48 replies to this topic

[Loxx]

Eddy Hawkins, on 21 February 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

The AC20 is like 120mm guns on the US Abrams, German Leopard, and British Challenger

Actually according to the Sarna wiki an AC/20 is 203mm so it's equal to the old M110 - 8 inch howitzer. But yeah it's is pretty much it.

Edited by Loxx, 21 February 2013 - 11:09 AM.

[Kingdok]

I haven't seen anyone mention this (in any of the AC discussion threads, I'm sad to say) so I will have a go at it:

The mechanics of autocannons in both TT and MWO do not correlate with 20th or 21st century ballistic weapons. They are not howitzers, vulcans, or tank main guns. With modern ballistics, bigger gun = bigger projectile + more propellant + longer barrel = more range. Mech autocannons follow the mechanics of sailing ship cannons, circa the late 1700's. In the age of sail when men were men and your most advanced combat vehicle was made entirely of wood, the longest range guns aboard were the small-bore bow chasers. These had 4- or 6- pound projectiles, long bores (possibly even rifled) and were used to cut rigging in a chase at very long ranges. The bigger guns aboard were mounted on the side for closer engagements, with a very steep drop in range as you increased from 12- to 24- pound cannonballs. The min/max limit on these guns is apparent in the heaviest broadside weapons, the carronades. These brutes had short bores, a 68-pound projectile, and only enough powder charge to shove that ball across point blank range and through the side of the other ship.

I imagine the biggest factor driving this range/size curve for 1700's weaponry was the metallurgy available to cannon manufacturers. It takes a lot more powder to launch a 24-pound ball a mile than it does a 6-pounder. The iron just couldn't take the pressure.

Why does this have any relevance to ballistics weapons in the year 3050? I don't actually believe it does... Yet the parallels are striking enough to me. 6-pounder is an AC2, 12-pounder is AC5, etc. 68-pounder works kinda like the AC20 for a ship-of-the-line (nautical equivalent of the Fatlas)

Anyone else ever struck by this comparison?

Edited by Kingdok, 21 February 2013 - 11:36 AM.

[Reverendk]

Vasces Diablo, on 21 February 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

Crazy to think...that thing is mounted in an airplane.

That car sized gun CAN FLY!

You mean the plane is mounted to the gun.

[Eddy Hawkins]

Mackman, on 21 February 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

Why is nobody addressing this? The only thing that makes an AC/20 worth taking over an AC/2 (or even two AC/2's) is the concentrated damage. If you want a fast-firing autocannon, get an AC/2 or an AC/5, and your DPS is (in theory) exactly the same as an AC/20, at a fraction of the weight and a far greater range.

I like how people talk about DPS like we are all playing World of Warcraft...

for example the AC2 might do the same DPS as a AC10, but lets take a second look:

at first firing: (puling the trigger)
AC2 - 2 damage
AC10 - 10 damage
AC20 - 20 damage

@ 1 sec (after first shot)
AC2 - 4
AC10 - 10
AC20 - 20

@ 2 sec
AC2 - 8
AC10 - 10
AC20 - 20

@ 2.5 Sec
AC2 - 10
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 20

@ 3 Sec
AC2 - 12
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 20

@ 4 Sec
AC2 - 16
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 40

@ 5 Sec
AC2 - 20
AC10 - 30
AC20- 40

@ 6 Sec
AC2 - 24
AC10 - 30
AC20- 40

@ 7 Sec
AC2 - 30
AC10 - 30
AC20 -40

@ 7.5 Sec
AC2 - 32
AC10 - 40
AC20 - 40

@ 8 Sec
AC2 - 34
AC10 - 40
AC20 - 60

This is of course assuming optimal ranges and every shot hits, but as you can see, in five sec the AC10 does 30pts which takes the AC2 seven sec to accomplish

I have had these discussions in other games, namely EvE Online when comparing high damage vs high DPS guns. In practice i have found that having two AC10s more effective then 2 or 4 AC2s or AC5s because you need to kill targets quickly and most will not stand there and let you dakka dakka them to death for seven or more sec. If two mechs armed with 2 AC20s vs 2 mechs with 4 AC10s, the AC20s win because thy kill you before your AC10s can match the damage, same argument with AC2s vs AC10s.

sources for numbers
[url="http://mwowiki.org/wiki/Template:Weapons_Table"]

Edited by Eddy Hawkins, 21 February 2013 - 11:59 AM.

[Vasces Diablo]

Look up footage of the bushwacker AC. I'd post it, but I'm at work.

It's awesome. Not a multi barrel rotary gun, but a fast firing cannon. Kind of what I always pictured the BattleTech AC to be.

[Jet Black Dog]

as to autocannon's
i forgot at this point whom said what;
but
what AUTOCANNONS are SUPPOSED to be in the battletech universe

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

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

I'm sorry, it's THAT simple, in black and white, form the sarna entry for AUTOCANNON.
As clarified earlier, auto-loading DOES NOT mean autocannon.

Now what 'should be' - and what has happened in the 25? years of games, fiction, computer games, etc is all up in the air.
But it means what it means.

Anyway, other than people being hard-headed and not LOOKING up the reference they tried to correct me on, it seems to be a topic of some interest to a few people... but please don't talk to me as though I don't know what I'm talking about when the source quoted agrees with ME.

Anyway, sure, autocannons could fire in BURSTS like they are "supposed" to, instead of ******** forth a single cannon shell like they do now, and lasers could or could not this or the other, or ac's could or could not sound like pulse lasers sound now ( oh come on, we have all thought it ).
Should autocannons NOT be burst wepaons, and not take the skill of a laser?
I dunno... I'm not a dev, so it doesn't matter what i think much does it...

Jack Lazarus, on 21 February 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

That's because the link he gave you was for rotary autocannons, which is what he says you're talking about, and is not in the game. You didn't read what he was was really saying, which isn't in the link - it's the fact that rapid is a relative term and can mean 'once every few seconds' just as much as it can mean '5000 times a minute'

Any cannon that loads automatically from a magazine, is an automatic cannon, or autocannon. The main gun on an AMX, for example, is an autocannon, because it loads automatically from a magazine (drum). It is not rotary or rapid-fire (compared to a machine gun). Most military cannons today are autocannons, from big to small, the same way that most hand-held military weapons are automatic. Technological advancement.

edited post for messy formatting and a quote that didn't work out.

- you sir did NOt read, as I DID, jesus's post - or you would have read specifically the definition of AUTOCANNON in the battletech universe- BURST FIRE - according to his OWN source - click the link i thoughtfully reposted - autocannon - found ON the rotary autocannon page -
and you will see yourself proven dead wrong.
What has been included or not in MWO is another discussion of course.
As to your definition of autocannon, in the real world; that was ALSO specifically de-fragged earlier, autoload IS NOT autocannon. Please see previous posts.

Could should would, ought to - but I only rile when you imply i am stupid when both the ORIGINAL batteltech - which i owned and played - and the new internet source that was quoted at me - AGREE.
That's rude and also asinine.

Anyone who doesn't agree that autocannons should fire ( and sound, lol ) more like the pulse laser does NOW in MWo, is entitled to their opinion.
Anyone who wants to debate what an autocannon is in battletech, isn't reading - or has one of the many disagreeing authors that come from a 25+ yera old property.
Anyone who wants to argue that auto-LOADIng = autocannon, can argue with someoen else. The defintions are considered separate on wiki, and if you want to fix the wiki, be my guest.

Edited by Mercier, 21 February 2013 - 12:35 PM.

[Eddy Hawkins]

Vasces Diablo, on 21 February 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Look up footage of the bushwacker AC. I'd post it, but I'm at work.

It's awesome. Not a multi barrel rotary gun, but a fast firing cannon. Kind of what I always pictured the BattleTech AC to be.

M242 Bushmaster, the Bushwacker is a Medium IS mech ;p

http://en.wikipedia....M242_Bushmaster

[Kingdok]

Eddy Hawkins, on 21 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

I have had these dissucons in other games, namly EvE Online when comparing high damage vs high DPS guns. In pratice i have found that having two AC10s more efective then 2 or 4 AC2s or AC5s because you need to kill targets quickly and most will not stand there and let you dakka dakka them to death for seven or more sec. If two mechs armd with 2 AC20s vs 2 mechs with 4 AC10s, the AC20s win because thy kill you before your AC10s can match the damage, same argument with AC2s vs AC10s.

sources for numbers
http://mwowiki.org/w...e:Weapons_Table

Thank you for breaking down the math for us - clear and concise. You left out what I consider to be a very important factor, however. You get to fit TWO AC2's for the same tonnage as the AC10, and have 40 damage dealt at the 5 second marker, exceeding the output of the AC10 and matching the AC20. Oh, and I plan to be delivering that damage from over half a mile away with the AC2.

I love all the autocannons, and they all work differently.

[Mackman]

Eddy Hawkins, on 21 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

I like how people talk about DPS like we are all playing World of Warcraft...

for example the AC2 might do the same DPS as a AC10, but lets take a second look:

at first firing: (puling the trigger)
AC2 - 2 damage
AC10 - 10 damage
AC20 - 20 damage

@ 1 sec (after first shot)
AC2 - 4
AC10 - 10
AC20 - 20

@ 2 sec
AC2 - 8
AC10 - 10
AC20 - 20

@ 2.5 Sec
AC2 - 10
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 20

@ 3 Sec
AC2 - 12
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 20

@ 4 Sec
AC2 - 16
AC10 - 20
AC20 - 40

@ 5 Sec
AC2 - 20
AC10 - 30
AC20- 40

@ 6 Sec
AC2 - 24
AC10 - 30
AC20- 40

@ 7 Sec
AC2 - 30
AC10 - 30
AC20 -40

@ 7.5 Sec
AC2 - 32
AC10 - 40
AC20 - 40

@ 8 Sec
AC2 - 34
AC10 - 40
AC20 - 60

This is of course assuming optimal ranges and every shot hits, but as you can see, in five sec the AC10 does 30pts which takes the AC2 seven sec to accomplish

I have had these discussions in other games, namely EvE Online when comparing high damage vs high DPS guns. In practice i have found that having two AC10s more effective then 2 or 4 AC2s or AC5s because you need to kill targets quickly and most will not stand there and let you dakka dakka them to death for seven or more sec. If two mechs armed with 2 AC20s vs 2 mechs with 4 AC10s, the AC20s win because thy kill you before your AC10s can match the damage, same argument with AC2s vs AC10s.

sources for numbers
[url="http://mwowiki.org/wiki/Template:Weapons_Table"]

I'm not disputing that. I was agreeing with the person I quoted, who was pointing out that we don't need to make the AC/20 fire more rounds that do less damage, because there are already weapons that do that, with more range, less weight, and better ammo efficiency.