So I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Please let me know if you find errors.
Lasers:
In contrast to MW2's "travelling" lasers which you can see moving to their target, at a speed of 300,000km per second it makes no sense to simulate movement in a computer game. That's why MW3's continuous beams are more realistical in this regard. Along its path, the beam loses cohesion, meaning that it widens linearly. As it widens linearly, the energy in its cross-sectional area remains constant, but the energy per area drops linearly, so damage could be understood to drop proportionally to inverse distance.
Ballistics:
There are two factors affecting ballistics:
- Aerodynamic resistance. Along its path, the speed of the projectile drops proportionally to the speed, so it drops proportional to the squared distance travelled until it reaches zero. However, at its travelling speed, most projectiles travel quite far before this becomes an issue.
- Drop. Even at its high velocities, the projectile drops normally due to gravity, so the projectile does not travel along a ray. It may also be thrown off by wind, making a weapon more difficult to aim accurately.
than 100m can damage even a BattleMech, although in reality their slugs may travel for kilometers.
PPC:
This is a plasma weapon, so the rules of conductivity would apply. Electric resistance reduces the amount of
electricity linearly, so the amount of damage is proportional to inverse range? However, at closer ranges, the weapon's effect is reduced to prevent feedback.
Missiles:
The missile runs out of fuel after a certain distance. It flies on inertia until it hits the ground and explodes. Missiles have to counter gravity and wind effects, if present.
Weapon focal point:
Without a targetting computer, all weapons simply fire parallel, whereas a targetting computer might allow to move
weapons so that their rays meet in one point.