27 replies to this topic

[Onyx Rain]

So IMO, LBX-10 has gotten better, but it still could use a little love. I don't think I'm alone in this.

We've seen the idea of allowing them to fire ac10 rounds...the problem is do you allow them to switch on the fly? And how do you do this without making the ac10 pretty much obsolete?

So how about this...
Allow them to switch fire on the fly, BUT.. make it so only a small percentage of their total ammo can be fired as ac10 rounds. I think the simplest way to do this would be to allow every lbx-10 user to load 1 ton of ac10 ammo per 4 tons of total ammo, or a max of 1 ton of ac10 ammo if they have 3 tons total ammo or less. So if you had 4 tons you'd have 3 tons lbx-10...1 ton ac10 (If you wanted it), could select which you wanted to use at will.

Or...
Just make it so each gun can only fire a max of 1 ton of the others ammo. This gives both guns a lil something extra but keeps both viable


If someone has already had this idea...I missed it, sorry. Credit goes to them.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 21 December 2012 - 02:29 PM.

[Sniper061]

I'm glad you are thinking about this problem, but what you propose is too complex.

Here's something simple that might work (I'll make a separate post later after I can think on it)

What about making the weapon have a variable choke? (Shotguns control pellet spread with a "choke")

Basically, you could have a long range and short range setting. Long range setting keeps the pellets in a much tighter ball so that the total spread may be about 1/2-1/4 of what it is currently. However, the tighter spread increases recoil which increases the time between shots by say two seconds (five seconds between shots).

[MustrumRidcully]

Sound a bit too complicated to me.

I think one way to do it would be to make the LB-10 X AC have a slightly lower rate of fire. That means it delivers less DPS, but it has a similar alpha strike capability. If you're going for a brawler build that keeps in combat for a 20+ seconds, the higher DPS weapon becomes more attractive, but if you go for something focused on using the long range, the LB-10 X AC will be more attractive.

I've experimented with trying to find stats that has all weapons balanced around their damage/tonnage efficiency - the idea being that the longer the range of the weapon, the lower its damage/tonnage efficiency.
In this particular case, I eventually went with the weapons having the same cooldown, but having the LB-10 X AC produce more heat, but get a bit more ammo per ton.
(Tonnage in this case does include the cost of ammo and heat sinks.), and this is what I settled for with the AC/10 and LB-10 X AC:

AC/10 (450m range): 10 damage, 0,5 heat, Cooldown: 3 seconds; 25 shots per ton
LB-10 X AC (540m range): 10 damage, 1,2 heat; Cooldown: 3 seconds; 30 shots per ton

There are many ways to balance weapons. I would try to keep the balancing within the "known" mechanics - that would be damage, heat, cooldowns, ammo cost, weapon weight and critical slots.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 04 November 2012 - 02:32 AM.

[Tuku]

I run a dual LBX Catapult and an Atlas with dual LBX..... I will tell you this. I think they are great just as they are.

In the catapult I run around .....fire 2 LBX and the rounds split into 20 pieces 20 crit chances or chances for ammo explosion. Its really the build that will simply steal your kills because it gets in, fires at the guy that you did all the work on, and disappears behind a rock. But that build is just for fun....not really super practical at all.

Now the atlas runs 2 LBX 3 SRM6 and 2 ER LL ....You move in and alphasrike then start firing the LBX over and over interspersing with SRMs every now and again and it works beautifully as a brawler because at close range you are hitting one maybe two torso sections but when you are closing in from 80-100m the LBX and SRMs spread a bit more covering all torso pieces and usually stripping armor down to the point that you can make a hole once you get right up to face hugger range it is fairly simple to make a hole in their armor and scramble the insides that are exposed there.

TL:DR its not a sniper rifle that dose 10 damage, that is what the AC 10 is for.

Having the ability to simply drop both ac10 and LBX ammo into your mechs and switch with a very simple action similar to un-jamming a UAC5 .

Tell me though, how would loading AC10 rounds into an LBX launcher obsolete the AC10. The only thing you get is a bit more range....

Edited by Tuku, 04 November 2012 - 05:11 AM.

[Onyx Rain]

Sniper061, on 04 November 2012 - 12:03 AM, said:

I'm glad you are thinking about this problem, but what you propose is too complex.

Here's something simple that might work (I'll make a separate post later after I can think on it)

What about making the weapon have a variable choke? (Shotguns control pellet spread with a "choke")

Basically, you could have a long range and short range setting. Long range setting keeps the pellets in a much tighter ball so that the total spread may be about 1/2-1/4 of what it is currently. However, the tighter spread increases recoil which increases the time between shots by say two seconds (five seconds between shots).

Well it is canon that it fires both...but I'm not a canon N a z i like some so I can compromise a little...but the potential problem I see with your solution is that you risk making the ac10 obsolete unless you limit the number of shots it can fire tight enough to replicate an ac10's focused damage at a remotely similar range, especially since the lbx is already lighter.

You also still have the issue of having to have some way to switch fire setting, which basically means assigning a key on the keyboard to switch fire settings. Same thing with my plan, so no less complexity there.

Also your plan might require as much or more work to retool the firing characteristics to achieve the desired goal....Honestly don't know, but I think overall your plan is likely just as complex, or almost so, would be trickier to balance just right, risks making the ac10 obsolete, while ac10 ammo, and firing characteristics are already programmed into the game.

All they'd have to do is assign a key to change fire setting and tweak the code to allow you to mix ammo. To be fair, again I don't know for sure if that would be easier or harder then implementing your change to the firing characteristics and assigning a key. Feels like it would be though...close at least.

My plan sticks closer to canon (which does matter to many), limits the potential of of making the ac10 obsolete since you'd be limited in the number of ac10 rounds you could fire. You'd want to save them for the best moments. Makes the weapon more fun to use (IMO at least) and introduces a potential new area of skill, since knowing when and when not to use the ac10 ammo would be important.

You mentioned "known mechanics"... Ac10 and lbx 10 mechanics are both in game already, my method just mixes them...it is a hybrid, that is more lbx10 then ac10 but can shoot like an ac10 a few times. Assigning keys to functions is a known mechanic...could basically work as part of the fire group system.

[Onyx Rain]

MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

Sound a bit too complicated to me.

I think one way to do it would be to make the LB-10 X AC have a slightly lower rate of fire. That means it delivers less DPS, but it has a similar alpha strike capability. If you're going for a brawler build that keeps in combat for a 20+ seconds, the higher DPS weapon becomes more attractive, but if you go for something focused on using the long range, the LB-10 X AC will be more attractive.

I've experimented with trying to find stats that has all weapons balanced around their damage/tonnage efficiency - the idea being that the longer the range of the weapon, the lower its damage/tonnage efficiency.
In this particular case, I eventually went with the weapons having the same cooldown, but having the LB-10 X AC produce more heat, but get a bit more ammo per ton.
(Tonnage in this case does include the cost of ammo and heat sinks.), and this is what I settled for with the AC/10 and LB-10 X AC:

AC/10 (450m range): 10 damage, 0,5 heat, Cooldown: 3 seconds; 25 shots per ton
LB-10 X AC (540m range): 10 damage, 1,2 heat; Cooldown: 3 seconds; 30 shots per ton

There are many ways to balance weapons. I would try to keep the balancing within the "known" mechanics - that would be damage, heat, cooldowns, ammo cost, weapon weight and critical slots.

If you have even moderately good aim the ac10 is overall the better weapon at all ranges. Say you roll up behind a mech 20-40m away fire dual Lbx 10's into its back...sure MOST but probably NOT ALL that damage is going to hit that back CT, now do the same with 2 ac10's....you are far more likely to put all that damage in the back ct.

The only advantage of the LBX-10 now is if your aim is a little off you still put some dmg on target....and that is useful for hitting faster mechs and/or in tight turning battles, and it is 1 ton lighter....That's pretty much it except more chances at a crit...but the crits and may or may not occur at the most useful time in battle and/or place on the mech. I think people overestimate the value of lbx-10 crits...just like they did when they thought machine guns were going to be crit monsters.

Ac10's for anyone who can half-way shoot straight are actually the more optimal weapon at all ranges in the vast majority of situations(and they still need a small buff IMO). In fact I'd bet that at the max range of the LBX-10, an ac10 shot if it hits still does more dmg then whatever pellets manages to hit the target most times from an lbx-10 at its max range.

IMO, Your idea actually sounds like a nerf to a gun that I think very few people feel needs to be nerfed. Also it seem to be more of a buff for the ac10 then then the lbx-10. I would agree that the ac10 could also use a slight buff of some type.

Anyways...
Lbx 10 is fun/looks cool and it may have longer range, but if you've ever fired one you should know that after about half way to 2/3rds through the range the spread is so large that the dmg it actually puts on target is crap. The ac10 for most range/most damage on target is almost always the better weapon...especially if you are aiming at a specific spot on the target...and that ability can make a huge difference in how effective you are in battle.

It also doesn't address the issue that it is canon that lbx-10 can fire both types of ammo. Which while not the end all be all to me...does matter to a lot of people...to some degree.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 04 November 2012 - 05:48 AM.

[Lazy Eye]

Interesting...

Canonically, the LBX DOES make the AC/10 all-but-obsolete. Remember: LBX-10 is an advanced tech weapon (Star League vs. standard IS), so you're comparing apples and oranges, just as if you were comparing IS vs. Clan tech.

The only remaining "advantage" of the standard, is the ability to fire specialist ammo types, such as Flak, AP & Precision... but given that, in the current iteration of the TT rules, the only one of these that actually has a benefit is Flak and there are no aircraft in MWO...

IMO, LBX should get all the benefits/advantages of canon (including switchable ammo types), but this should be 'compensated' for, by introducing switchable ammo types for the standard AC. This would mean that, in general, the LBX is 'just better', but in some situations, the standard has an edge.

[Onyx Rain]

Tuku, on 04 November 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

I run a dual LBX Catapult and an Atlas with dual LBX..... I will tell you this. I think they are great just as they are.

In the catapult I run around .....fire 2 LBX and the rounds split into 20 pieces 20 crit chances or chances for ammo explosion. Its really the build that will simply steal your kills because it gets in, fires at the guy that you did all the work on, and disappears behind a rock. But that build is just for fun....not really super practical at all.

Now the atlas runs 2 LBX 3 SRM6 and 2 ER LL ....You move in and alphasrike then start firing the LBX over and over interspersing with SRMs every now and again and it works beautifully as a brawler because at close range you are hitting one maybe two torso sections but when you are closing in from 80-100m the LBX and SRMs spread a bit more covering all torso pieces and usually stripping armor down to the point that you can make a hole once you get right up to face hugger range it is fairly simple to make a hole in their armor and scramble the insides that are exposed there.

TL:DR its not a sniper rifle that dose 10 damage, that is what the AC 10 is for.

Having the ability to simply drop both ac10 and LBX ammo into your mechs and switch with a very simple action similar to un-jamming a UAC5 .

Tell me though, how would loading AC10 rounds into an LBX launcher obsolete the AC10. The only thing you get is a bit more range....

I think they've improved lbx-10...I'll agree with anyone who says the weapon is viable...but I think it could still use work, and according to canon it can fire both...and I think that would be fun.

How it could make the ac10 obsolete though is, if an Lbx-10 is 1 ton lighter, has the same amount of ammo...same heat, or less...and you can fire it as many times as in that ac10 mode as you could in lbx-10 mode then there is basically no reason to ever carry an ac10. You could just set your lbx-10 to ac10 fire mode and run with a gun that is 1 ton lighter and shoots exactly the same. Oh and lbx-10 is 2 heat, ac10 is 3 heat so if they don't switch the heat with the fire mode you'd actually have a gun 1 ton lighter, 1 less heat and does exactly the same thing as an ac10...even the same amount of ammo and rof.

Dual lbx-10's are viable brawlers...I've used them, but I went back to gauss because overall being able to put that dmg exactly where I wanted it seemed to be getting me more kills even though it was 5 less total damage with a longer refresh time. Maybe others have a different experience...but that was mine.

The lbx-10 has gotten more love then the ac10 as far as tweaks...it needed it. I think the ac10 definitely needs some love too...but there is still room for the lbx-10 to do what it is supposed to according to canon, make the gun more fun....but by limiting the number of times you can fire it like an ac10 and keep the ac10 itself viable (especially if it gets some love).

I can't really understand why anyone, even those who think the lbx 10 is fine right now wouldn't want the option to switch fire modes in a way that doesn't make having the ac10 in game pointless. Lbx-10 still wouldn't be OP with this change...it would just be more versatile and have a slight weight advantage. In fact the better dmg even at range on a specific area in most situations prize would still go to the ac10. And that wins fights....winning more fights generally means winning more battles = ac10 the better overall weapon right now, and probably should be since it is heavier with more heat. Leaves room for lbx-10 to do what it is supposed to do.

[Onyx Rain]

Lazy Eye, on 04 November 2012 - 05:43 AM, said:

Interesting...

Canonically, the LBX DOES make the AC/10 all-but-obsolete. Remember: LBX-10 is an advanced tech weapon (Star League vs. standard IS), so you're comparing apples and oranges, just as if you were comparing IS vs. Clan tech.

The only remaining "advantage" of the standard, is the ability to fire specialist ammo types, such as Flak, AP & Precision... but given that, in the current iteration of the TT rules, the only one of these that actually has a benefit is Flak and there are no aircraft in MWO...

IMO, LBX should get all the benefits/advantages of canon (including switchable ammo types), but this should be 'compensated' for, by introducing switchable ammo types for the standard AC. This would mean that, in general, the LBX is 'just better', but in some situations, the standard has an edge.

True...but for the sake of gameplay...
Lbx-10 being lighter and generally made to do spread damage should give way to the ac10 as the better overall weapon at least in dmg to a specific target at most ranges in most situations. The advantage of the lbx-10 should be versatility, less heat at least in lbx mode and and less weight...ac10 the better weapon in raw power across most if not all ranges...assuming you don't miss.

That is why the most important part of my idea is to limit ac10 shots out of the lbx-10 to some degree, like a max of 1 ton of ac10 ammo for an LBX-10, the rest must be lbx ammo....If it can fire every shot like an ac10...no reason for the ac10 to exist. This way we get both, both have advantages/disadvantages and canon is respected.

Now ...
vise/versa if you wanna make the ac10 able to shoot a max of 1 ton lbx ammo...I'm fine with that. That would actually IMO, make both guns more fun, more useful, respect canon, and still give the edge to the heavier/hotter weapon as being the overall best weapon in most situations.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 04 November 2012 - 07:14 AM.

[Tuku]

Ya know the LBX is just the better weapon.....it can do more and is lighter....why dose it matter if the AC10 is obsolete anyway?

[wanderer]

Not as hard as people make this, seriously.

1) Let the LB-10X fire solid or cluster ammo. Fix cluster ammo so it does what it should- heads towards target, explodes into submunitions when near enemy 'Mech, boom. Like an SRM salvo that starts it's spread at the same range every time, regardless of how long it takes to get to that point.

2) Give the LB-10X a slower fire rate than the AC/10 (and later, UAC/10). Give the AC/10 a slightly better ammo/ton rating as well.

People then have reasons to use either one. LB's will give you the crit-seeking option, standard AC's the ability to fire faster for higher DPS.

[Butane9000]

I voted no. If you want to use AC10 rounds do so using an AC10. I do expect them to add various special ammo to the LBX-10 in time.

I myself use a LBX-10 on my founders Hunchback and am currently really enjoying it.

[Onyx Rain]

Butane9000, on 04 November 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

I voted no. If you want to use AC10 rounds do so using an AC10. I do expect them to add various special ammo to the LBX-10 in time.

I myself use a LBX-10 on my founders Hunchback and am currently really enjoying it.

Butane9000, on 04 November 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

I voted no. If you want to use AC10 rounds do so using an AC10. I do expect them to add various special ammo to the LBX-10 in time.

I myself use a LBX-10 on my founders Hunchback and am currently really enjoying it.

Special ammo other then the ac10 rounds? According to sarna they can fire HEAP... I'm guessing the High Explosive, Armor-Piercing kind, and anit-mech cluster rounds. The anti-mech cluster round are basically what the LBX 10 is firing now...if they aren't they still have pretty close to the same form/function.

On to heap...
Ok a heap round is basically what an ac10 fires now according to sarna.... It pierces with a pop doing nice very focused damage to a specific spot. Essentially what a heap should do. Ok so we have our heap round.for the lxb -10 and the gun is supposed to be able to fire these. But you don't want it to? even if it is only a few and the rest must be standard lbx 10 rounds? why would anyone not want that option? Switching to ac10 rounds would make a head shot on a shutdown mech much easier....the lbx ammo spread so much you wont get much focused dmg on the head.

Are you proposing that the devs just ignore heap, the second shell type for lbx and only allow it fire current lbx and mech cluster roundand maybe have the devs iinvent some new shell types? I guess they could do homing bullets or something...basically making it strk cannon. Or is there source material somewhere that says these gun in this time frame should be able to fire such and such shell types other then the heap and cluster round I've already listed? love to see it.

.

Well in game the ac10 type shell would basically be heap or functionally equivalent ... the cluster rounds are basically equivalent to the way the Lbx works now. Not a lot you can do with the shells and stick close to canon other then essentially make one do focused dmg, and another do spread damage.

So what more special ammo could they add? Is there more stuff this gun is supposed to fire in bt canon?

I'm really confused here...
How can you not want your gun to be potentially more versatile? I'm not proposing you have to use some ac10 rounds only that you could be allowed to carry 1 ton or some percentage of the total ammo you carry as ac10 rounds that the lbx can fire...you don't have to though.

And if you don't the proposed key on the keyboard won't do anything so your Lbx will be like it is now...You want pure LBX, you get pure Lbx.

If like me....You want the gun in a form that respects bt canon, by firing the 2 different shell types, doesn't make it OP and doesn't render the ac10 itself obsolete (because it can only fire a few ac10 shots) then you get that choice....push the key, and select the preferred fire mode for those battle circumstances. Both guns remain viable and worth having in game. Pure ac10 for best raw dmg on target with the ability to focus that dmg on secondary target sections. More punch were you need it, and at long range probably more then you'd get with a few lbx pellets hitting randomly on the target at its max range.

lbx's advantages over ac10-- would be lighter,run cooler at least in lbx mode, able to fire a few rounds of ac10 ammo. JUST A FEW.

Ac10 more direct raw dmg at respectable range....basically better in almost every situation if you have decent aim. So basically the best if not the most fun shoot. And should be the best because it weighs more and runs hotter. It couldn't have the same flair I guess...but overall, in most situations with moderately decent aim it will kill a mech dead and save you before lbx 10 will. But lbx 10 can damage multiple mechs at once, and is good for hitting fast movers and enemies in circle strafing fights...but beyond 200m sure it will hit but won't hit like an ac10

So you get both guns, both working as they do now...only the lbx would be able to fire a few ac10 rounds, but mostly still lbx rounds. Another tool in your tool box, and it won't tear down the ac10 because it is overall the better weapon in most situation. So really why don't you people want this...you get everything you have now, plus new fun features that are optional and get it all guilt free because we keep the ac10 viable...hell I like the idea of lettingi it shoot a few lbx round through it.

I'm offering you your cake, and telling you yes....you can eat it too! IT is win/win for us all. You don't have to use the feature but it is there, and it doesn't make one gun OP compared to the other. even respects cannon....what more could anyone reasonably ask for?

I'm glad you like it on your hunchie, but it could be more and at no cost to the viability of the ac10 especially if you make the ac10 capable of shooting a few lbx rounds itself.

Make a button put them in game like this and you'll thank me the first time you shotgun a mech and realize there is very little chance your next lbx will kill it, so switch to ac10 fire...bam...dropped him like a rock...or you're running an ac10 getting harrassed by a jenner and your aim is off, he is hurt.but so are you....switch to lbx fire to help ensure a few good hits at least even if it will be spread out dmg....bam, dropped him on that last pass just before he could fire again while you may have missed with ac10 ammo.
Best of both worlds but with limitations to keep both viable without either becoming OP, totally optional feature ....and respects canon. Seriously don't get the resistance to a win/win system like this

Edited by Onyx Rain, 04 November 2012 - 08:46 PM.

[Onyx Rain]

Bump because I think it deserves a second look.

[HlynkaCG]

I think people are all over-thinking this.

If we start with the basic premise that the LBX is essentially a mech-scale shotgun shouldn't we treat it's ammo like we would shotgun ammo? There's shot (what we have now), and there's slugs. The pros and cons of both have already been discussed, but even the highest quality shotgun firing premium sabot slugs is not going to match the range, accuracy, or muzzle-velocity of a proper rifle.

Therefore the solution to me seems obvious, if we want to keep the standard AC viable simply give it's rounds greater range or velocity, than the LBX's slugs.

The LBX remains the brawler's weapon of choice while the AC retains some advantages for those who tend to engage at range.

Edited by HlynkaCG, 24 November 2012 - 12:18 AM.

[ebea51]

The LB 10-X is fine the way it is.
Its ment to be a short-range shotgun - if you want point-damage, fit a AC10.

The LB 10-X wouldnt even be able to fire a AC10 round - Thats like trying to fire a .303 round in a shotgun... would never work!

[Deadoon]

ebea51, on 24 November 2012 - 12:30 AM, said:

The LB 10-X is fine the way it is.
Its ment to be a short-range shotgun - if you want point-damage, fit a AC10.

The LB 10-X wouldnt even be able to fire a AC10 round - Thats like trying to fire a .303 round in a shotgun... would never work!

Dude, the lbx has a longer effective range than the ac/10, but it cannot use it due to the spread of the rounds, and that it is missing the capability to fire regular ac/10 rounds.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/LB_10-X

Quote

LB-X Autocannons are able to use either the special cluster rounds or standard autocannon rounds.

Also man portable shotguns are meant to be accurate to 50 meters(around 2 hex in battle tech terms)

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Mossberg_500

Quote

Effective range 40 m
Maximum range 50m for shot, 300m for slugs

This shotgun is easily 10 times the size, just because it is a shotgun doesn't mean that the bullets are going to exit the barrel at 15 degree angles.

Edited by Deadoon, 24 November 2012 - 04:08 AM.

[Ragor]

I just stay with my concept:
- Different kinds of ammunition ('buckshot', AC/10 shells, HE shells, HEAT shells and proximity shells)
- for 'buckshot': by far less spread, double the number of pellets dealing half the damage per pellet (instead of 10@1 -> 20 @0.5)

[Deadoon]

Ragor, on 24 November 2012 - 05:29 AM, said:

I just stay with my concept:
- Different kinds of ammunition ('buckshot', AC/10 shells, HE shells, HEAT shells and proximity shells)
- for 'buckshot': by far less spread, double the number of pellets dealing half the damage per pellet (instead of 10@1 -> 20 @0.5)

Each of those would make sense, however the problem would be how would you differentiate ac/10 and heat shells?

[Strum Wealh]

Quote

Q: Will we be able to switch between cluster ammo and slugs with LB-X autocannons? [DerMaulwurf]
A: We plan to have this functionality eventually, but currently it is not available. Who doesn't want lots of different Ammo types, right? [GARTH]

(source)

Quote

Q: Will alternate ammunition like Inferno missiles be available for missile systems and autocannons? [Solis Obscuri]
A: I believe this is the third time I'll have answered this, but yes, there will be alternate ammunition sources at some point, though they'll be later in development. [Garth]

(source)

From the above, we can see that there are plans to (eventually) bring in the LB-Xs' ability to use both slug (which are technically different from - and canonically much more expensive than - standard (HEAP) AC munitions of the same damage class) and cluster (that is, shotshell) rounds, as well as the special munitions for Standard ACs and alternate ammunition types for the missile launchers.

However, neither of the above AtD sessions indicates how mid-match utilization of multiple ammo types will be implemented.

Normally, both types of LB-X munition were allotted in full-ton increments - to use both, one required both a full ton of slugs and a full ton of cluster rounds.
The result for the LB 10-X would be a consumption of 13 tons and 8 criticals for 20 salvos (10 slug, 10 cluster) at 540 meters, with a total cost of 432,000 c-bills (32,000 of which is ammunition).
By contrast, a "poor man's LB 10-X" (that is, a Standard AC/10 with one ton of standard (HEAP) rounds and one ton of flak rounds) would consume 14 tons and 9 criticals for 20 salvos (10 HEAP, 10 flak) at 450 meters, with a total cost of 212,000-218,000 c-bills (12,000-18,000 of which is ammunition, assuming flak rounds cost 1.0-1.5 times as much as standard (HEAP) rounds).

That said, I disagree with the OP's suggestion regarding forced slug/cluster ratios - very few canon 'Mechs that mount LB-X ACs carry enough ammo to do what the OP proposes, and there is little/no justifiable reason why a customized 'Mech that a player wants to carry slugs and cluster rounds in a 1:1 ratio (or a 2:3 ratio, or a 5:4 ratio, and so on) would or should be prevented from doing so.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 24 November 2012 - 06:11 AM.