the AC20 looks really slow
#1
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:00 PM
#2
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:09 PM
#3
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:19 PM
#4
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:21 PM
Dirk Le Daring, on 07 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:
I do wish there was something along the lines of a chromehounds sniper cannon in the BT verse. Before closed pits happened I've landed one hit kills at 2km in that game.
Edited by Steamroller Stig, 07 April 2012 - 08:22 PM.
#5
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:29 PM
Steamroller Stig, on 07 April 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:
I do wish there was something along the lines of a chromehounds sniper cannon in the BT verse. Before closed pits happened I've landed one hit kills at 2km in that game.
The thing is, if they equated to the same bore diameter, the AC20 could never hope to match the range due to the considerably shorter barrel, and due to that, the much lower muzzle velocity. Unless propellants were amazingly quick to burn.
#6
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:36 PM
#7
Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:41 PM
Bare with me because this is pure speculation.
The AC 20 slow round is very powerful but harder to land on fast moving targets. I believe the larger the AC the slower the rate of fire and the round speed. This would be a great way to make the smaller AC's not only useful, but viable at their extended ranges.
Again, just a theory.
#8
Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:50 PM
yeah that's pretty damn slow. as a kinetic energy weapon, it won't even stay afloat in the air, it'll just sputter and fall flat.
it should be as fast as modern sabot rounds if not more so.
#10
Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:02 PM
Paul Inouye, on 07 April 2012 - 09:54 PM, said:
Cool stuff, can't wait to see -- and congratz on 666 posts.
Paul Inouye, on 07 April 2012 - 09:54 PM, said:
Steamroller Stig, on 07 April 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:
Thanks, gentlemen.
#12
Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:23 PM
#14
Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:59 AM
Dirk Le Daring, on 07 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:
well, this is a bad comparison, b/c an AC20 has nowhere near the barrel length of modern tank gun, and doesn't fire sub caliber munitions encased in a sabot.. so the projectile velocity is going to be much slower than 1660m/s
#15
Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:15 AM
#16
Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:30 AM
Ghostrider45, on 08 April 2012 - 06:15 AM, said:
Just because something is a game doesn't mean it's not striving for realism. As a simulator, that is one of Mechwarrior: Online's main goals. I'd appreciate it if you didn't insult those of us actually trying to make this game better through discussion. Maybe you'd like to tell us why you think the AC/20 should travel that slow in the game?
#17
Posted 08 April 2012 - 08:22 AM
Ghostrider45, on 08 April 2012 - 06:15 AM, said:
One thing, a lot of the MW/BT universe is built around reality. Theoretical, maybe, but real science. Rail guns and lasers are being tested. Jumpships have "lithium" batteries for better energy storage. And surprisingly to me, as I was reading much of the books as a teen, much of the weapons and science they described weren't around, and now many of them are coming out.
Love the MW3 version of the AC/20 personally, but that's just me. Liked leading the target, and loading two of them to keep me from pulling from the recoil. That's actually been my biggest unanswered question so far, will there be recoil, from both firing and impact?
#18
Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:15 AM
#20
Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:24 AM
Paul Inouye, on 07 April 2012 - 09:54 PM, said:
well thank you for the FYI, so is there a range limit or damage drop off to keep in effective within is canonical distance? or are they just balanced by projectile velocity and cycle rate?
and if autocannons can be pushed further than its intended range with great marksmanship. Hello Centurion sniper
Edited by Steamroller Stig, 08 April 2012 - 11:25 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


















