1063 replies to this topic

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

and look at the stabilizer. a tripod covered with 3 Sandbags for weight. I only gave you a reference page, but I'm sure someone of your intelligence can discover the manual's sections covering stability and firing rates for accuracy.

[Redacted]

First off, I've never shot with the tripod, I shot with the bipods with no sandbags.


Are you trying to say the Mechs from the future have LESS stability than a 240 on EITHER bi or tri pods?

Edited by Niko Snow, 26 January 2013 - 08:17 PM.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

And yet again your a dunce.

First off, I've never shot with the tripod, I shot with the bipods with no sandbags.


Are you trying to say the Mechs from the future have LESS stability than a 240 on EITHER bi or tri pods?

so I can only assume you were shooting prone, then. Which is my point. Let me ask you this. What was your accuracy while firing your weapon while walking or running? Oh, right.

Even disregarding this, the force of a 5.56 bullet or 7.62, is much less against the unit firing the weapon than the force of a 120mm cannon. Do you disagree?

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 02:02 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

so I can only assume you were shooting prone, then. Which is my point.

You have no point, your full of it.
I already said I was in the prone.
A mech is more stable than me. Your so silly it angers me.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

You have no point, your full of it.
I already said I was in the prone.
A mech is more stable than me. Your so silly it angers me.

What was your accuracy with that gun while walking and shooting? Or while running and shooting? You're also attempting to equate the force applied by expending a 5.56 round to a 120mm cannon round. Im assuming troll because this wouldn't be an argument with someone with real experience.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 02:05 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

What was your accuracy with that gun while walking and shooting? Or while running and shooting? You're also attempting to equate the force applied by expending a 5.56 round to a 120mm cannon round. Im assuming troll because this wouldn't be an argument with someone with real experience.

I'm saying a 5.56 or 7.62 shot by a human is CLOSE to a 50-100 TON mech shooting a 120mm cannon.

And again, robots are more stable than humans, [Redacted]

Edited by Niko Snow, 26 January 2013 - 08:15 PM.

[Kelpaz]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

so you want to be able to fire as fast as possible without needing to use any skillsets? What you just described would occur if you didn't use skill and withhold firing until convergence settled to perfect aim, at which point you can then fire and do all the damage to a single point. But that takes skills to hold the aim on a spot and to keep yourself from firing until just the right moment. Instead you sound as if firing as much as possible until you or the other person is dead is preferable. Kind of like the difference between boxing or martial arts and a street brawl. Do I have that right?



you're talking about the difference between a pea shooter and cannons as if that is valid. I assume you're hitting like that from the prone position.

Well I wasn't talking about firing automatically, more like a controlled burst of fire.
In those games I only fire fully auto to supress enemies or at very short ranges.

I mentioned the AC20 PPC because if it was like how OP wanted, firing both PPC cannons would make them inacurrate.

There are already things in the game that makes aiming interesting, such as torso ranges arm limits and leading targets with ballistics. Terrain variation can also make the pinpoint aim stutter around, but most importantly mechs can twist their bodies to spread damage.

So the aiming is pinpoint in theory but ingame it's not always like that.
You have to take into consideration that there are factors that makes it hard to keep lasers focused on one spot for the whole duration of a beam.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

so I can only assume you were shooting prone, then. Which is my point. Let me ask you this. What was your accuracy while firing your weapon while walking or running? Oh, right.

Even disregarding this, the force of a 5.56 bullet or 7.62, is much less against the unit firing the weapon than the force of a 120mm cannon. Do you disagree?

120mm vs a 50-100 ton mech + mech computer and gyros = 5.56 vs Human +brain + muscles

Do YOU disagree?

EDIT: Spelling

Edited by Velba, 26 January 2013 - 02:28 PM.

[SteelJaws]

So, pop'ing back in and I see the debate rages on, and I got flammed as not knowing what I was talking about.

Oh well, but I will leave this little gem from www.sarna.net

[color=#000000]
The Targeting Computer was introduced by Clan Mongoose in 2860.^[1] Targeting Computers are sophisticated pieces of electronics that, unlike normal targeting systems, physically help MechWarriors target their opponents. Recoil compensators and gyroscopic stabilizers are used to prevent normal weapon drift from factors such as recoil and movement while the computer accounts for atmospheric and other conditions to present an accurate "lead" on the target. This allows for more surgical precision of weapons fire, especially with naturally accurate systems, allowing for the user to hit specific parts on the target vehicle.[/color]
[color=#000000]
The Inner Sphere finally caught up to Clan technology with the Federated Suns' development of their own targeting computer in 3062.[/color]


So yeah, the targeting computers we use now (current timeline) pretty much give you a crosshair, and let you get missile locks.

Now I do agree that Robots should be better at targeting, but also realize that anything that was advanced like that is rare, and people can barely repair the mechs we have now.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

What was your accuracy with that gun while walking and shooting? Or while running and shooting? You're also attempting to equate the force applied by expending a 5.56 round to a 120mm cannon round. Im assuming troll because this wouldn't be an argument with someone with real experience.

And my accuracy while running and shooting is that of being able to hit the T-box on a humans face or center mass of the chest within a 1-2 inch box at targets from distances of 1m-300m. shots at 300m and over would be taken standing still.

[Redacted] I'm an exceptionally good shot, according to you, better than a future robot.

Edited by Niko Snow, 26 January 2013 - 08:15 PM.

[BerryChunks]

1. Only if you were to also claim that it's the same if you're firing while walking or running.
2. It's not even close anyway.

when you fire your weapon, it rocks your entire body like this? http://youtu.be/Te57AQ9KQZo

Now consider a mech stands on two feet. It also fires while moving. Can you do the same with accuracy? There's also trifling issues of Physics getting in the way.

I went ahead and did the calculations , and the force applied to 24kg tank round for a shortest barrel 120mm gun = 37920.

the force applied to a standard 5.56 round in a saw = 3348.9.

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

And my accuracy while running and shooting is that of being able to hit the T-box on a humans face or center mass of the chest within a 1-2 inch box at targets from distances of 1m-300m. shots at 300m and over would be taken standing still.

So go F yourself, I'm an exceptionally good shot, according to you, better than a future robot.

That line of reasoning doesn't work, because you're attempting to equate you shooting a small arms weapon to a mech shooting a large bore cannon. You might be "a good shot" for someone with a weapon that is easy to use, but cannons are not lmgs. You also seem like a very angry individual.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 02:56 PM.

[Axident]

Some of us already have a cone of fire effect. It's called latency and lag. Aim at and hit left arm - damage indicator shows hit on right torso. Or leg. Or that teammate off in the background. Perhaps that's the solution: instead of fixing the latency, just make it equally bad for everyone. Call it Neurohelmet Render Latency or some such bollshot.

Edited by Axident, 26 January 2013 - 02:58 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

1. Only if you were to also claim that it's the same if you're firing while walking or running.
2. It's not even close anyway.

when you fire your weapon, it rocks your entire body like this? http://youtu.be/Te57AQ9KQZo

Now consider a mech stands on two feet. It also fires while moving. Can you do the same with accuracy? There's also trifling issues of Physics getting in the way.

I went ahead and did the calculations , and the force applied to 24kg tank round for a shortest barrel 120mm gun = 37920.

the force applied to a standard 5.56 round in a saw = 3348.9.



That line of reasoning doesn't work, because you're attempting to equate you shooting a small arms weapon to a mech shooting a large bore cannon. You might be "a good shot" for someone with a weapon that is easy to use, but cannons are not lmgs. You also seem like a very angry individual.

If you dont ACTIVELY BRACE YOUR BODY IT WILL ROCK LIKE THAT.

MECHS ARE ACTIVELY BRACING.

I'm angry at your foolishness.

AND I CAN AND DO SHOOT LIKE THAT WHILE MOVING

Edited by Velba, 26 January 2013 - 03:01 PM.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

If you dont ACTIVELY BRACE YOUR BODY IT WILL ROCK LIKE THAT.

MECHS ARE ACTIVELY BRACING.

I'm angry at your foolishness.

how are they bracing while running? Bracing implies using a stationary stance.

your previous claim was that you were very accurate, while prone, but that didn't matter to the discussion. Then you shortened your "accurate range" when we started talking about more realistic comparisons, such as running or walking and firing. When shown an abrams (sitting completely still) being rocked by firing it's main gun, you talk about bracing. The abrams was sitting still, but not braced. A mech can be sitting still and not braced by standing, which is analogous to you standing unbraced. Your comparisons have always been flawed, and you keep changing the rules of the argument to suit your need to be correct.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 03:06 PM.

[Vapor Trail]

Math, for the record:

M256 120mm smoothbore accelerates a 10 kg projectile to 1650 m/sec over a distance of 6.6m (L55 barrel is 55 calibers)

Where x is displacement:
x = 1/2 a * t^2
v = a * t
==> x = 1/2 v * t
==> 6.6m = 825m/sec * t
==> 0.008 = t

1650m/sec / .008 sec = a = 206,250 m/sec^2.

F= m a

Fp = 10kg * 206,250 m/sec^2 = 2,062,500 N

Equal and opposite reaction requires that same force

==>Fp = Ft

2,062,500 N / 69,000 kg = 29.89 m/sec^2

28.89m/sec^2 * .008 sec = 0.239 m/sec

------------------------------------------------

Too much math?

This is what it means.

Firing a modern M256 120mm smoothbore (M1A2 main gun, sometimes compared to an AC/2) imparts enough force on firing to accelerate a 69 ton tank to a velocity of twenty-three centimeters per second. Of course, this pretty much requires a frictionless surface, and the recoil path must pass through the center of mass of the tank. .


Now you want to talk torque firing said weapon several meters from the center of mass?

Edited by Vapor Trail, 26 January 2013 - 03:05 PM.

[Shard Phoenix]

This was actually a thread which contained some good discourse up until the past few pages.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

how are they bracing while running? Bracing implies using a stationary stance.

Using the arm and torso gyros........

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Using the arm and torso gyros........

I want you to lock and brace your fist and have someone else push against your fist. Feel the torque in your body? The gyros provide stabilizing. Stabilizing does not nullify the physics of applied force. It redirects it.

I bet you'd be really angry if they implemented "Knockdown by force" in this game.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 03:17 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

I want you to lock and brace your fist and have someone else push against your fist. Feel the torque in your body? The gyros provide stabilizing. Stabilizing does not nullify the physics of applied force. It redirects it.

I can stand on one leg and resist the force pushing into my arm. My muscles are like actuators and gyros.

And I can shoot while running, its very simple you only pull the trigger of the weapon when you foot strikes the ground. But that's if you only want to maintain accuracy. You can shoot with no feet on the ground, your forward momentum helps you from falling back over on your rear.
I'd assume the robots are doing the same thing.

The gyros would redirect the force into the leg the mech is standing on and into the ground if you must have me explain the obvious to you.

EDIT: Useless censorship

Edited by Velba, 26 January 2013 - 03:22 PM.

[SteelJaws]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

I want you to lock and brace your fist and have someone else push against your fist. Feel the torque in your body? The gyros provide stabilizing. Stabilizing does not nullify the physics of applied force. It redirects it.

I bet you'd be really angry if they implemented "Knockdown by force" in this game.

Last I heard, they are thinking of doing this, with the AC/20 against light mechs.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

I want you to lock and brace your fist and have someone else push against your fist. Feel the torque in your body? The gyros provide stabilizing. Stabilizing does not nullify the physics of applied force. It redirects it.

I bet you'd be really angry if they implemented "Knockdown by force" in this game.

Oh man I cant wait for knockdowns to be re-implemented. And knock downs by force.
[Redacted]. Stop trying to change the subject. Your wrong, Mechs could stabilize prior to shooting, and after shooting, would be able to maintain their balance, I'm sure they would rock, settle and shoot again, just like a tank.

[Redacted].

Edited by Niko Snow, 26 January 2013 - 07:58 PM.