Hellbringer
03/18/02 08:19 PM
192.195.234.26
|
Hey all, I am trying my hand at some fan-fiction writing. Does anyone know the measurements for the various classes of AC? I have read in the BT novels that AC sizes are recorded in cm, much like the way personal weapons are measure in mm. If you guys know which measurements match up to which ACs it would be a great help.
"But it SHOULD be a spectacle! It should be grand and exciting to us all! I'd hate to think that we've become so jaded that we find even our greatest tiumph, resurrecting the Star League, simply one more obligation."
-General Victor Steiner-Davion (First Prince and Archon in exile) 3064
|
Karagin
03/18/02 09:41 PM
63.173.170.29
|
Where did you read the AC where measured in centimeters? The BMR-R states that the size is millimeters NOT centimeters.
Could you sight a chapter or page in one of the novels that does this please? I am interested in seeing this.
Basically the AC2 covers the 30mm to 45mm range, while the AC 5 coves the 50mm to 70mm range, the AC 10 get's the 75mm to 100mm range and the AC20 covers the rest...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
NathanKell
03/18/02 10:21 PM
24.44.238.62
|
The glossary of terms at the back of the old books (i.e. Blood of Kerensky Trilogy) either states or implies this (by mentioning that an AC/20 has a caliber of 200mm--20cm).
However, the Battlespace Rule/Source Book states explicitly that the number is a rating of capability, not a precise measurement in either caliber or rate of fire (and gives an example of two 20-rating weapons, one firing many small shells, one firing a few large shells...they're both 20s).
-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
03/19/02 01:17 AM
63.173.170.64
|
Interesting...my copy of Leathal Heritage, in fact all three books of that trilogy, have this to say on page 329 which starts the glossary:
Autocannon:
The autocannon is a rapid-firing autoloading weapon. Light vehicle autocannon range form 30mm to 90mm caliber, while heavy 'Mech mounted autocannon may be 80mm to 120mm or more. The weapon fires high-speed streams of high-explosive, armor-piercing shells. Because of the of the limitations of 'Mech targeting technology, the autocannon's effective anti-'Mech range is limitd to less then 600 meters.
Now no where in the above or any of the older books, (Warrior Trilogy, Wolves on the Border etc...) do I find any mention of the ACs calibers in centimeters...the copies I am going on are the first run printings, NOT the ROC reprints. So can you give me a page number or another reference point please?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
NathanKell
03/19/02 02:36 AM
24.44.238.62
|
No, you're right, it's 120mm...
Must have been confusing it with Hammer's Slammers, and those (*cough*sweet*cough*) 20cm powerguns.
Sorry.
-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 |
Bob_Richter
03/19/02 04:12 AM
4.35.174.250
|
As with any metric measurement, AC caliber is easily converted between millimeters and centimeters. Thus, you will occasionally see an author refer to an AC/20 as a twelve-centimeter cannon, but millimeter measure is perhaps more appropriate.
ACs are in classes, not calibres. It's quite possible to have AC/20s that are 120mm and AC/20s that are 203mm, they just have varying rates of fire.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Cray
03/19/02 06:42 AM
204.245.128.3
|
The problem is, the ACs vary within classes. Both 120mm and 185mm weapons are in the AC/20 class, for example, while 120mm also shows up in the AC/10 class.
A good rule of thumb is to multiply the AC class by 10 to get the bore size in millimeters. This will be a bit low for AC/2s (which I've seen described as 25mm) and a bit high for AC/20s (which are typically under 200mm).
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
03/19/02 07:20 AM
63.173.170.230
|
 I wish the ACs where along the same lines as the Slammer's Power Guns...but then again having a vehilce mounting 20mm (2cm) MGs as a standard weapon is a little on the over kill side when you think about it...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/19/02 11:09 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>The BMR-R states that the size is millimeters NOT centimeters.
Oh, for Pete's sake. Dude, millimeter to centimeter conversion is easy. Some people say a 15cm autocannon, some say a 150mm autocannon. Who cares? They're the same thing.
>Basically the AC2 covers the 30mm to 45mm range, while the AC 5 coves the 50mm to 70mm range, the AC 10 get's the 75mm to 100mm range and the AC20 covers the rest...
3cm to 4.5cm, 5 to 7cm, 7.5 to 10cm, etc. What's so hard about that?
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
03/19/02 11:47 AM
63.173.170.51
|
Point:
No where in the books is it given in centimeters. Thus the actually facts from the glossary to clear up any confusion.
Point:
You missed the whole point of what I was saying in your rush to once again find fault in something I posted.
Is that your sole aim to find something to complain about in any thing I post?
What was the point of your post again?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/19/02 03:38 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>No where in the books is it given in centimeters
And...? Neither are multiplication tables, yet multiplication is done often enough while using BT. Likewise, the metric system isn't described in BT rule books, but it is used by BT. The metric system says "10 millimeters equals 1 centimeter." Therefore, it is equally valid to call a 185mm Chemjet AC/20 a 18.5cm Chemjet AC/20. It's one of those rules used by BT not covered in BT rulebooks, like multiplication tables.
>Is that your sole aim to find something to complain about in any thing I post?
Really, I take your posts one at a time. Some are interesting, some have flaws I want to comment on. In this case, you were climbing over Nathan with faulty logic, so I pointed out the flaw in it.
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
03/19/02 03:44 PM
63.173.170.89
|
What faulty logic? The novels and the rules give the Autocannon caliber in milimeters. He said he saw centimeters, all asked was were, he told me I looked, asked again to be sure and the pointed out what the books saided...he stated and I quote:
"No, you're right, it's 120mm...
Must have been confusing it with Hammer's Slammers, and those (*cough*sweet*cough*) 20cm powerguns.
Sorry. " End quote.
So the matter was cleared up and over with yet in you jump flamming away at me because of what again? If some where in the game it calls the ACs by their centimeter equalivente then I stand corrected, but seeing how it's done in milimeters your point is invaild since the game facts say other wise.
And so why are you even trying to flame me over this? The request for were he saw it and all was given, and the problem if there was one was solved with a simple reading of the part of the book he suggested and thus all was cleared up and settled tell you jumped in...why?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/19/02 03:52 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>What faulty logic? The novels and the rules give the Autocannon caliber in milimeters.
That's the faulty logic right there. Thinking that just because it is traditional or common to use millimeters to describe bore size, centimeters are verbotten.
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
03/19/02 03:53 PM
63.173.170.89
|
If the rules and storyline give it milimeters would it NOT makes sense to sick with that as NOT to confuse folks?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/19/02 03:57 PM
204.245.128.3
|
If they flunked out of grade school, it might not be a bad idea to stick to millimeters so they don't get confused. Most other people can do a centimeter-to-millimeter conversion.
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
03/19/02 04:05 PM
63.173.170.89
|
The point here is the game sticks to milimeters. The reasons why are not important, that is what they use, just like the speeds are KPH not MPH.
Changing how you describe the bore of the ACs could cause some confusion for some folks or it may not but seeing how the lasers are done by size would it not be odd to read the joules of engery in the mathmatical terms in the story and then try to figure which size laser fired?
Something I have always seen written and stated, if you are going to write fiction in a set universe, be it Star Wars or Star Trek of Btech, you should stick to the terminology that is standard in use and not cross over with something from one to another. For example it would be very werid to here Han Solo saying jump to Warp 10 would it not? Because for most folks they would picture Star Trek before they Star Wars do to the use of the word Warp.
What I am trying to say is for Hellbringer to stick to using milimeters for the ACs and other weapons since the game does that, and that way the story stays with in the BT universe and prevents someone from saying oh that came from _______________. (fill in your choice of Sci-Fi).
Can you see my point here or not?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Hellbringer
03/19/02 04:45 PM
192.195.234.26
|
*The point here is the game sticks to milimeters. The reasons why are not important, that is what they use, just like the speeds are KPH not MPH.*
First of all your little example here describes changing from metric to english. This is NOTHING like what we are talking about. Converting mm to cm is a helluvalot different than changing whole freaking systems of measurments.
Anyway I went back to my books and I dicovered that I made a mistake. THERE>>>ARE YOU FREAKING HAPPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I should have you in a circle of equals, Surat!!
Oh yeah...Karagin? What hurts when you pee? :-P
"But it SHOULD be a spectacle! It should be grand and exciting to us all! I'd hate to think that we've become so jaded that we find even our greatest tiumph, resurrecting the Star League, simply one more obligation."
-General Victor Steiner-Davion (First Prince and Archon in exile) 3064
|
Karagin
03/19/02 04:47 PM
63.173.170.89
|
Good to see that you hit the books to check things out. Good luck on your fiction and please post it here so we can see it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Hellbringer
03/19/02 04:49 PM
192.195.234.26
|
Heck man, if you've seen Saving Private Ryan, they had 20mm machine guns in WWII. Back then the things were just beastly, but think of the miniaturization work that could be done in the years between WWII and BT.
"But it SHOULD be a spectacle! It should be grand and exciting to us all! I'd hate to think that we've become so jaded that we find even our greatest tiumph, resurrecting the Star League, simply one more obligation."
-General Victor Steiner-Davion (First Prince and Archon in exile) 3064
|
Karagin
03/19/02 04:53 PM
63.173.170.89
|
Uhmm...that Veriling was a quad mount anti-aircraft gun used in the fire suppresion role since they needed something...
And the Slammers weapons are listed as 2cm power guns and the tribarrels on each combat car has three 2cm barrels to one gun and three or more Tri-barrels to a combat car...
If you haven't read any of David Drake's Hammer's Slammers books I would highly recommend them to you.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
NathanKell
03/20/02 01:40 AM
24.44.238.62
|
[engineer mode]
Quite.
[/engineer mode]
[author mode]
It depends on whether we're arguing over style or measurements: We all agree that 20cm and 200mm are functionally (and mathematically) equivalent. However, they are not stylistically equivalent--witness the difference between BT's and Hammer's Slammers's measurements..the former is (almost uniformly, Karagin is correct) given in mm, whereas the latter is (again almost uniformly) in cm. Furthermore, the major point of having a style is to stick to it: it would be really weird to read a story about NATO planes with 2cm Vulcan cannon, or an Abrams with a 12cm main gun (it is 120mm, now right?). The same for, say, Don Slade carrying a 10mm SM(P)G (while inside a tank with a 200mm main (power)gun). Or, heck, why not just refer to an M-16 as a 5,560,000 um (used u because the real Mu would stay posting) assault rifle.
[/author mode]
-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 |
Cray
03/20/02 11:00 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>The point here is the game sticks to milimeters.
The point is even RL militaries alternate between cm and mm for the same weapons. A choice example is at:
www.geocities.com/Pentagon/3620/sdkfz41.htm
Where the "15cm Panzerwerfer 42 auf Selbstfahrlafette Sd.Kfz.4/1" is noted later on the page as having "150mm Nebelwerfer 42 & 7.92mm MG34/42 (Sd.Kfz.4/1)."
It's a trivial web search to turn up alternating cm/mm descriptions for the same WWII and naval weapons.
RL military vehicle descriptions prefer millimeters, but often use centimeters. I HAVE seen centimeters used before for BT lasers (7cm lasers, a Clan ER medium laser IIRC), and I'm looking for more.
There is no reason to suspect millimeters are the exclusive descriptors of BT weapons just because there are no printed examples. The only way to know for sure would be to see a strict rule that says, "And weapons are only described in millimeters."
>The reasons why are not important, that is what they use, just like the speeds are KPH not MPH.
Inappropriate analogy. Now you're switching between measurement systems, rather than within a measurement system that specifically allows easy conversion between two units. Warp speeds in Star Wars are even less appropriate - the technology/physics of Star Trek absolutely doesn't apply anymore than you could label the speed of KF drives in terms of "warps."
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.
|
Grizzly
03/20/02 12:26 PM
12.108.119.227
|
I agree that there is no difference between 120mm and 12cm. As I mentioned over at CBT, I am pretty sure that Battletechnology listed some lasers in cm.
Just for the record and to broker a peace deal here, did anyone ever think that maybe the writers use mm to make a weapon sound more impressive? I know that operationally there is no difference between 15cm and 150mm, but if you look at fluff and see something listed as a "150mm smoothebore cannon" vs "a 15cm smoothebore cannon"; which sounds more deadly? I think, at least for the lay person/newbie they will say the 150mm. Just like the old joke, what weighs more, a ton of lead or a ton of feathers? Most people without thinking will say the lead, and then slap themselves on the forehead and say that they weigh the same. Just a thought.....
"I am but mad north-northwest, when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw" Hamlet
|
Karagin
03/20/02 12:54 PM
63.173.170.36
|
Thank you for telling us that.. what it added to the discussion I am not sure but I do know it was not needed.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/20/02 12:57 PM
63.173.170.36
|
I can not believe you are that slow....a Pentagon paper on the German military of WW2...man that is out dated.
99% of the militares today use milimeters for their gun sizes.
In the BT universe they do the same. So the point is that it's milimeters that is used and if you are going to write a story or what not you need to stick with that or as you are doing once more, open your self up for folks to complain about something.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/20/02 12:59 PM
63.173.170.36
|
While I am for peace around here, it seems that some want to find fault with everything so they can look important.
So again thanks for trying, but it's a wasted effort since one side won't see the other's points or listen and thus we have endless rounds of flames and BS.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
03/20/02 03:42 PM
4.35.174.250
|
I recall at least two instances where an AC/20 was referred to as a tweleve-centimeter autocannon.
Don't remember where they were, though.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Cray
03/21/02 07:05 AM
204.245.128.3
|
Addendum: Loren seems quite loose with the centimeter/millimeter terminology in his latest novels (Flashpoint and Illusion of Victory, I think), describing bigger bore autocannons as 10 and 20cm guns. Yep...
"In illusions of victory, someone mentions replacing a dragon fire's gauss with a light gauss so they can upgrade the AC to a 12 cm bore "
The Texas' NAC/40s are described as having a "nearly 2 meter" bore (See: TR:2750 or 3057).
The GDL books use cm to describe lasers a few times.
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 (03/21/02 07:23 AM)
|
Karagin
03/21/02 12:59 PM
63.173.170.175
|
You know I read this over on CBT and it doesn't tell me anything since I looked in those two book and still don't see what you claim so unless you have page number the person who told you this on CBT is not correct or misunderstood what they read. So how about you do your own research and not dump it on other over on CBT...and what happen to leaving thing that start on one board at that board?
A 2 meter bore, nice but that's not centimeters...As for the GDL I will check on that one but I think the removed it if it was there in the reprint...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
KamikazeJohnson
03/21/02 01:14 PM
209.202.47.12
|
OTOH, using millimeters to describe weaopn sizes is a convention to avoid confusion. Theoretically, someone might confuse 15cm with 15mm *gasp*
Also, using mm implies a greater degree of precision in the measurement.. you know, that whole "significant digits" thing
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
KamikazeJohnson
03/21/02 01:21 PM
209.202.47.12
|
>>the two have been used interchangeably, historically<<
And Karagin doesn't recall seeing cm used anywhere, and so he's asking for a specific page reference which no one seems able to provide. Which is why this thread refuses to die :-\
So...it's fairly irrelevent whether mm or cm are used. A lot of people claim to have seen cm used in the novels...does anyone have one such novel close at hand so we can get a page number and settle this instead of just arguing based on memory and hearsay?
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:27 PM
63.173.170.175
|
The problem is 99% of the info gives the mesurments in milimeters thus if someone is going to write a story set in the BT universe it would make sense for them to use what is given not changing the format just because they feel like it. IF that was the case then each TR would have the weapons having different stats since some one out there doesn't like how the generic gauss does it's damage or the LRMs are to small etc...as it has been said by all the guide books for writting that I have seen, if you are going to write a story set in someone else universe then make sure you don't change major events or change tech that is in use in any way...
And the other problem here is Cray's got be the one who get's in the I am right you are wrong line and he can't even do the research himself, he has to run over to CBT and beg them to help him and as Ruger said over there What's the point of this...
I think Cray in his rush to be the better person and slam me since I asked Hellbringer to tell us where he saw the CM part he is forgetting that Hellbringer has already said that he was mistaken and thus the whole thread was over at the point, but not for Cray...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/21/02 01:28 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>A 2 meter bore, nice but that's not centimeters...
It disproves your point about millimeters only.
Page numbers are pending.
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
03/21/02 01:30 PM
63.173.170.175
|
I agree with you, but as I said the game use milimeters...thus again if you write as story in the BT universe then you should follow that convention. That what I was pointing out to Hellbringer and it seemed to have gone over well enough for all expect Cray who seem bent on beating this into the ground and Kamiakze has a good point someone could in fact confuse a 15cm (150mm) gun for a 15mm gun...all because they thought they say two mm instead of a cm...
Any way this is getting no where and I think we all should let it drop and move on to other topics.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:33 PM
63.173.170.175
|
No it doesn't. All it says is that the gun has a big bore...that doesn't give the size of the cannon at all. Nice try.
As for the rest forget it, you are turing this into some kind of personal attack or something akin to that and it's getting old fast. Seeing how you have drag folks into this to get your points, it's not worth discussing anymore. The fun has gone from it.
As I said below Hellbringer note that he was mistaken and that should have been the end of it. But some how you think you have a point to prove, why I am not sure, but you seem to think you do.
So while the rest of us move on have your fun and please turn the light out when you leave.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:35 PM
63.173.170.175
|
Even if a page number comes up some one will say that their copy being newer or a reprint doesn't have it or someone will email the author and find out it was typo and we are back to the same arguement all over again...
So did anyone see the Piston play the other day?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/21/02 01:38 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>All it says is that the gun has a big bore...that doesn't give the size of the cannon at all. Nice try
What book did you look in?
>you are turing this into some kind of personal attack or something akin to that and it's getting old fast
No, I'm not. You've made an incorrect statement. I seek to determine the truth.
This is just a matter of finding some references. Getting pissy about it is something you're injecting into the matter.
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
03/21/02 01:38 PM
63.173.170.175
|
Analogies aside, the golden rule given by a lot of writers is that if you are going to write a story in a pre-set universe then you should follow all of the conventions and convections that it has and not add in new things UNLESS that is what you were asked to do. So making a minior change like using CMs can cause some to confuse the size of the weapons as pointed out above. And in the book "How to write Sci-fi and Fanasty" Orson Scott Card covers the light speed/Warp debate and his take is then two are not the same. I would suggest getting that book since it has a lot of good info in it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:42 PM
63.173.170.175
|
I looked in both books...I still can not find it.
And no I have not made an incorrect statement...the game rules, the glossary in the novels and the fluff supports that 99% fo the weapons that have caliber given is in milimeters period.
That is something you either have to live with or not. The only one who is getting pissy is you since you are taking this over to another board to get your answers instead of doing the work your self, now who is dragging this out to become something else...
And see how the rest of the folks really don't care about in any way let it drop man and talk about something else?
Did anyone hear about the little girl that got hit by the hockey puck?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:48 PM
63.173.170.175
|
As for the Card thing...well I have heard one person compare him to Stackpole so I can see your point.
As for the rest, while interchangeable some will confuse the two...just as we have all heard folks give the stats for one mech and find out they were talking about heavy named machine or lighter...or not even an offical one...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/21/02 01:49 PM
63.173.170.175
|
Good point, my bad...sorry about that.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
novakitty
03/21/02 04:26 PM
192.195.234.26
|
Is it not amazing how a simple question can spawn multiple flame wars over whether or not a 150mm cannon can be acceptably expressed as a 15cm cannon. It has all been said, and most of it did not help Hellbringer in his search for answers, so just let it die.
meow
|
Cray
03/21/02 04:40 PM
12.91.129.227
|
If you don't like it, don't read it.
Karagin:
pg144, TR:2750, Texas: "With a muzzle diameter of almost two meters..."
So, Hellbringer, NAC/40s approach 2000mm. Very lightweight shell for its size, IMO.
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
03/21/02 05:46 PM
207.43.144.140
|
Wow and that proves what?
NOTHING!
It doesn't prove cenitmeters is used as muchs if at all for milimeters and seeing how this is going no where let's drop it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
novakitty
03/21/02 06:04 PM
192.195.234.26
|
It gets in the way MEANINGFUL responses. Grow up.
meow
|
Bob_Richter
03/21/02 07:52 PM
4.35.174.250
|
...Karagin is justy amazingly good at starting flame wars. I wonder if he'll ever realise it?
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
novakitty
03/21/02 08:21 PM
192.195.234.26
|
Thank you for suporting my hypothesis.
meow
|
novakitty
03/21/02 08:21 PM
192.195.234.26
|
You do add to them yourself, three voices that refuse to be ignored get quite loud.
meow
|
Bob_Richter
03/21/02 08:32 PM
4.35.174.250
|
Show me where I commented on this flame war.
Or don't, and retract your statement.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Cray
03/21/02 08:59 PM
12.78.177.187
|
To answer the original question...
The Invading Clans sourcebook offers some good AC measurements in a single Technical Readout (for the Cauldron Born, pg74), all in millimeters.
There are 75mm LB5Xs, 203mm UAC/20s, and 25mm UAC/2s.
However, as noted, there are also 150mm and 185mm AC/20s.
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.
|
novakitty
03/21/02 09:08 PM
192.195.234.26
|
On this one you were quite quiet with only two posts, that does not change the fact that you get into flame wars often.
meow
|
novakitty
03/21/02 10:20 PM
192.195.234.26
|
If the original ACs were catagorized in this manner, and then the term came to describe a level of destruction, ("even though our cannon is only 12cm, it deals the damage of a standard 20cm" or similar commercials) that would explain the current chaos in gun sizes.
meow
|
Karagin
03/22/02 02:56 AM
63.173.170.99
|
Uhm...this topic ended when Hellbringer said he had misread the calibers, I was more the happy to let it go but others won't so telling me I am supporting your hypothesis, is saying you didn't read all the comments made around here on this one.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
novakitty
03/22/02 07:35 AM
192.195.234.26
|
About one third of all posts were under your name. You cannot play innocent.
meow
|
Karagin
03/22/02 07:41 AM
63.173.170.139
|
I am not playing inncocent...never claimed that. I am saying the thread should have died back with Hellbringer's post to me. That is where all of this crap should have stopped.
So to make this plain and simple let's all let it go and move on...okay?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/22/02 09:24 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>Does anyone know the measurements for the various classes of AC?
Well, as said several times through here, they're approximate. The Cauldron-born in Invading Clans is a great example.
>I have read in the BT novels that AC sizes are recorded in cm, much like the way personal weapons are measure in mm.
ACs are also typically measured in mm, but differences occur:
"Illusions of Victory" pg 19 about halfway down the page. "So we switch out the regular gauss rifle on my Dragon Fire for the lighter version and rip out the ECM package, then upgrade my autocannon to the twelve-centimeter bore of a Defiance Disinitegrator."
"Flashpoint" from pg 253, again about halfway down the page. "She toggled for an ammunition dump, ejecting two and a half tons of twelve-centimeter ordnance out the rear ports, where it rained impotently over the ground."
>Hey all, I am trying my hand at some fan-fiction writing.
Flames over nitpicky stuff aside, have you made any progress on the fanfic?
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
03/22/02 10:03 AM
63.173.170.186
|
Why don't you credit your source from CBT?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/22/02 10:51 AM
204.245.128.3
|
It was a Sarna source, actually. Since I wasn't taking any credit for the research, just posting the page numbers, I didn't see the need for a full bibliography and closing credits. Thanks for the effort were given in PMs. He can step forward if he wants.
The Texas reference was half mine - I was reminded and looked it up in my copy of TR2750.
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
03/22/02 10:54 AM
63.173.170.172
|
Sure if you say so...but the thread over on CBT speaks for it's self on this one...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/22/02 10:57 AM
204.245.128.3
|
I got quite a few pointers to references over there, but no page numbers. The Texas reference was pointed out there, for example, and I dug that up.
I'm not sure what you're getting at, though. I asked for the page references you wanted on a broader forum.
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.
|
Grizzly
03/22/02 11:01 AM
12.108.119.227
|
If you really want to know Karagin, the secret source is me! I got tired of hearing you two bickering back and forth about a point that is moot. Both measurements are the same thing! 10cm=100mm, that's not an opinion but a statement of fact.
And as I stated in my earlier post about "does size really matter?!?" The writers are using the analoguous measuring system to enhance their fiction. It wouldn't matter which one is used, they are the same. The only reason I went on a hunt for information was to give you your request to cite page and source. Which I did for both qoutes.
You always ask for the exact source whenever you question someones validity, well now you have it. Maybe you can take some one at their word and just agree to disagree with each other, instead of getting a flame fest started.
It is now proven that centimeters have been used in the fiction to describe autocannon size, can we please now get back to discussing Battletech and not "yelling" at each other.
"I am but mad north-northwest, when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw" Hamlet
|
Karagin
03/22/02 11:20 AM
63.173.170.172
|
Where did ever say they differed? I said the game sticks to milimeters for the most part, the rule books give them in that format and most of the authors do as well, thus up until now it has always been that way, and two times doesn't change the fact that for all purposes they are in milimeters.
Now it's not my fault Cray couldn't live with that and had to go off...the whole thread went down hill when got mad over my asking for a source...so how about jumping on his case not mine...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/22/02 11:21 AM
63.173.170.172
|
It shows that if you can't win here or at least get the upper hand you are willing to take it else where to get your points across and thus fan more flames...but hey that's my opinion...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/22/02 11:34 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>It shows that if you can't win here or at least get the upper hand you are willing to take it else where
"Win" here? That wasn't about "winning" it was about looking up a point I disagreed with you on.
Offhand, I could not think of the page reference you wanted, so I broadened the search. That isn't "fanning the flames," that's answering the question.
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
03/22/02 11:39 AM
63.173.170.172
|
But you see I wasn't...I was point out that 99% of the game mechcanics and authors used the MM as given in the rules...Cray is the one that turn this into posting to win...not me...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/22/02 11:39 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>If you're posting to "win," you've already lost.
Here, here.
>What about Charrette's 5cm lasers? That always struck me as an odd way to measure lasers...
I would've gone by energy output, personally. A laser point reflected off a 1m focusing mirror is a 1m laser, but doesn't say much about its firepower.
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
03/22/02 11:40 AM
63.173.170.172
|
Sorry I disagree, but again you have to be right so I guess you win and next time all will simplly ask you so as not to have you after them like a vigilant...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/22/02 11:45 AM
63.173.170.172
|
Why don't you go back and read the WHOLE thread again...once more let me point out something, the rule book, the supposed finial word on things, list the size of the guns in milimeters, now 2 points come up to where poor proofreading misses that and fails to change...again the rule book is fact and doesn't change as does the writing of an author from book to book.
As to your last comment guess you are more into that part about posting to bait...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/22/02 11:59 AM
63.173.170.172
|
Thanks for personal attack...
And I was trying to be helpful...but hey I guess you can see any way you want...so have fun...
And don't bother replying to this since I could careless about your opinions.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Grizzly
03/22/02 12:07 PM
12.108.119.227
|
I thought that I was fair and even handed in my criticism of the whole situation. I requested that "please now get back to discussing Battletech and not "yelling" at each other." If that statement isn't inclusive of everyone involved I don't know what is. I'm sorry if you feel persecuted, mayhaps you have issues of your own to deal with. It just seemed that you were persecuting everyone who did not feel the same way that you did.
I agree that for the most part the game does use millimeters, but you were inferring that Cray was wrong for wanting to use centimeters. If I want to call a 12cm or 120mm gun something else in my "battletech Universe" I can. If you want to call it something else in you version of Battletech, you can do that as well.
All I was doing was giving you the material that you requested with a page reference so that you could confirm the facts for yourself.
"I am but mad north-northwest, when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw" Hamlet
|
Spartan
03/22/02 11:21 PM
172.133.109.46
|
"for the most part"
I don't know but for some reason that particular sentence fragment just really sticks out at me. Something about the non-absoluteness of it. I.E. IT'S OKAY TO USE THE CM MEASUREMENTS IF SOMEONE WANTS TO AND IT DOESN'T MAKE A LICK OF DIFFERENCE IF THEY DO! It's no different than an engineer using ft/s instead of mph (or m/s instead of kph). Most people use the latter, engineers will use either. It's not breaking any rules, it's just using a different standard! *Different* not wrong.
Spartan
We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty.
(I refer you to what Nightward said)
|
KG_Brandenburg
03/24/02 12:14 PM
24.162.144.193
|
Im new to this forum but i shall try to give my input on the size of the AC.1st and formost. Ya take things to litteral. As with alot of things in the BattleTech universe, Things are more or less abstract.The size of the # on the Auto cannon represents hitting power and "might"give you a clue to its actual size.a AC 20 could be as little as 10cm\100mm or as much as 30cm\300mm. It doesnt matter really
Ya are trying to say that a AC2 is a little bitty 20 or 25 mm. That is obsurd. Not on a big battlemech. I play millitrary style games abunch and am a Moder in the Close combat community so i have a inclination to know the real values of such of weapons.
Im in my game room now,1 of my modder\mapper buddies says he also takes it to mean litterally in mm AC10=100mm. His oppinion on alot of things hold concinderable weight with me but not in this case. He pointed out that the ammo load out is smaller as the class goes up. True. But what about the AC2. 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+. In saying that the Ammo load outs that battle tech use cant really give u a indecation to size if your are trying to say it represents a real life calibre of weapon
I am planning to Mod this game i play "Close Combat III" and make it Battle Tech infantry.In saying that i have give considerable thought to the actuall size of a AC w/ its related reload speed,ammo load out, range,weight,chamber rate,explosion radius, ect.Still havent figured out how to represent lasers though. I dont wanna redo the weapon fire sprites across the board. Wont be able to have regular riflees\machinguns then and in the BT universe i believe that ordinary weapons arre more prevelant that infantry laser rifles:)
Dunno if i will get to it.Kinda got another mod project and if i dont finish up my data tables , certain ppl might get a little upset.heheheh.
Just my thoughts on this topic. If you wish to discuse this matter or any other matter for that fact. You can catch me at my hang out @ Microsoft gamming zone"close Combat III". Sorry,dont have the ling handy so that will have to do.
BTW. It doesnt matter if it says cm\mm. Its all the same. its a measurment of a item.2cm =20 mm. Doesnt matter if the BT books use cm\mm. its all the same
|
Cray
03/24/02 12:53 PM
12.91.128.209
|
>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.
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.
|
KG_Brandenburg
03/24/02 01:57 PM
24.162.144.193
|
Dude, dont get technical w\me about the Game stats ok.45 per ton. So u are trying NOW tellin me that 45 20\25 mm weighs a TON.That is roughly 2000 lbs. That comes out to like 44 lbs per shell.20 mm shells weigh like maby 5 lbs tops. As i said it is a Abtract representation of real life weapons.
God ppl, use allittle common sence here.All of you are taking things to litteral in this matter.As i said, as w\most sci-fi stuff, things are absractl in there depiction of various aspects of what ever it is they are talking about
Your quoting from a scorce book. You are tellin me that some book worm knows more bout weapons and there effect than I.Thats kinda dillussional thinkin i would say
I will loosely base the mod im workin on on some data that they give.Very loosely as things must be in mm of penetration value and range of said weapon. It will have infantry and armor only.
I will cut this short and look forward to a reply.Got kids to tend too so L8ta:)
BTW. if u must get technical ,pls do. I got a huge collection of battletech books.
|
novakitty
03/24/02 02:02 PM
209.242.100.230
|
His point was that in battletech, autocannons of the same rating do not neccessarily have the same bullet radius. Rate of fire is a factor in the definition also, yet for game simplicity, there are only 4 damage scales for small (not naval class) autocannons. I would recommend re-reading Cray's last paragraph.
meow
|
KamikazeJohnson
03/24/02 02:08 PM
209.202.47.12
|
Actually, the "realism" of the weapons has very little to do with the question at hand, which was an attempt to remain consistent with existing source material. So even though, realistically, such a weapon would be an order of magnitude larger, describing it as such within the bounds of the game universe would be inconsistent, same as bringing in hand-held energy weapons that fire over a mile.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Cray
03/24/02 02:59 PM
12.91.121.246
|
>So u are trying NOW tellin me that 45 20\25 mm weighs a TON
No, I'm not. I'd appreciate it if you at least read my posts before replying.
>20 mm shells weigh like maby 5 lbs tops
More like 1lb, tops. I have a dummy 20mm shell sitting on my shelf.
Wait, wait. Question for you: You DO know each "shot" an MG or AC fires in BT consists of more than one shell, right?
So the 45 "shots" in a ton of AC/2 ammo can consist of hundreds of shells?
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.
|
KG_Brandenburg
03/24/02 03:05 PM
24.162.144.193
|
i did read his post and come to think of it he actually helped make my point:)He is speaking in abstract terms is he not.AC2=30 mm to 90 mm. Thats itself is abstract way of dealing with the auto cannons so thx for help makin my point.Dude, i was just tryin to make a simple point and you had to be quoting out a scorce manual.Well,i was takin my info out of a book published by the state department in '55 LOL.
Havent descided how i will code the weapon types for the auto cannons. Probally will have the 3 basic types of ammo. AP,HE,and HEAT
All i was trying to do was answer the question at hand. I was baffled how so many post could come from a relatively simple question.i have done so in my oppinion.
As for the scale of damage that a AC2 will produce is 2 points of damage and produce 1 heat point.
When i do the data for such weapons. I will find a base weapon data. Start with the AC 10. Make the AC20 trice as powerful but half the range. Make the AC5 and 2 the same way. Thats what the author of the books did. Did they not.That is what u call "abstract"
BTW. The battletech novels rock. I enjoy reading them more than playing the game. For the most part they are very entertaining to read
Branden
|
NathanKell
03/24/02 03:44 PM
24.44.238.62
|
And what does a manual from the State Department, dated 1955, have to do with a fictional universe dated *30* 55?
Also, if you're looking for base weapon data, why not try the Battletech rules? They're rather explicit on range, you see.
-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 |
Cray
03/24/02 04:21 PM
12.91.121.246
|
>He is speaking in abstract terms is he not
When I give hard caliber numbers like 25mm or 203mm, no. I'm quoting a BT sourcebook. When I speak of AC/2 or AC/10, I'm speaking in the abstracted terms of the rules.
>AC2=30 mm to 90 mm.
I never said that. I quoted the Battletech Master Rules, which says, "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..."
"Light autocannons" do not begin and end with class-2 autocannons.
>I was baffled how so many post could come from a relatively simple question.
Because it turned into a flame war.
I would still like to know: do you think autocannons fire a single projectile per attack they make?
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.
|
KG_Brandenburg
03/24/02 04:56 PM
24.162.144.193
|
Autocannons fire several projectals per attack do the not.Correction there. They fire several, yes and no. Actualy its easyer on the book keeping to do it that way
Flame war? Bout what may i ask.I must confess that i had my kids w\me so only glanced through it all.To hard to concentrate on the post and them.
I was just sayijng that the weapons are done very abstractly. There is a reason for that. to preserve consistancy w\the data on the weapons.Thats all. If all of ya are goin on w/me about small minute details. I can very well see how this got turned into a flame war.I have no need to flame another.
Think this is something. You all should read my post on a game im modding. Was most hard on the programers. Just ran across several irregularities in the data i was workin on and expressed my ammasement and was dumbfounded at there lack of historical knowledge
Getting back to the types of attacks autocannons fire. Im not sure. I know that LRM ,MRM,SRM must roll to c how many hit. not sure on AC. I dought it though.
Dude, only reason i even found this sight is i was collecting pics for a certain fille i would have to edit.Just needed the house icons.I think it will be loosely based in the 4th succession war period. Prefere that period in the BT history compared to all others
branden
|
KG_Brandenburg
03/24/02 05:11 PM
24.162.144.193
|
OK dude i was gunna let that comment slide.NAAA dont think so.
"And what does a manual from the State Department, dated 1955, have to do with a fictional universe dated *30* 55? "
HMM it has actually a awfull lot to do with it.Damn, this it far to easy. Ya are makin my point for me here. Well sence someone wanted to make a comment about the dimmensions of the AC shells. I thought i would dig allittle and give data on the real life counterparts.That book and its weapons have nothing to do w/the fictional unerverse that is Battletech. 1st of all dude.
The weapons data in the BT books are most irrelevent to my needs.Lets see,1st of all. I need actual penetration values in mm not 1\2 ton\full ton lots. Second of all i need the range in meeters not hex's. Just checked. each hex is = to roughly 100 meeters. that will not help me much sence the playin field that i have to work with is rarely larger that 500 meeters.Alot of the weapons i knowticed had a short range of 1-7.Wont work. Wont make a very good mod.Playability would really blow if the short range was set to such.
As i said, it will be a infantry mod w\tanks and hovercrafts and field guns. Started it awhile back. Guess i might start work on it again
One more thing. Do not let the date of that book fool you. It wasnt "Clasified "for 10 years for nothing. Actually written in march of 45.(just F Y I)
Branden
|
Cray
03/24/02 05:59 PM
12.91.121.246
|
>Autocannons fire several projectals per attack do the not.Correction there. They fire several, yes and no. Actualy its easyer on the book keeping to do it that way
Firing what way? I'm having trouble parsing through your statement.
Autocannons fire bursts with each "shot." Just read up on the Hetzer and Mechbuster. The 45 shots of an AC/2 may represent hundreds of individual projectiles. A 20mm AC/2 is thus well within the realm of possibility - it would fire more shells per "shot" than a 30 or 40mm AC/2.
>I was just sayijng that the weapons are done very abstractly
Yes, their combat statistics are abstract. The fluff text in Technical Readouts and novels are less abstract, sometimes quite specific.
>If all of ya are goin on w/me about small minute details.
It's not the small details of the weapons, it's the small details of saying things like, "So u are trying NOW tellin me that 45 20\25 mm weighs a TON" when I did not, and "Ya are trying to say that a AC2 is a little bitty 20 or 25 mm" when there is a rock hard statement in the books that AC/2s do include 25mm weapons.
>Getting back to the types of attacks autocannons fire. Im not sure
ACs do not apply damage like missile weapons. They fire multiple shells (typically), as described in the Mechbuster and Hetzer fluff text, but apply the damage to a single hit location with unvarying damage value.
>Dude, only reason i even found this sight is i was collecting pics for a certain fille i would have to edit.Just needed the house icons.
www.classicbattletech.com has excellent picture archives of all House and Clan symbols. It's now the official BT website since Fanpro picked up the license for the game.
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.
|
novakitty
03/24/02 06:21 PM
209.242.100.230
|
If you can get your hands on the Solaris 7 boxed set, it has rules for smaller area, shorter round mech combat.
meow
|
NathanKell
03/24/02 06:22 PM
24.44.238.62
|
Here, this is the best section of any BT rulebook / sourcebook I know of describing ACs...
In reply to:
BattleSpace Sourcebook, pp25-26
Autocannons:
The direct descendants of the gunpowder weapons first used on ancient Terra, autocannons use a chemical charge to propel an explosive-tipped, unguided projectile at the target. There are four types of autocannon, three of which are standard weapons used in war machines from fighters to BattleMechs. The fourth is solely a naval weapon.
The standard autocannon is a rapid-firing auto-loading weapon, with a caliber ranging from 30 to 200 millimeters. Modern-day military experts grade these weapons not by caliber, but by damage potential. For example, the damage potential of a rapid-fire, 50mm cannon may place it in a higher damage category, whereas a 200mm cannon with a slow rate of fire might be classified as a medium damage weapon.
The so-called "ultra" group autocannon fire at faster than normal rates, increasing potential damage. However, this extremely rapid rate of fire makes the ammunition feed more likely to jam and reduces accuracy. The ultra-rapid fire mode means that in many cases, fewer than half the shells fired actually hit the target. To compensate for this problem, many ultra cannons are designed to fire at the standard rate as well, allowing the operator to switch to ultra mode when presented easier targets.
The LB-X series of autocannon are similar to standard cannon, but may also fire a "shotgun" shell. The larger, lighter shell increases the likelihood of hitting the target, but does less damage than the heavier standard projectile.
The fourth class of autocannon, found only on WarShips and space stations, weighs between two and five thousand tons. Though the chemical propellants they use limit their range to that of conventional autocannons, naval autocannon (NAC) can do tremendous damage by virtue of their colossal size. One or two shells alone may destroy a DropShip. However, like most naval weapons, their size also prevents them from accurately tracking small, swift targets.
-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 08:24 AM
63.173.170.46
|
My God man, do you have keep at this? Once again you have to be right!
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.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
03/25/02 08:33 AM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>Second of all i need
the range in meeters not hex's.<<
Each Battletech hex has a 30m diameter circle transcribed in it.
Battletech's weapons ranges are notoriously and insanely short.
This makes for better "playability"
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Cray
03/25/02 10:04 AM
204.245.128.3
|
>My God man, do you have keep at this?
KG Brandenburg brought up an almost entirely new subject unrelated to our discussion elsewhere in our thread. I wanted to respond. It's not a flame war or anything - it's an interesting discussion. If you feel like contributing, go for it. If you just want to re-start the flame war, please stay away.
>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...
Karagin, a question: Do you think that statement in someway contradicts something I said? If yes, what statement of mine does it contradict or disagree with?
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 10:06 AM
63.173.170.46
|
Yes, your whole answer back to KG.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/25/02 10:18 AM
204.245.128.3
|
I want specific quotes that show where my errors were, with detailed dissertation on how I showed ignorance of WWII weaponry. Come now, Karagin, you have the perfect opportunity to display my utter ignorance of this topic.
For example, you say this is completely wrong:
"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."
Then you said:
"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"
This in no way, shape, or form contradicts my prior statement that AC/2s fire multiple bullets per "shot" or that a ton of AC/2 ammo may hold hundreds of bullets. I rather agree with your statement by itself actually, I just don't see how it proves me wrong on any point.
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 10:43 AM)
|
Karagin
03/25/02 11:17 AM
63.173.170.79
|
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
|
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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 12:11 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 12:15 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
Cray
03/25/02 02:50 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 02:53 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 02:59 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 05:14 PM
12.91.117.254
|
>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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 05:20 PM
12.91.117.254
|
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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 05:22 PM
12.91.117.254
|
>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
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 06:21 PM
12.91.117.254
|
95% at least. Millimeters are very dominant in BT literature, except in Coleman's works.
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 06:22 PM
63.173.170.217
|
That was what I was trying to pointing, but that was missed on some parties...
90-95% of the time the caliber is in milimeters.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/25/02 06:27 PM
63.173.170.217
|
The 20mm comment is this, the guns on an armored car for the most part are magazine feed autocannons, SIMILAR to the ACs in the game, BUT not on the same size scale. The next thing that can be compared to the ACs is the single shot main guns of a tank. What I was suggesting was for YOU, Cray to go and look over some books that cover armored cars and their weapons so you would see that the ACs are not burping a cloud of round as you are suggesting...
Thus enter the Vulcan commnet, the ACs fire out a stream of rounds, and based on some of the older mech pictures those rounds seem to be belt feed systems and some seem to be magazine feed, just like some of the ACs on WW2 armored cars...do you follow me know or do you want more info?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/25/02 06:30 PM
12.91.117.254
|
Your initial statement was not a "most of the time," it was an absolute: "Where did you read the AC where measured in centimeters? The BMR-R states that the size is millimeters NOT centimeters."
I objected to that. The BMR-R does not say, "only millimeters are used," nor are are other BT sources lack in non-mm bore measurements. Your current position on the matter I have nothing wrong with.
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 06:31 PM
63.173.170.217
|
My postion has not changed, the rule book gives it milimeters and the authors use that as well so it is milimeters that they are in. I don't care if the godling Coleman wants to change them, the rule book gives the facts.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/25/02 06:34 PM
12.91.117.254
|
For the love of God, THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE!!!!
I got the impression Branden thought ACs fired *single* shells per turn. I was trying to make the point they fired more than one - anything more than one, including "a stream of rounds". I WAS SAYING THE SAME THING AS YOU!!!!!
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.
|
Cray
03/25/02 06:35 PM
12.91.117.254
|
>the rule book gives the facts.
I agree with that, yes, but the rule book does not say, "ACs are only measured in millimeters." It just gives example ranges coincidentally measured in millimeters.
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 06:37 PM
63.173.170.217
|
Fine you win game over...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
NathanKell
03/25/02 06:40 PM
24.44.238.62
|
Ah, light dawns 
-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 |
KG_Brandenburg
03/25/02 07:56 PM
24.162.144.193
|
1st of all, DOES it matter ppl. 1 cm is equal to 10 mm.If it doesnt actually change the rules of play then it is irelevent
How many cultures are displayed in the BT universe. well there are 5 houses w/ each its own identity not to mention all the minor kingdoms in the periphery.In saying that, IT is hightly plausable that not all of the cultures adhere to the same unit of measurement.
Use allittle comon sence. Does calling a weapon in cm or mm make that weapon stronger\weaker or intitle it to different attributes????. Didnt think so,there for it is a mute point as it is not in vialation to any of the rules as they are the same thing.
CASE CLOSED
Dig were im commin from there. Ive been real cool w/ all of ya but enough is enough. If ya wanna flame others go right ahead. I donot care in the least bit.Just watch were all of ya are aiming ya's"flame"thrower HUH
I only tried to answer the original question at hand and i have done so to the best of my ability. Not to be a smart ass or to increase my own reputation or ego but i did it to try to help. Nothing more.Besides, my ego is far too big allready, but as someone has told me it is a "Earned" ego
As for the modern weapon battle mech coallation. If its big or small it doesnt much matter i would think as a large gun works the exact same as a smaller gun. Only difference is its size and its effect that it produces on its target.
"An ally must be watched just like a enemy"
Branden
|
Chunga
03/25/02 08:35 PM
65.31.80.235
|
I've found that he's usually right, that's why I listen.
You on the other hand......
|
Karagin
03/25/02 08:38 PM
63.173.170.83
|
Welp...seeing how this is more or less over, I think we can close the lid, and finish shovling the dirt over the grave...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Chunga
03/25/02 08:39 PM
65.31.80.235
|
Blaming Cray.
That's rich.
|
Karagin
03/25/02 08:40 PM
63.173.170.83
|
Did you miss the part were we ended all of this finally?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Chunga
03/25/02 08:40 PM
65.31.80.235
|
You trying to be helpful?
Are they ice skating in hell this week?
|
Karagin
03/25/02 08:42 PM
63.173.170.83
|
Would you like fries with your oder? No. That will be $5.50 please pull around to the first window.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
The_Ogre
03/27/02 08:32 AM
63.10.28.184
|
Karagin-
Do you understand that millimeters and centimeters are the same thing?
"We will bring you the limp and beaten body of Bob Barker!"
|
The_Ogre
03/28/02 11:20 PM
63.10.29.174
|
In reply to:
You seem to think you have the only correct opinion on this topic and why is that?
Peer pressure?
Karagin- you won't listen to anyone.
Just be cool, and people will stop wishing that you'd step on a land mine...
"We will bring you the limp and beaten body of Bob Barker!"
|