35 replies to this topic

[Syllogy]

First, some canon for the Autocannon:

Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannons in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each "round" or burst of fire.

What does this mean for High Damage Alpha strikes?

Simple: Instead of the AC20 and AC10 firing a single slug that transfers all of its damage to a single component, it would fire a set number of smaller projectiles in rapid succession that each deal less damage, but totaling in the same amount.

Up close and Stationary targets would still take the majority of damage to a single component, but moving and twisting targets would spread out damage due to the "burn time" duration of the shot, each slug potentially hitting a different component because of Time to Target.

For example:
AC20 = 4 Shells @ 5 Damage Each
AC10 = 2 Shells @ 5 Damage Each
UAC5, AC5, AC2 = Unchanged.

OR:

AC20 = 20 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC10 = 10 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC5 = 5 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC2 = 2 Shells @ 1 Damage Each

Edited by Syllogy, 01 July 2013 - 07:36 AM.

[Pinselborste]

it would mean even more gauss and ppc loadouts.

i think it would be better to have different manufacturers with some autocannons like we have now, some that fire faster, with less damage, and others that would be extremely fast. they would need their own ammo since they would need different ammount of shots per ton.

faster autocannons could deal more damage per second as Advantage to Counter the lower Alpha damage.

and devs would finally need to drop the AC/10 has to be 10 damage crap.

[superteds]

yes fine etc, except it's not really AC5/10/20 that are the problem with alpha today. dual AC20's are a HUGE weight investment, and very ammo limited. I can count on no hands the amount of complaints about AC5/10 alpha, the issue people have is with PPC's. AC's in general are fine - if PGI decide they dislike dual AC20 heavies they should tweak the chassis that mount them to discourage that particular loadout, not the weapon itself which is used singly on lots and lots and lots of other mechs.

Hopefully when we see different weapon manufacturers we'll see AC's of the same class with different firing characteristics, but balancing THE ENTIRE series of them to mess with AC40 boats is seriously short-sighted.

[Unbound Inferno]

Syllogy, on 01 July 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

AC10 = 2 Shells @ 2 Damage Each

Typo I am hoping. 2x 5 damage I assume? Or 5x 2 Damage?

Basically you are arguing to turn it into a short-term burst rotary cannon (like it should be as per cannon info) firing in limited bursts of that damage.

Even though it would no longer be the one impact roll like in BT, it helps to place it as 'real' as it should be here.

I kind of like the idea.

[Karl Streiger]

Burst weapon.... yes yes yes yes...
PPC? is a charged particle BEAM - so no problem to get rid of it too.

Remains the cold killing fragile weapon of Gauss...what about heat? reload time? cripple the damage while increasing the rof?
7 dmg every 2sec?

[LordDante]

dont touch my Wang !

[Mechteric]

I think it would be a good idea actually, it would make them even more effective brawler weapons especially versus snipers. Also on the plus side it would be like how autocannons were in Mechwarrior 2! Of course as you say the DPS and ammo count would have to be appropriate to work.

[Unbound Inferno]

Karl Streiger, on 01 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Burst weapon.... yes yes yes yes...
PPC? is a charged particle BEAM - so no problem to get rid of it too.

Remains the cold killing fragile weapon of Gauss...what about heat? reload time? cripple the damage while increasing the rof?
7 dmg every 2sec?

No. They've finally got Gauss balanced, effective and true to both the weapon and function. Keep it as it is.

I like the PPC idea, making it into a beam. Even if its a shorter 'beam' like a .5 r even .25 sec beam that'll be plenty in this game to change the effect.

[Karl Streiger]

LordDante, on 01 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

dont touch my Wang !

Tyren is for more DakkaDakka so you are out

Unbound Inferno, on 01 July 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

No. They've finally got Gauss balanced, effective and true to both the weapon and function. Keep it as it is.

I can't hear you ... I'm still deaf because of the ever exploding Gauss Rifle in my Atlas.

In general it isn't a real nerf - its just a reallocation. A PPC should still do 10dmg - only over time but to hit the same spot at once.
Same with the Gauss...instead of 1 shot every 4sec - 1 shot every 2sec with 50% dmg....still a supperior rifle - but now you have to prove that you could dare to call yourself a sniper - to one shot a target prove nothing.

[Unbound Inferno]

Karl Streiger, on 01 July 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

I can't hear you ... I'm still deaf because of the ever exploding Gauss Rifle in my Atlas.

In general it isn't a real nerf - its just a reallocation. A PPC should still do 10dmg - only over time but to hit the same spot at once.
Same with the Gauss...instead of 1 shot every 4sec - 1 shot every 2sec with 50% dmg....still a supperior rifle - but now you have to prove that you could dare to call yourself a sniper - to one shot a target prove nothing.

I still say no. That exploding Gauss cannon is a valid risk to run to use such a high damage weapon.

If we change the AC-10 and AC-20 like explained here we'd have a valid reason to leave the Gauss as the peak single-damage weapon with a huge risk.

Syllogy, on 01 July 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

AC20 = 20 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC10 = 10 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC5 = 5 Shells @ 1 Damage Each
AC2 = 2 Shells @ 1 Damage Each

Before I forget, I'm personally partial to the idea of the extremely quick-burst of single-damage pellets like this. It leaves the LBX-10 in its unique class of front-loading all the damage at once while the others spread it over time.

It'll really make chain-firing those AC lines really fun to see and head - and a nightmare to receive.

[Boogie Man]

I highly support this, and this also gives PGI a path to have different manufacturers have different burst patterns to make them all different. Maybe one manufacturer's ac20 shoots 4 slugs at 5 damage each but fairly spaced out while another one shoots 10 slugs at 2 damage each in a different burst pattern.

Gauss rifle I would like to either see it have rapid fire of smaller slugs similar to an AC, or a longer cooldown between shots of maybe 6 to 8 seconds.

[Theodor Kling]

Voted no although I like the idea. Why?
First off the PPC issue is not solved with it.
Second I would only support it as an alternative to the existing models. So have one AC2 fire let´s say a decent burst of 30mm bullets, and another a single.. 50mm or whatever.
Fluff states that both kinds exist, even single shot AC 20s exist (I think that one is specifcaly mentioned in the sarna article for ACs.
So no for now.. but in the logn run I would love the diversity this could bring.

[DeadlyNerd]

because the problem with autocannons is their alpha capability... wow.

a 20 damage alpha for 24 tons is so much more OP than a 20 damage alpha for 14 tons at longer range. I must be playing the wrong game.

[Jonny Taco]

This is exactly how AC should have functioned in a modern mw game. Instead PGI (like the fools they are) decided to try an emulate TT.

[Applecrow]

I had to vote no, this does nothing to mitigate high damage alpha and makes the AC's worse not better. They already have a trade off for their damage (in the smaller ones too much IMHO) in weight+ammo.

Pinpoint accuracy IS the problem, but removing that from the AC makes them not worth carrying.

Convergence and Heat Scale are the problems to fix.

Also, how would you translate the UAC/5 into this? firing faster or a longer burst?

Edited by Applecrow, 01 July 2013 - 09:14 AM.

[General Taskeen]

Karl Streiger, on 01 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Burst weapon.... yes yes yes yes...
PPC? is a charged particle BEAM - so no problem to get rid of it too.

Remains the cold killing fragile weapon of Gauss...what about heat? reload time? cripple the damage while increasing the rof?
7 dmg every 2sec?

Indeed. Gauss can still be balanced by super high front loaded damage with a LONG loading time.

I've never had a problem with the idea where AC's should be super dakka guns that are low damage per shell, that equate to their 'damage factor.'

Edited by General Taskeen, 01 July 2013 - 09:19 AM.

[Iron Hyena]

No, then its exactly like a laser, you idiots.

I've heard this same argument a dozen times and its still completely IGNORANT.

[General Taskeen]

Dornhal, on 01 July 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

No, then its exactly like a laser, you idiots.

I've heard this same argument a dozen times and its still completely IGNORANT.

Explain how its like a laser? It still requires ammo and each shell is doing damage. That's not a laser, ever.

You haven't even seen it in action. That's called fear-mongering. Its time to let go of straight up front-loaded damage shells and have super-dakka action extreme.

Edited by General Taskeen, 01 July 2013 - 09:25 AM.

[Tezcatli]

Nerf AC20 ammo tonnage. I've watched streams of people running it. They run out of ammo very often. So if you nerf the ammo. They'll run out faster and make the build less useful. But I guess that doesn't save the poor sap caught in it's wake before then. Perhaps if firing them separates their convergence and takes a few seconds to realign. Provided it lasted longer then the cooldown it might deter people from two shotting heavier mechs.

[Rizzelbizzeg]

Pass

Idk, having zero BT exposure prior to MWO, something just feels off about this. Had it been this way from the start, it could've worked and I might've liked it, but it kinda feels like a hack, albeit lore justified, to nerf 2xAC20.

I love the crack of an AC10, and while the MGs sound amazing, I would really miss the feeling of firing a monster shell from a huge cannon.

For that reason, I'm out.

Edited by Rizzelbizzeg, 01 July 2013 - 09:57 AM.