

Need An Ac 15
#1
Posted 10 April 2013 - 12:39 PM
#2
Posted 10 April 2013 - 01:01 PM
The difference between the AC 10 and AC 20 is only 2 two tonnes so there is little need for an intermediary in terms of mass. Likewise once you account for the additional range and ammunition of the 10s a solid argument can be made for taking either, there is really no need to split the difference.
What we really need is an "AC 1" or "Heavy Machinegun" something that masses around 2 - 3 tonnes and has similar DPS to a Medium Laser. As it stands there are a lot of mechs, Cicada's and Spiders specifically, running about with wasted ballistic slots.
Barring that PGI should buff the DPS of the Machineguns, so that a Spider 5K or Cicada 3C with 4 has at least a shot at doing some damage with them.
Edited by HlynkaCG, 10 April 2013 - 01:30 PM.
#3
Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:22 PM
#4
Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:47 PM
#5
Posted 10 April 2013 - 09:11 PM
#7
Posted 10 April 2013 - 09:26 PM
LBX-5 would be interesting too, provided they alter the cone thing they have now for LBX.
#8
Posted 10 April 2013 - 10:40 PM
AC20 has a range of 270-810 weighs 14 tons using 10 slots shot speed of 900
AC10 has a range of 450-1350 weighs 12 tons using 7 slots shot speed of 1100
You can see that as the round goes up in size the range decreases so in theory an AC15 would be:
AC15 range 300*(to 350* max)-1000*(1100s* max) weight 13 tons and use 8 slots with a shoot speed of 1000
The Gauss weighs more but would do the same damage at a greater range (660-1980) and travels at 1200 speed. The advantage being the GR has no heat. While an AC15 would generate 4 or 5 heat, have less ammo per ton (8 or 9 shots per ton) because the round would be huge compared to a standard Gauss round. Meaning to achieve what is already done by the GR you would need more ammo and slots/tons as well as more HS to compensate for the heat. This is why the AC15 doesn't exist. It just doesn't make sense.
*Speculative numbers but it would not exceed the max range of the AC10. There is argument to be made that it could be higher. The rest of the numbers are patterned off of existing numbers.
Edited by SixStringSamurai, 10 April 2013 - 10:56 PM.
#10
Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:35 AM
#11
Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:56 AM
MasterErrant, on 12 April 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
they could just make teh existing AC relevant....
#12
Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:59 AM
#13
Posted 12 April 2013 - 10:40 AM
White Bear 84, on 12 April 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:
they could just make teh existing AC relevant....
Again, instead of just doubling the extreme ranges of weapons, individual weapons should have different damage drop off ranges to give them different roles. Making the AC/20's damage drop off sharply after its 270m primary range would give the AC10 an actual role, a cannon that does more damage farther than the AC/20. Right now, the AC/20 does the same damage as an AC/10 out to 540 meters, which is the AC/10's effective range.
#14
Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:45 PM
#16
Posted 13 April 2013 - 01:48 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users