43 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

MechB Kotare, on 01 December 2015 - 06:38 AM, said:

Would be cool, if you guys stopped comparing a MW free to play title, where every mech, every weapon and every tech is supposed to be usable comparing to others, with a BT set of rules.

You really think that each weapon system in MWO works exacly like it does in BT? You might be dissapointed.

You see that... That's the OP's point going right over your head.

[Strum Wealh]

Vellron2005, on 01 December 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

I've played MW games for a long time, starting with MW2, but what always puzzled me, was the fact that in-game we see weapons like LRM20, which fires a spread of 20 missiles at the same time, and at the same target..

This always seemed really powerful and extremely redundant to me, since in real-life, a single missile is usually enough to turn a tank into a smoking wreck..

Can anyone explain to me why this is so?

Shouldn't 20 missiles be your entire ammo count for that pod, and you fire them one at a time?

Is this a flaw in battletech as a setting, is there an in-game reason why missiles are so weak that it takes about a 100 of them to take down a mech, or are missiles that weak in real-life too?

Please, don't spam the thread about how LRM's suck or don't suck.. we have enough of those threads..

IS LRMs are 75mm-diameter projectiles (Wolves on the Border, chapter 19) with a mass of approximately 8.33 kilograms per missile (1 ton = 1000 kg, 120 missiles per ton -> 120 missiles per 1000 kg).
They are comparable in size & mass (and, presumably, relative destructive capability) to the FIM-43 Redeye shoulder-launched missile (70mm diameter, 1.20 meter length, 8.3 kg missile mass, 1.06 kg impact-detonated blast-fragmentation warhead).

By contrast, the MWO LRM (at ~5.56 kg per missile) would be closer to the Mini-Spike missile (see here and here) developed by Rafael Defense Systems in Israel (~4 kg per missile, 0.70 meters (70cm) long by 0.075 meters (75mm) in diameter), which probably isn't too much slower than the other members of the Spike missile family (with have a flight speed of 150-200 m/s, or 540-720 kph, versus the 580 m/s (or 2088 kph) of the Redeye).

SRMs are a bit more-massive, at roughly 10 kg per missile (1 ton = 1000 kg, 100 missiles per ton -> 100 missiles per 1000 kg), making them comparable in size & mass (and, presumably, relative destructive capability) to the FIM-92 Stinger shoulder-launched missile (70mm diameter, 1.52 meter length, 10.1 kg missile mass, 3.0 kg high-explosive annular-blast fragmentation warhead).
Standard SRMs are well-known to be loaded into handheld launchers and used by infantry - another testament to SRMs' similarity to modern shoulder-launched missiles.





In BattleTech, both missile types are typically equipped with guidance systems.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 12 December 2015 - 02:46 AM.

[M3 SABLE]

If you shot large-payload missiles that wreck mech in a single impact, it would mean that you shoot large, single missle that quickly gets taken down by a single AMS i suppose. \

Despite that, I searched all across the sarna website, in hopes to see bad-ass missiles.
I found one called Thunderbolt.

But yeah, the current lrm is boring crap with no visual satisfaction.

This stuff is way better:
https://youtu.be/jspEovlEK-w

[Tombstoner]

In 1984 they started out as unguided self propelled bombs. With multiple incarnations of MW they became guided. You can in fact use missile in MWO unguided. they are however rather slow and require a degree of skill to hit something.

The swarm thing is because mech armor is way more durable then 20th century armor where one hit from a HE or shaped charge can penetrate. mechs need multiple hits.

Why are the missiles in mw not guided, it's because you can't make head shots.... something a modern laser or wire guided bomb is capable of performing. What you see in game is suspension of disbeleaf.

Germany had wire guided self propelled bombs in WWII so you cant tell me they don't exist in 3025 even with lost tech.

I deliberate chose self propelled bomb because the distinction between guided and unguided missile/rocket is lost on people. some missiles are not guided. What is the difrence between a rocket and a missile?

Missile An object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon.
Rocket a cylindrical projectile that can be propelled to a great height or distance by the combustion of its contents...
Oxford Dictionary of English

MWO has long range rockets. The term missile has become to mean guided rocket.

[Bregor Edain]

Paigan, on 01 December 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

this

also:
- Why don't Mechs just use targeting software instead of clumsy slow humans?
- Why tons of funny looking, ill-designed (see hardpoints), redundant mechs?
- Why bother using mechs at all instead of airborne or orbital units for the same tech and mass?
etc etc.

1) They do and they also have the option of firing manually wich tended to be less accurate. Ingame it is more challenging to aim yourself.
2) Art department messed up some mechs.
3) Air assets are used and orbital strikes are basically not used anymore due to treaties and their barbaric nature.

[Vellron2005]

Ok, so there have been many explanations, and I understood most of what you guys are saying..

My comment is this:

When you fire a single RPG, it makes quite a boom, with a big and noticable shockwave and explosion, right?

Well, all I'm saying is that for me, a real-life LRM 20 would produce someting more akin to an in-game artillery strike?

I just wanted to know if there was an in-game reason for that not being so.

I figured the missiles were smaller, or did less damage but higher numbers than today's conventional missiles, but sorta hoped there was a lore-based reason for the makers of BT to make it so.

Some of you did name a few, and quite detailed to boot. Thank you for that.

I guess I have to keep in mind the scale of the mechs, and also the time the setting was created..

But it does make me wonder..

So here's a new question for you guys, just to keep it fun..

What do you think would happen if someone made a similar setting today, but took into account what was important, cool, and realistic today to expect in a high-tech robot-piloting battle of 3050?

1) My first guess is that mechs would not exist at all, since they are a huge target on the battlefield

2) Battles would be done mostly in the orbits of planets, and the winner would get to land forces such as infantry and mechanized infantry slightly bigger than a human up to the size of an SUV, but not bigger. Also, air superiority would be a huge thing, and the ground forces would only need to secure and defeat those targets that were too deep or too delicate for orbital bombardments.

3) High-tech units would have shields

4) High-tech units would have the ability to hover, fly, become visually and radar invisible

5) High tech units would be used rarely, only to get difficult and delicate jobs done (that orbital bombardment could not wipe-out)

6) High tech units would not be manned, but drones, robots and androids. Very few people would ever die, and those deaths would mostly be drone / spaceship / mech pilots up in the orbiting mothership. Mech pilots would not be tough-guys, but nerds with wires jacked into their brains.

7) Nukes and chemical warfare would be a used on planets that are already unable to support life.

8) The most important people, be they politicians or spaceship pilots, would have spare cloned bodies, with implants in their heads that recorded their memories and consciousnesses and transmitted them into a new body upon death. This would make genders irrelevant, since they could become male or female as easily as switching socks.

What do you guys think?

Edited by Vellron2005, 02 December 2015 - 06:32 AM.

[Rekkon]

Quote

Why tons of funny looking, ill-designed (see hardpoints), redundant mechs?

Having a large diversity of mechs actually makes sense, for the same reason we have so may different types of vehicles currently. You have different design parameters for different roles, then add a multitude of companies manufacturing competing models for any given role. All of these companies will have varying engineering ability, priorities and access to resources (difficult to manufacture a laser boat design if you cannot get enough lasers). Then layer in the Battletech political landscape where even if X is widely acknowledged as the best mech for a particular role, it might be manufactured by your most hated enemy who will never sell any to you. And just like the US rushed production on so many different aircraft in WWII, in a crisis situation, you will gladly take whatever your factories can turn out because 1000 additional mediocre Battlemechs are still better than 0 additional Battlemechs.

Edited by Rekkon, 02 December 2015 - 08:59 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Vellron2005, on 02 December 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

What do you think would happen if someone made a similar setting today, but took into account what was important, cool, and realistic today to expect in a high-tech robot-piloting battle of 3050?

To be honest... if there were mecha at all, it'd probably look a lot more like Heavy Gear rather than BattleTech/MechWarrior.

Jaguar Strike Gear
Height: 4.6 meters (15.09 feet)
Width: 3.4 meters (11.16 feet)
Weight: 7,123 kg (3,798.6 lbs)
Powerplant: S-V1110 V-Engine, 620 horsepower
Armor: Durasheet composite armor w/ alloy & ceramic reinforcement, avg. thickness 51mm
Armament:MR25 30mm Machinecannon Rifle ("Medium Autocannon"), RP-111 Pepperbox II 32-tube (~50-60mm) Rocket Pack ("Light Rocket Pack/32"), Mk. IV 44mm Grenade Launcher ("APGL"), three M-2A Hand Grenades, HW-VB1 Vibroknife


Jaguar Strike Gear, no armor (pilot in cockpit visible, for scale)


Jaguar MP Military Police Variant, with 60mm Fragmentation Cannon and Shield

Edited by Strum Wealh, 02 December 2015 - 08:02 AM.

[Krellshand]

Vellron2005, on 01 December 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

I've played MW games for a long time, starting with MW2, but what always puzzled me, was the fact that in-game we see weapons like LRM20, which fires a spread of 20 missiles at the same time, and at the same target..

This always seemed really powerful and extremely redundant to me, since in real-life, a single missile is usually enough to turn a tank into a smoking wreck..

Can anyone explain to me why this is so?

Shouldn't 20 missiles be your entire ammo count for that pod, and you fire them one at a time?

Is this a flaw in battletech as a setting, is there an in-game reason why missiles are so weak that it takes about a 100 of them to take down a mech, or are missiles that weak in real-life too?

Please, don't spam the thread about how LRM's suck or don't suck.. we have enough of those threads..

Its fantasy, thats why - don´t bother with logic on the weapons.

• Why do the lasers have colours? - laser light has no colour per se
  
• Why do they use depletet uranium in ACs (as stated in the books?) - modern weapons use wolfram darts - they can come up with some better metal in 1k years I guess
  
• Why does the Gauss shoot a "silver melon" as projectile? Does not seem to be very penetrating
  
• Why do they use a "fusion" core as enginge? When a fusion of two atom cores is so mighty that it can flatten a city if out of control. And need so much activation energy, that they used A bombs to trigger the fusion in fusion bomb tests? Seems like a very wastefull and dangerous way to propel mere 100 tons of armour.
  
• Why does none of the mechs have a countermeasure to projectiles, and the only counter measure to rockets is a "gun" shooting it down, when there are already reactive armour and other neat counters?
  
• Why does a computer 1000 years ahead not just lock on a target when he visually confirms it?
  
• Why do they use flat armour layouts, prone to be penetrated?
  
• Why are there no ultra precise "space killer vehicles", as in the modern sattelite weapons. Just drop them where the mechs are - battle won
  
• Why do they even have unguided missiles?
  
• Why do they have artificial "muscles" propelling the mech? And how is armour hodling on those things, if they contract and relax like real muscles, and thus changing their volume constantly.
  
• Why does a single "inferno" rocket cook a mech? And if this works, why no just shoot them with those things form infantery or small, fast vehicles. Seems like a waste to use a mech if its killed so easy. Not to mention what drones and stuff would do with a mechs lance.
  
• And why do they use mashine guns in anti personal warfare? Use ONE incendiary rocket (modern version: magnesium and some explosves to set it off) and simulatly burn then, rupture there lungs, cook them form the inside, burn their air and poison them? Should kill a few hundred with each shot, building and cover does not matter.
  
• Whats with EMP Bombs? Set it off in the atmposphere or slightly below and watch the lights go out in a country. And reduce all mechs to metal statues
  
• Tank mines? Use mines that go off at 20tons+ and watch those mechs become useless. I they cant detect mechs that hide in digged holes (books...), they cant detect mines, and the infantry would be safe.

Its a fairy tale about heroes and big stompy mechs. I like fairy tales

Edited by Krellshand, 02 December 2015 - 08:19 AM.

[1Grimbane]

MLRS are in real life as well.... multiple launch rocket systems... big and small.

[mark v92]

Vellron2005, on 02 December 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

So here's a new question for you guys, just to keep it fun..

What do you think would happen if someone made a similar setting today, but took into account what was important, cool, and realistic today to expect in a high-tech robot-piloting battle of 3050?

1. I think they may exist but not for combat. More of an advanced spacesuit that will keep people safe if they are exploring other planets. Not the size of a mech but more like a BT elemental suit. (airtight+supply, laser cutter, JJ etc)

2. Railguns and lasers are being developed as we speak. I think those will largly take over the role of missiles and traditional cannons. railguns basicly have no max range in space so it will be very large range engagements. (The only limiter being detection range and calculation of gravity near planets and time) They could even be firing from earths orbit to mars.

You may have something (drone) on the ground to designate targets or for assasination missions but most can be done by orbit or intercontinental railgun.

3. From what i know that is still fiction but we can assume they might be able to make them at that time.
Might depend on the amount of energy it would cost to stop a hyper fast round

4. yeah, they want to be as speedy/agile and stealthy as possible. they only need to paint the target.

5. they might be able to make something as small as insects for target designation or assasination. Those can be mass produced and cheap in materials. It wont need a gun anyway.

6. yeah, most things that will come close will be drones. even orbital cannons themselves can be largy automated.

7. deseases can be a nasty weapon when you dont want to damage the surroundings. nukes can be are low cost alternative or 'rebel' option instaid of railguns but can be easy to take down.

8. might work but im not sure. maybe not in a human body but rather a mechanical body if we can replicate the brain. Plant a chip in someones head that will record all and if they are about to die transfer everything to the computer and place that data in a mechanical body. If the brain is not gone they might be able to fix the body with created/bred organs and skin.

If they can clone anyone they might be able to use bodies as walking bombs and if its not that hard they might replace drones again since it wont matter if they die.

Edited by mark v92, 02 December 2015 - 08:50 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

MechB Kotare, on 01 December 2015 - 06:38 AM, said:

Would be cool, if you guys stopped comparing a MW free to play title, where every mech, every weapon and every tech is supposed to be usable comparing to others, with a BT set of rules.

See the title in the upper left hand of your screen? Where it says "a Battletech game"? When they remove that, ppl might stop comparing it to that

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 02 December 2015 - 10:20 AM.

[Tombstoner]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 02 December 2015 - 08:49 AM, said:

See the title in the upper left hand of your screen? Where it says "a Battletech game"? When they remove that, ppl might stop comparing it it that

Or better yet change it to a "Mech Warrior game", but that kinda conflicts with the title.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tombstoner, on 02 December 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Or better yet change it to a "Mech Warrior game", but that kinda conflicts with the title.

also true.

[wanderer]

Quote

Is this a flaw in battletech as a setting, is there an in-game reason why missiles are so weak that it takes about a 100 of them to take down a mech, or are missiles that weak in real-life too?

SRM/LRMs are actually "dumber" than modern missiles, owing to superior ECM (BT's battlefields have a LOT of countermeasures going on). They're also smaller and lighter, making up for the weaker guidance by volume. A single LRM in tabletop is a mere 8 1/3 kilograms in weight.

A more "modern" missile is the Thunderbolt launcher, which fires a single projectile rather than dumping a swarm of smaller ones in the enemy's general direction. Note that between better ECM and a higher density of anti-missile systems on the battlefield, quantity won out over quality in most cases.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Vellron2005, on 01 December 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

I've played MW games for a long time, starting with MW2, but what always puzzled me, was the fact that in-game we see weapons like LRM20, which fires a spread of 20 missiles at the same time, and at the same target..

This always seemed really powerful and extremely redundant to me, since in real-life, a single missile is usually enough to turn a tank into a smoking wreck..

Can anyone explain to me why this is so?

Shouldn't 20 missiles be your entire ammo count for that pod, and you fire them one at a time?

Is this a flaw in battletech as a setting, is there an in-game reason why missiles are so weak that it takes about a 100 of them to take down a mech, or are missiles that weak in real-life too?

Please, don't spam the thread about how LRM's suck or don't suck.. we have enough of those threads..

Considering the complexity of modern ATGMs and their weight (the FGM-148 weighs 22kg and the AGM-114 weighs 49kg) the odds are that LRMs at 120 missiles per ton being that they weigh at most 8.3kg, they're a simple warhead, motor, and rudimentary guidance at best.

[Novakaine]

I have only one thing to say.......

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Vellron2005, on 01 December 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

I've played MW games for a long time, starting with MW2, but what always puzzled me, was the fact that in-game we see weapons like LRM20, which fires a spread of 20 missiles at the same time, and at the same target..

This always seemed really powerful and extremely redundant to me, since in real-life, a single missile is usually enough to turn a tank into a smoking wreck..

Can anyone explain to me why this is so?

Shouldn't 20 missiles be your entire ammo count for that pod, and you fire them one at a time?

Is this a flaw in battletech as a setting, is there an in-game reason why missiles are so weak that it takes about a 100 of them to take down a mech, or are missiles that weak in real-life too?

Please, don't spam the thread about how LRM's suck or don't suck.. we have enough of those threads..

Battletech was heavily influenced by 80s anime including macross of macross missile massacre (AKA M^3) fame.

As for how it works in universe, the mechs all have magic space armor that requires huge amounts of damage to well damage. As a result all weapons have to be fairly short ranged to actually be effective.

[Lexx]

El Bandito, on 01 December 2015 - 06:40 AM, said:

Cause this is cool. Launching dozens of missiles feels powerful.

When I read the first two posts in this thread, I thought of the exact same video. I love that vid!

It's so much like MWO because in that video most of the guided long range missiles that get fired completely miss their intended target.

I think that's the very reason mechs fire so many missiles. It's like it was for the U.S. in Vietnam when they took the guns off their fighter jets and went missiles only. You have to fire a lot of them because most of them end up being wasted.

[Strum Wealh]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 02 December 2015 - 05:55 PM, said:

Considering the complexity of modern ATGMs and their weight (the FGM-148 weighs 22kg and the AGM-114 weighs 49kg) the odds are that LRMs at 120 missiles per ton being that they weigh at most 8.3kg, they're a simple warhead, motor, and rudimentary guidance at best.

As described in my previous post, BT LRMs & SRMs are similar in size and mass to real-world MANPADS like the Redeye and the Stinger.

Both the Redeye and the Stinger were equipped with infrared homing guidance systems, something available to BT LRMs & SRMs in the form of heat-seeking warheads - which, it should be noted, are alternate munitions rather than the standard munition in both cases.
Likewise, completely-unguided "dead-fire" missiles - which remove the standard guidance system in order to accommodate a larger, more powerful warhead - are not the standard munitions for either LRM launchers or SRM launchers in BT.

BT also allows for laser guidance (e.g. Artemis-compatible missiles, and later semi-guided LRMs), and homing on radio sources (e.g. Narc-compatible missiles, "listen-kill" missiles, and later anti-radiation missiles).

Given the novel/sourcebook descriptions, the known inaccuracy from the gameplay rules, and the point that missile accuracy is dependent on the MechWarrior's gunnery skill (among other things), the standard guidance systems for BT LRMs & SRMs would seem to be some form of radar/radio-based SACLOS-type system (similar to that used by the Javelin missile... and what is currently implemented in MWO for LRMs).