Author Topic: More Sub-Capital Weapons  (Read 11381 times)

Cryhavok101

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1840
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #30 on: 23 August 2017, 13:30:07 »
What about a short/medium range bracket minefield launcher? A space mine field can be pretty damaging.

There are places (I'd have to go searching for exact page numbers) where it says screen launchers can fire space mines, in the books already. So someone has thought of that before. I think it is a good idea. Basically a space shotgun. Short/medium range is definitely the right place for that, in my opinion.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #31 on: 23 August 2017, 13:37:50 »
There are places (I'd have to go searching for exact page numbers) where it says screen launchers can fire space mines, in the books already. So someone has thought of that before. I think it is a good idea. Basically a space shotgun. Short/medium range is definitely the right place for that, in my opinion.
Yes, the screen launcher seems to be able at launching mines into short range. But I think it would be plausible to use a bigger system for medium range.   
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

Cryhavok101

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1840
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #32 on: 23 August 2017, 14:53:08 »
I always though they should just do thunder ammo for capital/subcapital missiles, and deliver minefields where they want them in space.

HobbesHurlbut

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3089
  • Live Free or Die Hard
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #33 on: 24 August 2017, 17:17:58 »
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=54975.0

naval railgun aka: subcapital "gauss rifle"
Clan Blood Spirit - So Bad Ass as to require Orbital Bombardments to wipe us out....it is the only way to be sure!

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #34 on: 30 August 2017, 14:52:41 »

Does anyone have any guidelines about determining the C-Bill cost of Sub-Cap weapons?
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

dragonkid11

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #35 on: 14 September 2017, 10:09:12 »
Do you have any idea on making Light and Medium version of Sub Capital Plasma Cannon or should I just decrease weight by 50 tons, damage and heat by 20 points and multiply ammo count by 2?
On behalf of the Berserker,
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Salvage Dog AU SI Fanfic Thread
Salvage Dog AU Tech Compilation Thread
Salvage Dog AU Battlemech Thread

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #36 on: 14 September 2017, 17:18:03 »
Do you have any idea on making Light and Medium version of Sub Capital Plasma Cannon or should I just decrease weight by 50 tons, damage and heat by 20 points and multiply ammo count by 2?
What kind of damage outputs are you looking for? 2-4-6 or 4-5-6?
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

dragonkid11

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #37 on: 14 September 2017, 19:45:06 »
Considering the damage of SCC and SCL, 2,4,6 seems to work better.

Also, the sub capital Gauss rifle you designed seems really op, they might need to cut down their damage slightly or increase their weight by another 50 or 100

EDIT:

Actually, nevermind about the sub capital Gauss Rifle, light subcapital cannon doesn't seems any better than normal mech-sized gauss rifle already with more than ten times the weight already.
« Last Edit: 15 September 2017, 02:48:36 by dragonkid11 »
On behalf of the Berserker,
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Salvage Dog AU SI Fanfic Thread
Salvage Dog AU Tech Compilation Thread
Salvage Dog AU Battlemech Thread

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #38 on: 15 September 2017, 15:14:58 »
Considering the damage of SCC and SCL, 2,4,6 seems to work better.

Also, the sub capital Gauss rifle you designed seems really op, they might need to cut down their damage slightly or increase their weight by another 50 or 100

EDIT:

Actually, nevermind about the sub capital Gauss Rifle, light subcapital cannon doesn't seems any better than normal mech-sized gauss rifle already with more than ten times the weight already.
Giving me a poke is a good thing, I needed to review and bring everything together anyway.
The current state, with bench mark numbers:


   Weapon      Heat      Dam      Range      Bench      Shots/ton      WT (tons)      TR/Intro   
   SC-Gauss/2      6      2-C      Extreme-C      21      4      250      F/TBD   
   SC-Gauss/4      9      4-C      Long-C      20      2      500      F/TBD   
   SC-Gauss/6      12      6-C      Long-C      20      1      750      F/TBD   
   SC-Plasma/4      40      4-C      Short-C      18      4      200      E/TBD   
   SC-Plasma/5      50      5-C      Short-C      18      2      250      E/TBD   
   SC-Plasma/6      60      6-C      Short-C      17      1      300      E/TBD   
   SC-PPC/4      60      4-C      Long-C      20      NA      450      F/TBD   
   SC-PPC/5      60      5-C      Medium-C      19      NA      450      F/TBD   
   SC-PPC/6      90      6-C      Medium-C      20      NA      500      F/TBD   
   Chemical NL30      52      3-C      Long-C      9      1      800      C/2030   
   Chemical NL40      70      4-C      Long-C      10      0.8      1000      C/2120   
   Chemical NL50      85      5-C      Extreme-C      10      0.5      1200      C/2210   
   Thresher Miss. (OS)      10      2-C      Long-C      ?      OS      80      C/2010   
   Whale Shark Miss. (OS)      20      4-C      Extreme-C      ?      OS      180      C/2020   
   Thresher Launcher      10      2-C      Long-C      7      1/35      100      C/2125   
   Whale Shark Launcher      20      4-C      Long-C      8      1/60      200      C/2125   


I do still need to finalize the costs...
« Last Edit: 16 September 2017, 04:08:51 by Maingunnery »
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

Vition2

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 856
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #39 on: 15 September 2017, 19:06:20 »
   Thresher Launcher      10      2-C      Long-C      7      0,028571429      100      C/2125   
   Whale Shark Launcher      20      4-C      Long-C      8      0,016666667      200      C/2125   

Egads, please use fractions for the tons/shot for these.  #P

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4872
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #40 on: 15 September 2017, 21:07:27 »
Giving me a poke is a good thing, I needed to review and bring everything together anyway.
The current state, with bench mark numbers:


   Weapon      Heat      Dam      Range      Bench      Shots/ton      WT (tons)      TR/Intro   
   Thresher Launcher      10      2-C      Long-C      7      0,028571429      100      C/2125   
   Whale Shark Launcher      20      4-C      Long-C      8      0,016666667      200      C/2125   


Looks like the Thresher missiles are 35 tons each, while the Whale Shark missiles are 60 tons each.

The fun part is that IIRC missile launchers need to have a minimum of 10 shots of ammo per launcher, that means a single Thresher missile system will mass a minimum of 450 tons, and a Whale Shark system needs 800 tons.

dragonkid11

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #41 on: 15 September 2017, 23:27:52 »
Well, I was looking at Thunderbolt missile and thing that it could be effective as essentially a capital SRM launcher.

   Weapon      Heat      Dam      Range      Tons per Salvo      WT (tons)   
   Thunderbolt 20 MMLS      48      6*2-C      Medium-C      2      180   

Except it's actually kind OP for its low weight even after I doubled it.
On behalf of the Berserker,
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Salvage Dog AU SI Fanfic Thread
Salvage Dog AU Tech Compilation Thread
Salvage Dog AU Battlemech Thread

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #42 on: 16 September 2017, 04:07:59 »
Egads, please use fractions for the tons/shot for these.  #P
Will edit it in, it was a legacy from the bench calculation.


Well, I was looking at Thunderbolt missile and thing that it could be effective as essentially a capital SRM launcher.

   Weapon      Heat      Dam      Range      Tons per Salvo      WT (tons)   
   Thunderbolt 20 MMLS      48      6*2-C      Medium-C      2      180   

Except it's actually kind OP for its low weight even after I doubled it.
You can get that will all std weapons, if it wasn't for the range...... 
Thus I wouldn't object if capital scale is ever changed from x10 to x100.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

Vition2

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 856
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #43 on: 16 September 2017, 09:10:09 »
Will edit it in, it was a legacy from the bench calculation.
Thanks!
Quote
You can get that will all std weapons, if it wasn't for the range...... 
Thus I wouldn't object if capital scale is ever changed from x10 to x100.
Neither would I, in fact, I would probably laud it.

dragonkid11

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #44 on: 18 September 2017, 04:18:57 »
OK - here my "benchmark" result. As suspected your PPCs are heavy flavored with vanilla  ;)
(benchmark = damage x range/propability[like HM BV calculator] / load weight[heat + weight + ammo])

the NPPCs are 12 respective 13... the NL have a slightly better benchmark of around 15. The SCLs top at 20 so they are clearly better compared to the NSLs (ok when you want to have similar ranges you need to put 4 SCL/1 in a bay vs 1 NL/35) The SCL are hotter but safe 100t

Compare this with "your" SC PPC/6 and the N PPC 7 (light) - its great to have a PPC weapon - as Subcapital Weapon mountable on a dropship.
Maybe you should just drop the numbers back to a SC PPC 5  -but increase weight and heat and decrease range

I still honestly have absolutely no idea how does this equation even work.

Which probability should I use, there's a whole list of number on the HM BV calculator page.
On behalf of the Berserker,
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Salvage Dog AU SI Fanfic Thread
Salvage Dog AU Tech Compilation Thread
Salvage Dog AU Battlemech Thread

Hptm. Streiger

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 968
  • 3d artist, spread sheet warrior, KTF
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #45 on: 18 September 2017, 05:16:06 »
I still honestly have absolutely no idea how does this equation even work.

Which probability should I use, there's a whole list of number on the HM BV calculator page.

Heavy Metal BV uses the classic BT ranges  - not the aerospace brackets - you might try to trick the "system" by using 9 as short range, 18 as medium and 30 as long range but only for "long" range weapons.

For most capital weapons you should use the "to hit propability" 4;6;8 and 10 without any "special rules" - the propability is (33/36; 26/36; 15/36 and 6/36)
Ranges are 9 for short, additional 9 for medium, 12 for long and 7.5 for extreme

So the basic aerospace weapon bv for a long range weapon would be (9*33+9*26+12*15)/36 * damage * 1.25 (if energy) * 0.96??duno but is necessary???

Attached a Open Calc file for the calc.... or if the regional stuff is destroying the the formulas
 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YAR-u0jY8ev5t01tfbdOwP9uoka7XO791xQquocWo2w/edit?usp=sharing

- the "loaded weight" is a simple calc - weight+heat + 20(turns)/shots_per_ton





Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #46 on: 04 January 2019, 19:51:05 »
Coming back to this topic, I have been thinking on how to visualize these weapons.

For the Sub-Capital PPC, I think that peak power demand is the biggest technical problem.
More then a DropShip's powerplant can normally deliver, so I had to find an in-universe technical excuse for reduce this peak.

Currently I am thinking of having circular PPCs that slowly build up the particle load over more time to vastly reduce the peak power demand, and with some extra parts to cause the particles to exit at a specific angle, see picture:

Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

UnLimiTeD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2039
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #47 on: 04 January 2019, 21:30:07 »
While I am not one to discard a pleasing train of thought; why not just a capacitor?
The technology already exists in BT, and should be able to take care of peak requirements nicely.
Savannah Masters are the Pringles of Battletech.
Ooo! OOOOOOO! That was a bad one!...and I liked it.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #48 on: 05 January 2019, 02:20:01 »
While I am not one to discard a pleasing train of thought; why not just a capacitor?
The technology already exists in BT, and should be able to take care of peak requirements nicely.
You know I never have heard how the PPC capacitor works, we know what it does, but is it an extra projection/acceleration stage or source of electricity?
Because if it is the former, then most of the circle length could be projection/acceleration stages.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37301
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #49 on: 05 January 2019, 07:53:36 »
"Capacitor" implies the latter (a source of electricity)...

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #50 on: 05 January 2019, 08:59:00 »
"Capacitor" implies the latter (a source of electricity)...
Sure, but why does it have the odd heat behavior then?
Also it isn't as explosive as the capacitors in Gauss Rifles.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37301
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #51 on: 05 January 2019, 10:19:45 »
Not a good answer, but "game balance"... :)

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4872
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #52 on: 06 January 2019, 01:50:35 »
Coming back to this topic, I have been thinking on how to visualize these weapons.

For the Sub-Capital PPC, I think that peak power demand is the biggest technical problem.
More then a DropShip's powerplant can normally deliver, so I had to find an in-universe technical excuse for reduce this peak.

Currently I am thinking of having circular PPCs that slowly build up the particle load over more time to vastly reduce the peak power demand, and with some extra parts to cause the particles to exit at a specific angle, see picture: https://i.imgur.com/x4Qjmsh.png

Check out circular particle accelerators.  Essentially you have a 'gate' in part if the accelerator that is designed to keep the particles traveling in a circle, but that gate can also be deactivated to let the particles out in a stream.  You rotate the circular accelerator so the exit gate is pointed where you want, and just turn that little part off to let the particle stream go in that direction.

As for power demands, that may work, but you would still have the need to keep all the particles contained in the accelerator anyway, and the more particles you have inside the more energy you would still need to keep bending their path.  So you may still need the overall power demand, but you are right about it being a steadier build up.  However, damage to the accelerator will not only damage the emitter, but that particle stream will escape, potentially into your ship.

The fun part is when you make one of these large enough to be the circumference of the ship.  So you have a 'spinal mount' particle beam weapon, but it/they can only be mounted in the LBS/RBS arcs (changing the course of the beams is really difficult), you would have to spend one thrust point to reflect aiming the ship's waist at a target, and they can only be aimed at up to 2 targets (three points define a plane, the firing ship is one point, the emission cone of the particle emitter effectively defines a plane).

You would also have to make a rule about the size is proportional to the width of the ship, since it would be installed just under the armor, but also have the gate openings as close to the surface as possible to avoid having a 'girdle' on the 'waist' on your ship (also add Docking Collar penalties by reducing the max limit?).  Since a ship 8* the mass is only 2* the L/W/H of a smaller ship, that means if a 100 kton Warship has a SpNPPC that can do a max of 400 standard damage, then an 800 kton Warship mounting a SpNPPC would be able to do 800 standard damage.  Since SpNPPC requires the ship to maneuver to aim, all penalties for firing at smaller targets are doubled.


Now this gives me a 'flak' idea for NPPC weaponry.  If you fire the particle stream for a longer period of time, and use the magnetic aiming system to rapidly scatter the beam, you might be able to get an anti-small craft capability out of it.  It would have the NPPC's range, but the damage would be lower, and it might still have a penalty.  Similar to how CIWS uses a single stream of bullets but sprays them in the path of a missile.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7179
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: More Sub-Capital Weapons
« Reply #53 on: 06 January 2019, 06:54:26 »
Check out circular particle accelerators.  Essentially you have a 'gate' in part if the accelerator that is designed to keep the particles traveling in a circle, but that gate can also be deactivated to let the particles out in a stream.  You rotate the circular accelerator so the exit gate is pointed where you want, and just turn that little part off to let the particle stream go in that direction.

As for power demands, that may work, but you would still have the need to keep all the particles contained in the accelerator anyway, and the more particles you have inside the more energy you would still need to keep bending their path.  So you may still need the overall power demand, but you are right about it being a steadier build up.  However, damage to the accelerator will not only damage the emitter, but that particle stream will escape, potentially into your ship.

The fun part is when you make one of these large enough to be the circumference of the ship.  So you have a 'spinal mount' particle beam weapon, but it/they can only be mounted in the LBS/RBS arcs (changing the course of the beams is really difficult), you would have to spend one thrust point to reflect aiming the ship's waist at a target, and they can only be aimed at up to 2 targets (three points define a plane, the firing ship is one point, the emission cone of the particle emitter effectively defines a plane).

You would also have to make a rule about the size is proportional to the width of the ship, since it would be installed just under the armor, but also have the gate openings as close to the surface as possible to avoid having a 'girdle' on the 'waist' on your ship (also add Docking Collar penalties by reducing the max limit?).  Since a ship 8* the mass is only 2* the L/W/H of a smaller ship, that means if a 100 kton Warship has a SpNPPC that can do a max of 400 standard damage, then an 800 kton Warship mounting a SpNPPC would be able to do 800 standard damage.  Since SpNPPC requires the ship to maneuver to aim, all penalties for firing at smaller targets are doubled.


Now this gives me a 'flak' idea for NPPC weaponry.  If you fire the particle stream for a longer period of time, and use the magnetic aiming system to rapidly scatter the beam, you might be able to get an anti-small craft capability out of it.  It would have the NPPC's range, but the damage would be lower, and it might still have a penalty.  Similar to how CIWS uses a single stream of bullets but sprays them in the path of a missile.
That is a lot cooler then my idea of just being a subcap weapon.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships