153 replies to this topic

[Kiff Stevenson]

No.

No, it does not.

[Pht]

Terick, on 20 March 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

No. All ACs fire single rounds.

Quote

An Autocannon is a type of rapid-firing, auto-loading direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) or kinetic rounds at targets in bursts







Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage vs armor. The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors. Autocannon are grouped into the following loose damage classes:








Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannon in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each "round" or burst of fire.

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

Edited by Pht, 21 March 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Exilyth]

How many Vedettes was an Abrams again?

[Sidney]

Terick, on 20 March 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

No. All ACs fire single rounds. Yes some of the novel writers wrote that they fire a burst and the artist for one of the TROs did make it look that way. But all AC/s fire single shells or double tap if Ultra ACs or using the rapid fire optional rule.

For a good reference look at the description of the Enforcer in TRO 3025. It specifically mentions that the ammo bay for the enforcer is a magazine style with ten rounds load that can be easily loaded form the rear by a forklift. Made that way to allow for quick changes so the mech cna get back to the fight.

This has also been confirmed on the official website as being ACs shoot one shell with the exception of cluster round for LBs and then Ultra and rapid fire shooting two shells.

So- let me understand this correctly:

You are dismissing several instances where authors and artists have depicted Autocannons as being burst fire weapons due to a single instance where an author cited an individual model of a single 'mech using a particulair brand of an AC/10 uses 10 round magazines?

If anything, that TRO3025 reference would be the incorrect exception- not the others.

If you look through the various TROs, however, you'll see that ACs calibers vary in size depending upon manufacturer. There is, for example, a 75mm UAC5 and a 50mm LBx10 in...TRO3067, I think.

In any case, each caliber of AC varies widly from manufactuer to manufactuer. The smaller caliber ones make up by firing larger bursts or with more force.

Machine guns are also burst weapons- and they hit one location as well. The AC doing damage to a single location in the game is a by product of the gameplay mechanics- not that they fire a single individual round.

Say what you will about Microsoft's Mechwarrior 4, but they had the correct portrayal of the autocannons in that game- when an AC was fired, you had a burst of fire with several shells ejected from the gun, and the bullets hitting a tight grouping.

Pulse laser weapons, as cited, are 'machine gun' like weapons as well, although they have a computer that updates the laser and their 'pulses' allow armour to fall/melt away improving 'damage'. This allows the weapon to be concentrated on a single point, increasing the 'accuracy'

[Sychodemus]

Exilyth, on 22 March 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

How many Vedettes was an Abrams again?

Using real world statistics: more than 500,000 Vedettes for each Abrams.

And yes, that was tongue-in-cheek.

[God of War]

omfg, Vote 4 most stupid Topic! Cry me a River.
When will you learn that BT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REALITY!!!!

[jlbdeath]

well as one who has worked on M1a3's. the rounds of a 120mm go a long way but even with depleted ....... its not very heavy while in mechwarrior the rounds are considerbly much heavier as well as denser. so the same size round same size proplent canister means less range on the ac/ 20. so keep it the same no fixing needed. the game has been fine for at least 30 years leave it alone

[Karyudo ds]

I would say it could sure use one. The game is mostly okay and indeed is a game. If you want to talk about ranges there was a rule for shots beyond max effective range, but look at the scale of the 40k mini's. Ranges and tables should probably be much bigger for them, but they don't counts the meters like Battletech does.

On the other hand Battletech's love for math and page after page of record keeping drives me nuts. Why should I have to add in your cover bonus to my roll? If I miss your cover is irrelevant anyway! Whereas 40k lets you roll for the cover if it actually comes up. Little things like that I would love to see changed because while I like all the options Battletech has the math was always sort of annoying. Not huge, but why do math when other games use a couple rules and static rolls and get the same results quicker? It'd also be nice if each mech didn't require an entire page to itself. Armor diagram could be smaller on the page (or better laid out) and half of the critical hits table is exactly the same on every single page, silly to have it take up half a page every time when a condensed version with JUST what you mech has special and a generic table showing the basic set up. You could easily fit 2 maybe 3 mechs a page... similar to the Quick Strike with a little more data, but that's something gaming groups can do...still it would be nice if it were the norm.

If I were to tweak the weapons I might give non-missiles more than one shot per round. Maybe. Not a big deal as the game plays fine either way there.

Well that's my mini rant. I don't think it needs anything HUGE but it would be easier to bring in new guys if the game didn't look HUGE. 40k is fun the play and sometimes not AS detailed, but beyond a rulebook and codex you're only looking at mini's. No reason to go all clix on the thing though of course.

[Seabear]

Battletech TT is fine as it is. It was the starting point for the BT/MW universe as we know it. It represents a specific time period and technology. If you change the base line (BTTT) every thing after it is either changed or twisted out of its proper place. With the amount of material out there regarding this universe, anybase changes would represent a major undertaking working out all the ripples down stream. If you want advanced tech, play a later era. That is the thing about the BT/MW universe - something, somewhere for every taste.

[Stormwolf]

The only thing that the TT needs are more scenariobooks and maps.

I'd be up for a first Succession War type of campaign.

[Terick]

Sidney, on 22 March 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

So- let me understand this correctly:

You are dismissing several instances where authors and artists have depicted Autocannons as being burst fire weapons due to a single instance where an author cited an individual model of a single 'mech using a particulair brand of an AC/10 uses 10 round magazines?

If anything, that TRO3025 reference would be the incorrect exception- not the others.

If you look through the various TROs, however, you'll see that ACs calibers vary in size depending upon manufacturer. There is, for example, a 75mm UAC5 and a 50mm LBx10 in...TRO3067, I think.

In any case, each caliber of AC varies widly from manufactuer to manufactuer. The smaller caliber ones make up by firing larger bursts or with more force.

Machine guns are also burst weapons- and they hit one location as well. The AC doing damage to a single location in the game is a by product of the gameplay mechanics- not that they fire a single individual round.

Say what you will about Microsoft's Mechwarrior 4, but they had the correct portrayal of the autocannons in that game- when an AC was fired, you had a burst of fire with several shells ejected from the gun, and the bullets hitting a tight grouping.

As for ACs. I draw my source as the official CBT forum from the devs of the game. Sarna is stating what is seen as the standard for most games of what and AC is.

As for the artists and novelists. It has gone back and forth between artists and the novelists. Why the official declaration on the CBT official forums by the devs.

Again, the Devs of CBT state that ACs shoot one shells per shot unless they are a RAC, LB cluster, Ultra or Rapid Firing.

Trying to relocate the post now. Have to correct this one every few months playing online with the Mekwars server.

[Arctic Fox]

Terick, on 22 March 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

As for ACs. I draw my source as the official CBT forum from the devs of the game. Sarna is stating what is seen as the standard for most games of what and AC is.

As for the artists and novelists. It has gone back and forth between artists and the novelists. Why the official declaration on the CBT official forums by the devs.

Again, the Devs of CBT state that ACs shoot one shells per shot unless they are a RAC, LB cluster, Ultra or Rapid Firing.

Trying to relocate the post now. Have to correct this one every few months playing online with the Mekwars server.

It would be rather odd for the line developers to say that, since TechManual clearly contradicts that:

Quote

[...]autocannons (often abbreviated as ACs) are a broadly varied class of rapid-firing, auto-loading, heavy ballistic weaponry—gigantic machine guns, in other words. With calibers ranging from 30 to 90 millimeters at the lighter end, to as much as 203 millimeters or more at the heaviest, most autocannons deliver their damage by firing high-speed streams or bursts of high-explosive, armor-defeating shells through one or more barrels. While caliber and firing rate can vary greatly[...]

I (probably) haven't read the post in question, but if I were to guess they were specifically talking just about gameplay rules.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Here's what I see as a BattleTech overhaul:

• Leave the weapons, lore, technology all the same.
  
• Make it PC/ Console based
  
• Don't kill me

I think it needs to adopt lush, rich 3D environments and Mech modeling with captivating landscapes and custom Mech painting labs, live-action animated movement sequences, random number generator-based dice rolling, and the pther adjustments needed to keep the game moving forward in an age where BattleTech players live too far apart to play frequently, and for those darn LBX cluster rounds.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 22 March 2012 - 09:43 PM.

[Sidney]

Terick, on 22 March 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Again, the Devs of CBT state that ACs shoot one shells per shot unless they are a RAC, LB cluster, Ultra or Rapid Firing.

Trying to relocate the post now. Have to correct this one every few months playing online with the Mekwars server.

Not a problem- I found it for you:

Welshman states: "The same class of cannon has been shown in various sizes, muzzle rates, and shells per burst."

Cray (who helped write Techmanual) elaborates: "One model of AC/20 could be a 30mm autocannon that fires 200 shells in an attack, while another might be a 203mm autocannon that fires two shells per attack."

Thread is here:
http://bg.battletech....html#msg358043

That's one of many of course. The question comes up every once in a while. The answer is always the same- autocannons, despite dealing damage to a single location, are like machine guns: They fire an unspecified amount of 'bullets' in a burst. The amount of shells (and their caliber) vary from manufactuer to manufactuer.

[Ulric Kell]

It needs a happy medium. Something like MW:DA only with more complexity. I'm not saying we need to super dumb it down but there's got to be a collectable aspect and a progression aspect to attract and maintain a base.

[Terick]

Sidney, on 22 March 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

Welshman states: "The same class of cannon has been shown in various sizes, muzzle rates, and shells per burst."

Cray (who helped write Techmanual) elaborates: "One model of AC/20 could be a 30mm autocannon that fires 200 shells in an attack, while another might be a 203mm autocannon that fires two shells per attack."

If this is the case it is STUPID.... and probably not a strong enough word for it. Simply comes to logistics... if you need to stock AC ammo for AC/10s from 3 different manufactures... and they are different sized rounds. That means your logistics is a real mess.

Smarter to standardize ALL ACs to a standard round size, and them make the rate of fire the only variable. Meaning an AC/2 fires slower rate of fire with a longer barrel and hence does less damage but has more range and have an AC/20 fire much faster from short barrels and hence more damage.

If not then you can have over a hundred different types of AC ammo you have to stock for a regiment of mechs and have to make sure each lance get the right ammo, since the HBK in the 9th lance can't use the AC/20 ammo that the Atlas in the 21st lance uses.

Just really stupid for an army to try and be supplied. Maybe the clans have more standard ACs and why it is so much easier for them to forget proper logistics. But then that raises the question... can the clans ACs use IS ammo and can the IS ACs use the clan ammo? Does the company raid the clan supply depot and find that there are 100 tons of AC/20 ammo they can't use for the Victor in the company?

Does this mean that Gauss ammo for different manufacturers weapons are also different sizes so now you have to also stock different gauss ammo?

The sheer stupidity of that is just... I don't have strong enough words.

That is something that needs to be change in cannon.

All ACs fire the same same size round(s) per shot for the class (AC/10, AC/20, etc). I don't care if it is one 200mm shell or a dozen 50mm shells. Just make it standard. I know House Davion with their love of ACs would have standardized.

Edited by Terick, 23 March 2012 - 06:25 PM.

[Sidney]

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

If this is the case it is STUPID.... and probably not a strong enough word for it. Simply comes to logistics... if you need to stock AC ammo for AC/10s from 3 different manufactures... and they are different sized rounds. That means your logistics is a real mess.

Battletech is a game of 'armoured combat'. It's not a game of logistics.

A lot of things about Battletech is abstracted for purposes of gameplay. A burst of a machine gun isn't going to do the same amount of damage every time... let alone the same amount of damage as a SRM every time.

Yet it does.

Same goes for autocannons. You have dozens of different companies that make their own Autocannons. One uses smaller shells, cutting down on- say- recoil, but requires a longer burst. Another uses larger rounds, meaning shorter bursts giving you more recoil, but doesn't need you to hold the reticule just as long.

One may use a different sized round from another company because the propiatary parts they need to make that certain propellant isn't available. You have trillions of people and thousands of planets. It's not unreasonable that there is more than one company that makes an 'AC5', and that to ensure more sells over their competition they are different than the competition's AC5.

In the 'real world' of Battletech, not all PPCs deal the same damage. One might deal an average of '10.005' per shot while another deals an average of '10.1'. One large laser may generate 8.6 heat, while the other generates 7.95 heat.

But because the game is abstracted to a simple pair of dice, the game isn't granular enough to take all these differences into account- and it shouldn't.

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

Smarter to standardize ALL ACs to a standard round size, and them make the rate of fire the only variable. Meaning an AC/2 fires slower rate of fire with a longer barrel and hence does less damage but has more range and have an AC/20 fire much faster from short barrels and hence more damage.

Are all modern assault rifles standardized? Are all modern handguns?

Are all 9mm rounds the same?

(No. You have 9mm x 18, 9mm x 19, 9mm x 21 etc. etc.)

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

If not then you can have over a hundred different types of AC ammo you have to stock for a regiment of mechs and have to make sure each lance get the right ammo, since the HBK in the 9th lance can't use the AC/20 ammo that the Atlas in the 21st lance uses.

Correct. Just like you need to ensure every lance has enough fresh water, various types of food (Protein, vitamin C, breads, veggies...)

You also have to make sure they have proper clothing- and clean clothes for that matter. Don't forget medicine.

Dropping onto a planet? Well Mechwarrior Bob from New Avalon better have his vaccinations up to date for X planet, because many planets have unique non-sentient life native to it...and diseases.

Ready to ship out from Planet X to Planet Y for the next wave of attacks? Aw crap- turns out Mechwarrior Bob's vaccines are up to date, but he's also allergic to several of the plants on this planet.

If you want to talk logistic realities in Battletech, there are far worse things you need to handwave away than different types of AC ammo.

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

Just really stupid for an army to try and be supplied. Maybe the clans have more standard ACs and why it is so much easier for them to forget proper logistics. But then that raises the question... can the clans ACs use IS ammo and can the IS ACs use the clan ammo? Does the company raid the clan supply depot and find that there are 100 tons of AC/20 ammo they can't use for the Victor in the company?

It's up to the game master, but generaly no. Recall that Clan weapons are significantly more advanced. That includes ammunition.

For example, Clan LRMs are armed as soon as they leave the launcher (no minimum range) while the I.S LRMs take 700m (RPG) or 210m (Tabletop) to arm properly.

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

Does this mean that Gauss ammo for different manufacturers weapons are also different sizes so now you have to also stock different gauss ammo?

If you want to get technical, yes.

The game treats Gauss ammo as Gauss ammo though. Just like 'AC5' ammo is 'AC5' ammo to keep campaigns simple.

In 'real world' Battletech though, yes, the Gauss ammo you salvage off one 'mech may not work in another 'mechs Gauss Rifle.

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

The sheer stupidity of that is just... I don't have strong enough words.

That is something that needs to be change in cannon.

Considering it's been working just fine for the past 28 years, I don't see the need to suddenly rewrite most of Battletech's history just yet.

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

All ACs fire the same same size round(s) per shot for the class (AC/10, AC/20, etc). I don't care if it is one 200mm shell or a dozen 50mm shells. Just make it standard. I know House Davion with their love of ACs would have standardized.

It's not standardized 'fluff' wise.

Game purposes? Yes, it is.

[Moosehead]

Terick, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

If this is the case it is STUPID.... and probably not a strong enough word for it. Simply comes to logistics... if you need to stock AC ammo for AC/10s from 3 different manufactures... and they are different sized rounds. That means your logistics is a real mess.

It wasn't without real life examples, like M85 50 cal ammo belts for the M60 Tank wouldn't work for the M2 Browning,
and in WWII, the 3 inch M7 cannon and M1 76mm used the same projectile, but had different cases, wouldn't interchange.
So M18 Hellcat TDs had different ammo from M10 TDs, which was different from the 75mm in the M4.

But since the M4 Sherman had its cannon derived from from the WWI French 75, it could use that ammo.

[Terick]

Yes in the past it was more of an issue. But people (hopefully) learn form their mistakes.

Your comment on guns all being the same round is why NATO standardized their rounds. An army will have a few types of ammo for this very reason. All Assault rifles will load the same type of round or be capable of taking all rounds available.

You don't see the US or UK Armies field twenty types of rounds in a regiment of troops. All ARs or Carbines use the same size. Same for handguns and then SAWs.

Food is a very poor comparison. You deliver a balanced diet to every one, can be the same food or not. In the field you issue something close to the MRE, just send enough MREs. Yes, we got tired of eating MREs. But they took care of the need.

Strategic Ops tries to get to more things like logistics.

Need to to say from now on all AC/5s shoot 25mm shells. Real armies do this, they give contracts to make a specified number of rounds to exact specs. Doesn't' matter who makes them as long as they meet spec.

Once you have the exact ammo performance you then tell all the AC makers your ACs need to shoot this size. Don't think that works? Guess what... US and other militaries do it that way for many weapons. I hope you don't' think that they just let the newest and coolest shown on future weapons be what they buy for the week.

This is how you standardize ammo to simplify logistics so you can go trash the other guys on the field.

Energy weapons are different, but I'm willing to bet you can standardize the lens and a number of the parts to make them work. If not you wouldn't be able to swap weapons around. There is one point of fluff on the Zeus that talks about a custom laser design for the LL mounted in the CT. But I ignore that being that their whole description of using a fiber optic cable as being 'nice thought' but terribly bad idea.

You have got me thinking about weapons manufactures... really I can see a big AC user like the Fedcom standardizing their millitary and swapping ACs just to cut down on logistics. Could even work it in to a patriotic move as in using "Made in the Fedcom Parts ONLY." With the power the House lord have telling their manufactures that this is the size ammo you are going to make and your only going to make guns using this size round... could easily happen. Once one House does it the rest will follow and possibly adopt the same standard so they can use ammo they loot. Otherwise... can only use half of what you loot, not a good thing.

This type of standardization should have happened in the Star League and then would explain why the clans use the same standards. The Houses would have kept the same standards.

AC ammo for the same size round is going to be the same size and won't matter if it is a clan or IS gun you fire it from.

Need isn't' to rewrite history. Can have history still shooting bursts. Just say that all fluff now reads that all AC/5s shoot 25mm shells. Even gives them a reason to make easy changes to the TROs and publish them again.

Edited by Terick, 23 March 2012 - 09:37 PM.

[Derek Icelord]

To expand a bit on what Terick pointed out:

The primary reason for so many different specifications (projectile caliber in particular) is that every manufacturer wants their way to become the standard, usually for prestige and/or money. It makes sense that in a civilization that spans multiple star systems there would be even more variance than we have now.

However, the reason only a handful of these see active service is either 1.) the design has proven itself to be superior to its competition (such as the Colt 1911) or 2.) the consumer(s) request/demand a standard (a la NATO specifications).

As Terick said, it stands to reason that the Star League Defense Force would have made something the standard, even if that standard changed with the advent of BattleMechs and newer technologies.

In addition, even if the Succession Wars didn't leave a single old standard in their wake, something would have emerged as the new standard if for no other reason than it was the only specification to have any spare parts remaining. Without this, the technology for any type of weapon would have become, in all probability, extinct simply due to the inability to repair or replace units lost in battle.

A side note: Non-standardization is one of the thing that hampered the German Luftwaffe in WWII. While their aircraft were of excellent, handmade quality, no two were exactly alike, meaning that parts were difficult to come by and mechanics had to learn the ins and outs of each plane.

Addendum: All that said, tweak the fluff, but if the rules have functioned for over 20 years, don't fix what ain't broke.

Edited by Derek Icelord, 24 March 2012 - 02:58 AM.