133 replies to this topic

[Braggart]

Thontor, on 28 February 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

You can't compare them like that... Because the PPCs need a lot more tonnage worth of heat sinks so in reality you need a lot more than just the 14 tons of the PPCs themselves to make them viable.. Because if you don't have that extra tonnage put into heat sinks, the AC/10 is going to out damage your two PPCs pretty quickly while you wait for the heat to go down.

No, you seem to think that all people do is fire nonstop in this game. That is false. you take a few shots use cover, etc. If you are brawling with ppc or ac10, you are doing it wrong.

Also, it doesnt take many double heatsinks to maintain a your heat level. 2 PPCs is not much, barely different from having 2 large lasers on your mech. ER is much different, that difference is just skill though.

I run 2 PPC on my dragon and hunches all the time, and consistantly do 500+ damage a match, its all about playing smart. Playing smart is playing to the strengths of your weapons and mech.


AC10 is garbage, only a heavy or higher should even think about it.

You are tying so much tonnage up in a weapon that is dealing meh damage by itself, you need other weapons to support it. Those weapons are gonna be what? Medium lasers, which puts you in brawler range. Since you are in brawler range, why not take something that actually brawls, like the ac20 for just a tad more weight. This only goes for 60 ton or lower mechs. Heavier mechs have plenty of room to spare to mount good laser or missle weaponry and a heavier ballistic weapons.

2 PPC packs plenty of punch for a medium or lighter mech that isnt focused on brawling.

Edited by Braggart, 28 February 2013 - 09:18 AM.

[Zaptruder]

I use AC10s extensively through my Dragons and Centurions.

In those mechs, they're the optimal weapons due to several circumstances including

- refire time
- heat
- damage
- range
- 'popability'
- ammo count

That is, they work very well with a combination of lasers and missles; you can work 2 AC10s into a weapon rotation; AC10/MLs/AC10/SRMs - repeat.

They run quite cool, allowing for few heat sinks, they only need a couple tons of ammo to last the entire match...

And they're excellent weapons for pop and shooting at long range. You can pop and shoot as quickly as you can step in and out of cover.

Still, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing them buffed; but then again, I already think they're great, underrated weapons, as evidenced by a great number of posts in this thread.

[Mavairo]

Braggart, on 28 February 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

No, you seem to think that all people do is fire nonstop in this game. That is false. you take a few shots use cover, etc. If you are brawling with ppc or ac10, you are doing it wrong.

Also, it doesnt take many double heatsinks to maintain a your heat level. 2 PPCs is not much, barely different from having 2 large lasers on your mech. ER is much different, that difference is just skill though.

I run 2 PPC on my dragon and hunches all the time, and consistantly do 500+ damage a match, its all about playing smart. Playing smart is playing to the strengths of your weapons and mech.


AC10 is garbage, only a heavy or higher should even think about it.

You are tying so much tonnage up in a weapon that is dealing meh damage by itself, you need other weapons to support it. Those weapons are gonna be what? Medium lasers, which puts you in brawler range. Since you are in brawler range, why not take something that actually brawls, like the ac20 for just a tad more weight. This only goes for 60 ton or lower mechs. Heavier mechs have plenty of room to spare to mount good laser or missle weaponry and a heavier ballistic weapons.

2 PPC packs plenty of punch for a medium or lighter mech that isnt focused on brawling.

So tell me, between the AC10 2LLs and SRm6 build
vs the AC2, 2PPCs and SRM6

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d973480fe42f891
PPCs

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...a8cdcf3f86fe058
AC10

what exactly does the PPC build do better other than long arm engagements? (and that's debatable) It heats up faster, it's less capable of shots of opportunity (where you are at high heat, and you see a near dead target, either while engaged, or while out of combat) it's less apt at taking out light mechs. It's just as fast.

So for giggles I changed the setup. Dropped the AC2 to slap in an XL350 and loaded it up with another Heat sink or two.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...75b3fa286c6924c and it's -still- worse. Let alone the fact that now you've just put all the eggs in one basket.
God help you once someone takes your arm off. Because then you've got just an SRM6 and 104kph speed on your side.

2 PPCs are great on mechs that have alot of spare tonnage and weapon slots. When you start getting into Limited Weapon Slots (such as any dragon chassis and a few other mechs besides) the AC10 starts to really pick up appeal.

You can talk "oh you don't fire constantly" all you want, but the point is in a match when I'm moving at full tilt 24/7 I'm almost constantly taking shots at someone, either with the AC10 or the LLs even if it's just a shot on the run. PPCs don't have that reliability. There are too many situations where realistically the twin PPCs unless you go ER is a liability. (and then the ERs become a problem for being heat hogs. for an effective range gain that's minimally used on maps outside of Alpine)

Look if you can't aim that's fine, and a PPC is just the thing you need (2 is far too many though on a Dragon especially) so you can burst but not have to worry about ammunition. But for those of us that can aim?

You might hit 500 regularly. But with my AC10 5N I regularly hit 700 to 800 damage. I bag anywhere from 2 to 4 targets. The average is 3 bags and 3 assists. Or if I only get credit for 2 kills I bag 6 assists. One of those splashes, is usually a light mech that figured he could just out run the big old heavy staring him in the face.

Edited by Mavairo, 28 February 2013 - 09:31 AM.

[Spinning Burr]

I just played around with AC10s on Muromets and 3D after reading all the responses. Started with 3 AC10s. It was amusing. Moved to 2 AC10's and 2 PPC's to be more effective. Finally, switched out to the AC10's to 2 UAC5's. I gave it another chance, but I just don't see how AC10's are better than an equal number of UAC5's. I might even choose the UAC5's if they were identical weight to AC10's (esp if that got rid of jamming). But at 3 whole tons saving per gun, I just don't see it. Those 3 tons more than supply you with the extra ammo you need to buy per gun.

Edited by Spinning Burr, 28 February 2013 - 09:30 AM.

[Braggart]

Zaptruder, on 28 February 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

I use AC10s extensively through my Dragons and Centurions.

In those mechs, they're the optimal weapons due to several circumstances including

- refire time
- heat
- damage
- range
- 'popability'
- ammo count

That is, they work very well with a combination of lasers and missles; you can work 2 AC10s into a weapon rotation; AC10/MLs/AC10/SRMs - repeat.

They run quite cool, allowing for few heat sinks, they only need a couple tons of ammo to last the entire match...

And they're excellent weapons for pop and shooting at long range. You can pop and shoot as quickly as you can step in and out of cover.

Still, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing them buffed; but then again, I already think they're great, underrated weapons, as evidenced by a great number of posts in this thread.

you arent building that cent. So that leaves a dragon, the only 1 with 2 center missile slots. Which the only viable build for that thing is to focus on SRM and support it with other weapons. Instead of the AC10, you could take 2 Large pulse. This would be so much better of a build my friend. That AC10 is killing your mech.

[Corvus Antaka]

The AC10 could maybe stand a .5 recycle time improvement and the LBX needs some oomph, perhaps a cycle time improvement of 1 second on the LBX would make it much more fearful in close. imho the spread of the LBX 10 could use a little tightening still as well.

[Spinning Burr]

I guess since I started the thread comparing AC10 to PPC/ER PPC, let me now say that in apples to apples comparison, UAC5 is a better weapon at significantly less weight and space. Comparing apples to oranges, PPC is a better weapon at significantly less weight, space, and ammo.

[CodeNameValtus]

Roland, on 27 February 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

Hey, at least it's better than the LBX10.

Lies! LB-10X is the BEST Ballistic weapon in the game.

[Mavairo]

Spinning Burr, on 28 February 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

I just played around with AC10s on Muromets and 3D after reading all the responses. Started with 3 AC10s. It was amusing. Moved to 2 AC10's and 2 PPC's to be more effective. Finally, switched out to the AC10's to 2 UAC5's. I gave it another chance, but I just don't see how AC10's are better than an equal number of UAC5's. I might even choose the UAC5's if they were identical weight to AC10's (esp if that got rid of jamming). But at 3 whole tons saving per gun, I just don't see it. Those 3 tons more than supply you with the extra ammo you need to buy per gun.

And you have 10 tons to play with more than a dragon gets It also has more reliable hard points. 2 UAC5s are better than a pair of AC10s, but they cost 2 more tons, and more hard points. AC10s (and to a lesser extent AC5s) are for mechs where all of the ballistic points are in one hard point.

the UAC5 is a great weapon for the muromets and the vomitt kitty because they can be in an engagement longer than a faster mech. You also have the luxury of having weapon system redundancy since they are in different locations on the body rather than stuffed together.

For a hunchie, or Dragon I'd go AC10 long before I'd touch a UAC5 specifically because of those reasons. When you start relying on your superior speed to survive sustaining dps can become a chore if it's not a hit scan weapon like a laser is.

[Braggart]

Mavairo, on 28 February 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

So tell me, between the AC10 2LLs and SRm6 build
vs the AC2, 2PPCs and SRM6

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d973480fe42f891
PPCs

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...a8cdcf3f86fe058
AC10

what exactly does the PPC build do better other than long arm engagements? (and that's debatable) It heats up faster, it's less capable of shots of opportunity (where you are at high heat, and you see a near dead target, either while engaged, or while out of combat) it's less apt at taking out light mechs. It's just as fast.

So for giggles I changed the setup. Dropped the AC2 to slap in an XL350 and loaded it up with another Heat sink or two.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...75b3fa286c6924c and it's -still- worse. Let alone the fact that now you've just put all the eggs in one basket.

You are absolutely terrible at building mechs. That would probably be why you think the AC10 is great. If i am rocking an AC2 and 2 PPC, i wont take an srm 6. I am entirely built around distance. I would drop the SM6 for a UAC5.

lets not forget that you are even putting the AC2 on a mech that already produces alot of heat. The AC2 is a terrible terrible choice.

You are also using XL engines. That is the worst idea ever in anything but a light. I would glady debate this with you, but the builds you are showing pretty much shows me, we arent on the same level here.

Edited by Braggart, 28 February 2013 - 09:53 AM.

[Mavairo]

Braggart, on 28 February 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

You are absolutely terrible at building mechs. That would probably be why you think the AC10 is great. If i am rocking an AC2 and 2 PPC, i wont take an srm 6. I am entirely built around distance. I would drop the SM6 for a UAC5.

You are also using XL engines. That is the worst idea ever in anything but a light. I would glady debate this with you, but the builds you are showing pretty much shows me, we arent on the same level here.

Says the dragon pilot that thinks XL isn't the way to go on a Dragon with it's microscopic STs and 60 ton capacity.
The only thing you've proven is that you can't aim and you think 500 damage is particularly impressive out of the chassis.

Good luck fitting any real weapons on a dragon without an XL engine oh and for giggles. Here's more reason why double PPCs suck on a dragon
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...dc4896e6bd9e87d

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...98e8bb0fc1d81f7 Which one is better for engaging lights I wonder... and which one is better for conquest, or CQB engagements?

By the way that swap, does nothing to help you vs lights, nothing in Assault for base defense, or base offense for that matter, nor does it help you in conquest. And the weapon loadout is not even possible on a dragon without an XL engine. All you would have is 2 PPCs for weapons. And you want to say that's a great loadout? Don't make me laugh.

Edited by Mavairo, 28 February 2013 - 10:01 AM.

[Braggart]

Mavairo, on 28 February 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Says the dragon pilot that thinks XL isn't the way to go on a Dragon with it's microscopic STs and 60 ton capacity.
The only thing you've proven is that you can't aim and you think 500 damage is particularly impressive out of the chassis.

Ok man. You keep rocking that XL engine, and keep enjoying being dead before the rest of your team. Fast is great and all, but you are still a huge easy target in a dragon. You need to go fast, and be able to take a hit, You cant do that with an XL engine.

The fact you are building dragons on the 5N design , instead of the 1C shows you bad you are. You want some weapons in your torso, so you can survive. and Torso mounted weapons allow you to pop on ridges and expose as little as possible, and drop a volley on the enemy and disappear again. Some thing you cant do with lasers or ACs.

Seriously, your builds are horrible. Why would you arm mount your most important weaponry, you torso mount those PPCs.

It also doesnt matter which one is better for killing lights. This game isnt 1vs1 and a decent light pilot would core your back which is extremely easy when you have an XL engine. Good day sir. I hope to meet you on the battlefield. I could use some easy kills.

[Redacted]

Edited by Egomane, 05 April 2013 - 04:13 AM.
Removed CoC violation

[Mavairo]

Braggart, on 28 February 2013 - 09:55 AM, said:

Ok man. You keep rocking that XL engine, and keep enjoying being dead before the rest of your team. Fast is great and all, but you are still a huge easy target in a dragon. You need to go fast, and be able to take a hit, You cant do that with an XL engine.

The fact you are building dragons on the 5N design , instead of the 1C shows you bad you are. You want some weapons in your torso, so you can survive. and Torso mounted weapons allow you to pop on ridges and expose as little as possible, and drop a volley on the enemy and disappear again. Some thing you cant do with lasers or ACs.

Seriously, your builds are horrible. Why would you arm mount your most important weaponry, you torso mount those PPCs.

It also doesnt matter which one is better for killing lights. This game isnt 1vs1 and a decent light pilot would core your back which is extremely easy when you have an XL engine. Good day sir. I hope to meet you on the battlefield. I could use some easy kills.

I get it now, you're one of those idiots that goes charging in head long to the enemy and never moves his torso aren't you?

I am rarely the first to die, even in 8 mans. I'm usually one of the last to go down, if I go down at all. You on the other hand? You probably live because everyone looks at your horrible weapon loadout of ......2 PPCs on an 300 Standard Engine 1C and completely ignores you (and you ARE at least using a 300 engine right? LOL). You then think you're a hero because after shooting for an entire match while being ignored you score 500 damage.

The 5N is alot better than people give it credit for, there's this little thing called arm articulation and it matters, especially in combat where the elevation, and X Y axis can change completely independently of the direction you're moving.

No one is going to take you even remotely seriously if you're trying to propose that a dragon with 2 PPCs is even remotely viable, without an XL engine.

And you might as well be dead once someone takes your only 2 effective weapon systems off your mech. Because you aren't going to be contributing to damage, and since you're slow as balls for a dragon you sure as hell aren't going to help with a late game cap in enough time to win the match either.

By the way those ST's you're so panaroid about? Those are the same STs you house your PPCs in, in your 1C. They are just as easily hit and knocked out as my XL engine is. So you're completely screwing away both Firepower and Speed, for not going XL... only to get 2 weapons on your mech. Unless of course you want to say you run around with stripped down armor on both your STs, your legs, and a signficant de armoring of your legs to try and get 2 MLs on there too. In which case congratulations, your mech is both slower than mine, packs less firepower, and is less durable.

Edited by Mavairo, 28 February 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[Terror Teddy]

Spinning Burr, on 28 February 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

I guess since I started the thread comparing AC10 to PPC/ER PPC, let me now say that in apples to apples comparison, UAC5 is a better weapon at significantly less weight and space.

Most likely because the UAC/5's jamming got so much complaints that it was reduced so much that it is better all around.

I think the Jamming should be more severe on the UAC/5 due to it being DAMN good weight to damage ration in comparison.