149 replies to this topic

[Kanatta Jing]

I kinda like the Blackjack BJ-1

And not just because of the innuendo.

Because of the double head plinkers of the arms, that are comfortably backed up by a respectable 4 medium lasers (very important). But one AC/2 would not float my boat and dual AC/2s would not be acceptable without a sold secondary weapon.

But yeah the rate of fire on those things has to be pretty high.

[Melcyna]

Christopher Dayson, on 03 June 2012 - 01:03 PM, said:

Ok, I'm going to try to explain this simply now:

No weapon is perfect.

No layout is the best layout.

The fact that everything has a weakness is good balance.

Yes a Light would catch that medium, but it will take a lot of damage on the way in unless it successfully outmaneuvers it.

There is no, and should /never/ be, such a thing as an 'I Win' layout.

Everything has strengths and weaknesses.

Just because /you/ do not like the strengths of the AC-2 doesn't mean it needs to change. It just means it's not a good weapon for your playstyle. Use a different weapon then. It's existence does not harm you at all, other than that 'weak' weapon ripping you up and you being unable to respond to it...

Which is fine, because AC2s do have targets that it's very effective against... only problem? those happens to be not battlemech for the most part.

AC2s are doomed the moment ppl try to force it to do the job against targets it was never really good against in the first place.

[Kasiagora]

Alexander Fury, on 03 June 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

Ever notice no one ever says ''Don't worry! I have a Vulcan!'' There is a reason for that! the 3025 Vulcan, the 3050 upgrade actually made it a half decent light medium.

Hey! I say that! It's just that no one takes me seriously unless they have a very light scout, infantry, or mixed units.
The AC/2 isn't horrible because of that range, but you'll but your butt I want a way to zoom my reticule in because it won't be much use as a sniper if I'm shooting at a single pixel over a kilometer away. I can't wait for the Ultra AC/2 though. Nearly the damage of a medium laser at a range that can really lighten someone's armor before they can get close to me and I'll have the speed to try and make sure that doesn't happen. (This is hoping I can put one on a Jenner variant with endosteel and ballistics slots, or a Cicada variant)

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Everyone is saying that the AC2 is OK if it fires a lot faster and has a lot of knock. If it has a high RoF with the same damage then its really an AC8 or 10. Which makes a mockery of the AC5 and 10, leading to people claiming that they also need to be buffed. Basically it is junk in a PC game when the range advantage can be closed in a few seconds. Your better off with MLs and extra heatsinks or whatever. It is a total waste of weight and crits and can't be improved without unbalancing other weapons.

[GrizzlyViking]

Max Liao, on 03 June 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

One weapon in the BattleTech universe that severely underwhelmed, unless you were duck hunting VTOLs, was the AC/2. For years I tried to find a way to make the weapon useful - yeah, yeah, ultra/rotary autocannons, gauss rifles and all that jazz, I play 3025 era pretty much exclusively - to no avail. I like the idea of a long range plinker, but it actually has to be able to 'plink.'

With minimum range, ridiculous weight to damage ratio, and very few maps ever allowing 24 unimpeded 'hexes' I just couldn't find a way to make this weapon useful. To me an LRM 5 (or three of them) is a much better way to go - indirect fire alone makes them more useful.

In your opinion, how could MWO make the AC/2 weapon useful, or do you think that's going to be the least/never used option in the 'Mech Lab?

AC-2 could add an interesting element on a flat desert, flat arctic map, or frozen lake with sparsly placed structures, trees, rocks. etc.

[Melcyna]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 03 June 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

Everyone is saying that the AC2 is OK if it fires a lot faster and has a lot of knock. If it has a high RoF with the same damage then its really an AC8 or 10. Which makes a mockery of the AC5 and 10, leading to people claiming that they also need to be buffed. Basically it is junk in a PC game when the range advantage can be closed in a few seconds. Your better off with MLs and extra heatsinks or whatever. It is a total waste of weight and crits and can't be improved without unbalancing other weapons.

The part on 'Which makes a mockery of the AC5 and 10' are not necessarily true when it comes to the role and position of the weapon in comparison to AC5 and 10.

there are basically 4 components or aspect to a weapon that determines their role in video games such as this:
A. Alpha damage (how much damage the weapon can inflict in the first opening shot or salvo in the case of burst)
B. Effective range (we don't exactly have diminishing effectiveness on the weapon over distance so this is mainly just the weapon reach and projectile speed for the most part since we also don't really have significant aim dispersion)
C. Rate of Fire (which determines how quickly we can follow up the shot and thus determines how much potential damage the weapon can do for a certain amount of length of time that is not instantaneous)
D. CC or debuff on the target (essentially the degree in which the weapon cause loss of control on the target or degree of impairment inflicted on the target which will create difficulty for the target to operate)

even if we suppose that AC2 gets buffed in ROF and it's debuff, and on top of the AC2's natural effective range advantage, AC5 and 10 naturally still holds the undisputed reign on Alpha compared to AC2.

Generally speaking in most video games especially in competitive match against other human players, Alpha damage tend to be the biggest factor overall since window of opportunity to fire on human opponents tend to be very small, and the premium thus is on inflicting as much damage as possible within standard engagement's time window. For battletech settings, we generally will fight longer and in slower pace than say FPS so our engagement's time window is longer than most other games giving a much better viability for lower Alpha, high ROF weapons, but the same principle applies.

Mind you of course that i don't think a buff on AC2's are actually needed, i enjoyed using AC2's to swat pesky flyers out of the sky which strictly speaking is what i consider the weapon is best at, and the problem with these comments thus far is that many are trying to use the weapon in a situation and platform that can't really use it to it's full advantage.

I don't consider AC2's in need of improvement per say, but i also know the weapon is more suited against other types of target and condition and NOT really effective or efficient for battlemech for use in most of the engagement in which they fight against each other.

[DocBach]

With cover and concealment the any advantage the AC/2 has is nullified. But in the open, the AC/2 is the premier long range direct fire weapon system. In the different forms of BT (besides the MW games the) AC/2 had a faster reload rate than other systems - from the board game, when the Solaris VII boxed set added reload times, to MPBT, the AC/2 could only be countered by closing in without being hit or having long range weapon systems like LRMs to counter with.

[Frostiken]

Christopher Dayson, on 03 June 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

The AC2 weighs in at 6 tons. That means it's well capable of fitting on medium mechs, even 2 of them. Possibly even 3 depending on other factors. That means the medium mech can /ensure/ the range is kept against anything bigger than it, and it can fire without return fire. That's a hell of an advantage. Against a light mech that's coming in 3 AC2's would shred significant amounts of armor.

The AC2 has it's place for sure.

Not when you take into consideration ammo requirements, at least with the standard-size engines we have now.

7 tons / weapon is just way too much for the poor damage.

Edited by Frostiken, 03 June 2012 - 05:17 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

I think the AC/2 simply suffers at the hands of the BT game mechanics. If you weren't forced to fight in 'arenas' with arbitrary boundaries, AC/2's would be amazing for fighting running battles. You'd be able to bleed your opponents dry while keeping them at a safe distance.

Short of changing the nature of the weapon or adding to them, they are just stuck being 'meh' for the type of warfare we're limited to in the BT universe (for now.)

[chainedbeast]

Depending on gunnery skill here having a mech with a few of these to provide suppressing fire seems to help chip away armor for the those big nasty weapons to be able to punch through in one shot. Just having a mass volley at long range with the random hits makes things exciting. Once you get close in they are useless. An overwatching position with great line of sight is imperative for this weapon system.

[Frostiken]

Franklen Avignon, on 03 June 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

I think the AC/2 simply suffers at the hands of the BT game mechanics. If you weren't forced to fight in 'arenas' with arbitrary boundaries, AC/2's would be amazing for fighting running battles. You'd be able to bleed your opponents dry while keeping them at a safe distance.

Short of changing the nature of the weapon or adding to them, they are just stuck being 'meh' for the type of warfare we're limited to in the BT universe (for now.)

Oh god, you just made me want Battletech + Planetside.

[SweetJackal]

Franklen Avignon, on 03 June 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

I think the AC/2 simply suffers at the hands of the BT game mechanics. If you weren't forced to fight in 'arenas' with arbitrary boundaries, AC/2's would be amazing for fighting running battles. You'd be able to bleed your opponents dry while keeping them at a safe distance.

Short of changing the nature of the weapon or adding to them, they are just stuck being 'meh' for the type of warfare we're limited to in the BT universe (for now.)

The answer is to steal the 6' by 4' wargaming tables at your local hobby shop for a day and print out a tree's worth of interconnecting maps to cover it in Hex. If you can get 4 of those tables, even better.

Now you are looking at a proper sized field. BT rules only made maps so small so they wouldn't take up the whole room like this.

[Samaritan]

Hon. Mechwarriors;

The AC2 is an unbelievably usefull weapon system. Most of the damage inflicted when armies face off in the Inner Sphere is from the insane numbers of AC2 Field Guns serving in the infantry. These anti tank, anti mech, anti aircraft wonder weapons are cheap, easy to make, and fill the ranks of countless millions of motorized infantry plattoons.

That being said, you are going to find it difficult to justify installing one on your two story tall two legged space ship we call Battlemechs.

There is a place for the AC2, and it will probably kill you more often than mechs will once infantry and preparred field guns make it into the MWO game engine.

My two Cbills, and thanks for hearing me out.

Respectfully

Samaritan

[Randalf Yorgen]

I believe the idea behind the A/C2 was that it could pelt the target at all ranges interupting the pilot trying to get a target lock. If you were loaded with 3 LRM 15's and were 18 hexes away from your target, ready to fire and there was a Blackjack at 20 hexes pelting you in chain fire mode you would have one heck of a time getting a target lock on your target at long range. The other viable use I can find for A/C2 (other then AntiAir) would be for Bunkers and hardpoints set on hard to get to high ground over looking the only advances. 10 or 20 A/C2's could lock down a wide swath of land for a very long time.

[WiCkEd]

It seems that the usefulness of the weapon really depends on how they implement critical hits in the game. AC/2 pepper-spray after the outer armor is shredded equals a whole mess of chance-to-crit rolls. Be excellent if we were working with canon crits but I would foresee alot of cry-babies on the forums from mechs shutting down(permanent due to engine crits) and falling(no getting back up once your Gyro is destro) early due to AC/2 fire.

Also 2 dmg is a considerable amount of damage when dealing with 35 ton mechs. I just want to point out what's relative and all. Try to keep perspective.

[Pook600]

AC2 would most likely serve as a method of deploying withering fire and obtaining a form of fire superiority. Everyone loves slinging an AC20, but the rate of fire is slow and it is more of a haymaker weapon. AC2's have a fast reload, extended range, and the ability to put alot of rounds downrange quickly...

[AlphaKale]

Melcyna, on 03 June 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

(...)
Generally speaking in most video games especially in competitive match against other human players, Alpha damage tend to be the biggest factor overall since window of opportunity to fire on human opponents tend to be very small, and the premium thus is on inflicting as much damage as possible within standard engagement's time window. For battletech settings, we generally will fight longer and in slower pace than say FPS so our engagement's time window is longer than most other games giving a much better viability for lower Alpha, high ROF weapons, but the same principle applies.

I'm hoping the designers focus on damage per second when they stat out the RoF of the ACs. The smaller the AC, the less DPS it should do to balance against the longer range featured by the smaller ACs.
That said, you do make a good point about the initial strike. If you are weaving between buildings in an urban environment and come face-to-face with a Hunchback and its AC20 you could die instantly if your armor has already been chewed up. A lesser autocannon would take longer to inflict those 20 points, possibly giving you time to duck for cover behind a building. Even if the AC20's DPS is lower than the other ACs due to its slower fire rate, that initial shot is really going to hurt! (Assuming the pilot can hit the broad side of a barn, and lets face it, AC20s should be used at near point-blank range... )

[PANZERBUNNY]

Can't remember if I've posted this or not.

I think the small damage weapons, if specialty ammo is included, be made available to them only. AC/2, SM-2, etc

[AlphaKale]

PANZERBUNNY, on 03 June 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

Can't remember if I've posted this or not.

I think the small damage weapons, if specialty ammo is included, be made available to them only. AC/2, SM-2, etc

That could potentially trash the balance though. It would boost the low-end weapons unfairly, so everything else would have to be buffed, nerfing the speciality ammo in the first place. Overall I think it would just be too much complexity anyhow.

Have the devs said anything at all about speciality ammo, generally? I know the LBX ACs are going to be in game, but maybe the ammo is linked to the weapon type? That way LBX's always fire scatter ammo, so you can't outfit an Ultra with it...?

[akkelemvor]

People keep forgetting about the low heat of ACs. In the mauler the 4 ACs serve as quick jab after it shoots off its large lasers or its LRMs. In the TT the ACs is used for crit seeking. though that might be a biased showing because I love the mauler.