22 replies to this topic

[VYCanis]

Pretty much all the mechwarrior games so far have regularly represented the LBX like a big shotgun, the "pellets" spreading the moment they leave the barrel,

however, that's not totally accurate. Most probably know about the ammo switching stuff, probably not as many know about how even cluster rounds manage to achieve the same relatively long ranges that the solid rounds do without seemingly ever suffering damage dropoff at longer ranges like you'd expect a shotgun to do.

This heavily implies that the round is fired as a solid round but ends up releasing its submunitions some preset distance to the target, (kinda how inferno srms are fluffed to work) maintaining consistent spread no matter what range it is fired in.

However, would it look as cool as firing a big huge shotgun? Would it grind against most people's preconceived notions of what an LBX is all about? Would it make LBXs too good?

what chu think?

[Dlardrageth]

Well, the standard slug round of an XAC should be just that... a normal "slug". Now for the "pellet" rounds, that's a twofold dilemma probably. First of all, we still have the two opposing models on how an AC actually fires - burst-fire vs. single-round. For the former option a classical "shotgun approach" seems a bit weird. That would IMHO definitely call for sub-ammunition rounds. Just picture your average ICBM releasing its MIRVs, and you get the idea.

For the single-round modeling, the classical shotgun could work as well. It might be easier to realize graphically, but would still leave the question open why one uses such a relatively crude means on the battlefield. Instead of, say, a sub-ammunition solution. I mean, look at contemporary warfare, how big a role play classical shotguns there?

[Soturi05]

when i think of Autocannons of any type in the battletech universe i think of something like..


As for LBX autocannons i think the time funtion of the round in the video would be close to what it would look like except on a larger scale and probably more directed in a forward cone like a shotgun instead of exloding above the target so i would have to say option 2 sounds right to me.

Edited by Soturi05, 11 January 2012 - 02:45 PM.

[Larry Headrick]

Both the first option is a semi smart round and detenates at a predetermined range from the target.

The second option is a giant shotgun controlling the spread with a choke system in the barel.

The ammo would not be compatable and the shotgun method would be cheaper but less accurate at longer ranges probably more dangerious at close range. the type of LBX you have and the way you play would be the deciding factor.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I see it as more like "case" shot keeps together until close to mech, prob with a range detonator. As for how it affects it in relation to BTU - I think as no other weapon is being scattered around the mech I would be happy with it just having a wider effect ie 3-5m2 depending on how they do damage and game balance.

[Xhaleon]

If I'm not mistaken, MW3 used something like Option 2 in a stream of shells. I remember the shots coming out of the barrel like bright orange balls, but the hit effects on enemies were pellets. No idea what underlying mechanic was used.

If they're sticking with the tabletop rules like they say they are, then LBXs are going to absolutely need Option 2 in order to represent them properly, especially with their increased range over standard ACs even when firing pellets. They could use a very tight shotgun spread from the muzzle, but just like a real shotgun, they would then hit like a single bullet when fired up close, which eats into the LBX slug ammo's niche.

Me votes for Option 2.

[Tatius Pryde]

I like option 2, however it might come down to the fact that it wont be fun or usefull to use gameplay wise. depending on how the dev implement it.

Keep to the canon as close as possible. although some allowances will have to accepted.

Unless they add both the shotgun spread from barrel and the "canister/mirv" style as another option within ammo load outs. not sure if totally canon-ish but it covers both options?.

[Virgil Caine]

Remember the LBX wasn't designed to shoot cluster rounds: it was designed to 'ALSO' shoot cluster rounds. The idea was to open with the standard round, and then when you penetrated the armor on perhaps one or two locations, you'd switch to the cluster munitions, to increase your chance to hit, and your chance to hit the already penetrated locations, triggering 'critical hits'.

Dlardrageth, on 11 January 2012 - 02:13 PM, said:

For the single-round modeling, the classical shotgun could work as well. It might be easier to realize graphically, but would still leave the question open why one uses such a relatively crude means on the battlefield. Instead of, say, a sub-ammunition solution. I mean, look at contemporary warfare, how big a role play classical shotguns there?

The answer to the end of your question.
1. The reason you'd use a 'relatively crude' system, is because IT WORKS. In the Inner Sphere, Reliability trumps most other things, because only the most reliable stuff survived the succession wars.

However I imagine the LBX system works like the XM25 weapon system in reverse. With the XM25, you lase the target, which is the cover they are hiding behind, then you fire the weapon slightly high, and the munitions are designed to explode 2-3 meters further than the range you lased. Meaning the munition flies through the window, over the sandbags, etc and explodes just beyond the cover in mid air.. which allows you to attack the unit in defilade just as lethally as you could in enfilade.

The LBX would work in reverse, target is lased at "X" distance, then you fire the weapon and it explodes into submunitions at "X-Y" distance, where Y = the optimal dispersal range.

2. In Modern Warfare, shotguns still serve a role. Not just in breeching either. Real life shotguns aren't like videogame shotguns, they are in fact useful beyond point-bank range. The shotgun also allows the use of the most diverse types of ammunition. Including experimental grenade-type ammo. Tear Gas, Slugs, Buckshot, Breaching Rounds, Sandbag Rounds etc. The trend on the modern battlefield is to move away from the 'dedicated shotgunner' and apply the usefulness of shotguns to other tactically flexible weapons. Hence the underslung shotgun and other more compact shotgun systems.

[Ghostrider45]

All of you are thinking too small the LB 20 blast think about the small flachs that punched holes in ever thing small wright Now think of Each one of those flachs as haveing the power of one stick of TNT think of the Holes it would put in those plates thats an LB20 shotgun Blast !!!

[FACEman Peck]

What if you could have preset ranges, depending on what environment you're in.

[Sturmbb]

i like the second option my self

[Phades]

Could have different options based upon different manufacturers.

[Kenyon Burguess]

the "shotgun" style would be the easiest for the devs to program.

[Dlardrageth]

FACEman Peck, on 11 January 2012 - 04:31 PM, said:

What if you could have preset ranges, depending on what environment you're in.

Wouldn't take all environmental factors into account, though, like the proverbial sand-/snow-/hailstorm.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 11 January 2012 - 05:47 PM.

[FACEman Peck]

Dlardrageth, on 11 January 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Wouldn't take all environmental factors into account, though, like the proverbial sand-/snow-/hailstorm.

So what, you just never know what environment you're entering? If you know, like you should, then it should be quite easy to adjust chokes or range adapters for early/late cartrige opening. Better still, incorperate a sort of rangefinder into your 'Mechs reticle system to auto-adjust for you.

[Dlardrageth]

I know always in advance exact weather conditions? Maybe the daytime and general conditions, but an actual local weather report... I seriously don't expect that to be the case. And with the variability of environmental conditions many here have been arguing for...

The rangefinder/auto-adjust/gauge mechanic could work... within limits. Taking into account the sensor tech isn't all that shiny in the BT universe compared to ours, prolly only a solution for closer ranges: And you cannot make it too complicated anyway, as that only makes it more susceptible to being broken/damaged.

[Solis Obscuri]

I always imagined those "submunitions" should function more like sabot-stabilized flechettes. Tumbling spherical pellets would just spread too much to be effective past close range (and would destroy bore rifling if they were made of anything hard enough to puncture mech armor!) and airburst rounds would suffer minimum-range limitations. But fit some fin-stabilized depleted-uranium or tungsten steel darts into a sabot, and you'd have a very nasty weapon with a much more limited spread.

But I'd really like to see the option to switch munitions - I could really dig an LBX that I could reload with either standard or submission rounds during a fight!

[Durant Carlyle]

Solis Obscuri, on 11 January 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

But I'd really like to see the option to switch munitions - I could really dig an LBX that I could reload with either standard or sub-munition rounds during a fight!

You can do this already. All you need to do is have more than one 'lot' of ammo for your LB-X. As long as you have enough tonnage and critical spaces, you can have X tons of Standard and Y tons of Cluster ammo. You would switch by using a certain key, and it would go through a reload cycle to switch ammo types.

[Fyrwulf]

The most modern beehive rounds, which are what LB-X cluster rounds really are, use flachettes as their submunition. I can see them being proximity fused, not unlike modern 25mm smart grenades.

[AmazingBilldo]

I voted shotgun, simply because they are/were described as advanced projectile guns that fire shot, and slugs. I had always figured it had some sort of auto-choke system for the muzzle of the barrel (like a shotgun)

Proximity fusing is a reasonable enough leap of logic, tho.

EDIT: I think its important to point out that not all AC's or lbx's have to operate the same. it is just the end result that counts.

Edited by AmazingBilldo, 11 January 2012 - 10:42 PM.