, despite that fact that we know pin-point damage to be more effective in this game? If things were as you propose, what sounds more effective, carrying a massive chain-firing ballistic, or devoting that tonnage to more, bigger energy weapons and lots of heat sinks? Because I know what sounds more effective to me.

Energy weapons have had a massive edge over ballistic in TT for years, and doing things the way you want would make ballistics in MWO even weaker than their TT cousins. Basically, the end result would be all but removing most ballistics from the game, simply because most players would avoid them. In order to rectify this problem you'd need to institute more and more fixes to either buff ballistics or nerf energy weapons.

I think the way Spheroid ACs work is fine as is. Is it a perfect match to the fluff from TT? Nope. And it doesn't need to be. What it needs to do is work in a balanced fashion with the MWO game mechanics. Which I think it does a good job off.

[Ultimax]

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

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.

Considering the quirk revamp, I don't think this is a cut and dry statement any more.


A good many IS mechs basically have one specific laser weapon each where they are at least equal to if not superior to the heat intensive clan lasers.

IS still retains the superior ballistics, and several mechs also now boast superior versions of those as well.