32 replies to this topic

[PaintedWolf]

Normally I don't call very many weapons under-powered, but compared to Gauss Rifles: They have far, far less range, they do only five more damage, they are less ammo efficient, and unlike the TT, Gauss do not have minimum range. Overall, as it stands there is almost no reason to carry an AC-20 over a Gauss Rifle. I would suggest simply boosting AC-20 firing rates to compensate for this.

[Targetloc]

My AC20's seem to work fine.


I think all the guns could use a bit more ammo per ton, because most builds take 3-4 tons of ammo for their main gun while in TT builds were usually pretty sufficient with 2-3 tons of ammo, which just compounds the other issues with trial mechs... (try running the HBK-4G stock for example)

But the AC20 is in a pretty good place since they lowered the heat on it.

[PaintedWolf]

Targetloc, on 23 March 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

My AC20's seem to work fine.


I think all the guns could use a bit more ammo per ton, because most builds take 3-4 tons of ammo for their main gun while in TT builds were usually pretty sufficient with 2-3 tons of ammo, which just compounds the other issues with trial mechs... (try running the HBK-4G stock for example)

But the AC20 is in a pretty good place since they lowered the heat on it.

I'm not saying they don't work well...but compared to a Gauss Rifle? They do 5 more damage, produce 7 times the heat, and have less then half the range. They also have less ammo per ton. Currently a brawler using a Gauss Rifle has a good chance at beating a brawler using 2 AC-20s at close range because the AC-20s can cause over-heat, so does not mesh as well with other weapons.

[Targetloc]

The extra heat affecting how much you can fire your other weapons is a very good point, but I find that AC20 mechs beat Gauss mechs in a brawl because that extra 5 damage opens internals a tiny bit sooner, and then the Gauss goes kablooie when you sneeze on it, taking a torso section out with it.

Edited by Targetloc, 23 March 2013 - 07:22 PM.

[Royalewithcheese]

Because of how damage fall-off works, AC/20s hit harder than gauss rifles out to ~400m. They also don't explode if you breathe on them too hard, so there's that too.

[Deathlike]

AC20s are fine. It's hard to NOT carry one on an Atlas.

[ICEFANG13]

This sounds like a logical connection. I don't see a problem with A/C-20s, both are great weapons and very scary. I mean you'll be glad to have an A/C-20 when something gets in your back and tries to remove it. A Gauss just pops right away and does a little damage. I'm picking the A/C-20 guy over the Gauss (without knowing what the situation is), but Gauss is really good for a great pilot as well.

[Khobai]

The only problem with the AC/20 is that you can't split it's crit slots between your arm and side torso like you can in tabletop.

[Rubidiy]

just no, they are not. Actually AC/20 is the only really useful ballistic weapon in the game currently.

[idle crow]

AC20 is a great weapon. Be even better if/when it gets state rewind.

[Dephylr]

i love my ac 20 personally, just need to try it on a different mech than the atlas as it's the first thing destroyed

[focuspark]

Raw Damage: AC20 > Gauss
DPS: AC20 > Gauss
Weapon HP: AC20 > Gauss

AC20 is way scarier, plus if I see one I know they don't have an XL engine and this is going to be a long fight.

[kiltymonroe]

The AC/20 gets shorted a bit on ammo compared to other ACs, A slight buff to AC/20s by making all AC ammo 160 damage per ton (8 shots for AC/20 rather than 7.5 rounded down to 7) would be fair. They're not really underpowered though.

[Cyke]

I've never felt AC20s were overpowered whenever they appear on the battlefield (I don't use them, I just get blown to pieces by them), but I guess giving AC20s one more shot-per-ton of ammo wouldn't really hurt.
That will still stick to the +50% shots/ton (compared to tabletop) design rule that all the Autocannons use, except we round the "7.5" up to 8, instead of rounding down to 7.
Don't think it's needed... just saying it wouldn't hurt, probably nobody would mind, it still maintains internal design consistency, and 8 is a nice round number. But honestly, not necessary.

[Cyke]

Khobai, on 23 March 2013 - 09:13 PM, said:

The only problem with the AC/20 is that you can't split it's crit slots between your arm and side torso like you can in tabletop.

This is probably what AC20s need to see more use. Right now, it's rather hard to put them into your builds (especially if you use an XL engine), even if you have the total free slots and tonnage to spare.

In TT you can split the criticals between the arm and side torso, which would probably allow the AC20 to appear much more frequently in the game. We know the MWO MechLab can handle this, since it handles XL engines just fine.
Of course, the Yen Lo Wang wouldn't be so special anymore, so don't count on it

Edited by Cyke, 24 March 2013 - 01:55 AM.

[Hotthedd]

With only 3 hit points before exploding, it is insane to brawl with a gauss. AC/20s OTOH are better for brawling in every way.

[Mister Haha]

AC20 is a great weapon, dual AC20 is absolute cheese it is so good. Goodbye entire section that it just hit..

[Monkeystador]

It doesnt matter what TT says. This is a whole different playing field where balancing has to be done independent from TT.
And no the AC 20 does not need that for now.

[Cyke]

Monkeystador, on 25 March 2013 - 01:23 AM, said:

It doesnt matter what TT says. This is a whole different playing field where balancing has to be done independent from TT.
And no the AC 20 does not need that for now.

After some consideration, I don't have a problem with that viewpoint either, I don't need more AC20 shells flying at me

[Karl Streiger]

AC 20 is fine...as it is. However a slightly increased damage curve would be nice...maybe base factor of 3...resulting in a AC 20 to have 24 dmg. Just to make the choice between exploding, coolrunning and smaller gauss rifle and tougher, hoter and larger AC 20 more harder.