64 replies to this topic

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Well, there are examples of Machine Guns and Autocannons that do not have a bright muzzle flare when fired. I'd perfer reducing the flares we see in MWO at least for weapons near the cockpit.

Edit: adding spoiler tabs.

Spoiler

Edited by Praetor Knight, 08 January 2015 - 07:05 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Sorcery! I call Sorcery!

Man I love Naval gun tech...they get all the nice stuff.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 January 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

Oh I'm well aware that smokeless powder isn't totally smokeless, but the MGs, which are more likely firing 12.7 mm rounds and not the massive 30 mm of the GAU-8, aren't going to produce huge clouds of smoke.

Going to be more like this:

I know the artwork in MWO resembles a weapon like that, and who knows, maybe being more antipersonnel that would seem about right.

However we are talking about "Machine Guns" that can tear into a massive war machine. In reality, it would be like an auto cannon for that duty.

In either way, that gun is blowjng smoke too. Scale that up to mech size, and your still getting considerable flash and smoke.

[Joseph Mallan]

StandingInFire, on 08 January 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

Its pretty bad, I can handle it on a day map, but on a night map it makes it pretty much impossible to properly gauge the movements of an enemy.

Wow... ever turn on a lamp in a dark room? Muzzle Flash is intense at night. and firing a Machine gun in the dark... Look at the video Link I have above and imaging it at night! Sir you would be blinded by that till your eyes adjusted, and even then the flash would be bad.

[Brody319]

Why Is this an argument?! A group of people aren't saying "hey could you remove those machine guns and replace them with some energy hardpoints?"
We are asking the flash to be toned down. I don't care if its not bad for you. When I play it can get really bad, like to the point I don't want to use it. Its way to extreme. this is a minor visual thing that could be handled easily in a day. not like I'm asking them to redesign the Awesome, just tone down the flash effects for the Pirate's Bane before someone has a epilepsy attack and PGI gets sued.

[Joseph Mallan]

Brody319, on 09 January 2015 - 09:19 AM, said:

Why Is this an argument?! A group of people aren't saying "hey could you remove those machine guns and replace them with some energy hardpoints?"
We are asking the flash to be toned down. I don't care if its not bad for you. When I play it can get really bad, like to the point I don't want to use it. Its way to extreme. this is a minor visual thing that could be handled easily in a day. not like I'm asking them to redesign the Awesome, just tone down the flash effects for the Pirate's Bane before someone has a epilepsy attack and PGI gets sued.

because Machine Guns in the range of CBT Machine Guns have PLUMES of flash! All PGI has to do is have a disclaimer the Epileptic has to acknowledge with a mouse click before playing. kinda like McDonalds having to remind idiots that coffee is hot!!!

I mean if you have a reaction to flashing lights why play games with strobing effects? Sorry but I have to take responsibility for my Alcoholism. Why should a bar have to stop selling Booze cause I wanna go in???

Also I have fond memories of Staff Sargent Dietz Firing a M-60 on a night fire range and lighting up a good 30' Radius around him... With Blanks!!!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2015 - 09:29 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Also, just FYI.

If you run with particles and effects turned to low in the game's video settings, the muzzle flash gets toned way down a ton. Plus it will improve your frame rate to boot. If you haven't done that, I recommend it.

[Strum Wealh]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 January 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

Oh I'm well aware that smokeless powder isn't totally smokeless, but the MGs, which are more likely firing 12.7 mm rounds and not the massive 30 mm of the GAU-8, aren't going to produce huge clouds of smoke.

Going to be more like this:

Actually, someone else went through and found several references to the calibers & bore sizes for many individual weapons in BattleTech.

Most MGs are in the 20mm range, which make them closer to likes of the M61 & M197 (as multi-barrel rotary weapons) or Mauser MG 213 (as a single-barrel "revolver cannon") than to the likes of the M2 Browning or the GAU-19.

[Kalimaster]

Suggestion. Use your lasers.

[Joseph Mallan]

Strum Wealh, on 09 January 2015 - 10:42 AM, said:

Actually, someone else went through and found several references to the calibers & bore sizes for many individual weapons in BattleTech.

Most MGs are in the 20mm range, which make them closer to likes of the M61 & M197 (as multi-barrel rotary weapons) or Mauser MG 213 (as a single-barrel "revolver cannon") than to the likes of the M2 Browning or the GAU-19.

Vulcan Flash at night! 1:11 look at the size of that Flash compared to the vehicle it is on...

[Y E O N N E]

Strum Wealh, on 09 January 2015 - 10:42 AM, said:

Actually, someone else went through and found several references to the calibers & bore sizes for many individual weapons in BattleTech.

Most MGs are in the 20mm range, which make them closer to likes of the M61 & M197 (as multi-barrel rotary weapons) or Mauser MG 213 (as a single-barrel "revolver cannon") than to the likes of the M2 Browning or the GAU-19.

If they are 20 mm, they'd be better compared against the German MG 151/20 and Hispano 20 from World War II than any of those examples

That said, 20 mm is not a machine gun anymore. 20 mm is when you start referring to the weapon as a cannon.

[Joseph Mallan]

Yeonne Greene, on 09 January 2015 - 11:39 AM, said:

If they are 20 mm, they'd be better compared against the German MG 151/20 and Hispano 20 from World War II than any of those examples

That said, 20 mm is not always a machine gun anymore. 20 mm is when you start referring to the weapon as a cannon.

The other deciding factor is if the weapon is firing bullets or Shells. A 20 mm weapon firing bullets is still a machine gun.

[Y E O N N E]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

The other deciding factor is if the weapon is firing bullets or Shells. A 20 mm weapon firing bullets is still a machine gun.

Nope.

The only difference between a bullet and a shell is that the projectile is meant to do damage by means other than pure impact on the latter. Cannons have been firing solid shot for centuries, and don't get referred to as muskets or rifles just because they do. Likewise, the 30 mm GAU-8 is not referred to as a machine gun just because it fires solid shot, either. It's a cannon. It has always been a cannon and will always be a cannon.

So no. A 20 mm weapon firing solid rounds is still a cannon. It was a cannon in WWII, it's still a cannon now.

[Joseph Mallan]

Yeonne Greene, on 09 January 2015 - 11:53 AM, said:

Nope.

The only difference between a bullet and a shell is that the projectile is meant to do damage by means other than pure impact on the latter. Cannons have been firing solid shot for centuries, and don't get referred to as muskets or rifles just because they do. Likewise, the 30 mm GAU-8 is not referred to as a machine gun just because it fires solid shot, either. It's a cannon. It has always been a cannon and will always be a cannon.

So no. A 20 mm weapon firing solid rounds is still a cannon. It was a cannon in WWII, it's still a cannon now.

That it fires solid shot is not the point Auto Cannons fire Shells and Machine guns and rifles fire bullets. You will not Tell a Marine a Cover is a hat Unless you are ready to be dressed down hard!

Bullet: The projectile. They are shaped or composed differently for a variety
of purposes.

A shell is a payload-carrying projectile which, as opposed to shot, contains an explosive or other filling, though modern usage sometimes includes large solid projectiles properly termed shot (AP, APCR, APCNR, APDS, APFSDS and proof shot).[1] Solid shot may contain a pyrotechnic compound if a tracer or spotting charge is used. Originally it was called a "bombshell", but "shell" has come to be unambiguous in a military context.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2015 - 12:04 PM.

[Brody319]

well we look at the ammo per ton.

ammo per ton in the board game - 200

1 long ton = 2 240 pound
1 short ton = 2 000 pound
1 metric ton = 2 204.622 621 8 pound

if this game uses long tons each bullet is 11.2 pounds each
if the game uses short tons each bullet is 10 pounds each.
if the game uses metric tons each bullet is 11.02 pounds each.


Of course that is in the battletech board game. Since this game has 2000 round per ton
long ton bullet = 1.12 pounds
short ton bullet - 1 pounds
metric ton bullet = 1.1 pounds.

[Antagonist]

CocoaJin, on 07 January 2015 - 05:17 PM, said:

Muzzle flash SHOULD be blinding with night vision. Proper protocol is to line up the target, close eyes and squeeze trigger.

There isn't a single reason why the muzzle should even be visible to the pilot. Also, that's not the muzzle flash of an MG, it's a ******* sunspot you're carrying around.

[Joseph Mallan]

Antagonist, on 09 January 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

There isn't a single reason why the muzzle should even be visible to the pilot. Also, that's not the muzzle flash of an MG, it's a ******* sunspot you're carrying around.

Nope thats a 20mm Muzzle flash. I linked a Utube of a Vulcan night firing... look it up (6 posts above) 1:11 in that Nighttime flash is HUGE!

[Strum Wealh]

Brody319, on 09 January 2015 - 11:59 AM, said:

well we look at the ammo per ton.

ammo per ton in the board game - 200

1 long ton = 2 240 pound
1 short ton = 2 000 pound
1 metric ton = 2 204.622 621 8 pound

if this game uses long tons each bullet is 11.2 pounds each
if the game uses short tons each bullet is 10 pounds each.
if the game uses metric tons each bullet is 11.02 pounds each.


Of course that is in the battletech board game. Since this game has 2000 round per ton
long ton bullet = 1.12 pounds
short ton bullet - 1 pounds
metric ton bullet = 1.1 pounds.

Considering a single BT MG "round" could kill many infantrymen, odds are good that they follow the same cassette-fed design as the BT ACs (e.g. that each of the 200 "rounds" in one ton of MG ammo represents a cassette that holds multiple individual bullets).

[Y E O N N E]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2015 - 11:55 AM, said:

That it fires solid shot is not the point Auto Cannons fire Shells and Machine guns and rifles fire bullets. You will not Tell a Marine a Cover is a hat Unless you are ready to be dressed down hard!

I don't give a hoot what the Corps told anybody if they failed to define the difference between a bullet and a shell. A bullet is solid shot and does damage on impact.

Show me the page where the USMC defines the difference between a bullet and a shell and you might have a case, because I've already given you the technical difference. That technical difference is the only right one, but if there's some dogmatic BS semantic difference, then by all means lay it on me. Never forget that milltary practices are subject to politics as much as they are actual utility.

That said, the Oerlikon 20 mm fired shells and not "bullets", so you are still wrong no matter how you slice it.

[55555]

i for one, like the muzzle flash of the mgs on the PB. it obscures your vision a TINY bit but HEY YOU'RE IN A LOCUST, it gives it some snazz, and i've never had a problem with it.

tl;dr: slap a epilepsy warning on the bootup to MWO and call it good. whiners gotta whine.