Cannons could certainly use a buff

[V'larr]

I agree personal preference is a big factor. I like cannons because I like the subject of gunnery and the challenge to make cannons effective in ED's gamey combat model. I've tried frag cannons too but didn't like to have to get so very close to the target. I try to score hits with cannons at ranges of 1-2 secs flight time (less for small targets btw). Very satisfying to see a pirate in his gutsy FAS blow up 2 km away trying to run from me. With engineering It's easy to make every weapon OP against NPCs so I limit engineering to overcharged grade 1 that gives the same damage as premium synthesized munitions.

I don't mind the limited ammo. I don't like hanging out in RES or CZ for hours anyway. When the ammo is gone, I'm going home (and there's also synthesis).

If you are already flying to get close and get a "broadside" shot on your target, i.e. where the largest surface area of your target is exposed, to reduce the probability of a missed cannon shot then you are literally dogfighting in exactly the same fashion you would be when using frag cannons.

And in close quarters in your face combat where your goal is to expose the largest surface area of your opponent before pulling the trigger the frag cannons are far superior to the cannons anyways.

So why not just use frags in that case?

Because cannons have more range? Range means missed shots, so you close distance before pulling trigger anyhow.

I tried a fully cannon fitted and fully frag-cannon fitted Chieftain, and the frag cannon setup is vastly superior. It shreds most shields and absolutely wrecks hull. I've taken down everything from Sidewinders to Cutters with the frag-cannon setup, from fully shielded to zero hull, and the frags are simply superior in every way to cannons.

I honestly don't know why anyone would use cannons other than some personal preference for cannons and thus wanting to justify the use of cannons.

Low ammo, relatively low damage, high miss probability (especially on small targets) makes them undesirable.

And sure, some argue you can engineer the cannons. But that doesn't make cannons any better since, newflash, you can engineer frag cannons and other weapons as well.

Double-shot or High Capacity frag cannons with drag munitions, corrosive and incendiary shells will take down any ship much faster and more efficiently than cannons ever will.

I agree with Red Fox Four's points.

This debate echoes the age old "Regular cannon vs. LBX cannon" infighting debate in Battletech.

Given, however, that Elite is not constrained by the bounds of hexagon tabletop rules, and that there's been considerable time in game design to figure out possible answers to this...it's a bit annoying that it is echoed. Battletech is not well-known for being balanced.

 

[Krieger]

I agree with Red Fox Four's points.

This debate echoes the age old "Regular cannon vs. LBX cannon" infighting debate in Battletech.

Given, however, that Elite is not constrained by the bounds of hexagon tabletop rules, and that there's been considerable time in game design to figure out possible answers to this...it's a bit annoying that it is echoed. Battletech is not well-known for being balanced.

I don't know Battletech.

As I said I agree it's a matter of personal preference. I just like to share why and how I use cannons and I find it interesting to read why/how others use them or not use them. No need to feel annoyed... it's only my opinion.

 

[V'larr]

I don't know Battletech.

As I said I agree it's a matter of personal preference. I just like to share why and how I use cannons and I find it interesting to read why/how others use them or not use them. No need to feel annoyed... it's only my opinion.

It's not you I'm annoyed with, it's the game.

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

Cannon have been buffed multiple times already. While they aren't great primary damage dealers, cannon have useful specials that multi-cannon do not, and specials that other weapons duplicate less well.

It's also not hard to synchronize cannon velocity by carefully selecting which mods you use, what levels you take those mods to, and what you pair them with. A medium force-shell cannon has the same projectile velocity as a PA and very similar velocity to a huge non-force shell cannon, for example. You can also use auto-tracking mounts on some of them if the projectile velocity is too out of sync with the rest of one's weapons.

Don't tell them that you fool! xD

But yeah force shell is one of my favorite mods simply because of the shot speed decrease, If you can aim well, noone is landing succesive hits in PvP either, just gotta make sure you get faster on the targeting than your opponent and they don't stand a chance.

But yeah, they could use a damage buff I agree, but they are a good choice for armour pen' and module sniping. Just don''t bother with the gimbal/turret versions as they track too slowly to be majorjy useful. (And personally, I think it should stay like that being a heavier calibre round, and a heavier barrel)

 

[60mm]

Cannons are my favorite weapon to use as landing a shot is soooo very satisfying.

That being said, they aren't good for much besides fun. The round velocity is just atrocious and totally negates the *one* thing Cannons have that nothing else does. Long range without damage fall-off. Of course, landing a Cannon at 3Km out simply is never going to happen with current specs. How modern APDS cannon rounds routinely run in excess of 1.5Km/s through atmosphere and ED cannon rounds crawl along at 900m/s in a vacuum is beyond me.

And why do Cannons have magazines? Why would anyone design a vehicle mounted weapon to do so? This point isn't just poor design, it is straight up .

My opinion on what would improve the Cannon
Giving the Cannon a healthy velocity boost would make them more useful, but still not enough to drag them out of the just-for-fun bin imo. Outside of niche builds, I just don't see how they would compete with Rails/PA. What would really give the Cannon a shot at being viable without directly competing with Rails/PA would be a kinetic energy transfer mechanic. Getting hit by a Cannon round would be like an impact with an object, possibly altering the course of your vehicle or even putting it in a spin, depending on your ship's mass and the class of the Cannon. In this case Cannons still wouldn't be the go to for reliable DPS, but it would be a lot of fun and very deadly in the hands of a skilled pilot. It would open up a new world of combat tactics where targeting would be best gauged by how you seek to alter your opponent's facing. Boosting the Cannon's DPS abilities is just an exercise in stat-treadmilling that I don't wish to see. Though even with this, I still think a velocity boost is needed.

Also agree on the impact. Very hard to notice impacts unless very close and, frankly, pathetic. Would be simple to change and really improve the experience.

 

[60mm]

Cannons are my favorite weapon to use as landing a shot is soooo very satisfying.

That being said, they aren't good for much besides fun. The round velocity is just atrocious and totally negates the *one* thing Cannons have that nothing else does. Long range without damage fall-off. Of course, landing a Cannon at 3Km out simply is never going to happen with current specs. How modern APDS cannon rounds routinely run in excess of 1.5Km/s through atmosphere and ED cannon rounds crawl along at 900m/s in a vacuum is beyond me.

And why do Cannons have magazines? Why would anyone design a vehicle mounted weapon to do so? This point isn't just poor design, it is straight up ________.

My opinion on what would improve the Cannon
Giving the Cannon a healthy velocity boost would make them more useful, but still not enough to drag them out of the just-for-fun bin imo. Outside of niche builds, I just don't see how they would compete with Rails/PA. What would really give the Cannon a shot at being viable without directly competing with Rails/PA would be a kinetic energy transfer mechanic. Getting hit by a Cannon round would be like an impact with an object, possibly altering the course of your vehicle or even putting it in a spin, depending on your ship's mass and the class of the Cannon. In this case Cannons still wouldn't be the go to for reliable DPS, but it would be a lot of fun and very deadly in the hands of a skilled pilot. It would open up a new world of combat tactics where targeting would be best gauged by how you seek to alter your opponent's facing. Boosting the Cannon's DPS abilities is just an exercise in stat-treadmilling that I don't wish to see. Though even with this, I still think a velocity boost is needed.

Also agree on the impact. Very hard to notice impacts unless very close and, frankly, pathetic. Would be simple to change and really improve the experience.

 

[Morbad]

What would really give the Cannon a shot at being viable without directly competing with Rails/PA would be a kinetic energy transfer mechanic. Getting hit by a Cannon round would be like an impact with an object, possibly altering the course of your vehicle or even putting it in a spin, depending on your ship's mass and the class of the Cannon.

ED cannon contain either 105 or 126 rounds of ammunition in a modular hardpoint. If half of that is weapon, a huge cannon shell is, at most, just under 80kg. An 80kg projectile traveling at current, or even 50% past current, velocities is not going to transfer much momentum. Also, the firing ship would experience at least as much force as recoil.

From a gameplay perspective, this would also depreciate force shell.

Getting hit by a Cannon round would be like an impact with an object, possibly altering the course of your vehicle or even putting it in a spin, depending on your ship's mass and the class of the Cannon. In this case Cannons still wouldn't be the go to for reliable DPS, but it would be a lot of fun and very deadly in the hands of a skilled pilot. It would open up a new world of combat tactics where targeting would be best gauged by how you seek to alter your opponent's facing.

Already one of the most common reasons to take force shell cannon.

A fixed medium force shell cannon has the same velocity as a PA and FDL's (for example) carrying one or two of these, in addition to their PAs and rails is not rare. They can do a good job of crapping up an opponent aim.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

ED cannon contain either 105 or 126 rounds of ammunition in a modular hardpoint. If half of that is weapon, a huge cannon shell is, at most, just under 80kg. An 80kg projectile traveling at current, or even 50% past current, velocities is not going to transfer much momentum. Also, the firing ship would experience at least as much force as recoil.

From a gameplay perspective, this would also depreciate force shell.



Already one of the most common reasons to take force shell cannon.

A fixed medium force shell cannon has the same velocity as a PA and FDL's (for example) carrying one or two of these, in addition to their PAs and rails is not rare. They can do a good job of crapping up an opponent aim.

I suspect you know this, but to be pedantic kinetic energy and momentum are different things, and hull damage is already a "kinetic energy transfer".

For KE, an 80kg projectile @ 900m/s = 32400000 J, or 32.4 MJ.
Nothing to sniff at!
Reverse engineering the in game damage(83.13) from a stock huge fixed cannon gives a projectile of around 200kg(!) if my math is correct.

 

[CMDR Redcrest]

At the moment Cannon could do with a push, not a buff

 

[Krieger]

It's not you I'm annoyed with, it's the game.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

 

[V'larr]

Cannons are my favorite weapon to use as landing a shot is soooo very satisfying.

That being said, they aren't good for much besides fun. The round velocity is just atrocious and totally negates the *one* thing Cannons have that nothing else does. Long range without damage fall-off. Of course, landing a Cannon at 3Km out simply is never going to happen with current specs. How modern APDS cannon rounds routinely run in excess of 1.5Km/s through atmosphere and ED cannon rounds crawl along at 900m/s in a vacuum is beyond me.

And why do Cannons have magazines? Why would anyone design a vehicle mounted weapon to do so? This point isn't just poor design, it is straight up ________.

My opinion on what would improve the Cannon
Giving the Cannon a healthy velocity boost would make them more useful, but still not enough to drag them out of the just-for-fun bin imo. Outside of niche builds, I just don't see how they would compete with Rails/PA. What would really give the Cannon a shot at being viable without directly competing with Rails/PA would be a kinetic energy transfer mechanic. Getting hit by a Cannon round would be like an impact with an object, possibly altering the course of your vehicle or even putting it in a spin, depending on your ship's mass and the class of the Cannon. In this case Cannons still wouldn't be the go to for reliable DPS, but it would be a lot of fun and very deadly in the hands of a skilled pilot. It would open up a new world of combat tactics where targeting would be best gauged by how you seek to alter your opponent's facing. Boosting the Cannon's DPS abilities is just an exercise in stat-treadmilling that I don't wish to see. Though even with this, I still think a velocity boost is needed.

Also agree on the impact. Very hard to notice impacts unless very close and, frankly, pathetic. Would be simple to change and really improve the experience.

You know, I rather dig this idea - one of the examples of how "special effects" was a mistake, in my view; many of the things that are special effects should just be baked into the baseline equipment and weapons.

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

You know, I rather dig this idea - one of the examples of how "special effects" was a mistake, in my view; many of the things that are special effects should just be baked into the baseline equipment and weapons.

Though gimmicky I tink TLB should stay, unfortunate though it is, without it, seekers would be as good as death for any hulltank/small ship.

Also why we need small PA's.

MAKE THE EAGLE GREAT AGAIN!

 

[Sneake Llama]

They technically have slightly more DPS than Multi-Cannons and slightly higher armor piercing value, but one miss throws that all out the window because of the slow rate of fire. Oh yeah, and it’s easier to miss because they have a lower shot speed, so your DPS will definitely be lower. Then there’s the fact that the shot speed is all over the board. Every different mount has a different shot speed, and every different class has a different shot speed, so you really can’t mix and match. Let’s say none of that bothers you and you have the perfect balance of skill and luck so you literally land every shot and you get that edge from slightly higher DPS... now you are out of ammo TWICE as fast as if you had multi-cannons. Seriously, I want to use cannons so bad, but there are so many reasons not to. Multi-Cannons are just better.

You must not have been around during the Heat Cannon debacle...

 

[V'larr]

Though gimmicky I tink TLB should stay, unfortunate though it is, without it, seekers would be as good as death for any hulltank/small ship.

Also why we need small PA's.

MAKE THE EAGLE GREAT AGAIN!

Nah. I'd rather eliminate that gimmicky special effect and directly balance seekers, ECM & PDT.

 

[60mm]

Giving Cannons the ability to transfer kinetic energy on impact would really up the fun for those who already find them fun in the fact that the more challenging the shot placement (further from center), the more rewarding the effect would be. Nailing a shot dead center would have minimal effects, while shots landing near the edges of a craft would effect the ship far more. The victim would, then, certainly feel like they were hit by a Cannon. [yesnod]