236 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

Quote

Do you plan on removing their damage penalties VS Mechs? Otherwise, they're simply not worth the tonnage.

Since MWO armor is doubled, halve the damage penalty. This means even a light rifle will damage armor (and rifles deal full internal damage in any case). It also would make the heavy rifle compare favorably to the AC/5- higher damage but vastly lower (in MWO terms, a heavy rifle has 9 shots per TON) endurance.

They really are the ideal solution to fill the gap between MG and AC.

[kosmos1214]

Mcgral18, on 12 March 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

I think it would add a unique flavour to the weapon, being able to damage IS more than armour, without any crits being taken into account.

Of course, not 0 damage like the light rifle would have. Don't know what would be appropriate.


Light rifle is 3 damage for 3 tons, with a 360M unbuffed range and unbuffed 18 rounds per ton. It could be doubled and still not meet the current AC number of ~150.

Perhaps just -1 damage to armour, which makes the LR a better AC2, though likely with a lower RoF and shorter range.


At 8 tons and 3 crit slots, the King Crab could mount 6 Heavy Rifles for (without reduction) 48 PP FLD, for the same heat as 6 MLs. Only a ton per gun makes it run dry fast, though it does have a pair of MLs as backup. A 540M range makes it reasonably ranged.

It could add something different to the game. An IS only weapon.

on a side note yes it could do it but you are forgetting that we have ghost heat witch would keep you from doing to much with it like the 11 erppc dire wolf

[Ovion]

Alek Ituin, on 12 March 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, but I feel there needs to be less emphasis on PPFLD weaponry. Which is why I'd want HMG's and MG Arrays over Rifles any day.

Smaller, high RoF weapons should dominate the low tonnage end of the Ballistic spectrum, ramping up to large single shot cannons at the high tonnage end. But that's not to say things like Light AC's, modified ProtoMech AC's, and Rifles would be entirely unwelcome. I'd actually look forward to ProtoMech AC's, assuming of course they're MUCH shorter ranged than their higher tonnage counterparts. Something to let Lights have Ballistic options, you know?

Why?

Why should lights be relegated to small DoT weapons only?
Why can't I be a hitandrun or ambush predator?

I can mount 6 Small Pulse on my Locust and run in at 170, and put out 24 damage a volley, and generally can land 2-3 on a pass of a heavy mech.

Why can't I be able to do the same with short range heavy ballistics?
Being able to mount 1-4 mech rifles on a light mech would be nice.

[Alek Ituin]

Ovion, on 12 March 2015 - 12:05 PM, said:

Why?

Why should lights be relegated to small DoT weapons only?
Why can't I be a hitandrun or ambush predator?

I can mount 6 Small Pulse on my Locust and run in at 170, and put out 24 damage a volley, and generally can land 2-3 on a pass of a heavy mech.

Why can't I be able to do the same with short range heavy ballistics?
Being able to mount 1-4 mech rifles on a light mech would be nice.

Because that's how Ballistic weapons work. Either they're low caliber and compact, or they're large and damaging. Lasers don't have that limitation because of their core method of operation.

If you want a PPFLD weapon, then you want a cannon. And cannons are not lightweight weapons. Ergo, the low tonnage end of the Ballistic spectrum will be dominated by small, low caliber, high ROF weaponry. It's just the reality of weapon design.

Mind you, I never said Lights can't have PPFLD weapons. I just said most of those light Ballistic options should be high RoF DPS type weapons. ProtoMech AC's and Rifles (without damage penalties) are very lightweight alternatives that provide PPFLD abilities. But unlike the higher weight classes, I don't feel Lights should have a major focus on PPFLD Ballistics. But before any new low tonnage Ballistic options get added, PGI needs to remove MG CoF and bump them up to 1 DPS. Make them worth something...

Edited by Alek Ituin, 12 March 2015 - 01:23 PM.

[Ovion]

And yet, mech Rifles and Rocket Launchers are an option that exist in BT, and there's no reason we couldn't / shouldn't have them for lights, and any other mech.

And it's hardly a focus, just an option.

Plus one that's timeline valid, unlike HMGs and arrays.

[stjobe]

That Dawg, on 11 March 2015 - 03:16 PM, said:

when the TT game was going on in 1985 the concept, the thought of turning it into some 3D "game" you'd play sitting at a desk was literally incomprehensible

You do realize the original MechWarrior computer game was released in 1989, right? And that the original Elite was released in 1984?

The concept was far, far from "literally incomprehensible" 30 years ago.

[KraftySOT]

stjobe, on 12 March 2015 - 02:29 PM, said:

You do realize the original MechWarrior computer game was released in 1989, right? And that the original Elite was released in 1984?

The concept was far, far from "literally incomprehensible" 30 years ago.

And considering FASA's first computer game was in 1982:

http://en.wikipedia....le_Playing_Game

It was pretty obvious that their other creations in the works would be games. Namely Shadowrun and Battletech.

[kosmos1214]

Alek Ituin, on 12 March 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Because that's how Ballistic weapons work. Either they're low caliber and compact, or they're large and damaging. Lasers don't have that limitation because of their core method of operation.

If you want a PPFLD weapon, then you want a cannon. And cannons are not lightweight weapons. Ergo, the low tonnage end of the Ballistic spectrum will be dominated by small, low caliber, high ROF weaponry. It's just the reality of weapon design.

Mind you, I never said Lights can't have PPFLD weapons. I just said most of those light Ballistic options should be high RoF DPS type weapons. ProtoMech AC's and Rifles (without damage penalties) are very lightweight alternatives that provide PPFLD abilities. But unlike the higher weight classes, I don't feel Lights should have a major focus on PPFLD Ballistics. But before any new low tonnage Ballistic options get added, PGI needs to remove MG CoF and bump them up to 1 DPS. Make them worth something...

on a side note this is not 100% true by any mater or means you see the damage a bullet does is from the energy of its impact not its caliber while that does in fact help its not the whole story for example rounds with heaver heaver bullets will hold there energy beater and be effective at longer ranges where as a round with a lighter bullet will deal its damage fine up close but will lose it energy faster as it travels

[KraftySOT]

Alek Ituin, on 12 March 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Because that's how Ballistic weapons work. Either they're low caliber and compact, or they're large and damaging.

Wut?

I dont think you know how ballistics work. Small can be more damaging than large. It has alot to do with muzzle velocity but thats not the only aspect that matters.

A high velocity 25mm round might be more deadly than a low velocity 75mm round. Then you have of course, different types of ammunition. Heavier solid shot for penetration, or hollowed points/sabot/aprc these days. High explosive. APHE. APHEI.

Take for example the high velocity 37mm gun on a Panzer 38(t) being more effective than the low velocity 50mm gun on the Panzer IIIH.

Size isnt everything.

[Alek Ituin]

KraftySOT, on 12 March 2015 - 04:58 PM, said:

Wut?

I dont think you know how ballistics work. Small can be more damaging than large. It has alot to do with muzzle velocity but thats not the only aspect that matters.

A high velocity 25mm round might be more deadly than a low velocity 75mm round. Then you have of course, different types of ammunition. Heavier solid shot for penetration, or hollowed points/sabot/aprc these days. High explosive. APHE. APHEI.

Take for example the high velocity 37mm gun on a Panzer 38(t) being more effective than the low velocity 50mm gun on the Panzer IIIH.

Size isnt everything.

Oh yeah, because a 50mm is such a large Ballistic weapon *rolls eyes*

The 8.8cm KwK43 L/71 was the most dangerous and powerful cannon in common service at the time. It was LARGE. Do you know why? Because the 8.8cm shells were abso-f**kin-lutely massive to achieve their velocities. Which means a powerful Ballistic weapon will also be a large Ballistic weapon. It's a reality of their design. 7.62mm weapons are generally larger than 5.56mm weapons. 30mm cannons are generally larger than 20mm cannons. 120mm guns are generally larger than 90mm guns. An 18" naval cannon is generally larger than a 16" naval cannon. See the progression here? The more powerful the cannon, the larger and heavier it becomes to deal with the stress of firing. Otherwise they'd simply break apart with catastrophic consequences.

You can have a .22 with a foot long cartridge going at 4km/s and still not achieve the same damage as a 120mm shell going at 1km/s. Because that's how Ballistic weapons work. It's not just about how fast your round goes, it's about how fast your round goes, how large the round is, how heavy the round is, how aerodynamic the round is... etc. etc.

Anyway, if you said to me "Not if it's a magnetic weapon, they can be both compact and powerful", I would have agreed entirely. Because magnetic weapons have none of the constraints that conventional Ballistics do when increasing the velocity of the projectile. I also forgot about the Magshot, which would be a huge boon to Lights for PPFLD damage, much better IMO than Rifles.

EDIT - Here's a nifty list of weapon weights from my list up there:

5.56mm AR-15 - 3.9kg
7.62mm G3K - 4.1kg

20mm M61 - 112kg
30mm Gsh-6-30 - 149kg

90mm M3 - 2'000-ish kg (?)
Rheinmetall 120mm - 3'317kg

16"/50 Mk 7 - 121'519kg
BL 18" Mk I - 151'390kg

Edited by Alek Ituin, 13 March 2015 - 08:19 AM.

[kosmos1214]

Alek Ituin, on 13 March 2015 - 07:59 AM, said:

Oh yeah, because a 50mm is such a large Ballistic weapon *rolls eyes*

The 8.8cm KwK43 L/71 was the most dangerous and powerful cannon in common service at the time. It was LARGE. Do you know why? Because the 8.8cm shells were abso-f**kin-lutely massive to achieve their velocities. Which means a powerful Ballistic weapon will also be a large Ballistic weapon. It's a reality of their design. 7.62mm weapons are generally larger than 5.56mm weapons. 30mm cannons are generally larger than 20mm cannons. 120mm guns are generally larger than 90mm guns. An 18" naval cannon is generally larger than a 16" naval cannon. See the progression here? The more powerful the cannon, the larger and heavier it becomes to deal with the stress of firing. Otherwise they'd simply break apart with catastrophic consequences.

You can have a .22 with a foot long cartridge going at 4km/s and still not achieve the same damage as a 120mm shell going at 1km/s. Because that's how Ballistic weapons work. It's not just about how fast your round goes, it's about how fast your round goes, how large the round is, how heavy the round is, how aerodynamic the round is... etc. etc.

Anyway, if you said to me "Not if it's a magnetic weapon, they can be both compact and powerful", I would have agreed entirely. Because magnetic weapons have none of the constraints that conventional Ballistics do when increasing the velocity of the projectile. I also forgot about the Magshot, which would be a huge boon to Lights for PPFLD damage, much better IMO than Rifles.

EDIT - Here's a nifty list of weapon weights from my list up there:

5.56mm AR-15 - 3.9kg
7.62mm G3K - 4.1kg

20mm M61 - 112kg
30mm Gsh-6-30 - 149kg

90mm M3 - 2'000-ish kg (?)
Rheinmetall 120mm - 3'317kg

16"/50 Mk 7 - 121'519kg
BL 18" Mk I - 151'390kg

well where do i start with how bad this post is the flawed logic the obvious lack of knowledge of ballistics the extremely bad examples im honestly not sure where to start well i guess ill ill go with a line item listing so as to not use piles of run on logic

note shell and cartridge weights are rounded up to the nearest thousandth where applicable


1 by your own logic in these posts an IS heavy rifle would do more damage then an ac 20 to do basic math a heavy rifle has 6 shots per ton meaning each shell weighs 183.334 pounds or 166.667 kg approximately where as an ac 20 has 7 shots per ton meaning each shell if the ac only fires 1 shell to deal its full damage weighs 157.143 pounds or 143.828 kg now is the ac uses more then 1 shell to deal its full damage it is at even greater disadvantage as you would be losing a grater portion on your total mass to shell casing

2 while i can not speak on the artillery class weapons in your examples i can speak on the personal class arms listed namely
the 5.56 witch i assume it the 5.56 NATO as you dident list the designation and the 7.62 with i assume is the 7.62x51mm as you yet again did not list the designation and while yes these 2 specific rifles have weights that would appear to support your argument i will point out that there are lighter arms that can adequately handle the pressures of thoughts rounds and baring that how about we bring up the Thompson center encore hand gun witch can handle both thoughts rounds and round up to and including the 500 nitro express witch is a cartridge capable of killing any animal that walks the face of the earth literally
and the encore weighs in at 5 to 6 pounds

3 your terrible comparison between a theoretical foot long 22 cartridge and a 120mm artillery shell now i really dont need to speak on this to much as any idiot can see the disparity in volume in this example yet i also feel need to comment on the fact that if we continued to increase the amount of powder behind the 22 cartridge if we could keep the bullet together at thoughts speeds could reach the same potential damage as that 120mm shell and before you say it i will yes that is a big if but considering the fact its a theoretical argument same as yours i feel its a valid point to make. on a side note for all thoughts who may be wondering his theoretical 22 round is traveling 13123.36 feet a second

4 the way you ignored SOTS point as ballistics is a proportional science that is if ever thing is proportionally the same you will get the same effect as in if i shoot a cartridge at a block of ballistic soap and the bullet stops exactly 1/2 way through the block
and i take and double every thing the amount of powder weight of bullet the size of the block of soap ect i would get the same result i say this to point out that there are no magic rules that come in to play with larger shells to make his point any less valid

now i also wish to ask a question do you shoot ??? i ask as you seem to have some misunderstanding as to the definition of caliber

[Alek Ituin]

kosmos1214, on 15 March 2015 - 07:15 PM, said:

well where do i start with how bad this post is the flawed logic the obvious lack of knowledge of ballistics the extremely bad examples im honestly not sure where to start well i guess ill ill go with a line item listing so as to not use piles of run on logic

note shell and cartridge weights are rounded up to the nearest thousandth where applicable


1 by your own logic in these posts an IS heavy rifle would do more damage then an ac 20 to do basic math a heavy rifle has 6 shots per ton meaning each shell weighs 183.334 pounds or 166.667 kg approximately where as an ac 20 has 7 shots per ton meaning each shell if the ac only fires 1 shell to deal its full damage weighs 157.143 pounds or 143.828 kg now is the ac uses more then 1 shell to deal its full damage it is at even greater disadvantage as you would be losing a grater portion on your total mass to shell casing

2 while i can not speak on the artillery class weapons in your examples i can speak on the personal class arms listed namely
the 5.56 witch i assume it the 5.56 NATO as you dident list the designation and the 7.62 with i assume is the 7.62x51mm as you yet again did not list the designation and while yes these 2 specific rifles have weights that would appear to support your argument i will point out that there are lighter arms that can adequately handle the pressures of thoughts rounds and baring that how about we bring up the Thompson center encore hand gun witch can handle both thoughts rounds and round up to and including the 500 nitro express witch is a cartridge capable of killing any animal that walks the face of the earth literally
and the encore weighs in at 5 to 6 pounds

3 your terrible comparison between a theoretical foot long 22 cartridge and a 120mm artillery shell now i really dont need to speak on this to much as any idiot can see the disparity in volume in this example yet i also feel need to comment on the fact that if we continued to increase the amount of powder behind the 22 cartridge if we could keep the bullet together at thoughts speeds could reach the same potential damage as that 120mm shell and before you say it i will yes that is a big if but considering the fact its a theoretical argument same as yours i feel its a valid point to make. on a side note for all thoughts who may be wondering his theoretical 22 round is traveling 13123.36 feet a second

4 the way you ignored SOTS point as ballistics is a proportional science that is if ever thing is proportionally the same you will get the same effect as in if i shoot a cartridge at a block of ballistic soap and the bullet stops exactly 1/2 way through the block
and i take and double every thing the amount of powder weight of bullet the size of the block of soap ect i would get the same result i say this to point out that there are no magic rules that come in to play with larger shells to make his point any less valid

now i also wish to ask a question do you shoot ??? i ask as you seem to have some misunderstanding as to the definition of caliber

1 - Where the hell did you get this from? Not even going to dignify your strawman with a defense.

2 - Do you not understand the word "generally"? Because generally, a 5.56mm weapon will be smaller and lighter than a 7.62mm weapon. What do you expect, a list of every weapon using one or both of those calibers, and their weights? Get over it.

3 - You obviously don't pay attention to anything, do you? The reason I used a .22 @ 4km/s and a 120mm is exactly because of the disparity in size. A comparison made to show the ridiculousness of saying that round velocity is the only thing that matters in ballistics.

4 - I don't think you understand how this works. Let me educate you then: Shell A weighs 1kg and goes 1km/s. Shell B weighs 2kg and goes 1km/s. Both shells are fired at a 1m thick target and stop 0.5m in. Shell A generates 1MN of force, Shell B generates 2MN of force. Hmmm... the heavier, larger shell generates more impact force for the same velocity. Last I checked, a higher impact force meant more damage to the target.

Getting tired of explaining this s**t over and over again... It's clearly explained and readily available for you to read over and over again.

Respond to this reply with the same argument(s), or fail to understand what I've written, and I'll be adding you to my ignore list to save myself time in the future. (Note: this applies to any and everyone, not just Kosmos)

Edited by Alek Ituin, 16 March 2015 - 01:23 AM.

[Ovion]

Your assumption seems to be 1 : they're all firing around the same velocity.
2: real world physics apply here.

Regardless of anything else, It's battletech future science, enjoy.

[Triskelion]

wanderer, on 24 December 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

Heavy MGs later.

Light/Medium/Heavy Rifles going in would actually be meaningful for IS 'Mechs. They suffer damage reduction vs. armor, but deal full damage to internals and neatly fill the weight gaps between MGs and ACs.

For that matter, mortars. Indirect-fire ballistic weapon, anyone?

MECH MORTARS.


YEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS




I have a dream,

that one day my dire wolf will be an artillery piece.


I would still like to have MG types and arrays though. The point-blank carnage would be hilarious.

Edited by Triskelion, 16 March 2015 - 02:44 AM.

[ThrashInc]

Mercules, on 24 December 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

3. Ammo Based - They doubled the amount we get but it is still doing far less than in TT. 2 MGs should not burn through 1/2 a ton of ammo in a 15 minute fight much less in a 1 2/3rds minutes.
4. Cone fire - It's random. It's not even like a Clan AC multi-shot but you can direct it with good aim, it's just RNG.

Then TT is dumb. If a ton of ammo is 2000 rounds, you should burn through a ton of ammo is 2-3 minutes of constant firing. If that isn't the case, it isn't a machine gun lol.

Also, aren't machine guns coded as lasers? Pretty sure they are. Lasers aren't cone fire so.

Edit: Not that it matters, but for a ton of ammunition to contain 2000 rounds, each round would weigh in at 500g or roughly 5 times the weight as a 12.7x99 round.

Edit2: And another fun fact, assuming we just scaled up the round, it would transfer about 100,000 J each.

Edited by ThrashInc, 16 March 2015 - 03:03 AM.

[Mcgral18]

ThrashInc, on 16 March 2015 - 02:49 AM, said:

Then TT is dumb. If a ton of ammo is 2000 rounds, you should burn through a ton of ammo is 2-3 minutes of constant firing. If that isn't the case, it isn't a machine gun lol.

Also, aren't machine guns coded as lasers? Pretty sure they are. Lasers aren't cone fire so.

It's hitscan +CoF.

[Mercules]

ThrashInc, on 16 March 2015 - 02:49 AM, said:

Then TT is dumb. If a ton of ammo is 2000 rounds, you should burn through a ton of ammo is 2-3 minutes of constant firing. If that isn't the case, it isn't a machine gun lol.

Ehem... a TT MG has enough ammo to shoot continuously for 2000 turns. Even Autocannons in TT are not single round cannons, they burst fire much like Clan ACs do in MWO. I "ammo" for TT is enough to fire that weapon for a ten second turn. So AC 10 fires and you mark one "shot" off your carried ammo. MG fires(probably continuously) for 10 seconds and you mark 1 "shot" off your 2000 shots. This is why you could normally feed multiple MGs off a ton of ammo or would only load .5 tons for up to 4 MGs because that would be 2,500 seconds of continuous fire from 4 MGs. Compare that to ammo consumption in MWO.... Remember, those 4 MGs would do 2,000 damage if they managed to fire off that whole .5 ton ammo.

[stjobe]

ThrashInc, on 16 March 2015 - 02:49 AM, said:

Then TT is dumb. If a ton of ammo is 2000 rounds

I'ma gonna stop you right there.

TT ammo counts isn't in individual rounds or shells, but in something known as "cassettes" (this is only spelled out for autocannons, but it's a pretty safe bet that the TT designers didn't mean for the MG to have a fire rate of 6 individual rounds per minute).

A cassette contains however many rounds that particular gun fires in one 10-second turn.

For example, the ChemJet AC/20 has a four-round cassette (it fires in a four-round burst). This means that while a ton of ammo for the ChemJet has five cassettes, there's actually twenty individual rounds in total.

Load four tons of AC/20 ammo for that ChemJet, and you've loaded four cassettes containing a total of eighty individual rounds.

Think of it like the clips the 40mm Bofors is fed with:

[Mcgral18]

After nearly a year...I've thought of another idea.

Along with the 1 DPS damage buff, reduce the CoF. On the isMG, remove it entirely. Fully pinpoint hitscan.

For the cMG, being half weight, reduce the CoF to a third. 0.5 "Spread", or 1 M CoF.


Current MG stats:

-<Weapon faction="InnerSphere" HardpointAliases="Ballistic,MachineGun,ISMachineGun" name="MachineGun" id="1024">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\MachineGun.dds" descTag="@MachineGun_desc" nameTag="@MachineGun"/>
<WeaponStats maxDepth="10.0" volleydelay="0" speed="100" lifetime="1.0" duration="-1.0" tons="0.5" maxRange="240.0" longRange="120.0" minRange="0" ammoPerShot="1" ammoType="MachineGunAmmo" cooldown="0.0" heat="0.0" impulse="0.001" heatdamage="0" damage="0.08" numFiring="1" projectileclass="" type="Ballistic" slots="1" Health="10" spread="1.5" maxheight="0" critChanceIncrease="0.06,0.03,0.01" critDamMult="9.0" rof="10.0"/>

Look at all those Weapons.XML edits we could do!


It's funny...nearly a year, and neither the MG nor the Flamer have even been touched.

[MischiefSC]

Clans have been broken for years.

Literally, people have me, fallen in lust, shagged, gotten knocked up, carried that child to term, given birth, that little would-be mechwarrior is starting to learn to walk.

That is how long is/Clan balance has been broken. Flamers and MGs have languished line than that.

I don't feel like it's being unreasonable to ask that a few hours go into these things.