112 replies to this topic

[Grayseven]

Roland, on 08 April 2013 - 05:41 AM, said:

Steel Claws is correct. The AC10 and AC5 are currently trash tier weapons.

Folks who are using those weapons are basically just running poor, sub-optimal configurations.

Currently, the only truly viable ballistic weapons are:
Gauss
AC20
UAC5 (and this only if you understand how to not make it jam on the first shot, which lots of folks don't seem to grasp fully)

AC5's are garbage, AC10's are garbage.. The AC2 is kind of garbage, in that it at least serves some useful niche, but is generally outclassed by the gauss if you want long range.

The big reason why the lower caliber AC's are garbage is because DPS is generally meaningless in this game. Large caliber weapons are more useful for killing mechs, because you want to generate high alpha strikes.

Once you get down to the AC5, as Steel correctly points out, you can get the same damage for ONE ton with a medium laser.

Comparing an AC5 to a Medium Laser based solely on the damage it does means you aren't looking at the complete picture, which balance requires you to do.

A ML does 5 damage for 4 heat with a 3 second recycle time out to a range of 540 meters.

An AC5 does 5 damage for 1 heat with a 1.7 second recycle time out to a range of 1620 meters.

Lower heat, faster cycle time, greater range...balanced by the fact that it weighs 7 tons more without ammo.

[El Bandito]

3rdworld, on 08 April 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

So some people understand what makes weapons / loadouts / mechs good. so we shouldn't buff the weapons that are bad?

Thing is, it is not bad. They have their niche role to play. Take the example of AC10. AC20 has less range and cooldown in comparison, and UAC5 has less punch per shot. AC10 also has the most damage per ton of ammo in the AC class along with AC2 but runs a lot cooler. It fills a hole where those two cannot. It has less performance over-all but it is not a bad weapon.

Roland, on 08 April 2013 - 05:48 AM, said:

Your post here doesn't make any sense. There's no reason to not make every weapon competitively viable. You're basically saying, "Well, sure.. those weapons are trash, but some folks want to run trash!" No they don't. It's even more nonsensical to say, "Those guys are running cheese, and are lame! But don't improve the trash weapons!"

Your biggest mistake is equating less than absolute top class weapon with trash.

AC10 is NOT trash. AC5 is NOT trash. MG and Flamer are trash. Jeez.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 April 2013 - 06:01 AM.

[jakucha]

Something like slightly buffing the fire rate of the lesser used ACs might help.

[Roland]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 05:50 AM, said:

Thing is, it is not bad. It has it's niche role to play. Take the example of AC10. AC20 has less range in comparison, and UAC5 has less punch per shot. It fills a hole where those two cannot. It has less performance over all but it is not a bad weapon.

No man, it's not filling a niche. It's a bad weapon. The niche you are suggesting here doesn't actually exist in any meaningful way.

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 05:50 AM, said:

Your biggest mistake is equating less than competitive weapon with trash.

AC10 is NOT trash. AC5 is NOT trash. MG and Flamer are trash. Jeez.

Yes man, they are trash.
If a weapon is simply outclassed by another weapon to a significant degree, then the outclassed weapon is trash.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that,"Hey, it still does damage when I pull the trigger! So it must be useful!"

But it's not. You're just handicapping yourself by bringing it. It's why good players don't bring those weapons unless they are doing it "for the lulz".

You admit that those weapons are less useful than other weapons... so why on earth are you resisting the urge to improve them?

If you improve them such that they are competitive with the weapons that folks use, then the effect will be that you will have MORE weapon variety. This is a GOOD thing. There is literally no reason why any rational person would object to such a thing.

[El Bandito]

Roland, on 08 April 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

No man, it's not filling a niche. It's a bad weapon. The niche you are suggesting here doesn't actually exist in any meaningful way. Yes man, they are trash. If a weapon is simply outclassed by another weapon to a significant degree, then the outclassed weapon is trash. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that,"Hey, it still does damage when I pull the trigger! So it must be useful!" But it's not. You're just handicapping yourself by bringing it. It's why good players don't bring those weapons unless they are doing it "for the lulz". You admit that those weapons are less useful than other weapons... so why on earth are you resisting the urge to improve them? If you improve them such that they are competitive with the weapons that folks use, then the effect will be that you will have MORE weapon variety. This is a GOOD thing. There is literally no reason why any rational person would object to such a thing.

People will still stick to 2-3 "best" weapon no matter which weapon is buffed or nerfed how many times. Competitive play is just like that. Even if it is miniscule advantage, you will be regarded as r3tarded not to take advantage of it.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 April 2013 - 06:02 AM.

[3rdworld]

Thontor, on 08 April 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

Because no "top competitive team" uses them I should follow their example? Maybe that's the thought process that kept "top competitive" teams from using them in the first place. Maybe if they actually used the weapons, and learned how to use their strengths to their advantage, instead of just doing what everyone else is doing they would understand that they are not bad weapons and they have many advantages over the so called "acceptable" ballistic weapons.

What strength does the AC/10 posses over the gauss? 3 tons?

[Grayseven]

The biggest problem with a number of the AC's isn't ROF, it's the number of slots they take up and the locations of hard points on various mechs.

AC's often don't get used just because they take up so much space, especially considering the ammo requirements added on to the weapon slot requirements.

[El Bandito]

3rdworld, on 08 April 2013 - 06:02 AM, said:

What strength does the AC/10 posses over the gauss? 3 tons?

Better to have an AC10 with 3 tons of ammo than a Gauss without ammo.

AC10 also fires instantly, unlike Gauss.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 April 2013 - 06:04 AM.

[jeffsw6]

Steel Claws, on 08 April 2013 - 05:24 AM, said:

Ummmmm how can it be poor dps and yet good damage? You do 5 points of damage - that's the same as - 1 medium laser. Think about that.

Firing a medium laser is 5 heat. AC5 and UAC5 are both 1 heat.

[MustrumRidcully]

Roland, on 08 April 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

No man, it's not filling a niche. It's a bad weapon. The niche you are suggesting here doesn't actually exist in any meaningful way.



Yes man, they are trash.
If a weapon is simply outclassed by another weapon to a significant degree, then the outclassed weapon is trash.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that,"Hey, it still does damage when I pull the trigger! So it must be useful!"

But it's not. You're just handicapping yourself by bringing it. It's why good players don't bring those weapons unless they are doing it "for the lulz".

You admit that those weapons are less useful than other weapons... so why on earth are you resisting the urge to improve them?

If you improve them such that they are competitive with the weapons that folks use, then the effect will be that you will have MORE weapon variety. This is a GOOD thing. There is literally no reason why any rational person would object to such a thing.

I think the only rational reason would be if you don't think the weapon is worse than others.

I still think one big reason the AC/10 is not used much is because it's sit in an unfortunate spot between several other good weapons that are a few tons heavier. There is just never a mech with a hardpoint and max weight combination that would make it impractical to run a Gauss or AC/20, and the benefits of convergence and identical cycle times for weapons just make it unattractive to mix weapons.

That said... If I look back at my "math" on weapon balance, the AC/10 is weak on shorter engagements, and I am getting the feeling that my original targeted estimatim times where too long. I should redo my weapon balance charts for shorter time frames. The AC/10 outperforms several weapons at the 20 to 30 second mark, but if no realistic engagement ever is that long, it's a meaningless advantage.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

I'll take a medium laser boat vs an AC5/AC10 equipped boat anytime.

Medium Lasers will win each and every time.

AC5's and 10's are a joke.

And trying to justify that an AC10 is better than Gauss is flat out stupidity at it's best, the GR is far superior.

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 April 2013 - 06:08 AM.

[El Bandito]

DV McKenna, on 08 April 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

I'll take a medium laser boat vs an AC5/AC10 equipped boat anytime. Medium Lasers will win each and every time. AC5's and 10's are a joke.

Opinion.

Based on many variables.

Do you think a medium laser boating D-DC can beat AC5 boating D-DC?

Edited by El Bandito, 08 April 2013 - 06:12 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

Better to have an AC10 with 3 tons of ammo than a Gauss without ammo.

AC10 also fires instantly, unlike Gauss.

But on what mech is that the issue? What mech can fit an AC/20 or Gauss only without ammo, but an AC/10 with ammo?
You can even put ammo for the AC/20 or the Gauss on a Raven or Cicada (but these builds are ineffecient - even without double heat sinks, you're basically wasting free cooling potential from engine sinks. Better take lots of energy weapons.)
Maybe you'd get somewhere with a 55 or 60 ton mech with 2 ballistic slots. (Especially if it's symmetric. People hate to break symmetries and will not equip just a single AC/20 or Gauss...)

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 08 April 2013 - 06:10 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

Opinion. Based on many variables. Do you think a medium laser boating D-DC can beat AC10 boating D-DC?

Fact, i'd give up 50 tons, take a hunchback and the D-DC would still lose even with it's weight advantage.

Thontor, on 08 April 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Have you actually used the AC/5 and AC/10? Or are you just being a parrot.

AC 10's sure, the reload sound is pleasing. The weapon itself...not pleasing in the slightest.

[El Bandito]

MustrumRidcully, on 08 April 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

But on what mech is that the issue? What mech can fit an AC/20 or Gauss only without ammo, but an AC/10 with ammo? You can even put ammo for the AC/20 or the Gauss on a Raven or Cicada (but these builds are ineffecient - even without double heat sinks, you're basically wasting free cooling potential from engine sinks. Better take lots of energy weapons.) Maybe you'd get somewhere with a 55 or 60 ton mech with 2 ballistic slots. (Especially if it's symmetric. People hate to break symmetries and will not equip just a single AC/20 or Gauss...)

I would say Jagers and K2's can have such issues.

[3rdworld]

Thontor, on 08 April 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

3 tons lighter
Higher rate of fire
More ammo per ton
Better DPS
More durable
And while ammo can explode, it is much less likely to happen than the gauss rifle exploding.

Hotter. Less range, Lower alpha

Ammo/ton is irrelevant, they both do 150 dmg per ton of ammo.
DPS is the worst DMG stat.
RoF is only relevant when it gives you an advantage. .25 of the worst damage stat is not relevant.
If the ammo explodes it will cause much more damage than a gauss explosion.

Edited by 3rdworld, 08 April 2013 - 06:16 AM.

[El Bandito]

DV McKenna, on 08 April 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Fact, i'd give up 50 tons, take a hunchback and the D-DC would still lose even with it's weight advantage. AC 10's sure, the reload sound is pleasing. The weapon itself...not pleasing in the slightest.

See? It is variable, as I pointed out. How about you face my Dual AC5 (counts as boating right?), Triple SSRM and Dual LLaser/PPC D-DC with your Mlas cheese Hunchback? Bet you won't win.

3rdworld, on 08 April 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

Hotter. Less range, Lower alpha Ammo/ton is irrelevant, they both do 150 dmg per ton of ammo. DPS is the worst DMG stat. RoF is only relevant when it gives you an advantage. .25 of the worst damage stat is not relevant.

People seem to think we are trying to make AC10 seem better than Gauss. That is not the fact. People simply asked what edge does AC10 has over Gauss and we pointed out. And you guys are flipping.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 April 2013 - 06:18 AM.

[Grayseven]

Please also remember that state rewind for ballistics will dramatically change the reliability of ballistics. Anyone who has tried to hit a fast mech with ballistics knows that leading with them isn't an exact science when lag can put the mech you were just leading ahead of your shot right as you pull the trigger.

It would be foolhardy to start playing with ballistic balance before state rewind.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

See? It is variable, as I pointed out. How about you face my D-DC with Dual AC5 (counts as boating right?), Triple SSRM and Dual LLaser D-DC with your Mlas cheese Hunchback? Bet you won't win.

Actually i bet i would.
Dual AC5 on a D-DC is a total waste of a D-DC
DPS is not a great viable option here in MWO.

It would be great to have private lobbies to put peoples terrible theories to test..alas...PGI you have failed us all!

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 April 2013 - 06:20 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

I would say Jagers and K2's can have such issues.

That would require you to decide to use additional non-ballistic weapons that are heavier than medium lasers on these mechs. But why would you? There is very little benefit to be had from this. Having your firepower being focused in identical behaving weapons with identical recycle times (aka "boating") is usually the most efficicent way to build your mech.

And even if it wasn't - there is very little design space left. The next best laser after the medium is either the pulse laser (which is just 2 tons of ammo), or the large laser (which is a whopping 4 extra tons per LL compared to the ML). There is just n o real sweet spot in between. Not to mention you greatly increase your heat load with this, meaning you will run into more heat issues.

It's unlikely that a 2 AC/10, 2 MPL or 2 LL Catapult or Jagermech would do any better than a 2 AC/20 or 2 Gauss Rifle (with or without 2 MLs) catapult or Jagermech.