14 replies to this topic

[XCOM Engineer 3051]

Greetings o7,

We need to fix our beloved Ballistics primarily the 2's. I believe the way to do it is decrease the cool down and give the cannons boxes of ammo which reload after 20, 10, or 5 shots for each individual cannon.

Display shells at the bottom right screen next to the cool down bar. Use shift+R to reload or auto reload once all the shots in the cannon have been fired. The bigger the ballistic the fewer shots per reload.

So I would take the DPS of B-20's, and work how fast 2's, 5's, and 10's would have to fire to do 20+/- damage in the amount of time a 20 would. Then figure in the reload time make some adjustments. Rework the Ballistics to compete with 20's.

I hope you play with this idea. Thank you for reading.

[Spleenslitta]

You mean increasing the firerate of the AC2? I'm in.
How fast should it be? Maybe something like this?

Keep in mind that these are just numbers i put forward as examples.

A) 5x0.35 secs= 1.75 secs for 10 damage.
B ) 5x0.30 secs= 1.5 secs for 10 damage.
C) 5x0.25 secs= 1.25 secs for 10 damage.

I liked the C alternative best because it pulls even with the IS ER LLs burntime for almost the same amount of damage.
But I'm worried that's too powerfull even if we put a magazine function on...what to do?

Edited by Spleenslitta, 19 July 2016 - 11:56 AM.

[XCOM Engineer 3051]

Spleenslitta, on 19 July 2016 - 11:29 AM, said:

You mean increasing the firerate of the AC2? I'm in.
How fast should it be? Maybe something like this?

Keep in mind that these are just numbers i put forward as examples.

A) 5x0.35 secs= 1.75 secs for 10 damage.
B ) 5x0.30 secs= 1.5 secs for 10 damage.
C) 5x0.25 secs= 1.25 secs for 10 damage.

I liked the C alternative best because it pulls even with the IS ER LLs burntime for almost the same amount of damage.
But I'm worried that's too powerfull even if we put a magazine function on...what to do?

Yes exactly like that. I like option 3 myself.
This is what I would do In order to keep the B-2's (B=Ballistics) from being too overpowered. I would make a dps chart including all of the weapons, figure the damage per minute of each weapon, and work the reload time with the discovered data to match the rest of the weapons. This should help keep everything balanced.

[Spleenslitta]

Many say the current AC2 is too hot and it would be even worse like this. But i think that high heat only happens when the AC2 is boated.
But i'd say we need to make the AC2 able to compete with the PPC's as single weapons.
-They weigh the same when ammo is taken into account.
-Both are for long range.

With increased firerate we could think of the AC2 as a weapon best fired in bursts. That also fits with the magazine suggestion you made.
But how many shells per magazine for the AC2 and how fast to reload the mag?

[XCOM Engineer 3051]

Spleenslitta, on 19 July 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

Many say the current AC2 is too hot and it would be even worse like this. But i think that high heat only happens when the AC2 is boated.
But i'd say we need to make the AC2 able to compete with the PPC's as single weapons.
-They weigh the same when ammo is taken into account.
-Both are for long range.

With increased firerate we could think of the AC2 as a weapon best fired in bursts. That also fits with the magazine suggestion you made.
But how many shells per magazine for the AC2 and how fast to reload the mag?

I struggled with number crunching...
a Clan 20 does 20 dmg every 4 sec. So give the 2's a cd of .3. (4/.3=13.3 shots per 4 seconds). 10 shots per mag clip at a reload rate of 4 sec per mag or .4 sec per shell.
The numbers would look something like this. I am lost figuring how much the 2's dmg would be in 4 seconds emptying the mag. The dps will be a little higher initially but the reload time should help compensate for the increased DPS.

[Spleenslitta]

YaYahCult, on 21 July 2016 - 07:05 AM, said:

I struggled with number crunching...
a Clan 20 does 20 dmg every 4 sec. So give the 2's a cd of .3. (4/.3=13.3 shots per 4 seconds). 10 shots per mag clip at a reload rate of 4 sec per mag or .4 sec per shell.
The numbers would look something like this. I am lost figuring how much the 2's dmg would be in 4 seconds emptying the mag. The dps will be a little higher initially but the reload time should help compensate for the increased DPS.

You pretty much got it all bagged. Much better than my own ideas inside my own AC2 balance thread - http://mwomercs.com/...lancing-debate/

Magazines is a lot more simple and more logical idea than the burst fire limitation thing i came up with.
I wouldn't mind the AC2's heat if things were like you describe.
You're saying something like this right or am i missunderstanding things?

10x0.3 secs= 3 secs for 20 damage. 0.3 secs cooldown between shells.
With a 10 shell magazine and 4 seconds to reload a mag.

Sounds good. But regretably i doubt Paul or Tina will see it. The only real way to get PGI's attention is to talk to Russ on Twitter.
And even that is kinda...unlikely.

[Spleenslitta]

Oh yeah...there is one thing i'm worried about. What about magazines for the bigger AC's?
If magazines allows for faster firerate wouldn't that make the AC20 firerate even faster. That would upset the balance AC's have with other weapons such as lasers and missiles.

Or should the magazines only be for the AC2's?

[Bad Pun]

smaller magazines for larger cannons with a lower fire rate than 2s? Seems logical to me.

And I don't believe that the AC20 should have a magazine, per se, should probably stick to the single shell per cooldown it has now.

[XCOM Engineer 3051]

Spleenslitta, on 21 July 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

You pretty much got it all bagged. Much better than my own ideas inside my own AC2 balance thread - http://mwomercs.com/...lancing-debate/

Magazines is a lot more simple and more logical idea than the burst fire limitation thing i came up with.
I wouldn't mind the AC2's heat if things were like you describe.
You're saying something like this right or am i missunderstanding things?

10x0.3 secs= 3 secs for 20 damage. 0.3 secs cooldown between shells.
With a 10 shell magazine and 4 seconds to reload a mag.

Sounds good. But regretably i doubt Paul or Tina will see it. The only real way to get PGI's attention is to talk to Russ on Twitter.
And even that is kinda...unlikely.

Solid thread bro, it appears I am not the only one who would like to see the Ballistics get what they deserve.
Yes you hit the nail on the head.

10x0.3 secs= 3 secs for 20 damage. 0.3 0.4 secs to reload a single shell.
With a 10 shell magazine and 4 seconds to reload a mag.

These numbers are guesstimates, however I believe the 2's should do a little more damage with in the cool down time of a B-20 (B=Ballistics) to do its damage. The reason being, one will need to focus fire continuously in order to put out the 2's max dps which will be more challenging then simply blasting someone for 20 damage with a B-20. However; the reload time for a magazine on a B-2 will be a little longer to help curve its dps down.

Spleenslitta, on 21 July 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

Oh yeah...there is one thing i'm worried about. What about magazines for the bigger AC's?
If magazines allows for faster firerate wouldn't that make the AC20 firerate even faster. That would upset the balance AC's have with other weapons such as lasers and missiles.

Or should the magazines only be for the AC2's?

Yes B-2's; 5's; & 10's would gain magazine clips. B-5s would gain 4 clip magazines; & B-10s would gain 2 clip magazine. Leaving the 20 at 1 shot with no magazine. Keep the amount of rounds divisible by 20. If that seems silly something else could be worked in.

Negative what we want to do is use the B-20s to figure out what numbers we need to keep the Ballistics useful but not over power one another. Using the 2's even though the dps might be a little higher after unloading a full clip is a consequence because one needs to be revealed while constantly firing and making contact! Plus they would generate a little more heat since the weapon (B-2) is being fired off so frequently.

It may upset the "balance", but the the way I look at it is you need constant fire + contact unlike missiles and lasers were the duration of contact does not need to be as long.

[Spleenslitta]

Allright. I suggest putting those numbers into the first post.
The only thing that is missing is for a developer to see this. Unfortunatly that has always been the biggest problem.
You must take a very shortened version of this to Twitter and show it to Russ. If he doesn't show an interrest it's all over.

[GrandTyme]

You guys are forgetting to address a very basic item: In the Battletech universe do ballistic weapons use magazines? The answer is no.

Ballistic weapons use an auto-loading system that pulls the ammunition from other areas of the mech in a long curving and twisted skeletal magazine that is not necessarily attached to all ammo reservoirs but allows ammo to feed from the legs up to the hardpoints in the arms. Our modern tanks, APC's, and aircraft use this style of auto-loading system that does not need the assistance of a person or another system to 'reload' the firearm. Now seeing that we are incorporating several ammo reserves located in different areas of the mech we have to assume that the loading system has indipendant loading trakcs for the ammo to feed along. Lets say we adjust how ammo is fed to the weapons. Lets say i have ajager with ac5's on my arms. If i have ammunition located in every part of my mech i have an overly intricate loading system. obviously ammo consumption should start within the same compartment as the weapon but what after that half-ton of ammo in my arm is used up? Next is my side torso. What if there was only a slight delay as my auto-load system adjusts to start pulling ammo along belt to my weapon. I have 3 tons of ammo there and i should be able to chew right through that without having to stop and reload but after its gone my system will have to change again forcing a small 'load' time as the ammunition in my legs is now being funneled up my back to my arms. This way we can increase the rate of fire and still have a reasonable 'loading' function that everyone could agree with.

The M242 Bushmaster used by the US military is a 25mm cannon, equivalent in size to the AC2's. It has a fire rate off 200 rounds per minute with an electronic trigger (the only option for firing weapons in battlemechs) this is 3.3 rounds per second or a shot every 18.18 milliseconds. Why do AC2's, 25mm cannons, have a fire rate of 1 round every 72 milliseconds? This is astonishing slow when compared to modern military equipment.

The L62 Allargato is a 76mm cannon (equal to an ac5 in size) had a firerate of 1 round per second. The AC5 fires a single round every 1.66 seconds.

I propose an increase to the ROF of all AC weapons with the limitation of the slow load changing system i described.

[Spleenslitta]

GrandTyme, on 23 July 2016 - 08:08 PM, said:

I propose an increase to the ROF of all AC weapons with the limitation of the slow load changing system i described.

I do not mean to offend you Grandtyme....seems a lot of people take offence so i said that as a precaution.

You mean the more sections the ammunition is away from the weapon the longer the cooldown or a larger pause after changing to another canister of ammo?
We are trying to specificly improve the AC2's position in comparison to all the other weapons here. True the other the 5 and 10 AC's get more powerfull too through increased fire rate, but the AC2 stands to gain the most.
Many players say it's because of the heat...but that's because they boat the AC2. We're trying to improve the AC2 itself.

The real reason the AC2 is so bad is the 3.6 secs of facetime in order to do 10 damage in comparison to the ER PPC which is of similar weight when you factor in ammo/heatsinks.
ER PPC takes 4 secs to cooldown...that's only a 0.4 secs advantage to the AC2 with very spread damage.

There are players who use the AC2 on mechs that are quirked for it, but they always mount at least 2 of them.
Would you ever use a single AC2 along with other weapons on a mech not quirked for it as things are now? Be honest...

In comparison would you mount a single ER PPC or AC5 along with other weapons on a mech not quirked for it?
I use a single ER PPC on my Kit Fox along with backup weapons constantly....when i tried exchanging the ER PPC for an UAC2 things never turned out well....ever.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 24 July 2016 - 12:52 AM.

[dwwolf]

AC2 > AC 2.5 with corresponding decrease in RoF.
Heat is AC2s biggest problem.

[Spleenslitta]

dwwolf, on 02 August 2016 - 12:24 AM, said:

AC2 > AC 2.5 with corresponding decrease in RoF.
Heat is AC2s biggest problem.

No it isn't. Imagine if you tried to mount a single AC2 into a light mech along with some backup weapons.
Even if that AC2 caused no heat at all it would not be the equal of an ER PPC or any other longrange weapon. Reason?
Because of the long facetime to cause decent damage and the spread of damage. 3.6 seconds shooting at the target to cause 10 damage.

Imagine if we had an ER LL that had to face the target for 3.6 secs to cause 10 damage....that would be the worst weapon in MWO.
But an AC2 doing 10 damage in 1.25 secs for 4 heat is acceptable in my book.

But having said that...everyone has a right to have an opinion. You and me just disagree that's all.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 02 August 2016 - 01:04 AM.

[Fluff My Garfield]

I tend to avoid the smaller ballistics because of 3 things:

• I can't get over the DPS per ton ratio (0.46 for IS AC-2 with Medium lasers sitting pretty at 1.28).
  
• My assessment is that most combat happens under 400m so the 720m range on the AC-2 is extra I don't need or want to pay for with weight, damage, and heat.
  
• Face time, just like you've said, Spleenslitta. I don't play assaults because I don't like being stuck in a spot once the fight starts. I like to poke and move, get that back angle. This means I run lighter things that can't take the face time needed to endure. That, or I'm just a chicken who blinks first.

This all combines to make the AC-2 a heavy, hot, low-damage, face-tanking weapon - in my personal assessment. However, I want to like ballistics and to do that with the AC-2 needs either better damage (RoF unless you're going to change the name of the gun) or less face-time (burst-fire of some description). The problem with these suggestions is, however, that if you give me long enough to tweak this thing it'll end up a Med pulse laser with more range.

In all, I really don't have anything to add to this conversation, I'm realizing so I apologize for those of you who read this. But I spent time at work writing it when I had other things to be doing so I'm going to post it anyway and comfort myself by believing that perhaps the additional view will be useful somehow or that maybe I brought up a good point. I don't know. You guys got this.