423 replies to this topic

[blackcatf]

Is there a lore post? I want one. Also, want one for the Black Lanner and Pirhanna.

Edited by blackcatf, 09 January 2018 - 04:54 PM.

[Dee Eight]

Dont LRM me please, on 09 January 2018 - 01:07 PM, said:

To rephrase the question, why would a 185mm AC/5 have more range than a 185mm AC/20. It makes no sense.

Barrel length and the targeting system of that particular autocannon over the other one. Its like comparing destroyers and cruisers mounting the same gun in a WW1-WW2 setting. The Cruiser is larger and has the benefit of having its optical range finder mounted higher and usually wider apart (for the optics) thus gaining an advantage in terms of distance it can accurately engage an enemy. The ammunition also plays a part. The high velocity sabot rounds developed for the british 17 pounder in WW2 were great in terms of armor penetration and in theory could penetrate a panther front armor at 2kms, but inaccurate as all get out. As an experiment, the US army took a firefly turret and fired 18 rounds of the high velocity ammo at a 6 x 6 target at 1,000 yards and didn't hit it once.

Also remember...battle tech armor isn't like how tanks/warships actually used armor... it was ablative. Any weapons fire damaged and degraded it, even machinegun fire. It wasn't depended on penetration of the armor to do damage. There were examples of certain tanks at certain moments in WW2 history receiving hundreds of non-penetrating hits during a battle and continuing to function. A Meroka 20mm CIWS would likely be considered an AC/10 or 20 by Battletech reasoning, as it was a mounting of TWELVE 20mm Oerlikon cannons together and firing all simultaneously.

Edited by Dee Eight, 09 January 2018 - 05:37 PM.

[Stingray Productions]

Audacious Aubergine, on 09 January 2018 - 01:58 AM, said:

We need the warhorn to be the T-Rex sound from Jurassic Park

*GASP*!!! You're so right!!!!

[Cori Gamble]

Somebody help me understand: if you all hate each other and everyone hates everything about the game, why do any of you play it?

I'm pretty sucky and, y'know, get chewed out all of the time, but I do try to play this game to have fun. I just so happen to enjoy big, stompy robots. I guess I don't "get" all of the toxicity.

I'm really looking forward to Faffy here, ever since using it in Mech4.

Edited by Cori Gamble, 09 January 2018 - 06:54 PM.

[Koniving]

Dee Eight, on 09 January 2018 - 05:27 PM, said:

Was gonna follow up with mentioning that we didn't even dive into any other factors. Like even with the custom rules the Ac/20 range is going to be inferior to an Ac/5 of the same caliber. Faster firing weapons need shorter barrels of a thicker density to better handle the high heat and frequency of fire or else it could melt. Shorter barrels lead to less accuracy which turns into shorter effective range even in single shot scenarios.

Once read details in Battletechnology which explained how the weight of a ppc was distributed. It also pointed out that this was just x brand, and that other brands will focus on other aspects such as decreasing weight in the firing mechanism in order to increase the cooling by another in weapon heatsink (thus creating a 9 damage 9 heat ppc) etc. Another described lengthening the barrel by sacrificing some cooling power and thereby giving it a longer effective range. Now imagine this applied to any weapon system as applicable. Ac 20s funnel more weight into firing chambers and ammo feeds for faster firing and faster reloading. The barrel gets shorter but thicker to prevent the melting risk that Ac/5s have when they try to imitate uac/5 and Ac/10. Who knows what other factors also play into it as well.

[Genesis23]

Fox the Apprentice, on 09 January 2018 - 03:21 PM, said:

Also the reason many modern soldiers are equipped rifles that only fire in burst - it forces the soldier to not just hold down the trigger. It's not like COD where you have perfect form and keep a reliable recoil pattern.

sorry but for some reason that sentence really bugged me.. the only rifles that can only shoot in bursts as far as i recall are variants of the M16 and that is far from modern, goes back to vietnam war. actual modern rifles have single fire, burst fire and full auto to choose from, simply because more options are better. i get why some M16 were introduced like this in the first place, but burst fire is only good for moderate suppression or for urban combat, not for accurate shots over longer ranges. with actual training and trigger discipline this baby sitting mode is no longer required on a rifle.

and btw: if the sig 550/stgw90 could only fire bursts, it would be absolutely useless on the swiss Feldschiessen, the biggest shooting competition in the world, which would be a shame and a loss of a century old tradition.

[Arkhangel]

Koniving, on 09 January 2018 - 04:21 PM, said:

Exactly my point. Niche long range circumstance. Or when not under heavy fire.

honestly, I think the main reason we get single-shot ACs is simply the fact that you wouldn't really see any credible difference in firing between them, Ultras and RACs. firing a Stream essentially is almost making AC hitscan, or like an LBX, in that at least SOME damage hits the enemy.

I honestly prefer single shot because it actually takes a decent amount of skill to aim and fire accurately on the move when you're only firing a single shell, and i'm fairly good, at least when i'm in a Centurion, of dropping autocannon rounds into the same area consistently. but the fact is, it honestly actually makes people have to have a decent amount of skill level to properly use a standard AC, rather than just "Spray and Pray" (multiple small AC boats notwithstanding, natch). but honestly, if you guys are so hell bent on having multishot standard ACs, why not bring another lore bit in.. the fact ALL ACs can jam, not just ultras and Rotaries. You want good, you should take the bad with it. beggars can't be choosers and all that.

[Arkhangel]

Genesis23, on 09 January 2018 - 11:15 PM, said:

sorry but for some reason that sentence really bugged me.. the only rifles that can only shoot in bursts as far as i recall are variants of the M16 and that is far from modern, goes back to vietnam war. actual modern rifles have single fire, burst fire and full auto to choose from, simply because more options are better. i get why some M16 were introduced like this in the first place, but burst fire is only good for moderate suppression or for urban combat, not for accurate shots over longer ranges. with actual training and trigger discipline this baby sitting mode is no longer required on a rifle.

and btw: if the sig 550/stgw90 could only fire bursts, it would be absolutely useless on the swiss Feldschiessen, the biggest shooting competition in the world, which would be a shame and a loss of a century old tradition.

your average soldier still isn't going to consistently fire in full auto though. that's just a waste of ammo, not to mention that's what the squad's SAW Gunner's job is. shouldn't waste four clips doing what you coulda done in three bursts, specially since the recoil when firing full auto is pretty heinous, which throws accuracy out the door as well. thing most people forget is Full Auto is really mostly used for Suppressive fire, not for actually killing anyone, due to that inaccuracy, hence WHY Assault Rifles are most often fired singly, or in bursts for actual kill shots.

Real Life ain't like the movies where someone can accurately put kill shots at full auto into 10 people with a one-second burst of full auto. the recoil'll make your aim ****... and you'll probably get shot by someone who actually took the time to aim and knows how to fire their weapon properly in a combat situation.

Edited by Arkhangel, 10 January 2018 - 12:07 AM.

[Genesis23]

Arkhangel, on 09 January 2018 - 11:52 PM, said:

I honestly prefer single shot because it actually takes a decent amount of skill to aim and fire accurately on the move when you're only firing a single shell, and i'm fairly good, at least when i'm in a Centurion, of dropping autocannon rounds into the same area consistently. but the fact is, it honestly actually makes people have to have a decent amount of skill level to properly use a standard AC, rather than just "Spray and Pray" (multiple small AC boats notwithstanding, natch). but honestly, if you guys are so hell bent on having multishot standard ACs, why not bring another lore bit in.. the fact ALL ACs can jam, not just ultras and Rotaries. You want good, you should take the bad with it. beggars can't be choosers and all that.

agreed. i prefer the single-shot IS AC's as well, and the fact that they dont force you to stare at your foe balances the clan slot- and weight advantage at least a little bit. if we had multishot AC in the IS mechs it would be even worse a nightmare to balance since they would be just laughably inferior to their clan counterparts in every way imaginable, rendering IS ballistics absolete (except maybe for loyalists).

which is why i hate the newer multishot ultra AC who make no sense at all imo. just as stupid as the newer LBX who for some reason use more slots than their AC counterparts, making it for pretty much all scenarios inferior, while the LBX10 uses one slot and ton less than the AC10 and thus is a viable option in some situations.

[Kul Tigin]

As always like by every MWO Mech designs, the legs look ugly, because they're too long compared to the Torso. The lower legs must be more massive and the arms larger. Also the Heavy Gauss Barrels have to be longer, now it looks like a sawed double barrel shotgun. Cmon PGI, don't make me angry, there were so many people waiting for this mech over years now, you have one job to do, just design this mech perfect. Do not make me angry again with your crappy ugly leg design. Dude i'm serious ..

[Bolter01]

I have always though of an ac2 to be around a current 25-30mm chaingun 1-3 rd bursts, AC5 75-90mm, AC10 our current main battle tanks 120mm <> with some deadly round variations (wld like to see that in the future, ability to change btwn HE & sabot, canister, smk... !)
smks a big 1, such an asset to battle, cld include wp that sticks to mechs & lights em up..!
just rabbilin' o7

Edited by Bolter01, 10 January 2018 - 01:58 AM.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Koniving, on 09 January 2018 - 04:21 PM, said:

Exactly my point. Niche long range circumstance. Or when not under heavy fire.

I agree that when under heavy fire I would be more inclined to suppressing fire burst/full auto.
I wouldn't consider long range to be a niche, though.

[MovinTarget]

Fox the Apprentice, on 10 January 2018 - 07:09 AM, said:

I wouldn't consider long range to be a niche

Especially in MWO...

[Koniving]

Arkhangel, on 09 January 2018 - 11:52 PM, said:

honestly, I think the main reason we get single-shot ACs is simply the fact that you wouldn't really see any credible difference in firing between them, Ultras and RACs. firing a Stream essentially is almost making AC hitscan, or like an LBX, in that at least SOME damage hits the enemy.

I honestly prefer single shot because it actually takes a decent amount of skill to aim and fire accurately on the move when you're only firing a single shell, and i'm fairly good, at least when i'm in a Centurion, of dropping autocannon rounds into the same area consistently. but the fact is, it honestly actually makes people have to have a decent amount of skill level to properly use a standard AC, rather than just "Spray and Pray" (multiple small AC boats notwithstanding, natch). but honestly, if you guys are so hell bent on having multishot standard ACs, why not bring another lore bit in.. the fact ALL ACs can jam, not just ultras and Rotaries. You want good, you should take the bad with it. beggars can't be choosers and all that.

Whole heartedly agree, which is one of the reasons I like Rifles so much (plus Gauss Rifles and PPCs would also be high skill weaponry with the satisfying power to match; the PPC is also called a Siege Cannon and an Awesome carrying 3 of them is able to take down the reinforced gates of a facility like that in MWO's Invasion gamemode by blasting through it with PPCs -- something we can't do in how MWO has been made with front loaded weapon damage.)

Even if you go beyond that, there's actually a lot of variety between ACs. Just within a class you have belt-fed (think RAC), cassette fed, extended cassette, rapid cassette, you've got certain brands that seem pretty advantageous but then have issues like needing to lock the arm carrying it into a position for several seconds to reload or the feed will jam, requiring the use of an alternate feed that requires the use of the other hand (Victor, specifically, is being used for this example but there are numerous others) with a longer reload time.

I'm not talking MWO machine gun style where you just hold and pray (or prey, as it may be), but weapons that generally still have a cooldown period.

This is an OLD, old example and the Chemjet Gun shot count is wrong (went by the phrase "few" shots and the image's 3 shot count and tried it) but it shows two types of multi-shot burst fire style ACs (and one with two variations) as a way of picturing how it might work if we fired on MWO's firing cycles.


Also keep in mind that at the time of this video, autocannons were the most overpowered weapon in the game after the Gauss and PPC nerfs and the idea of a laser meta was a joke.
Today this would require a bit of an extensive rework in max heat to reign in lasers, as well as to stop PGI's trend of inflating large laser damage and increasing smaller laser firing rates.
(It was also back in the time before I learned even the 203mm isn't a single shot UAC either The fluff at the end is what I is what I read from other lore efficienados before I began my own quest. Which isn't far off, the 203mm UAC/20 does have those requirements for ultra firing mode, doesn't even do 20 damage per shot, and is actually exclusive to a 65 ton mech of a particularly squat and colossally wide nature and lacks torso twist.).

Anyway if you go far enough back, I mentioned that standard ACs can compete with Ultras, but were far more likely to have not only jams but Explosive Jams as in the gun explodes, as well as barrel melting... which can lead to it exploding while firing [so basically the same thing just depends on how you describe it in whatever fluff you come up with for a match where it happens. Got no issue with that, in fact it would have helped prior to the Ultra stash we have now. Ideally I'd like to see variants on all weapons.

Things could be done to make all three unique without resorting to single shot weapons, but the only way I would advocate that in MWO is if Rifles got brought in to fill the gap, and steps were made to make the ACs and Ultras unique from RACs, and RACs reigned in to be able to churn out 6 times the damage of its AC counterpart in the same time it takes for the AC counterpart to make one rating, making the RAC more formidable (and consequentially much more likely to jam as it'd be doing 30 damage in a little over a second).

But the mainstay of the whole conversation is PGI, its "attention to lore" or lack thereof even when they say they are doing it, and MW5: Mercs' weapon variants (as we are supposed to have a dozen different ac/2s, a dozen of different AC/5s, a dozen or so of different medium lasers, etc. in Mw5: Mercs.. and yet with all this "attention to fluff" a mech with an 80mm AC/5 is insta-killing 20 ton tanks in one or two AC/5 shots; tanks that in tabletop have 16 armor and 3 structure on the front, with an additional 10 armor and 3 structure on the rear, with 16 armor and 3 structure on the turret and 11 armor and 3 structure per side. That's assuming PGI isn't doubling armor and structure, in which case we're looking at 32 and 6 for the front... and yet these 'cheap wimpy tanks' which are a life and death struggle against as a Shadowhawk 2D with the weapons available in the video prior to Mech Con).


(Also: Squatting like that puts incredible strain on the joints for a person for long term storage. Not to mention that an Atlas can stand inside a Leopard... partly due to being less than 14 meters tall as opposed to MWO's 17.8 meters tall, but meh.)
Absolutely infuriating is SRMs still have no visible homing capabilities. I know they are limited, but there's a reason why SRMs have enhancements like Artemis (which enhances basic homing weaponry), NARC-enabled SRMs, and "DEAD FIRE" SRMs that do 3 damage instead of 2 (dead fire SRMs drop all guidance for added explosive punch. Emphasis, guidance).

Lastly...

I kinda hoped they'd replace the whole betty with BBWolfe and not just parts. (The voice behind ejection in MWO is BBWolfe).

Edited by Koniving, 10 January 2018 - 09:24 AM.

[Arkhangel]

in fairness, SRMs're really more "semi-guided." I do agree you should see a noticeable increase in guidance if, say, a target is NARCed or TAGed though, as both are supposed to help munitions with any kind of guidance system (way i figure it, NARC is almost like a "missile magnet" when it's stuck to something, according to how it's worded on Sarna).

Also, while people complain "PGI doesn't follow the lore exactly," it really should be noted that MWO is the first game to even really CONSIDER it for the mechs themselves fitting-wise. don't even get me started on the @#$%-show MW4's MechBay was, and MW3's.... yeah. real point is why they might deviate from the lore a bit, they still respect it a hell of a lot more than pretty much every other MW title to date.

also, you can't really say an exact height on MWO's mechs, as we don't really have a point of reference yet. mean, if, say, we could see Techs walking around and working on our mechs we could get a sense of the actual scale. you really can't use any specific mech as a measuring stick until you have something that ISN'T a mech to compare it to.

Edited by Arkhangel, 10 January 2018 - 10:16 AM.

[MovinTarget]

Arkhangel, on 10 January 2018 - 10:05 AM, said:

in fairness, SRMs're really more "semi-guided." I do agree you should see a noticeable increase in guidance if, say, a target is NARCed or TAGed though, as both are supposed to help munitions with any kind of guidance system (way i figure it, NARC is almost like a "missile magnet" when it's stuck to something, according to how it's worded on Sarna).

Also, while people complain "PGI doesn't follow the lore exactly," it really should be noted that MWO is the first game to even really CONSIDER it for the mechs themselves fitting-wise. don't even get me started on the @#$%-show MW4's MechBay was, and MW3's.... yeah. real point is why they might deviate from the lore a bit, they still respect it a hell of a lot more than pretty much every other MW title to date.

also, you can't really say an exact height on MWO's mechs, as we don't really have a point of reference yet. mean, if, say, we could see Techs walking around and working on our mechs we could get a sense of the actual scale. you really can't use any specific mech as a measuring stick until you have something that ISN'T a mech to compare it to.

That's what I've been saying for years about trying to follow BT/Lore... It sounds great until you try to implement realtime FPS elements with a system that watered down things to turns. Don't get me wrong, clearly BT was able to get into rich minutiae as this discussion over AC's has demonstrated, but the fact is, many of the things they could ignore by being turn-based and having less emphasis on the importance of hardpoint location are the very things that MWO and previous MW titles have to tackle...

Addressing these aspects means they have to tweak other things (no skill/dice roll for pilot/gunnery), and it kind of just goes downhill from there.

This is why I'm not *to* hard on PGI from that standpoint, there's a lot up for interpretation and compromised implementation. The problem there is everyone has their own idea of how it should be interpreted so PGI will never make everyone happy.

[Ghastly]

blackcatf, on 09 January 2018 - 04:54 PM, said:

Is there a lore post? I want one. Also, want one for the Black Lanner and Pirhanna.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Fafnir

[Koniving]

So

Dont LRM me please, on 09 January 2018 - 01:07 PM, said:

As promised, I started digging for the extended range sharp shooting stuff...

And I accidentally found what came before Battle Value: "Combat Efficiency Factor".
It also had a WRF (or WFR, not sure which since both are used and one is clearly a typo... but which) for rating weapons (with the AC/2 rated as 2.0, AC/5 as 2.3, AC/10 as 2.5 and AC/20 as 3.0..with a medium laser rated as 1.4....for some reason. SRM 6-pack at 2.3, and small laser at 0.6 (beating the MG and flamer by 0.1)


This is weird and needs looking into. (Note two and a half pages crammed into this. The BT sim page and its big block of text are the first page; tried to use the excess space and wound up making a mess to cram it in.

I should note: This is the 9th separate instance I have encountered of a "35 ton Urbanmech." Of the 9 times I have seen it, this makes 4 from BattleTechnology. Once in the Mechwarrior compendium. Twice in successor state books (Liao being one of them) and the other two escape me right now.. But these have only been in FASA made books.

It then goes into a simulator scenario as it usually does. "In the Name of the Dark Mother".... I'll get into that another time though. Oh jesus its a whole freaking campaign... And a Tech Readout!...of two mechs. "ALI-1A Alliance" and "SCR-1A Screaming Hawk"...

Huh.

The detail here beats any TRO I ever seen.

And concludes with an ad for Stackpole's "The Warrior" trilogy. Which I don't even think is a Battletech book.
Oh. Lead writer for that magazine. Stackpole.

Why am I not surprised?

Moving on... Ooo. Timber Wolf versus a LAM!
*Skips to end*...Phoenix Hawk LAM apparently wins.... uh...yeah much disbelief there.

Ad for the next magazine comparing targeting and tracking systems, "Mechs that never were," "BattleTrac" feature? "The Federated Commonwealth Fights for the Clans."

An image basically showing Gundam's "Gunpla" game, as rendered in 1987 long before Gundam had it.
Some decent art of a Templar... wait I'm getting side tracked.

The coolest Stinger or Wasp art (whichever had the rectangular box for a head) I had ever seen... even if the arms are too damn short. Note to self: Get image out of BT 001: PDF page 38)

1980s gundam quality art of a Falcon. (Same book.)

Okay I'm close; there's the huge thing on in field engine swaps.

Ah! Found the index of issues. (Found "The Dragon Slayers." No relation to Victor heromech.)
Issue number 2, Long Range combat (also a Marauder hammerhead punching a really amazingly well drawn Thunderbolt).
Devastator (Demolisher upgrade) with a 240 Magna fusion engine. Some lasers. Twin Mech Eater AC/20s. Says they are well known (but never heard of them before). Overcomes fire delay issues of the Chemjet Gun's chemical injection propellant by replacing with conventional propellants. Nicknamed Mech Slayer, reputation is more hype than substance, though they can easily make mincemeat of mechs in one off scenarios provided they shoot first (like Han Solo used to do).
A frankenmech! These are rare but you can find them in numerous places though it never really explains how they work. "The Wolfman" is a franken mech of Wolverine and Rifleman. Actually... that would do surprisingly well in MWO.

Woflman
BT simulator, Maximum Range. First iteration of Extreme Range rules.
Extreme is the fourth range class. Maximum range is the fifth and final range class.

Phew, this goes on for several pages. This isn't the one I was looking for but interesting all the same. This seems to be where Sarna's getting the "RPG" stats of the brand name ACs like the GM Whirlwind/5
I'll share it all the same.
(Took a quick break to watch more of that forest gameplay of MW5 Mercs.. The AC/5.. one of the better anti-air weapons frequently used by mechwarriors... can't even a helicopter because it's a glorified Rile and not a real autocannon... Disgraceful.
Also: Locust seems tanky as heck, that super autocannon barely does anything to them even though it'll turn 25 ton tanks with 3/4ths of the armor of your basic 1V Locust into mince meat. Nine shots later can barely tell he's registered any damage. Lol, he got stuck on a tree. Walk through tanks, crusher towers by jumping on them. Get stuck on a tree. Think it'd be more fitting if the computer informed you of a Battlemech; I could see your comms guy doing it while watching the battle from the sky but...meh. Also "Dav-ee-un"? o.O; Huh.)
Oh found Atlas gameplay. So AC/20 apparently fires like a mortar...but aimed forward... with stupendous bullet drop. The one shot AC/20 at work here. Kinda reminds me of a grenade launcher.

So glad this game has mod support. Gonna have to replace the entire weapons aresenal as well as beef up vehicles.


Here's the long range stuff I dug up on the first extreme/max range implementation.

Spoiler

And it just keeps going, though as I said this isn't the one I was looking for. Not the custom rules but more of a Mechwarrior RPG expansion.
I will look more tomorrow, I have a lot of books to dig through.

[UrbanTarget]

@Koniving

35t Urbie? Its already OP, adding 5 tons? PGI, make it so!

LOOKOUT CLANNERS WE COMMING FOR YA!

[HammerMaster]

Let me just say, how much I appreciate the NTH degree that Koniving goes in trying to show a point. Not only does he convincingly type a wall of text how he is correct. He pulls REAL DATA FROM LORE BOOKS/FLUFF/TROs. AND VIDEOS! Sorry to say too may people just wave their hands dismissively with the old adage: "Does not translate from turn to FPS" (well yes it would if you did it properly), but hey what you gonna do? I for one am worn down on attempting to sway the deaf ears. So Huzzah for the continuing effort Koniving. Don't ever stop.