9 replies to this topic

[VPrime]

My friends and I are getting really frustrated with the autocannon range issues, specifically with the AC20. We seem to be getting hit out 2 to 3 times their posted effective range for full damage. It is getting to the point where we get into a game, get hit a few times by AC20 snipers, die, all within 3 or 4 minutes. Its getting really un-fun. A few have given up on the game entirely. Can we address this somehow? Its getting so that we don't want to play. Like COD, we jump in, get sniped, die, jump in, get sniped die. Some will say that if you can't beat em, you should join em, but my point is those are supposed to be really short range weapons. Please fix this devs, before you loose some very longtime players from frustration.

[Mad Porthos]

Hey VPrime, are you aware that ballistic weapons have greater range before thier damage drops off than energy weapons? I mean no offense or condescension, I'm just checking since some I know who have been shocked by AC20 hits were truly unaware even that weapons could damage beyond thier stated range at all, let alone at two or three times range.

All the ballstics can damage at up to triple thier listed range, not as a bug but simply I guess, but because of the "rationale" that they are a physcial mass moving at great speed, rather than energy/particles that tend to quickly disperse in atmosphere/lose focus. That projectile won't just stop at a given range, but it gets less and less accurate as it's trajectory drops or veers over distance due to windage and gravity, curving it's path downward till it impacts ground or some other obstacle.

On long range shots, good snipers can see this "dip" in a shot at range, forcing them to sometimes aim high... something they often already do to avoid low barriers, or if they are in a cataphract with low mounted ballistic weapons.

Regardless, given that an AC20 does 20 damage in a pin point location, and only begins to start losing that damage at over 270 meters, I think alot of people are shocked when they are still taking Gauss Rifle or PPC levels of damage at around 400-500meters. That to some seems wrong, a bug or worse a violation of what they think such a gun should be about - I know I did after having been used to AC20's as devastating close range weapons in Classic Battle Tech games.

The thing is, these weapons are firing shells that are absolutely huge and have a great deal of force behind them. Think about an AC20. 7 shots per ton. A ton is 2000lbs. Even if it's a "long ton", or metric ton, that's 2200lbs. So each projectile could be 286 pounds! Even given that some of that is likely the "gunpowder" to propel it and casing, it's like an artillery round from a battleship or destroyer. It doesn't just suddenly drop to the ground or stop at a range of 270meters. The real equivalents literally have effective ranges of MILES. So as a slight nod to realism, I believe the developers chose to allow them to still travel and be dangerous at out to that 3x range.

None of it is going make perfect sense, but I'd recommend it's easier to accept this as a feature of ballistics than to ask it be removed/nerfed. More realism likely won't come for things like energy weapons which also should carry very very far and I think less realism, with weapons artificially hitting an invisible wall at thier range, will only serve to make it harder to suspend people's disbelief as their deadeye shot on an enemy raven cockpit fails just because that raven was at 271 meters, rather than 269 meters.

[Cyke]

I certainly disagree that problematic design features of a game should be addressed with the (flawed) rationale "can't beat 'em, join 'em".
However, I don't think this is actually a problematic feature at all.

Thus, I would suggest you and your friends mount some AC20s and see how easy (or difficult) it is to land hits on targets in the 540m to 810m range band before abandoning the game.


Slightly off the point, it's generally a good idea to familiarize oneself with the weapons of the enemy. Using those weapons often provides insight into how you should behave in combat to best counteract them.

[VPrime]

I understand the physics, but it is full damage at way past max range. In Battletech, you simply don't hit at that range with that weapon. The barrels are very short for such a large projectile, the dropoff is simply too severe. I really think that needs to be represented in such a devastatingly strong gun. There has to be a downside to all the upsides.

[Cyke]

VPrime, on 19 March 2013 - 05:58 PM, said:

I understand the physics, but it is full damage at way past max range.

I'm assuming you mean "optimal range" (270m) rather than "max range" (810m)?

Regardless, is that correct? The AC20 does full damage beyond 270m?
I only really make extensive use of AC5s and AC10s (and their advanced variants), but I was under the impression that ballistic weapon damage does start to drop off beyond optimal range.

[Alilua]

If you are getting hit by ac20 snipers, perhaps pilot error is to blame. Might also be lag not showing projectile correctly for you.

[Mad Porthos]

Cyke, on 19 March 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

I'm assuming you mean "optimal range" (270m) rather than "max range" (810m)?

Regardless, is that correct? The AC20 does full damage beyond 270m?
I only really make extensive use of AC5s and AC10s (and their advanced variants), but I was under the impression that ballistic weapon damage does start to drop off beyond optimal range.

If I recall correctly it does start to drop off after optimal range, but not as sharply as energy weaponry. Where Medium Lasers drop after 270, such that at 540 they should be reduced to zero... the ballistic curve is such that at double "optimal" range, they are at half damage. It is only at triple optimal that they reduce to zero. Hence an AC20 hitting at 520meters could well still be doing 11 points of damage, nothing to laugh at. At say 670 meters, that AC20 still could be hitting like an AC5 shot, still nothing to sneeze at. 810 meters though, I'm guessing it will bounce off your armor or not even hit. Testing grounds should give a sense of this, but again, I've never seen sign of full damage at those ranges when I hit either.

What should be discouraging that AC 20 from being used that way is how little AMMO one has to waste. Especially if it's a main weapon, wasting AC20 shots at 520 means less for when you're up close and can really place those shots to maximum effectiveness. Dropping 14 tons into a Autocannon, then four or more tons to just have 28 or so shots... it just doesn't make sense sniping with it unless you are a master marksman or are grinding a ballistic mech and it's the best you can do to hit someone far, when most of your other loadout is close range.

Edited by Mad Porthos, 19 March 2013 - 10:02 PM.

[kiltymonroe]

Are you sure they're AC/20 rounds and not Gauss slugs? And it's just one AC/20 round instead of two?

[Tombstoner]

I think it' probably 2x gause the OP is referring to. personal i think the ac-20 is doing way to little damage to justify taking it over the gause.

also can it be fixed..... no, perfect convergence and link fired boating are hear to stay.
Why.. battle tech fans are not the target audience for MWO.

[Strig]

kiltymonroe, on 20 March 2013 - 02:04 AM, said:

Are you sure they're AC/20 rounds and not Gauss slugs? And it's just one AC/20 round instead of two?

Since you posted this recently I would guess that you are running into Dual AC/20 Jaegers (or the odd dual-AC/20 Catapult). This means that you are probably being hit for half damage BUT by 2 slugs (somewhere between 400-500m still nets at least 50% effectiveness for AC/20 slugs).

There is no question that builds packing multiple large ballistic weapons sting when they hit, but it isn't a bug and it is by design (although I still believe that the K2 was a mistake that PGI decided to allow as opposed to a design choice).