25 replies to this topic

[TheBossHammer]

Just to make it clear, the power triangle I am referring to are the three weapons right now that, in my experience playing the game since closed beta, most people have considered overpowered at some point or another. It really isn't the point of this post so do not just read this and go "I don't think X is overpowered" because it won't affect what I'm trying to say, this is just the easy start. Also, none of these weapons have ever really been OP when mounted alone. It's only when boated that they have become a problem, as the next paragraph goes into more detail on.

PPC
Gauss Rifle
AC20

Now, the reason I am defining this triangle is that these weapons were all considered underpowered during closed beta, but have since changed because of the increase in the availability of good weapon slots on some of the newer mechs. The Gauss Rifle got good because people figured out that mounting two of them on a K2 would give you a 3 shot kill on an Atlas, the AC/20 jumped up there because people figured out that the same setup would give you a 2 shot kill on an Atlas, and the PPC got there because people figured out that the PPC could do the 2 shot (or even a 1 shot sometimes) at better range if you had 6 of them on a Stalker. While other weapons have been considered OP at times, these are the 3 that have contributed to the High Alpha problem.

So, what's the point of defining this? Well, the fact that all three of these guns have the same drawback: A low fire rate. While two of them have high heat generation and one of them has the possibility of an explosion, the common factor is that all of these guns are dependent on putting one huge alpha strike on a pinpoint location once every 5 seconds or so. The solution? It's not to weaken the guns or to weaken the size of the alpha, because the former will weaken the utility of the weapons used alone and force people to boat them and the latter will just force people to min/max even more.

The solution?

#1: Give the autocannon family, SRMs and machineguns a few new tricks: All of them should break weapon convergence when they hit a target (if you get shot in the shoulder, something tells me you won't be able to keep your gun pointed at the guy who shot you!) and the larger autocannons (AC10, LBX 10, AC20) should actually throw the target's torso off to one side if you hit in the side torso, and light mechs should get completely blown off their feet if they get hit by an AC/20. This should only work on the Autocannon Family, SRMs and MG's because lasers work by burning through a location, not imparting a massive force on a location, and Gauss Shells are meant to go straight through the target, not embed themselves in it. LRMs are also not going to help here because they come down on the target, meaning all of their force is directed straight down.

Clarification: This would only work within optimal range, aka within the range where your weapon lights up green. That way it wouldn't help snipers nearly as much as it helps brawlers, and it would contribute to the real point of such a change, which is limiting the effectiveness of weapons like the PPC that can plow most players at range once the distance has been closed.

#2: Give machineguns another neat trick: If you hit someone with machineguns and they have a Gauss Rifle, the Gauss Rifle should jam momentarily because the magnetic coils would vibrate out of alignment, and the gun itself should have a system to fix it, but it should take a second or two. Too much opposition already and I agree with most of the arguments, this isn't really necessary.

This will do a few things for the meta: People will actually run the AC/10, for starters, because the higher fire rate will make it possible to lock down larger mechs from around 500 meters or so and make it possible for a medium or heavy to skirmish at medium range with an assault, without increasing the one alpha lethality of these smaller mechs because it won't knock an Atlas completely off target if you hit in the dead center. This will also make massed machine guns a reality, because being able to consistently prevent your opponent from sniping off a body part with 2 AC/20's or 6 PPC's (and being able to shut down the dreaded Gauss Rifle entirely at close range, something that really needs to happen) is more important than putting out raw DPS.

The important thing is that people will stop running high alpha, one gun cheese builds because they won't work anymore. The 6 PPC Stalker wouldn't function if it couldn't put more than 2 of its PPC's into one location on a consistent basis, the 2 Gauss Rifle anything build would drop off the face of the earth if they couldn't fire when MG's are hitting them, and the AC/20 would get dominated by the AC/10 because of its lower fire rate.

For anyone that doubts whether something like this is valid in canon, watch this video, in particular the nova cat and the mad dog (vulture, for the newcomers).
http://youtu.be/aHGfIyYyIuY?t=3m36s

Then watch this video, and pay attention to when the Thor is able to cap our friendly Timber Wolf (Mad Cat)...
http://youtu.be/BNLBj8IyVN0?t=45s

This is a part of Mechwarrior and Battletech. Half of the fight is keeping your opponent's guns off of your mech, and being able to sacrifice lethality on your end to cut lethality on the opponent's end will go a long way towards solving the balance problem.

Edit: Lasers will be affected heavily by this change, so they'd all need some sort of buff. Most likely a DPS buff over duration, since this change would make holding a laser on target pretty difficult. Or the damage could be shifted to the front end of the beam, so that most of the damage is dealt on the initial hit.

Quoteception: More good stuff, same basic idea. The part about hitting a target dead center slowing them down makes a ton of sense. Thanks Miekael.

Miekael, on 26 June 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

It doesn't have to be drastic, but just having heavy ballistics, and even SRMs throw off aim to enemies, or say if you hit dead center cause the enemy to slow down a few KPH and have to rebuild the acceleration momentum, could be good quirks introduced to gameplay to make it feel like you are in these three story tall walking death machines. Although with this idea, it would work better if convergence was actually a factor in the game, it could be less rock the mech and more restart the convergence of weapons for pinpoint strike. As for energy weapons, if convergence was ever tweaked, I would let one of their advantages to be having better/faster convergence over ballistics.

TL/DR: The fix isn't to make every gun perfectly balanced because that will just encourage min/maxing and boating, because people will pick one gun and use it exclusively. The fix is to reward players that take varied loadouts by allowing them to stop their opponents from being able to use their cheese effectively, and the suggestions I gave above will do just that.

Edited by TheBossHammer, 26 June 2013 - 12:39 PM.

[Bagheera]

<<actually ignore me, nothing to see here>>

Edited by Bagheera, 26 June 2013 - 10:39 AM.

[Redliner]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

#1: Give the autocannon family, SRMs and machineguns a few new tricks: All of them should break weapon convergence when they hit a target (if you get shot in the shoulder, something tells me you won't be able to keep your gun pointed at the guy who shot you!) and the larger autocannons (AC10, LBX 10, AC20) should actually throw the target's torso off to one side if you hit in the side torso, and light mechs should get completely blown off their feet if they get hit by an AC/20.

If they did this, I would play with my pants off.

[TheBossHammer]

Bagheera, on 26 June 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:

<<actually ignore me, nothing to see here>>

Edit: lol i jumped the gun a bit, thanks for the correction

Edited by TheBossHammer, 26 June 2013 - 10:41 AM.

[Miekael]

Personally I don't see Gauss as a problem, it has been delt with enough, the low heat and similar range profiles makes a good synergy with PPC. When boated by themselves, the mech just becomes a walking bomb with a 30 alpha strike instead of 40-45 which is more tolerable in my opinion for most people.

As for AC/20s and PPCs, both weapons have lower heat then what they did in table top, in CB the AC/20 was lackluster and got a heat buff to bring it in line. Later the weapon would receive a velocity buff as well, and with the release of DHS, I feel this weapon could have it's heat value changed back to the original. This may not due much to curb the problem of the duel AC/20 platform, but I think it would be a step in the right direction. Same applies to the PPCs.

As for option one, I think that is a great idea, option two not so much, again Gauss rifles I feel are fine and don't need another senseless nerf.

[TheBossHammer]

Miekael, on 26 June 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

Personally I don't see Gauss as a problem, it has been delt with enough, the low heat and similar range profiles makes a good synergy with PPC. When boated by themselves, the mech just becomes a walking bomb with a 30 alpha strike instead of 40-45 which is more tolerable in my opinion for most people.

As for AC/20s and PPCs, both weapons have lower heat then what they did in table top, in CB the AC/20 was lackluster and got a heat buff to bring it in line. Later the weapon would receive a velocity buff as well, and with the release of DHS, I feel this weapon could have it's heat value changed back to the original. This may not due much to curb the problem of the duel AC/20 platform, but I think it would be a step in the right direction. Same applies to the PPCs.

As for option one, I think that is a great idea, option two not so much, again Gauss rifles I feel are fine and don't need another senseless nerf.

I definitely see where you are coming from, the Gauss is a little weak right this second. What I'm worried about is this: if option one happens, the Gauss Rifle's ultra high, ultra low heat DPS will become the king at long range again (like it was back in closed beta), and the gun still works at close range, while the AC/20 is worthless beyond 500 meters or so. Option 2 really isn't option 2, it's "Lets preemptively prevent the Gauss Rifle from turning into God once the PPC and the AC/20 stop being a problem" but it's separate because it's the less important half. I'd be totally ok with it if the first half was the only part that got implemented. Thanks for the input!

[ObsidianSpectre]

I'm not entirely sure that #1 helps the problems any. Doesn't this just mean that the first person to fire wins, unless that person was using lasers? It seems like the only thing really getting nerfed here would be lasers, which probably don't need it. All the other changes roughly cancel out since ballistic weapons are both affected by and cause the effect. (It would be fun seeing lights go sailing when they caught an AC/20 round though, and I always thought AC/20 Ravens should launch themselves from the recoil - it'd make a joke build so much more funny!)

I'm definitely opposed to #2. I really don't like any solution that involves expanding the web of ridiculous forced counters. If one system counters another, it should be a natural result of the involved mechanics, and not a check like "if I fire a machine gun and you have a gauss, you lose".

[Bagheera]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

Edit: lol i jumped the gun a bit, thanks for the correction

There was much gun jumping, and then I decided best to just walk away, lol.

[Miekael]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

I definitely see where you are coming from, the Gauss is a little weak right this second. What I'm worried about is this: if option one happens, the Gauss Rifle's ultra high, ultra low heat DPS will become the king at long range again (like it was back in closed beta), and the gun still works at close range, while the AC/20 is worthless beyond 500 meters or so. Option 2 really isn't option 2, it's "Lets preemptively prevent the Gauss Rifle from turning into God once the PPC and the AC/20 stop being a problem" but it's separate because it's the less important half. I'd be totally ok with it if the first half was the only part that got implemented. Thanks for the input!

I just don't see Gauss reclaiming the throne it once had, the explosion attribute of the weapon brought it in line with brawling, and it's velocity is still slow enough to dodge at long range. If PPCs could be tweaked right, I could see both the duel Gauss, and something along the lines of a three PPC sniper (think awesome) as being the primary builds for sniping in the game. 30 point alpha strikes I feel are just more acceptable in game play when in comes to sniping mechs.

[TheBossHammer]

ObsidianSpectre, on 26 June 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

I'm not entirely sure that #1 helps the problems any. Doesn't this just mean that the first person to fire wins, unless that person was using lasers? It seems like the only thing really getting nerfed here would be lasers, which probably don't need it. All the other changes roughly cancel out since ballistic weapons are both affected by and cause the effect. (It would be fun seeing lights go sailing when they caught an AC/20 round though, and I always thought AC/20 Ravens should launch themselves from the recoil - it'd make a joke build so much more funny!)

The first half definitely wouldn't be "first person to fire wins" because the person who fired first would essentially be wasting the shot trying to hit the side torso. This would mean that the double AC/20 build would get one good shot in, like it already does, but the opponent would be back on target before the cooldown is even halway up and the Dual AC/20's would start behaving like one AC/20 instead. Even in the best case scenario, if the player somehow maintained 2 AC/10's on target without taking a single hit from his opponent using a similar weapon, the very best he could do is hold the opponent for a second, once every half AC/10 cooldown. The other player would get a chance to shoot, and if he's popping the center torso, chances are he'll still win. The only weapons that are going to get affected by a change like this are weapons with a long cooldown, and only really when boated. If i fire one PPC, chances are I can still hit the opponent on the second shot because I know where the gun is going to end up. However, because my torso is bouncing all over the place and I don't have any convergence going on, while I might score a second hit in my hypothetical 6 PPC Stalker, the reality is that I'll effectively be running on 1 PPC, and my damage numbers will reflect that. Actually the lack of convergence would work in the favor of the player who has been hit, because they'll be able to shoot back with their guns without needing to get the reticle completely on target.

ObsidianSpectre, on 26 June 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

I'm definitely opposed to #2. I really don't like any solution that involves expanding the web of ridiculous forced counters. If one system counters another, it should be a natural result of the involved mechanics, and not a check like "if I fire a machine gun and you have a gauss, you lose".

You're right about the second half though. It was really just an alternative to help balance option 1, check my reply to Miekael to see what I was getting at. I'm probably gonna pull it though, it's really not necessary to get my point across.

Edited by TheBossHammer, 26 June 2013 - 11:17 AM.

[Miekael]

It doesn't have to be drastic, but just having heavy ballistics, and even SRMs throw off aim to enemies, or say if you hit dead center cause the enemy to slow down a few KPH and have to rebuild the acceleration momentum, could be good quirks introduced to gameplay to make it feel like you are in these three story tall walking death machines. Although with this idea, it would work better if convergence was actually a factor in the game, it could be less rock the mech and more restart the convergence of weapons for pinpoint strike. As for energy weapons, if convergence was ever tweaked, I would let one of their advantages to be having better/faster convergence over ballistics.

[TheBossHammer]

Miekael, on 26 June 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

It doesn't have to be drastic, but just having heavy ballistics, and even SRMs throw off aim to enemies, or say if you hit dead center cause the enemy to slow down a few KPH and have to rebuild the acceleration momentum, could be good quirks introduced to gameplay to make it feel like you are in these three story tall walking death machines. Although with this idea, it would work better if convergence was actually a factor in the game, it could be less rock the mech and more restart the convergence of weapons for pinpoint strike. As for energy weapons, if convergence was ever tweaked, I would let one of their advantages to be having better/faster convergence over ballistics.

Personally I'd have energy weapons deal more damage overall than they currently do (PPC NOT INCLUDED :/ ) and have ballistics gain the stuff I suggested in option 1. Energy weapons have always been the killing blow in Battletech while ballistics have been more meant to keep the opponent from shooting back, as the AC/20 in the fluff is really just meant to blow off arms in one shot and the other autocannons are just weaker versions of the same principle. I like the other ideas though, might add some of them to the original post.

[MeatForBrains]

The only thing the guass rifle needs is a better sound effect.

[ObsidianSpectre]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

The first half definitely wouldn't be "first person to fire wins" because the person who fired first would essentially be wasting the shot trying to hit the side torso. This would mean that the double AC/20 build would get one good shot in, like it already does, but the opponent would be back on target before the cooldown is even halway up and the Dual AC/20's would start behaving like one AC/20 instead. Even in the best case scenario, if the player somehow maintained 2 AC/10's on target without taking a single hit from his opponent using a similar weapon, the very best he could do is hold the opponent for a second, once every half AC/10 cooldown. The other player would get a chance to shoot, and if he's popping the center torso, chances are he'll still win. The only weapons that are going to get affected by a change like this are weapons with a long cooldown, and only really when boated. If i fire one PPC, chances are I can still hit the opponent on the second shot because I know where the gun is going to end up. However, because my torso is bouncing all over the place and I don't have any convergence going on, while I might score a second hit in my hypothetical 6 PPC Stalker, the reality is that I'll effectively be running on 1 PPC, and my damage numbers will reflect that. Actually the lack of convergence would work in the favor of the player who has been hit, because they'll be able to shoot back with their guns without needing to get the reticle completely on target.

I see what you're saying now, mostly - you're timing the reconvergence so that the heavier weapons can't cause enough of the shake to keep other weapons off target as much as smaller weapons. I don't understand how getting hit means you can hit back without aiming well, though - are you just talking about a shotgun effect, where projectiles are all over the place and something's bound to hit?

I do understand how this will help end the high alpha meta, but I still think this is going to also wind up harming weapons that don't need to be nerfed. This also seems like a frustrating way to go about it - imagine getting hammered by this effect from multiple mechs and then dying without landing a shot, not because your aim was terrible, but because you couldn't stop getting shot long enough to return fire. Yeah, maybe you should have used cover and managed your lines of sight better, but this seems like it could be extra salt in the wound that would cause no end of frustration and anger in players.

I'd really like to see PGI just lower the projectile speeds way down again, and then see where we're at. If these weapons become effective assault killers, but basically useless against lights and mediums, I think we could be in a good place.

Edited by ObsidianSpectre, 26 June 2013 - 11:42 AM.

[Lostdragon]

This is an interesting idea but I just don't like the thought of having weapons used to counter one another. What about mechs who can't mount those weapons? Most of them are pretty marginalized already and I think this system would only reinforce that.

[Miekael]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

Personally I'd have energy weapons deal more damage overall than they currently do

I would rather not see the heat and damage numbers messed with.

When PGI started this project up, they took the numbers from TT. The numbers in TT I feel were balanced with each other, and the game, because of the other game mechanics involved in TT, single heat scale, random hit locations, etc etc. Now when you take those TT numbers, but not the rest of the mechanics, and introduce different game mechanics into the system, that wasn't even complete with features to begin with, then the numbers are not going to pan out right.

PGIs solution so far has been to tweak the numbers, but this has just seem to lead to certain weapons becoming OP and really never achieves balance in the game. I think this is because the numbers are still balanced to each other and other carried over aspects such as tonnage and crit space. I think a better approach would be to return to the TT values and try to balance weapons based on firing characteristics. Example, I would have the lasers remain unchanged, damage over time, with pin point convergence and a fast rate, thus requiring the pilot to keep on target to apply damage. Then the lasers themselves should be balanced around cool down, and beam duration with each other, say the pulse family has a .25 beam duration that might bring them in line. Ballistics would have longer/more drastic convergence times, but would still but full damage in single locations. I would try having ACs and Gauss have projectile drop as well. PPCs would follow under ballistics without projectile drop. Missiles... well, I don't think splash damage is a helpful game mechanic and with it GL on figuring that out PGI. But I would probably remove that aspect, and balance around flight paths, travel times and cool downs.

[Otto Cannon]

So swapping pinpoint for stunlock as the new meta?

Nah.

[TheBossHammer]

ObsidianSpectre, on 26 June 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

I see what you're saying now, mostly - you're timing the reconvergence so that the heavier weapons can't cause enough of the shake to keep other weapons off target as much as smaller weapons. I don't understand how getting hit means you can hit back without aiming well, though - are you just talking about a shotgun effect, where projectiles are all over the place and something's bound to hit?

I do understand how this will help end the high alpha meta, but I still think this is going to also wind up harming weapons that don't need to be nerfed. This also seems like a frustrating way to go about it - imagine getting hammered by this effect from multiple mechs and then dying without landing a shot, not because your aim was terrible, but because you couldn't stop getting shot long enough to return fire. Yeah, maybe you should have used cover and managed your lines of sight better, but this seems like it could be extra salt in the wound that would cause no end of frustration and anger in players.

I'd really like to see PGI just lower the projectile speeds way down again, and then see where we're at. If these weapons become effective assault killers, but basically useless against lights and mediums, I think we could be in a good place.

The idea is that if you get hit by anything, you can fire back to throw your opponent's convergence off target. Even if you are getting pummeled by AC/2's, which would be the abusive case here, if your opponent has four of them, all you need is one and if you can poke him once with it, his 4 AC/2's will start acting like a single AC/2. Without convergence, damage can't be focused on a particular body part, and while he's technically dealing 8 dps to your 2 dps, it won't count for anything because it will be falling all over your mech. Heck, it might even make taking high leg armor worth the tonnage

What I'm trying to do from a gameplay standpoint is find a way to make the guy who's about to be on the receiving end of an alpha strike able to cut down the lethality of that alpha by shooting back. That way, while one big alpha strike will work some of the time, you won't typically be able to focus it on one body part like you can now unless the other guy doesn't see it coming, in which case you totally deserve to plow him. I'm also trying to find a way to keep the big guns relevant without the ability to mass alpha, and adding incentives like the AC/20 torso spin is one of those. Lowering projectile speed, to me at least, just seems like it would frustrate people even more. Heck, the worst part of closed beta was being completely unable to hit anything with the AC/20.

Also, in response to Lostdragon, there's only one mech in the game that can't mount at least one of the following: AC/2/5/10/LBX10/20, SRM2/4/6, and MG's. That mech is the Swayback, and it already has torso mounted lasers that won't be affected at all by losing convergence. That's actually a large part of the balancing factor here. Also, I threw out the system that specifically countered the Gauss Rifle. What's left affects almost half the guns in the game, and the other half could have their damage buffed a little (but not the PPC or Gauss).

Otto Cannon, on 26 June 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

So swapping pinpoint for stunlock as the new meta?

Nah.

Stunlock won't happen. It's legitimately impossible unless the numbers are done horrifically. And in any case, you can still shoot under what I just said, you just can't target one body part with your whole alpha. No convergence =/= Stunlock by any means.

[TheBossHammer]

Miekael, on 26 June 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

I would rather not see the heat and damage numbers messed with.

When PGI started this project up, they took the numbers from TT. The numbers in TT I feel were balanced with each other, and the game, because of the other game mechanics involved in TT, single heat scale, random hit locations, etc etc. Now when you take those TT numbers, but not the rest of the mechanics, and introduce different game mechanics into the system, that wasn't even complete with features to begin with, then the numbers are not going to pan out right.

PGIs solution so far has been to tweak the numbers, but this has just seem to lead to certain weapons becoming OP and really never achieves balance in the game. I think this is because the numbers are still balanced to each other and other carried over aspects such as tonnage and crit space. I think a better approach would be to return to the TT values and try to balance weapons based on firing characteristics. Example, I would have the lasers remain unchanged, damage over time, with pin point convergence and a fast rate, thus requiring the pilot to keep on target to apply damage. Then the lasers themselves should be balanced around cool down, and beam duration with each other, say the pulse family has a .25 beam duration that might bring them in line. Ballistics would have longer/more drastic convergence times, but would still but full damage in single locations. I would try having ACs and Gauss have projectile drop as well. PPCs would follow under ballistics without projectile drop. Missiles... well, I don't think splash damage is a helpful game mechanic and with it GL on figuring that out PGI. But I would probably remove that aspect, and balance around flight paths, travel times and cool downs.

I agree with you 99% there, the only problem is that some weapons were just legitimately underpowered/overpowered in the TT system back at mwo's launch because of pinpoint accuracy, and I don't think changing the firing characteristics would necessarily fix that. I'd be totally ok with going back to TT numbers if the system I suggested was implemented though, then it would make sense because hitting stuff with the bigger guns would actually be pretty difficult, like the hit tables in TT would suggest. If an AC/2 can provide some protection from a PPC at 6 tons, even if it does 2 damage, people will take it.

[ObsidianSpectre]

TheBossHammer, on 26 June 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

The idea is that if you get hit by anything, you can fire back to throw your opponent's convergence off target. Even if you are getting pummeled by AC/2's, which would be the abusive case here, if your opponent has four of them, all you need is one and if you can poke him once with it, his 4 AC/2's will start acting like a single AC/2. Without convergence, damage can't be focused on a particular body part, and while he's technically dealing 8 dps to your 2 dps, it won't count for anything because it will be falling all over your mech. Heck, it might even make taking high leg armor worth the tonnage

What I'm trying to do from a gameplay standpoint is find a way to make the guy who's about to be on the receiving end of an alpha strike able to cut down the lethality of that alpha by shooting back. That way, while one big alpha strike will work some of the time, you won't typically be able to focus it on one body part like you can now unless the other guy doesn't see it coming, in which case you totally deserve to plow him. I'm also trying to find a way to keep the big guns relevant without the ability to mass alpha, and adding incentives like the AC/20 torso spin is one of those. Lowering projectile speed, to me at least, just seems like it would frustrate people even more. Heck, the worst part of closed beta was being completely unable to hit anything with the AC/20.

I'm pretty sure I do understand how your idea works, my point was that it's likely to be pretty frustrating a lot of the time. The first person hit is at an immediate disadvantage, and while he can even things up again, he has to do so by hitting back while under an aiming penalty. And what if there are two mechs with AC/2s?

Another issue with this is that most of these high alpha snipers are shooting once, and then going back into cover. This convergence penalty isn't going to do anything about that, and in fact may support this meta as anyone who isn't poptarting or ridge humping and fighting someone who does is going to find it much harder to return fire before the shooter gets back into cover.


edit: On lowering projectile speed - it makes it harder to hit fast moving mechs, but atlases, stalkers, etc. would still be pretty easy targets. That'd be intended, and I don't see that it'd be frustrating as it's something that can be learned and compensated for, it's completely under your control, and the idea here is that you shouldn't even be trying to shoot Jenners at 500m with your AC/20s. Save it for the the Atlases, which you'll have no problems hitting.

Edited by ObsidianSpectre, 26 June 2013 - 12:27 PM.