125 replies to this topic

[XTRMNTR2K]

Pvt Dancer, on 11 May 2012 - 01:53 AM, said:

What your asking is to reduce the damage of a AC to make it DoT vs a single damage packet. Small packets of damage hosed over a mech may be neat looking, but is a primary reason why Laser Boats dominated those MW games. Why use a AC 20 when 4 medium lasers do the same thing?

1) I never asked to reduce the damage of autocannons. In fact, from a balancing point of view, they would need to have higher DPS or damage per burst than single-shot ACs. That's common sense, really.

2) You dismiss "fluff" as being meaningless, yet you seem to accept the fact that lasers inflict DoT. As far as I know that is something only established through the very thing you disregard. Did they spread their damage over multiple areas in TT? I think not.

What I mean to say is that the TT rules should be obeyed where it makes sense. 640 meters maximum range for LRMs? No prob. But on the other hand, not obeying it where it makes things interesting is a viable design choice as well. That's why I'm okay with DoT lasers. I'm just thinking out loud that the same should be allowed for autocannons.

Quote

You can not base or balance a game off of fluff. As I said, fluff is fluff... it means nothing.

Well, for some of us it is closely related to immersion. Sure, you can take that away if you want. In that case I figure we don't need fancy graphics (so no CryEngine 3), high-quality sound effects, joystick support or anything like that. Monochrome graphics with untextured wire models as mechs should be sufficient, I guess.

On a more serious note, immersion really isn't meaningless. You can have the best gameplay mechanics in the world, but without at least some immersion, maybe through some synthesis of both established rules and fluff, a game may be good - but never truly great. It's not a black/white matter between balance and immersion, it's about finding the ideal compromise somewhere in the gray shades that lay inbetween.

Since I assume that PGI are going for a great game as opposed to merely a good one, it just surprised me to see the current implementation of the AC20 look so... bland and boring. Especially compared to spectacular-looking effects such as the PPC trails shown in the latest vids.

[Strum Wealh]

Saiph, on 10 May 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:

I've always been happy with AC/2 as rapid fire (basically a single 20mm anti-air cannon, *thumpthumpthumpthump*) while AC/5 is the 40mm cannon (*Thump! Thump! Thump!*).

AC/10 moves into the 105-120mm (~5-inch) class, which fires maybe every 3-5 seconds (like the shipboard autocannon above and is basically equivalent to the main gun of a modern battle tank).

AC/20 is like a 10-12 inch battleship cannon. Huge blast, earsplitting bang, immense damage, long reload.

Going into LB-X autocannons, we have things that are more like shotgun rounds. Single shot, different ranges and clustering. LB 2-X is the mech sized 4-10 shotgun, going down to 20-ga, 16-ga, then 10-ga. Bigger cluster munitions, tighter grouping, more damage.

Ultra ACs are sort of like chainguns. UAC-2 is gatling 20mm (vulcan cannon), up to gatling 30mm (Avenger minigun from the A-10) for UAC-5. UAC-10 has a few huge barrels for rotary fire, while the UAC-20 has fewer, larger barrels.

A few minor corrections:

-- The AC-2/5/10/20 are actually designations of "damage class", rather than caliber.
For example, the "GM Whirlwind" AC-5 on the Marauder is a 120mm cannon (the same caliber as the M256 used on the M1 Abrams MBT) that fires in 3-round bursts, while the "Crusher Super Heavy Cannon" AC-20 on the Hetzer is a 150mm cannon that fires in 10-round bursts and the Clan-built UAC-20 on the Ebon Jaguar/Cauldron-Born Variant A is described as a 203mm (8-inch) cannon.
That being said, TechManual describes the lighter ACs as ranging from ~30 to ~90 mm, and the heavier ACs as ranging from there to ~203mm or more.

-- The cluster rounds for the LB-X ACs contain a number of pellets equal to the weapons' damage class - that is, the shotshell for an LB-X AC-2 contains only two pellets (that deal one unit of damage apiece), while the shotshell for an LB-X AC-20 contains 20 pellets (that deal one unit of damage apiece).

-- Ultra ACs are not rotary weapons. If they are multi-barrel models (like what is depicted in the recently-released art for the Cicada), they would be similar to weapons known as "Gast guns" like the Soviet-built GSh-23.
"The GSh-23 works on the Gast Gun principle developed by German engineer Karl Gast of the Vorwerk company in 1916. It is a twin-barreled weapon in which the firing action of one barrel operates the mechanism of the other. It provides a much faster rate of fire for lower mechanical wear than a single-barrel weapon, although it cannot match the rate of fire of an electric Gatling gun like the M61 Vulcan."

-- The RAC-2, IMO, would be the equivalent to the 20mm M61 or the 25mm GAU-12, with the RAC-5 being closer to something like the 37mm T249 (the highest-caliber example of a Gatling-type weapon that I could find quickly).

-----

That being said, my personal - and somewhat arbitrary - scale is:

AC-2: 20-45mm
AC-5: 50-95mm
AC-10: 100-145mm
AC-20: 150-203(+)mm

As for ROF, I for one would not mind recycle times similar to those from the S7 rules: ~2.5-sec recycle for the AC-2, ~5.0-sec recycle for the AC-5 and AC-10, and ~7.5-sec recycle for the AC-20.

[Sleeping Bear]

I really like the idea of one hit doing all the damage. This will make ACs frighteningly dangerous weapons on the battlefield and mitigates the dangers of having them in your loadout. And for all of you clamboring for burst damage, what do you think LB-X series autocannons will bring to the table.

[Strum Wealh]

Sleeping Bear, on 11 May 2012 - 04:47 AM, said:

I really like the idea of one hit doing all the damage. This will make ACs frighteningly dangerous weapons on the battlefield and mitigates the dangers of having them in your loadout. And for all of you clamboring for burst damage, what do you think LB-X series autocannons will bring to the table.

Burst fire: all shells can land in one location, or be spread across the target; dependent on attacker's aim and movement and target's movement and available cover

LB-X AC: each shell in a burst fragment and deliver damage across the target, increasing the likelihood of internal damage (critical hit) to an already-damaged target; damage is still dependent on attacker's aim and movement and target's movement and available cover
"The most notable feature of the weapon was its ability to fire both standard HEAP rounds as well as a specialized anti-'Mech cluster round.
The cluster round fragmented in flight, peppering the target with submunitions. The cannon was able to punch through an opponent's armor with standard rounds, and then fire cluster rounds to increase the chance of getting a critical hit on a target's internal systems.
The LB-X's 'shotgun' flak-like effect also makes it an effective and deadly weapon against AeroSpace Fighters, VTOLs and Infantry."

[Odanan]

Ravager AI, on 07 May 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

Hmm... I looked up Autocannon on Sarna and found this: The Autocannon is a direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) rounds at targets either singly or in bursts.

So that would basically mean that both are possible. Basically it would have two firemodes, one for burst and one for single.

If you fire a burst, you won't have all the damage necessary at the same spot. That's more like how a LRM works, not a Tabletop Autocannon.

BUT, there is an optional rule in the TT that you can actually split the AC damage for 2 different consecutive targets... this really sounds more like a burst fire.

I think the TT rules are contradictory here: sometimes the AC work as a single shot, sometimes as a burst.

What I prefer, burst or single? No matter, as long as you will always deal all the damage at the same spot (which makes the AC so deadly).

[Fetladral]

technically an AC20 could be 30mm as long as it does 20 points of damage. The caliber and damage are not dependent on each other. Though usually the more damage are large caliber which is 30mm - 203mm (203 seems an odd number to end on)

[FaustianQ]

I'm still not seeing why burst fire must break down the damage of say an AC/2 into two shots for 1 damage each, but not two shots for 2 damage each. This pretty much solves the very poor damage to weight ratio of AC weapons, and would make sense as to why anyone would fear an AC toting mech over a laser or missile boat.

• Standard ACs fire in forced bursts with each round having the same damage as the weapon class.
  
• LB-X simply have short cooldown times, they do not fire in bursts and are not automatic.
  
• Ultras fire in essentially slow automatic, with the cooldown timer building up to max. Once max, the UAC must wait for the cooldown timer to reach zero to begin firing again.
  
• Rotarys are simply automatic with no cooldown time but a short wind up time.

Just my thoughts.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

AC20 delivers 20 damage to a single location

LBX AC20 delivers 20 damger in cluster

IE: AC's should fire a single shell that damage's a single area.

while not completely lore friendly [as there are both types used in lore] from a gameplay prospective, this is the way to go.

now maybe later, PGI will introduce AC's that fire the stream of shells, that distribute damage and require more dicipline of the pilot to put the damage on the place they want it. But right now, from a 'source material' to practicality standpoint... The current model is correct.

[Toothman]

Fetladral, on 11 May 2012 - 06:00 AM, said:

technically an AC20 could be 30mm as long as it does 20 points of damage. The caliber and damage are not dependent on each other. Though usually the more damage are large caliber which is 30mm - 203mm (203 seems an odd number to end on)

The 203 comes from modern artillery pieces. Although the current trend in artillery is smaller more mobile guns usually in the 105-155mm sizes.

Strum Wealh, on 11 May 2012 - 04:27 AM, said:

A few minor corrections:

-- The AC-2/5/10/20 are actually designations of "damage class", rather than caliber.
For example, the "GM Whirlwind" AC-5 on the Marauder is a 120mm cannon (the same caliber as the M256 used on the M1 Abrams MBT) that fires in 3-round bursts, while the "Crusher Super Heavy Cannon" AC-20 on the Hetzer is a 150mm cannon that fires in 10-round bursts and the Clan-built UAC-20 on the Ebon Jaguar/Cauldron-Born Variant A is described as a 203mm (8-inch) cannon.
That being said, TechManual describes the lighter ACs as ranging from ~30 to ~90 mm, and the heavier ACs as ranging from there to ~203mm or more.

-- The cluster rounds for the LB-X ACs contain a number of pellets equal to the weapons' damage class - that is, the shotshell for an LB-X AC-2 contains only two pellets (that deal one unit of damage apiece), while the shotshell for an LB-X AC-20 contains 20 pellets (that deal one unit of damage apiece).

-- Ultra ACs are not rotary weapons. If they are multi-barrel models (like what is depicted in the recently-released art for the Cicada), they would be similar to weapons known as "Gast guns" like the Soviet-built GSh-23.
"The GSh-23 works on the Gast Gun principle developed by German engineer Karl Gast of the Vorwerk company in 1916. It is a twin-barreled weapon in which the firing action of one barrel operates the mechanism of the other. It provides a much faster rate of fire for lower mechanical wear than a single-barrel weapon, although it cannot match the rate of fire of an electric Gatling gun like the M61 Vulcan."

-- The RAC-2, IMO, would be the equivalent to the 20mm M61 or the 25mm GAU-12, with the RAC-5 being closer to something like the 37mm T249 (the highest-caliber example of a Gatling-type weapon that I could find quickly).

-----

That being said, my personal - and somewhat arbitrary - scale is:

AC-2: 20-45mm
AC-5: 50-95mm
AC-10: 100-145mm
AC-20: 150-203(+)mm

As for ROF, I for one would not mind recycle times similar to those from the S7 rules: ~2.5-sec recycle for the AC-2, ~5.0-sec recycle for the AC-5 and AC-10, and ~7.5-sec recycle for the AC-20.

Gau-8 Avenger at 30mm is the largest I know of. Its the main armament of the A-10 ground attack plane

[Pvt Dancer]

XTRMNTR2K, on 11 May 2012 - 03:08 AM, said:

1) I never asked to reduce the damage of auto cannons. In fact, from a balancing point of view, they would need to have higher DPS or damage per burst than single-shot ACs. That's common sense, really.

Apparently you have no real concept then on how this will work nor are you really thinking this through. Again, your lack of understanding of rules is being clouded by fluff. You /want/ to turn ACs into a RL machine Gun. You can not balance the weapon to shoot 10-1000 rounds a minute and keep it balance without speeding up /all/ of the weapons. The game is balanced with how armor, internal structure and weapon damage are designed. You can not have a AC 10 fire a round a second over a 10 second period (using 10 seconds as an arbitrary number) and keep it doing 10 points of damage per shot. The only way to balance it would be a 'single round' to last 10 seconds, doing a point of damage per second. Your then nerfing the weapon and end up making lasers a better weapon. Specially when you consider a AC 20 as the largest single damage packet in the game.

XTRMNTR2K, on 11 May 2012 - 03:08 AM, said:

2) You dismiss "fluff" as being meaningless, yet you seem to accept the fact that lasers inflict DoT. As far as I know that is something only established through the very thing you disregard. Did they spread their damage over multiple areas in TT? I think not.

Again, your assuming. I /never/ said lasers are DoT weapons nor is it a fact. I will point out in those vids, no one was ever damaged because they were in God mode for the demo. It is hard to demo the game when another Dev runs up to you and alpha strikes you and you blow up. The only thing the Devs have said about lasers is that you have to hold them on the target to do damage. Is it doing DoT or is that a single packet? It is hard to tell when you haven't seen a actual real combat video that is longer than 10 seconds.

The only things that spread damage to multiple areas were missiles and LBX weapons, and missiles were broken down to maximum packets of 5pts. So a LRM 20 that hit with 12 missiles did two 5pt packages of damage to a random location and 2pts of damage to a 3rd. It was possible for missiles to hit the same location (same with the LBX). SRMs and LBX rolled location per missile/cluster.

XTRMNTR2K, on 11 May 2012 - 03:08 AM, said:

What I mean to say is that the TT rules should be obeyed where it makes sense. 640 meters maximum range for LRMs? No prob. But on the other hand, not obeying it where it makes things interesting is a viable design choice as well. That's why I'm okay with DoT lasers. I'm just thinking out loud that the same should be allowed for auto cannons.

The two biggest changes for the devs to deal with is real time and aiming at locations. MW games were crippled by 'legging' because they had such pinpoint accuracy. To counter this, you notice the reticules are not able to zoom in to a location to do nothing but head shots. They are effectively duplicating the 'hip fire' of Modern War series games. Your not going to get pinpoint accuracy in this game, because to pull it off, you have to stop moving and your opponent has to stop moving.

[Melissia]

I think it should depend on the size of the weapon. AC/20s shoudl fire a single big shot, makes it look more like an impressive cannon, whiel the AC/5s should fire in bursts, making their lighter damage apparent.

This would be the most visually intuitive to new players.

Edited by Melissia, 11 May 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[Capt Cole 117]

I'd vote for consistent rate of fire, but with the option to hold down the trigger.

Edited by Capt Cole 117, 11 May 2012 - 01:44 PM.

[Sassori]

The sheer number of people who think LB-X Autocannon's fire in bursts make me think this is a pointless discussion. To many people have no idea what the weapons /do/ let alone how they work.

[Hawks]

Johann Devalis, on 10 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

I don't like the single shot AC. That fight where the atlas downs the K2 didn't seem right, and here's why: the atlas fired what, three AC20 rounds, all three hitting the center torso for the kill? This setup for the AC is completely opposite of the system they have established for lasers. Laser fire over time so that the damage is more likely to be spread out over a mech and not be so pinpoint. This seems to make the AC crazy powerful and easy to use as well. A weapon that is so powerful should be kind of hard to use. I think a three round burst with heavy enough recoil to force aim to drift off to either side makes for better play. Just my $0.02

I think we can sum up what we have learned from this, and other threads, thusly:

1. Autocannon are overpowered relative to other weapons.
2. Lasers and PPCs are overpowered relative to other weapons.
3. Missiles are overpowered relative to other weapons.

[zverofaust]

I like the idea of the rate of fire of the weapon depending on its size, and relation with conventional real-world weapons. I see the AC/20 as something like a heavy assault gun (Sturmtiger or ISU-152 style) firing maybe 10 rounds per minute, the AC/10 as more of a conventional 105-120mm tank gun firing maybe 25 rounds/minute, the AC/5 as a traditional heavy automatic cannon like the Bofors or S-60 57mm firing around 100 rounds a minute, and AC/2 like a 25mm Bushmaster firing closer to 200 rounds a minute.

[BrosephBrostar]

In the tabletop an AC/2 and an AC/20 can both shoot once per turn. Now you have to figure out how long a turn is. According to the page on sarna.net the Highlander can run at 54km/h and jump 90 meters. Since the Highlander has 5 running mp and 3 walking mp we can figure out that it moves at a rate of 360 hexes per hour, or in other words that one turn is 10 seconds. Going strictly by tabletop rules all autocannons (and basically all weapons in general) should shoot exactly once every 10 seconds.

Now if you ask me a machinegun that can only shoot 6 times per minute sounds completely retarded, and I think most people would agree. Why should it be any different for autocannons? By making different weapons reload at different rates you've already deviated from the tabletop balance, so making autocannons shoot faster is just a question of whether it looks cooler and how it works out compared to other weapon types. In my opinion making autocannons rapidfire weapons would be a lot cooler and make them more distinct from gauss rifles.

[Strum Wealh]

BrosephBrostar, on 25 May 2012 - 04:21 AM, said:

In the tabletop an AC/2 and an AC/20 can both shoot once per turn. Now you have to figure out how long a turn is. According to the page on sarna.net the Highlander can run at 54km/h and jump 90 meters. Since the Highlander has 5 running mp and 3 walking mp we can figure out that it moves at a rate of 360 hexes per hour, or in other words that one turn is 10 seconds. Going strictly by tabletop rules all autocannons (and basically all weapons in general) should shoot exactly once every 10 seconds.

Now if you ask me a machinegun that can only shoot 6 times per minute sounds completely retarded, and I think most people would agree. Why should it be any different for autocannons? By making different weapons reload at different rates you've already deviated from the tabletop balance, so making autocannons shoot faster is just a question of whether it looks cooler and how it works out compared to other weapon types. In my opinion making autocannons rapidfire weapons would be a lot cooler and make them more distinct from gauss rifles.

Well, the TechManual states (on page 207):

Quote

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.

The Classic BattleTech Master Rules states (on page 132):

Quote

An autocannon is a rapid-firing, auto-loading weapon that fires high-speed streams of high-explosive, armor-piercing shells. Light autocannon range in caliber from 30 to 90mm, and heavy autocannon may be 80 to 120mm or larger.

The glossary in the Legend of the Jade Phoenix omnibus states:

Quote

Autocannon
This is a rapid-firing, auto-loading weapon. Light autocannon range from 30 to 90mm caliber, and heavy autocannon may be 80 to 120mm or more. The weapon fires high-speed streams of high-explosive, armor-piercing shells.

Though, Classic BattleTech RPG does apparently state that the Marauder's "GM Whirlwind" AC-5 is a 120mm cannon that fires in 3-round bursts...

Still, the TT rulebooks and the novels establish, with a fair degree of consistency, that the largest of the "light ACs" (generally considered to include both the AC-2 and the AC-5, while excluding the AC-10 and AC-20) tend to top out at the ~90mm range, and that ACs are generally burst-fire weapons.

As for TT ammunition-expenditure-per-turn, the idea is that the ACs are clip-fed weapons, where each unit of ammunition (45 per ton for an AC-2, 20 per ton for an AC-5, 10 per ton for an AC-10, and 5 per ton for an AC-20) represents a clip containing multiple (three to ten) shells.
As such, a Marauder that fires its AC-5 "once per turn" is supposed to be really firing three 90mm to 120mm (depending on who one asks) shells in a burst, ejecting the spent clip, sending a new clip from the magazine/ammo bin, loading the new clip, and chambering a new round inside of a 10-second (Standard TT) or 5-second (Solaris 7 Duel Rules) period.

The MWO gameplay and demonstration videos released thus far seem to indicate that ACs will be implemented in such a way as to make them more like field guns or howitzers - short barrels and small charges (relative to shell size) leading to relatively short ranges, firing single shells with each salvo, and timing periods of continuous fire (AC-5 and AC-20 only) implying recycle times slightly shorter than the S7 recycle times (e.g. ~4 seconds for an AC-5 (vs 5.0 seconds), ~6 seconds for an AC-20 (vs 7.5 seconds)).

Your thoughts?

[Max Liao]

Burst, single-shot, or both (depending on manufacturer) I don't care. As long as an AC/10 does 10 points of damage, the fluff is ... fluff.

[Gat]

osito, on 07 May 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

I voted for other. In canon i believe different ac designers do it both ways. Some ac do all the damage in one shell, when other companies do their damage in a burst fire mode. I don't know how the devs will work with this. If they will allow different ac do different damage or if they will choose one way or the other. Only time will tell for us.

My hope is that they will eventually introduce different brands of Autocannons. Since ammo isn't specified as being a certain quantity per ton they could introduce many autocannon types for each classification. This would make practical and business sense because it would provide players more content to purchase.

The one problem with this is what if you wanted to use two different brands of the same AC type. An easy solution is to only allow one brand per type so you don't run into ammo conversion issues. Also, those who bring up RACs they are a completely different type of autocannon.

Personally if Machine guns had more punch I would be happy.

For more on BattleTech Autocannons go to http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Autocannon

Edited by Gat, 30 August 2012 - 11:59 PM.

[Fischkopp]

Autocannons should fire in bursts...
ac/2 more shells per round as an ac/20...so, maybe 10 shells per round for an ac/2 and 3 shells per round for an ac/20 or whatever to show the shell scale.