56 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

As many of us may know, the Armed Forces of the Federated Suns (AFFS) has long demonstrated a preference and affinity for the autocannon (AC), dating to the introduction of the Suns' second homegrown BattleMech, the venerable HMH-3D Hammerhands, in 2475.

From various gameplay and showcasing videos, we know that typical autocannons in MechWarrior Online fire single shells, in the style of field guns, howitzers, and other large real-world artillery weapons.

In Ask the Devs 10, it was stated that there are plans to have LB-X ACs be able to use both standard (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing, or HEAP) shells and cluster/shot shells.

In Ask the Devs 14, it was stated that there are plans to have Ultra ACs be able to have some form of ROF/mode-switching.

Presumably, the response in Ask the Devs 10 may also lead to Standard ACs (and, if/when, Light ACs) eventually having access to some of the "special munitions" available to them in the BattleTech table top game.
(Though, the only munition types available prior to 3050 are Standard/HEAP, Flak, Incendiary, and Tracer rounds. Additionally, as of 3050 only Standard ACs are able to make use of such munitions.)

Presumably, the response in Ask the Devs 14 may also lead to Rotary ACs (if/when implemented) also being able to feature some form of ROF adjustment.

And so, I put forth the question: what is the preferred AC type of MWO's AFFS (or, rather, Suns-affiliated AFFC) units, allies and affiliates of the AFFS/AFFC, and anyone else who wishes to take part in the discussion? Why?

Also: for those who intend to play as Faction players in AFFS (or, rather, Suns-affiliated AFFC) units or as members of Mercenary Corporations allied with the Suns, do you expect to mirror the AFFS' traditional preference and affinity for the AC - perhaps enough so to make it your primary/go-to weapon system? Why or why not?

Additionally: for those AC types there more than one munition type may eventually become available, what are the preferred munition loads of MWO's AFFS (or, rather, Suns-affiliated AFFC) units, allies and affiliates of the AFFS/AFFC, and anyone else who wishes to take part in the discussion? Why?

Also, please be mindful of the NDA...

Edited by Strum Wealh, 11 September 2012 - 04:40 PM.

[Korin Orrel]

I have loved the AC for years now. It takes some gunnery skills, but there is nothing like a giant cannon blasting away at an enemy 'Mech. If only they were lighter...

[dusted]

UAC all the way. You burn through ammo but it just means you have to make your shots count, and bring plenty of munitions. I've always choose the uac in the past, and I see no reason to change now.

[Xavier Murphy]

I haven't made it into the closed Beta yet, but what I remember of the TT games I played long ago leaves me with a warm, bloodthirsty feeling for the ac/20. I absolutely loved slipping close to long range mechs like archers & awesomes with a dragon modified to carry an ac/20 and plenty of ammo . I voted "no" on planning to use the ac as my primary weapon because the short range brawler is usually my backup mech. I prefer longer ranged mechs in general, and absolutely love the gauss rifle. I look forward to seeing everyone in game soon!

[Strum Wealh]

Keep the votes and responses coming!

-----

For circa-3049 ACs, I personally prefer the LB 10-X - hard-hitting with range that complements that of the PPC (one of my personal favorites), good flexibility with the two ammo types (the ability to use the cluster rounds to exploit openings produced by said HEAP shells, as well as from lancemates' fire),and a great damage-to-heat ratio at a not-reasonable weight.
The main downside is the canonical pricetag (weapon + 1 ton of Standard ammo + 1 ton of cluster ammo = 432,000 c-bills).

For 3057+ ACs, I personally prefer the RAC/2 - the range complements those of the LB 10-X, PPC, AC-5, and UAC/5, the heat build-up is moderate, the canonical price is much lower than the LB 10-X (weapon + 4 tons of ammo = 187,000 c-bills), and the on-demand ability to deliver controlled rapid-fire bursts at such ranges while harder-hitting and slower-cycling complementary weapons (LB 10-X, PPC) are readying for another salvo are very good characteristics. Besides, who doesn't like 30+ mm Gatling guns?
Though, it is canonically incompatible with the AC special munitions.

As for whether I could/would make ACs my primary weapon of choice, I don't know at this time - it depends on whether I can get by my own long-standing affinity for PPCs (which, from what I've read, seem to be as much "the Combine's weapon" as ACs are "the FedSuns' weapon"), how the heat scale actually behaves, and how the weapons themselves actually behave (most notably, with regard to ROF).

[Armored Yokai]

My Favorite autocannon is the one that kills davions XP

[Jukebox1986]

RAC all the way if possible. Like both, the 2´ and the 5´, but voted the 2´ because of its range.

Edited by Janus Wealth, 21 September 2012 - 10:36 AM.

[Verdun]

I chose rotary cannons because I'm fond of rapid fire.

[acefalcon]

AC's are good weapons, biggest are the best. With Ultra-20 one can kill with a style! But LB-X 10 is a reasonably universal gun, especially when some enemy tanks are at your LoS)))

[TheRuntMan]

LB 10-X AC I really like. I wasn't a big fan of it in MW4 because it wasn't really much of a huge shotgun, but in MWO it is total beast.

[Evinthal]

Right now I am favoring the AC/10 for MW:O.

In the miniatures game I am very fond of the RAC/5, so much so that I am just a few Ajax Assault Tanks away from a battalion...and like a Mantueffel.

[NPComplete]

I voted for ultra ac5, rotary ac5, and I don't know. I do like autocannons a lot, but it depends how effective they will be in game for me to use them.

[DieselCat]

I have a some what general idea of what is being polled, but can't tell or really know what they are except that there differences in power and damage.
I have to become more familiar with being able to match up the best suited AC for the type of mech it's used on.
Try to get the best "bang for the buck" sort of speak.

^^Why is there no color choice in the settings above ?....

*+

[Ansen Mallory]

Even though I'm a FedSuns/Davion through and through, the autocannon has always been an off primary for me. I'm more of a missile man myself. When I do go autocannon primary I always go for a heavy hitter in the AC/20 class, prefering in the later editions for the ultra. But the ability to strike hard and over a large swath of the opponent and from range, and -then- be able to open them up like a can of beans when in the thick of it, that is an advantage I have never been able to shake myself of.

[Scarlett Avignon]

I'd like to see ultra and rotary autocannon RoF be adjusted simply by fire discipline. Let UAC's be capable of twice the RoF at all times and simply put in a jamming chance if you exceed standard rate. Seems that's how it would work in real conditions.

[Strum Wealh]

Franklen Avignon, on 24 September 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

I'd like to see ultra and rotary autocannon RoF be adjusted simply by fire discipline. Let UAC's be capable of twice the RoF at all times and simply put in a jamming chance if you exceed standard rate. Seems that's how it would work in real conditions.

Personally, I had thought of UACs as a take on the "Gast Gun" concept.

"The [Gast gun] uses two barrels combined into a single mechanism in such a way that the recoil from firing one barrel loads and charges the second. Ammunition was fed into the gun from two vertically mounted cylindrical drums, one on each side of the gun."


One modern example of the Gast gun being the Russian-built Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23.
"The GSh-23 works on the Gast gun principle developed by German engineer Karl Gast of the Vorwerk company in 1916. It is a twin-barreled weapon in which the firing action of one barrel operates the mechanism of the other. It provides a much faster rate of fire for lower mechanical wear than a single-barrel weapon, although it cannot match the rate of fire of an electric Gatling gun like the M61 Vulcan."


Furthermore, I would think that "Standard ROF mode" would represent a safer and more reliable mode of operation would be maintained by some sort of limiter built into the arming circuitry and fire control systems, while "Ultra mode" would double the rate of fire and could be achieved by disengaging the aforementioned limiter but risks jamming and/or damaging the gun.

By contrast, the RACs would be based on the Gatling gun/rotary cannon concept and would have a greater number of firing modes (standard ROF, 2x ROF, 4x ROF, and 6x ROF), but would be otherwise similar in operation/usage to the similarly-sized UACs.

Your thoughts?

[Assault One]

As an Assault Mech pilot I always want to fit the largest caliber AC possible on my ride. So it's standard AC/20 for now (3049) and the Ultra version when its available.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Strum Wealh, on 25 September 2012 - 03:51 AM, said:

Personally, I had thought of UACs as a take on the "Gast Gun" concept.

"The [Gast gun] uses two barrels combined into a single mechanism in such a way that the recoil from firing one barrel loads and charges the second. Ammunition was fed into the gun from two vertically mounted cylindrical drums, one on each side of the gun."


One modern example of the Gast gun being the Russian-built Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23.
"The GSh-23 works on the Gast gun principle developed by German engineer Karl Gast of the Vorwerk company in 1916. It is a twin-barreled weapon in which the firing action of one barrel operates the mechanism of the other. It provides a much faster rate of fire for lower mechanical wear than a single-barrel weapon, although it cannot match the rate of fire of an electric Gatling gun like the M61 Vulcan."


Furthermore, I would think that "Standard ROF mode" would represent a safer and more reliable mode of operation would be maintained by some sort of limiter built into the arming circuitry and fire control systems, while "Ultra mode" would double the rate of fire and could be achieved by disengaging the aforementioned limiter but risks jamming and/or damaging the gun.

By contrast, the RACs would be based on the Gatling gun/rotary cannon concept and would have a greater number of firing modes (standard ROF, 2x ROF, 4x ROF, and 6x ROF), but would be otherwise similar in operation/usage to the similarly-sized UACs.

Your thoughts?

It could work that way, but I think it would go more along with their core game concept of player skill being most important if ultra type weapons had to be manually limited by the player.

[Fischkopp]

all the way standard AC20...i like it massive!
don´t know why, but i dont need the ultra Version of it. Standard AC 20 is perfect for me, in all timelines

[Sir Roland MXIII]

AC2, RAC2, and Yes.

AC2 because it's been fun to snipe from outside LRM range, though MW:O looks to keep available firing ranges short via terrain, which may bum me out a bit. Will see once I get in to beta.

RAC2 because only thing better than having sniper range is having something approaching sniper range with a high ROF. Historically, the Browning has been remarked upon in the Vietnam conflict as being a combination like this, a tripod mounted automatic machine sniper rifle of sorts. So looking at post Clan Invasion era ACs that is the type of weapon I would have to go with personally, sounds fun! Never used it in the tabletop - well, yet anyways - so will be fun to try something relatively new. Plus the highly amusing idea of attempting to stitch a smiley face into some one elses mech at extreme range can not be done with any other weapon I am aware of!*

Yes I plan to use ACs as main / primary weapons. Nothing beats the absolute visceral joy of sending shells downrange, although missiles are almost as much fun. In TT BattleTech and in FPS games as well, I've always enjoyed using a certain panache of long range warfare, although this is not to say I dislike point blank range. Just that one can take more pride from hitting a target from extreme distance, really.

~Sir Roland

* Attempting this at close range, well, that's what the Medium Lasers will be for...

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 29 September 2012 - 09:44 PM.