11 replies to this topic

[Iron Horse]

Shouldn't the kick of gravity induce a falling reticule, given the loose mount with respect to the AC's (and the 'Mech's) center of gravity or is there a myomer connection to support the gun on every 'mech's arm?

Is it the barrel or the mount that causes the weapon to shift while firing? (I use the AC example because it has a ballistic projectile, and because it fires more than one shot at a time.)

Basically, I guess, are myomers able to constrict like human muscles, or is it a more mechanical connection being made at the firing position?

Thoughts? Suggestions?

P.S. I still think weapons fired from the torso should recoil upward.

EDIT: I guess what I'm asking is would it add anything to gameplay if the recoil from guns on the arms went down, instead of up (if this made sense physics-wise).

Edited by Iron Horse, 09 March 2012 - 01:32 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

If you look at the weight of AC's you will see that they are considerably greater than required just for the "gun". The majority of this weight has always been considered to be the mounting (including recoil moderation) and ammo feed mechanism. The mounting also presumably contains the "fine adjustment" mechanism for aiming as in other weapons.
Not sure how gravity "kicks" anything, it's a constant force.
The reticule is an electonic display on the HUD - it's not mechanically linked to anything so why would it "fall"?

[Iron Horse]

I

Nik Van Rhijn, on 09 March 2012 - 01:36 AM, said:

If you look at the weight of AC's you will see that they are considerably greater than required just for the "gun". The majority of this weight has always been considered to be the mounting (including recoil moderation) and ammo feed mechanism. The mounting also presumably contains the "fine adjustment" mechanism for aiming as in other weapons.
Not sure how gravity "kicks" anything, it's a constant force.
The reticule is an electonic display on the HUD - it's not mechanically linked to anything so why would it "fall"?

The "fall" I'm talking about is recoil.

In most modern shooters, the barrel of automatics goes up as more shots are fired. What I want to know is if there would be a similar effect in autocannons, and if so, would arm-mounted weapons behave the same, or in an opposite manner (due to the fact that they are underslung, and as opposed to having most of the stabilizing pressure coming from the bottom, on arms, it might be from the top).

Edited by Iron Horse, 09 March 2012 - 01:59 AM.

[Kiyoshi Amaya]

Iron Horse, this might help.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Iron Horse, on 09 March 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

I

The "fall" I'm talking about is recoil.

In most modern shooters, the barrel of automatics goes up as more shots are fired. What I want to know is if there would be a similar effect in autocannons, and if so, would arm-mounted weapons behave the same, or in an opposite manner (due to the fact that they are underslung, and as opposed to having most of the stabilizing pressure coming from the bottom, on arms, it might be from the top).

Interesting. I suspect it would depend on how the weapon is mounted on a specific mech. even IRL rifles have different recoil patterns, and not just in amount, some go to the side as well depending on their construction. It would be cool to see mechs weapons recoil up/down/left/right depending on their particular mounting point.

[Victor Morson]

I am all for weapons dropping off after a specific range and losing damage. This is how MWLL handles it, and it's pretty neat - it also jives with the extended TacOps rules for the board game regarding Extended Ranges, something that I always play with enabled.

It just feels way more simish and less arcade if weapons don't just suddenly stop working at their listed maximum.

[GrimLeo]

I think for a fully functional Mech the only recoil effect would be the AC barrel sliding back on its buffer then sliding back in place. The different actuators absorb the recoil impulse under control of the Mech Gyro.

Recoil effects should come into play if you install a bigger gun (actuators not sized for the greater recoil) or when the the mech's actuators/ gyro are damaged. This would cause arm and torso movements that would throw off any follow-on shot using other weapons or the AC itself if the rate of fire is fast enough.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

@OP - I think the error here is that you're looking at it with the "Modern" shooter. This is a "Future" shooter with update and improved tech. Even if there was recoil on the cannon, you wouldn't see the effect through your helmet. Also, buy the time the cycle rate is ready, recoil doesn't matter anyways. Keep in mind that you're not looking down the barrel, but towering above it. Your barrel is a shinny reticule projected onto your HUD.

@GrimLeo - I really don't think you're going to be able to install a cannon onto your mech that causes damage each time you fire it.

[GrimLeo]

Agent CraZy DiP, on 09 March 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

@OP - I think the error here is that you're looking at it with the "Modern" shooter. This is a "Future" shooter with update and improved tech. Even if there was recoil on the cannon, you wouldn't see the effect through your helmet. Also, buy the time the cycle rate is ready, recoil doesn't matter anyways. Keep in mind that you're not looking down the barrel, but towering above it. Your barrel is a shinny reticule projected onto your HUD.

@GrimLeo - I really don't think you're going to be able to install a cannon onto your mech that causes damage each time you fire it.

I think your correct that the OP is thinking in terms of a solder firing an assault rifle instead of a 50 to 100 ton robot firing an arm/torso mounted autocannon. Still, neither are prefect firing platforms.

The classic walk-up of the assault rifle is caused by the rate of fire (ROF) being faster than the solder can recover from recoil. I think we can assume ROF is such that a fully functional mech recovers from recoil before the next round is fire.

None of the confirmed mechs have an AC firing through the mech's center of mass(Cm). The Atlas is closest with the AC/20 about the same height as the Cm but offset to the right. Firing the AC will cause a clockwise twist that needs to be countered by the torso twist actuator. The hip and knee actuators will also need to counter recoil as the impulse is transferred to the ground through the feet (this may make firing on ice interesting).

So an Atlas mechwarrior fires the AC/20. The gun's recoil buffer actuator changes the recoil impulse from a quick punch to a longer soften push. The stabilization system (Gyro) orders the torso twist actuator to counter the clockwise twist impulse while the leg actuators counter the translational recoil impulse. With everything working correctly, the mechwarrior doesn't feel anything. Other weapons can be immediately fired without the aim being effected by recoil. Of course by the time the AC cycles the mech has recovered from recoil.

Things get interesting once you damage systems. Damage the recoil buffer means dealing with the quick punch so the mech torso jerks back and clockwise. Damage the Gyro slows response giving you the same motion. You could also get a "walk-up effect" due to the Gyro not getting the mech stabilized before the next round is fired. Lockup the torso twist actuator and the whole mech jerks clockwise. If the twist actuator goes limp, the torso will not be able to return to the original firing position.

Things get more complex with the other mechs. Add the torso pitch actuator to the mix when a Hunchback fires it's AC/20. Add on a shoulder actuator when the Dragon fires it's AC/5. (Note: I am assuming the there is no elbow on the Dragon as the artwork is conflicting). Finally add the elbow to the Centurion.

My point about up-gunning a mech is that it takes a lot of engineering to get the mech to absorb recoil so the mechwarrior's aim-point is not affected. Going into the Mech Lab and jury rigging an AC/10 on your Dragon is going to mess up that engineering. In this timeframe, there are not mech techs around that can make all the necessary adjustments. In game terms, you are adding the additional tradeoff of having to wait for the mech to recover before firing other weapons.

So why go to the trouble of modeling this? My take is that it goes to the heart of why AC are useful in mech combat. Lasers are instant hit, lighter, don't require ammo, and have no recoil. The drawbacks of lasers are more heat per shot (solution: add heat sinks) and no kinetic impact on the target. In open combat, I would want to time my AC shot to hit the target mech just before that mech fires it's weapons. The kinetic punch of the shell impact throws off the target's aim hopefully causing a miss. I would then want to quickly put in a laser shot while the target's weapons are cycling. Optimally the AC cycles before the target weapons cycles allowing the process to be repeated. This would make the target's return fire ineffectual. Delays caused either by kinetic impacts or recoil affects could determine who wins the fight.

Edited by GrimLeo, 09 March 2012 - 09:28 PM.

[TimberJon]

Iron Horse, I'm with you man. Excellent spatial attention. You're right. Any thrust from an event point exerts its force opposite to the pivot or mounting point. To illustrate with a ballistic as you suggested, an AC10 firing from a right arm which is attached to a mech at the top of the weapon such as a Timber Wolf should walk DOWNward. It the weapon was attached to the top on a pivot point like with the blood-asp, it would walk upwards. It it was mounted on the side of the weapon (torso-side) like with the Timber Wolf Mk II, it would walk OUTwards.

I support this and since it is realistic, it should be included into the game. Not only that but we pop in and out of mechs without thinking about this, the mechwarriors we know spend alot of time in their assigned or favorite mech learning the special nuances of it that are unique to each one. This kind of learning curve would serve to provide a little bit of that factor so when we jump in a new mech and run into combat we might forget that we may need to compensate in a certain way for a combination of a mech/weapon and it might make us miss. We would curse ourselves as we take fire and THAT'S true to the goal of a simulation game.

[Iron Horse]

Shrekken, on 09 March 2012 - 02:28 AM, said:

Iron Horse, this might help.

I think in this case, the recoil comes from the pivot point (or, where your hand is) on the weapon. The end of the barrel goes upwards because of the way you hold the gun, not necessarily the barrel shape (my understanding, anyway).

Also, I dig your pilot seat.

[Shai tan]

I`d like something like this done so that Gunnery is more of a skill as apposed to Quakey point n click always dead on target no matter the distance. Lazers I can see doing that, but not the ACs. Of course distance to target, the closer to = lesser amount of the effect.