Auto-cannon Measurements

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | >> (show all)
Karagin
03/25/02 11:17 AM
63.173.170.79

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Sure Camille, just as soon as you stop attacking folks who offer their opinions or ideas on this whole topic.

So far you have come down all who have NOT shared your take, and you blasted me over this and yet, I GAVE the proof that is stated in the rules. But yet you took it upon your self to lash out to prove a point, that is STILL POINTLESS, since the game rules state the ACs are in milimeters...but again you won't see that or live with it.

So when you stop acting like a child over this and stop trying to have the only opinion on this then I think this all might end...but so far I don't see you doing that.

I say your way of going about giving US your opinion is WRONG. You are attacking the person at the worse or treating them as if they know nothing of the game or how things work, you have done on other threads around here. So how about you stop with the hostile comes backs and replies before you really piss off someone.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/25/02 11:41 AM
63.173.170.79

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
On the WW2 note, the lighter guns 20mm and such were normally magazine feed, so were not, some where still breech loaded.

The idea is and I think you missed it, is of comparing a magazine feed slowing firing AC with a magazine feed rapid firing one...that is what you are doing.

But since you won't listen or believe me and no matter what I post you will attack it or me, I suggest you get any book by Ian Hogg that he has done on WW2 weapons or weapons in general and READ IT COVER TO COVER.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 12:11 PM
204.245.128.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>But yet you took it upon your self to lash out to prove a point, that is STILL POINTLESS, since the game rules state the ACs are in milimeters...but again you won't see that or live with it.

What does that have to do with ANYTHING I've said to KG Brandenberg? We're on a completely different topic, man. Move on. Get over that flame war.

>Sure Camille, just as soon as you stop attacking folks who offer their opinions or ideas on this whole topic.

You're mistaking my rebuttals for "attacks". They are statements of fact or, as noted, opinion. The facts, being facts, are statements that can be disproven.

But you do not do that. When I provide a counterpoint - for example, to quote the use of centimeters in fluff text descriptions of ACs - it's an "attack." When I stick to a point because you provide nothing but flames instead of definitive rebuttals that would shut me up, I'm childish.

Why don't you stand and deliver more facts back at me? I ask questions that would fill in my blanks and satisfy me - do you think they're rhetorical? (Do you think the questions in this post are rhetorical?)

>I say your way of going about giving US your opinion is WRONG. You are attacking the person at the worse or treating them as if they know nothing of the game or how things work,

My God, could you be anymore mistaken? I do not attack - I provide facts or opinions as I see them. If you just provide decent counter points rather than flaming, I will shut up. I like to learn from my mistakes. I learn so much from give-and-take exchanges over game rules and fluff text. I asked KG Brandenberg about how he thought ACs worked - if he had a good idea I hadn't thought of to explain ACs, I would've loved to hear it. If you had found a rule that said, "ACs are only measured in millimeters," heck, I'm all for that. All those fluff text counter examples I had would've gone out the window. Rules always win over fluff.

Stop reading my questions as rhetorical. I await enlightenment to see what people I'm talking with think, and why they think something - not to accuse them of being ignorant of BT.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 12:15 PM
204.245.128.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>On the WW2 note, the lighter guns 20mm and such were normally magazine feed, so were not, some where still breech loaded.

Yes, I'm aware of both feed systems for 20mm weapons in WWII.

>The idea is and I think you missed it, is of comparing a magazine feed slowing firing AC with a magazine feed rapid firing one...that is what you are doing.

I was? When? Please, those are not rhetorical questions. I wasn't even thinking of feed systems at all, hence my confusion about your statement.

>But since you won't listen or believe me

I'm willing to believe you, I just don't see where I said anything about magazine feeds at all, or made any such comparisons. This is a matter of facts you can prove quite handily - a few quotes is all it takes.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Karagin
03/25/02 01:05 PM
63.173.170.100

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Why not tell him the same thing, he does it you don't say a word to him...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/25/02 01:07 PM
63.173.170.100

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Then stop posting them as such and no one will read them as anything other then your opinion.

You seem to think you have the only correct opinion on this topic and why is that?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/25/02 01:11 PM
63.173.170.100

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
More BS from a crapped out bull...GET THE BOOKS and read them, the feed system dictates the rate of fire for the smaller guns...but don't take my word for it get it from a noted expert...like Mr. Hogg.

SO until then why don't you stop telling us your opinion, which you give over as fact, something someone else around has a bit of trouble doing, and let others have an opinion on this.

Given that all who have posted tried to help out Hellbringer and you have bashed them if you don't agree...

And given how KG responded back to your reply it should be clear that your postings are ticking folks off.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
novakitty
03/25/02 01:25 PM
209.242.100.230

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Karagin, you have declared that Cray is wrong by saying, in different words, a statement exactly equivalent to one of the points he made. Beyond that, you have refused to acknowledge the fact that he DID agree with your point, and have responded to his every statement with insults and unveiled anger. Your random oppositions are getting old.
meow
Karagin
03/25/02 01:32 PM
63.173.170.100

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Excuse me? Where did he ever argee with me on this whole topic? If he had then he would never have spouted off over any of it.

I have said he is wrong for trying to force HIS opinion over this ON to everyone who hasn't agreed to HIS ideas.

And his opposition to folks having a different view on this is getting old...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
novakitty
03/25/02 01:43 PM
209.242.100.230

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I WILL NOT EXCUSE YOU! You have managed to make a post that was answered over a week ago, as far as the original poster is concerned, into a long lasting argument. When he has sourcebook support, he is not opposing people who's views differe from him, he is informing the new member of the forums what the sourcebooks say. He pointed out that the sourcebooks say that Autocannons are rapid fire guns, meaning that the barrel diameter may not be directly related to the damage quality of the gun. You make one quote that says the EXACT SAME POINT and then flame him when he asks how that is different from what he said.
meow
Karagin
03/25/02 01:53 PM
63.173.170.66

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You are in fact wrong. I gave the sourcebook facts and the facts from the glossary of terms form one of the MAIN LINE novels.

Cray didn't give squat. He had to take this over to CBT to get any of his facts and then someone else form here had to help him out. I got all my facts from the game.

He attacked me from the start, I asked Hellbringer if could show us where he say the use of Centimeters in the novels...and then went on to point out that the rule books and such show it as milimeters, to which Cray blasted me over that...so how about getting your facts right. I am doing nothing but defending my self from the person who took this WAY to personal and kept it going more then I have.

I don't see you telling him to stop or asking him to let it die, so how about take your comments and land them on the main problem here, and that would be Cray's door step NOT mine.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
novakitty
03/25/02 02:16 PM
209.242.100.230

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Actually, I have told him to stop also, try looking in the responses to my post labeled "Nothing ot see here, move along" and since then, Cray's behavior on this post has been noticeably less personal, where you just argued with me then and kept insiting that none of it is your fault.

If you want me to angrily reply to his most recent post, just say so. If that is what it takes to make you shut up, so be it.
meow
KG_Brandenburg
03/25/02 02:24 PM
24.162.144.193

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Well i was assuming that we were talkin bout auto firing weapons. If so that would mean clip\belt fed. As for any 20 mm cannons in WW 2 that were breach loaded. There wernt many. Most were antiquated AT "rifles". The one that comes to mind was the best 1 in its class , the finnish 20 mm AT rifle. Believe it was called the soumi. Not sure on the name

My original intension when i 1st posted was to explain what the game designers were thinkin when they created the rules.As i have said, They did the rules abstractly on weapons to preserve consistancy. Proof in point, A AC 10 is half as powerful as a AC20 with more range.The AC 5 is half the power of the AC 10 w\more range, ect.In saying that it is and would be totally irrellevent to put a size to the shell. Lets just say they are big, why dont we.

I would not of brought up real life weapons ,if some of you would not starteed trying to put the weapons in real life terms. Giving it a specific size\calibre is doing just that

Instead of reading books bout guns\weapons.Why dont you go out and actually shoot a gun or 2. I got 7 and have been shooting guns sence as far back as i can remember.

pls. if you wish to get on the subject of WW2 weapons, by all means pls do. You have just drifted into a area i know a great deal about sence i have been playing stratagy board games sence i wasa 16.Right at half my life.I also regularly get in real time chats w/ ppl about weapons and there effects , wether it be economic,political,stategic,tactical, or operational.Also get into a bunch of discusions bout religion, world politics,ect. Ya get the idea

Several of the weapons in Battletech universe do have real life counterparts. 1 that comes to mind is the inferno. YES, the inferno. The soviets made a disposible rocket launcher(Like the LAW oy RPG18\29)that had napalm warheads in them.Believe it was called a POA.

I do not think autocannons are like the gatling gun. I believe that would be the anti-missle defence weapon:)Autocannons are more like chain guns very much like the gun on the 30 mm on the apache or the gun on the SDKfz 232.Only difference between the 2 is that 1 is really has chain gun and the other has a clip fed 20 mm cannon. 5 rds to be exact i do believe.

You all take these rules to damn litteral.For the most part they are well written. Several rules are too simplistic for my taste. Mainly refering to infantry combat though.Just used to playing more detailed infanrtry games like SL\ASL,MBT,CC3 and 5 to name but a few.Then again the game is centered around BattleMechs. I actually prefere playing w\just infantry and tanks w/possible areospace\dropship assets

Thats all i got to say on this topic that i can think of.

Branden

BTW, KG is the clann im not my name. I go by Branden. Hell we aint just a clan we are a Brotherhood.on occasion i will go by my real name.

LONG LIVE KG
CrayModerator
03/25/02 02:50 PM
204.245.128.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>I would not of brought up real life weapons ,if some of you would not starteed trying to put the weapons in real life terms. Giving it a specific size\calibre is doing just that

Clarification: FASA's writers did that. I'm just quoting FASA's works when I say an AC/20 is 185mm (or 120, or 203).

BT autocannon calibers are one of those "nice to know" factoids, but have no impact on game play. (I.e. I don't think I take them too literally - all that matters is the abstracted rules.)
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 02:53 PM
204.245.128.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>More BS from a crapped out bull...GET THE BOOKS and read them, the feed system dictates the rate of fire for the smaller guns...

Man, I just asked you to show me where I said this stuff you say I'm talking about. I didn't bring up feed mechanisms or see how it ties into what I was talking about.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 02:59 PM
204.245.128.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>Excuse me? Where did he ever argee with me on this whole topic?

Well, I rather agreed with you about the WWII feed mechanisms.

I agreed most BT weapon measurements are in millimeters; I even said as much to Hellbringer. I just did not agree ALL BT weapon measurements are in millimeters.

>I have said he is wrong for trying to force HIS opinion over this ON to everyone who hasn't agreed to HIS ideas

Sorry, man, I'm allowed to state whatever the heck I want within the posting rules and laws of the land.

If you do not like what I say, DO NOT LISTEN TO ME. You are under no obligation to read what I post nor obligated to agree with my statements.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Nightmare
03/25/02 03:57 PM
194.251.240.107

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That`s a Lahti AT rifle you`re thinking of. Actually semi-auto,
although the shooter must recover first Box of 10 shots.
The Suomi was (is) a first-generation SMG, 9mm Parabellum ammo fed from either a box or drum, different sizes.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~ejuhola/7.62/lahti20mm.html
Advice for Evil Overlords:
My legions of terror will be trained in basic marksmanship. Any who cannot learn to hit a man-sized target at 10 meters will be used for target practice.
KG_Brandenburg
03/25/02 04:03 PM
24.162.144.193

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I did say i could be mistakin so thx for the correction. I looked through some books before that post but could not find the name anywere.Just dont have any books on finnish weapons

branden
Karagin
03/25/02 04:05 PM
63.173.170.72

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You don't take them literal? Then why were you so hot to trot to prove your point earlier if it DIDN'T matter?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/25/02 04:06 PM
63.173.170.72

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You want where you did all then re-read ALL of your posting on this entire thread starting with your BS to my posting answering the original question...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
KG_Brandenburg
03/25/02 04:10 PM
24.162.144.193

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Dude, Got 1 word for ya. You are "trippin".I donot care what you believe as I AM right. LOL. think what you will.



KG_Brandenburg
03/25/02 04:20 PM
24.162.144.193

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
WAIT A DAMN MINUTE dude. I was trying to contribute to this damn discusion.I have no intension of starting a petty flame war.pls, i got better things to do with my time. I am baffled bout all this. I just tryed to say what the game designers intended.Its common sence really.Well, doesnt much matter really.not to me.

"Men fight and loose the battle,and the things they fought for comes about in spite of there defeats,and when it comes,turns out not to be what they meant,and others have to fight for what they meant under a different name"
Karagin
03/25/02 04:22 PM
63.173.170.10

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
What I want is simple, how about if folks read the post and stop trying to insert what they THINK the person is saying and actually read what is there.

How about we all try this?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 05:14 PM
12.91.117.254

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>WAIT A DAMN MINUTE dude. I was trying to contribute to this damn discusion.I have no intension of starting a petty flame war.

You did not start a flame war. Karagin seemed under the impression that I was continuing to talk about an old flame war in this thread; I tried to tell him I was talking to you about an entirely different subject. You have no fault or role in this flame war, unless you decide to contribute to it. By sticking to your intended topic:

>I just tryed to say what the game designers intended.Its common sence really

You needn't consider yourself involved or at the start of a flame war. And I would be interested in continuing to discuss your views on ACs.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 05:20 PM
12.91.117.254

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There's literal and there's literal.

There's literal "this what the game writers said about AC measurements," and there's literal "calibers influence game play." In reply to Branden, I was speaking of the latter.

>Then why were you so hot to trot to prove your point earlier if it DIDN'T matter?

MY point? You brought up the fact that BT only measures ACs in millimeters. This was simple enough to prove/disprove by reading a few books. It did NOT matter significantly, and it was a simple thing to look up - no muss, no fuss. Since it was relatively painless to look up, I did so.

In the mean time, you pissed me off and we got into a flame war. That mattered a lot.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
CrayModerator
03/25/02 05:22 PM
12.91.117.254

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>You want where you did all then re-read ALL of your posting on this entire thread starting with your BS to my posting answering the original question...

Most of my posts have NOTHING to do with WWII 20mm weapons. Put up the posts of mine that are relevant or drop the point.

You started with: "The authors have written that the AC are akin to the Vulcan weapons is spitting out a stream of shells, and on some armored cars in WW2 they had autocannons that fired of clips...why don't you step out side of the game and READ a book on weapons."

Which in no way, shape or form related to the post it replied to:

>>Ya are trying to say that a AC2 is a little bitty 20 or 25 mm. That is obsurd. Not on a big battlemech.

>pg74, Invading Clans: "Alternate Configuration CF boasts a pair of LRM-15 launchers, with two tons of ammo provided for each. A pair of ***25mm*** high-speed chain guns allows the Cauldron-Born-C to place more accurate, if less effective, fire on an enemy's position."

>pg75, Alternate Configuration C of the Cauldron born has 2 Ultra AC/2s.

>pg124, BMR (unrevised): AUTOCANNON
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..."

>So 20-25mm is not out of line.

>>It has a load out of 45. uuhh ppl the German armored car in WW II had a 2cm L\55 had a load out of roughly 250+.

>Open your copy of Technical Readout 3026 and read up on the Hetzer and Mechbuster. Both mount AC/20s that fire multiple shells per "shot". Logically, AC/2s also fire multiple shells. A 20mm AC/2 may also fire 5-6 shells per "shot," therefore actually have 250 shells (or more) per ton, though it only has 45 "shots" per ton.

I mean, you were COMPLETELY off topic, and went off on old subjects (mm vs cm) that had nothing to do with my conversation with Branden. I still want to know how your WWII 20mm comment has anything to do/contradicts/disproves my statements as you think it does.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.


Edited by Cray (03/25/02 05:37 PM)
NathanKell
03/25/02 06:08 PM
24.44.238.62

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Branden: looking back at my previous post, I find it rather harsh, though sadly in keeping with what this topic has become. I apologize.
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson
NathanKell
03/25/02 06:13 PM
24.44.238.62

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There are two topics.
1. Whether mm or cm is used, and, if not exclusively either, what the balance is
2. The caliber and rate of fire of Battletech Autocannon, and their comparison with World War 2 cannon.

It seems to me that the former has been settled thusly: that, while there are some instances in which AC bore sizes are referred to using cm, mm are used about 90-95% of the time.

Does anyone feel that this is not the case?
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson
NathanKell
03/25/02 06:14 PM
24.44.238.62

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
This sounds like a very good idea. I'd like to see what *everyone's* results are...
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson
Karagin
03/25/02 06:17 PM
63.173.170.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You didn't look up anything, you had others do the work for you...

And if it didn't matter then WHY did you even bring it up to start with? If anyone started the flames it was you.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | >> (show all)
Extra information
1 registered and 43 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 35458


Contact Admins Sarna.net