8 replies to this topic

[Sir Immortal Shadow]

I'll keep it simple. I want higher velocity light gauss rifles, just because the current setup is upsetting my OCD, the light gauss is supposed to have lighter projectiles and a higher velocity than the regular gauss rifle. That's kind of it's "thing". So if you give it a 2150-2200 and that will be enough to appease my obsession and it would improve the light gauss without actually buffing it's damage potential. A lighter projectile with the same speed would actually have shorter range generally.

Note: This is a repost, I deleted the earlier post because when I posted the original I couldn't insert a poll, so I wanted to repost now that it has a poll so that it get's more attention than an old edited post.

[Y E O N N E]

Your OCD will still be unsatisfied, because a higher velocity would also yield greater damage up close. Range and damage on target go hand-in-hand with real ballistics, something MWO ignores.

[Sir Immortal Shadow]

Yeonne Greene, on 12 August 2018 - 05:57 PM, said:

Your OCD will still be unsatisfied, because a higher velocity would also yield greater damage up close. Range and damage on target go hand-in-hand with real ballistics, something MWO ignores.

But see the light already has an explanation for doing small damage despite it's high velocity. The whole reason it's supposed to have more range than the much more powerful regular gauss is because it fires a smaller lighter round. Like the relationship between the AC/5 and 10.
The reason AC's have backwards ballistics in the lore is mostly that they fire high-explosive-anti-tank rounds. The power of an explosive warhead is largely determined by the weight of the shell.
At the same time if a gauss rifle is tuned to fire a heavier round it can impart more energy to it before it leaves the chamber. It will also rip bigger chunks out when it lands a glancing blow, staggering mechs and tearing limbs off of weaker ones. An autocannon of similar power and range would need a very heavy barrel to withstand the forces involved. There is actually mech artillery and hypervelocity autocannons in the battletech universe, but they are heavy. I have to admit though: having hypervelocity AC/5s at least would be really cool.

[Vlad Striker]

Real AT guns shoot 900-1400 m/s. 2000 is excellent.

[Sir Immortal Shadow]

Vlad Striker, on 25 August 2018 - 02:08 AM, said:

Real AT guns shoot 900-1400 m/s. 2000 is excellent.

And real railguns shoot around 2500m/s.
If you want a gun to compare to a real life AT gun look at the AC/10.

Edited by Sir Immortal Shadow, 30 August 2018 - 05:58 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Realistically though, the problem is paltry damage.

[Sir Immortal Shadow]

The6thMessenger, on 30 August 2018 - 07:21 PM, said:

Realistically though, the problem is paltry damage.

It's not really worth the drawbacks is it? But I'd rather they lowered the charge time and destruction damage and increased the velocity than going for more damage. It's an ice-cold extreme range weapon, I'm fine with it being a easier to use but weaker gauss than trying to make it a direct competitor.

Edited by Sir Immortal Shadow, 07 September 2018 - 08:27 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Sir Immortal Shadow, on 07 September 2018 - 08:26 PM, said:

It's not really worth the drawbacks is it? But I'd rather they lowered the charge time and destruction damage and increased the velocity than going for more damage. It's an ice-cold extreme range weapon, I'm fine with it being a easier to use but weaker gauss than trying to make it a direct competitor.

It's already usable at those ranges, there's more pressing issues. Granted removal of gauss-charge would work, problem is that its' what makes it a Gauss from a mechanical perspective, it makes it different from an AC.

It's not going to be a competitor, but 8 damage is certainly making it not worth it.

[Jon McFuzzy]

Buff the LGR damage to make it a worthy option.

Edited by Jon McFuzzy, 10 September 2018 - 03:20 PM.