44 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

Right now, the Autocannon family is pretty much dead. While you will see people pugging in AC/2 boats and driving an abundance of glass canon twin AC/20 'mechs, the majority of AC weapons are generally regarded as underpowered and inferior to their sniping cousins.

With weapons that fill long, medium and close range roles, correcting this set of guns would be an incredible first step to helping balance greatly.

My proposed buffs to AC have tried to focus less on damage, and more on the other things I think dragging ACs down. Here's my brief thoughts on each - remember, if you have ideas too, that's what this thread is for!

--

AC/2 -50% heat reduction. The AC/2 is an almost reasonable long range weapon despite it's "stay on target" style of play, primarily because it is flexible and offers a decent ROF. However, they are way too hot to use effectively on the 'mechs that could otherwise use them, rendering them massively inferior to the alternatives like the Gauss Rifle.

Note, if your experience with AC/2s includes the macro boats, I feel the need to stress that these things are terrible. they do very little damage, but the shake and noise makes it feel like you're being clobbered. If you ignore that and focus on moving around between shots, you'll utterly obliterate them.

AC/5 - 40% heat reduction and a velocity increase to 1800 from 1300. There are two reasons the AC/5 isn't a viable weapon in the game right now, and the first is heat - it runs just as hot as the AC/2, making it really tough to operate consistently. Second, the reason the AC/5 feels worse than the AC/2 despite all the buffs they've done is velocity. It's rounds move at a horrid 1300, compared to the AC/2's that move at 2000. This means the AC/5 is going to be a far harder weapon to hit with, even within it's own optimal range, and leaving it inferior to PPCs.

UAC/5 - I think the heat shouldn't be touched on the UAC/5, but increasing it's velocity to 1800 would again make the weapon far easier to hit with, and be the nudge it needs to go from "2nd tier" to "1st tier." It's a gun that's ALMOST really good, but just feels inferior, and I think that's a big chunk as to why.

AC/10 - The AC/10 is right now the AC most in limbo. It's not long range enough to be useful at midrange, it's projectile speed is terrible for sniping, and it's not more damaging than Gauss/PPC up close. My solution is not to buff the damage, but rather, increase the ROF by almost a third. Making this weapon recycle rapidly (and thus increasing it's DPS) would make it an exceptional brawling weapon, with enough drawbacks (heat, ammo) to keep it from being abused.

All that said, I would propose bringing the velocity up to at least 1300, as it is as a horrible 1100 right now - neutering the weapon not just in it's ability to hit, but it's ability to have synergy with other weapons.

LBX/10 - I recommend the same ROF buff, but the bottom line is, the "cone" of shots will never be really more useful, the way things are, than the single punch shot. Likewise, lots of CBT fans are saddened that the LBX/10 doesn't really feel usable at longer ranges than the AC/10.. again, due to the slow velocity. Thus in addition to the ROF buff, I propose LBX/10 projectiles get moved to 1800-2000 for velocity. This will give them a further "falloff" and make them far easier to hit with - perfectly in keeping with the spirit of LBX - while at the same time still having the scattered damage trade-off. It seems like a much more viable niche than focusing on the crits.

AC/20 - This one I KNOW is going to catch some heated debate, largely because tons of pug games feature at least a couple people in 2xAC/20 K2 or Jagger. The reason I am suggesting increasing it's velocity anyway is because it is only viable on twin-AC20 'mechs and those 'mechs are very, very easy to kill due to the weight taken by the AC/20s.

However, people wanting to run a SINGLE AC/20 are vastly underpowered. Again, a lot of this has to do with simple projectile velocity - you're going to have an easier time hitting the exact spot you want with an ER PPC going at 2000, when the AC/20 only goes 900. Again, this makes the AC/20 not synergize with other weapons well - as it's velocity isn't close enough to them to work in concert properly - meaning the only way to really use AC/20s well is to mount two (and synergize them with each other as they travel at the same speed).

I believe bringing the velocity up will make single AC/20 builds, backed by other weapons such as instant-hit lasers, drastically more useful without touching the weapon's other stats and offering a minimal bonus to 2x AC/20 'mechs (slightly easier to aim, sure, but they can't mount backup weapons to blend with them).

-

And there you have it. I think damage on the ACs isn't the problem, and the most obvious solution is for people to call for more damage - and PGI is going that route in response. But it's not working. The serious problems are their DPS via ROF (not per-shot, which would turn them into midrange snipers instead of brawlers), their velocity in many cases and with the light ACs, their scorching levels of heat.

There are other weapons that need help too, but if we were to focus on Autocannons for a patch... I would totally dig that. We need better ACs!

Edited by Victor Morson, 30 June 2013 - 10:27 PM.

[zztophat]

The buff I would like to see for the AC/10 is an ammo per ton buff, as well as a projectile speed and maybe, maybe some range. It doesn't so much need a DPS buff as it needs some... quality of life boosts.

It should be the cannon you choose when you have room for one good ballistic and you need it to be good all-around. Like cents or hunchbacks, only having to carry one ton of ammo in those cases would be invaluable.

[Kmieciu]

AC/20 has 5 DPS and the best alpha-damage-front-loading capability. It's the best brawling weapon since SRM nerf. It is perfect the way it is.

AC/2 needs +25% more ammo per tonne (up to 100)
AC/5 needs better ROF (5 DPS) and +25% more ammo per tonne (up to 40)
AC/10 needs slightly better ROF (5 DPS) and +25% more ammo per tonne (up to 20)
LBX/10 needs slightly better ROF (5 DPS) and +25% more ammo per tonne (up to 20) and spread overhaul (it should spread out up to 100 meters and then remain constant, like SRMs)

[Oderint dum Metuant]

If you want to help the AC 10, it needs a projectile speed boost, and the AC 20 needs a shorter effective range.

[Ralgas]

Only problem with ac's is that ppc's and ppc/gauss are way to effective and efficient atm. If/when they take that off the "competitive" table they will return, and then you only have to screw around with the ac5/10/20/lbx.

Down at the levels they are used fequently i'd more like to see ac5 heat raised 1 point (to 2) on both ac/5 uac/5 to differentiate them from ac2's and to put brakes on uac/5 splatting now it's jam chance is reasonable again. ac5 to 1.25 rof (in line with avg ac's)

ac/10 speed and range buffs. give lbx a range shorten (effectively swap ac/10lbx as they are now) and a slight rof increase (It doesn't need pellet dmg increase when you can get in close) if that doesn't fix it spread reduction

on the fence over an ac/20 speed buff (it would probably just make it a 500m sniper) , but then i also believe it should get a rof nerf to 5 secs and dps in line with the rest of ac's (uac5 excepted)

it should be noted if/once dps becomes more relevant (ie alpha warrior gets a nerf bat) that ac's are already still lower heat and almost 2x the sustained dmg on lasers

Edit: if ammo was to be increase no more than 10%, personally it's fine now, 3 tons is plenty for a match with leftover now unless you're "boating" or a dakka fiend

Edited by Ralgas, 01 July 2013 - 12:40 AM.

[Monky]

AC2 - ammo per ton increase (20-25%), heat decrease (25%)
AC5 - cyclic rate at 1 per second
UAC5 - cyclic rate at 1 per second, ammo per ton increase to match AC5
AC10 - cyclic rate at 1 per 2 seconds, heat decrease (30%), ammo per ton increase (25%). Projectile speed AND max range increase past the point where an AC20 shot would deal 10 damage, by a significant margin.
LB 10-X - cyclic rate at 1 per 2 seconds, ammo per ton increase to match new AC10 ammo, damage per pellet at 1.5, faster projectile speed.
AC20 - ammo per ton increased to 10.

That's what I would like to see.

Edited by Monky, 01 July 2013 - 12:35 AM.

[One Medic Army]

Did you say the AC/5 runs as hot as the AC/2?
No, no it does not.
They both generate 1 heat per shell, but one is a 2 dmg shell every 0.5 seconds and the other is a 5 dmg shell every 1.5 seconds.
The AC/5 is actually the third coolest running Ballistic weapon, behind the MG and the Gauss, or in other words it's the coolest running Autocannon.

The AC/5 needs a fire rate buff, because it's also the lowest DPS ballistic weapon aside from the MG.

The AC/10 needs a range boost, or else it will always be overshadowed by the AC/20's ability to still deal 10dmg/shell at 540m while only weighing 2 tons more and having twice the pt-blank per-shell dmg.

The LBX needs several things, one of which is definitely a velocity boost, it also needs a damage boost per pellet pretty severely.

UAC/5 is fine as is, when you consider that the only downside it currently has is mainly due to the PPC-alpha meta rather than it's own deficiencies.

AC/2 could definitely use a heat reduction, and probably an ammo boost. It should be the lightest AC, but it's heavier than the AC/5 when you add in heatsinks and ammo requirements.

The AC/20 is fine as is.

Edited by One Medic Army, 01 July 2013 - 12:45 AM.

[stjobe]

One Medic Army, on 01 July 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

Did you say the AC/5 runs as hot as the AC/2?
No, no it does not.
They both generate 1 heat per shell, but one is a 2 dmg shell every 0.5 seconds and the other is a 5 dmg shell every 1.5 seconds.
The AC/5 is actually the third coolest running Ballistic weapon, behind the MG and the Gauss, or in other words it's the coolest running Autocannon.

Exactly. My dual-LL, dual-AC/5 Firebrand (yes, it's a Rifleman "frankenmech") actually cools down when I only fire the dual AC/5s - even if I hold down the trigger continuously.

I also agree with another poster above that the main reason the AC family seems underwhelming is that the PPC in particular currently is too good. It could do with having the pre-HSR buffs removed, in effect increasing its heat and lowering its velocity.

[Otto Cannon]

I don't think the AC10 needs range since the 20 has half the ammo for the same damage at 540m. What it could really do with is a ROF increase to 2seconds. That would at least give it the same dps as the AC20 for 2 less tons.

[El Bandito]

Only thing I would suggest is that yes, AC2 definitely needs heat lowered and LBX pellets need damage buff.

You guys have better ideas on the rest.

Edited by El Bandito, 01 July 2013 - 01:27 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

I wish someone would rename the auto-cannons so they can have whatever damage per shot value actually is justified.

The Light Auto-Cannon should probably deal 5 damage and 1 heat per shot every 1.5 seconds, and the Medium Auto-Cannon could deal 7 damage and 1 heat per shot every 2 seconds.

[Demos]

Basically, I'd love to see the ammo doubled per TT standards
100 shots AC2 (yeah, Ihnow, only 45 in TT - what a crap)
40 for AC5 AND UAC5
20 for AC2
10 for AC20

As the (ER)PPCs are way to good, I'd adjust them and THEN decide, if further adjustments for ACs would be necessary.
Then I'd like to see a slight buff of the RoF for AC10/LBX10 to 2.25 sec. (and a reduced cone for LBX).
Also, the RoF for AC5 and UAC5 should be harmonised at 1.33 sec.

[El Bandito]

Demos, on 01 July 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Basically, I'd love to see the ammo doubled per TT standards 100 shots AC2 (yeah, Ihnow, only 45 in TT - what a crap) 40 for AC5 AND UAC5 20 for AC2 10 for AC20 As the (ER)PPCs are way to good, I'd adjust them and THEN decide, if further adjustments for ACs would be necessary. Then I'd like to see a slight buff of the RoF for AC10/LBX10 to 2.25 sec. (and a reduced cone for LBX). Also, the RoF for AC5 and UAC5 should be harmonised at 1.33 sec.

Yes, ACs definitely NEED more ammo to stay competitive. On top of their already heavy weight, I need to bring 7-8 tons of ammo just so multiple ACs can last through the match.

Edited by El Bandito, 01 July 2013 - 03:27 AM.

[aniviron]

I think most of the acs are viable (maybe small velocity increases to the 5 and 10, substantial increase to the rof of the lb10, and a heat decrease for the 2) but ammo per ton would make a pretty huge difference. As it stands, a ballistic weapon is so heavy that outside of certain assault builds, you either have one of them or your build is pure ballistic. The problem is that the only guns worth taking just one of in the game are the gauss and ac20, leaving the other ballistics in a weird spot. Boating works pretty well with the 2, 5, and taking two 10s is reasonable enough- sure, you're out of tonnage for other weapons, but you no longer have to choose between having enough ammo or having enough backup guns. Right now the low ammo counts are essentially a four-ton tax on most ballistic weapons on top of their already considerable weight. Increasing ammo per ton gives PGI a way to tweak the weight of the weapon system without actually tweaking the mass of the gun itself, something they have stated they are unwilling to do. If that weren't the case, I would suggest reducing the weight of most of the ac family.

[Liberator]

zztophat, on 01 July 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

The buff I would like to see for the AC/10 is an ammo per ton buff, as well as a projectile speed and maybe, maybe some range. It doesn't so much need a DPS buff as it needs some... quality of life boosts.

It should be the cannon you choose when you have room for one good ballistic and you need it to be good all-around. Like cents or hunchbacks, only having to carry one ton of ammo in those cases would be invaluable.

ALL the ac weapons need additional ammo per tonn. Now that we bring it up, all ammo dependent weapons in general need more ammo.

[PanzerMagier]

this thread just smacks of stupid. My ac weapons are fine as is.
Ac 2's might need a TINY heat reduction ,but that's about it. Maybe when 12v12 get's implemented, we can look at increasing ammo by a small amount.

You know mr. victor morson, PGI listened to people to buff PPCs, Personally I was quite fine with them. They worked and I used them extensively. But then people like you came along, QQ'ng about weapons that were working just fine. And PGI had to unfortunately listen to those people. Now look in what kind of a mess we're sitting in.

I see plenty of ballistics users out there of Ac5's utlra5's ac2's. And they're doing quite fine. However, I'm seeing dimwitted 4 year old's piloting quad ppc boats and they're doing better than most veteran pilots, not because of skill but because of broken gameplay mechanics. Complain about things that are broken. Not about things that might be or just plainly isn't.

[Victor Morson]

stjobe, on 01 July 2013 - 01:09 AM, said:

Exactly. My dual-LL, dual-AC/5 Firebrand (yes, it's a Rifleman "frankenmech") actually cools down when I only fire the dual AC/5s - even if I hold down the trigger continuously

Dual LL and Dual AC/5 isn't very good, primarily because regular AC/5s aren't very good.. but.. I couldn't possibly call that a Frankenmech. AC/5 and LL work well...ish (the velocity sucks) together, it's just that AC/5 is terrible.

Edited by Victor Morson, 01 July 2013 - 05:30 AM.

[Victor Morson]

PanzerMagier, on 01 July 2013 - 03:36 AM, said:

this thread just smacks of stupid. My ac weapons are fine as is.

What version of MW:O are you playing? I want to play that version.

PanzerMagier, on 01 July 2013 - 03:36 AM, said:

You know mr. victor morson, PGI listened to people to buff PPCs, Personally I was quite fine with them. They worked and I used them extensively. But then people like you came along, QQ'ng about weapons that were working just fine. And PGI had to unfortunately listen to those people. Now look in what kind of a mess we're sitting in.

PPCs were awful. PPCs needed a nerf. Lots of units wanted them buffed.

You know what every single hardcore unit wanted done to PPCs, the Blazing Aces included (I know, because this was the LAST time PGI contacted the community about feedback): We wanted (remember, this is from closed beta, NOT the PPCs we have now) the PPC recycle brought up to 8+ seconds and the DPS to be kept exactly the same, but front loaded into longer-recycle hits.

Like EVERYONE wanted that.

We got high velocity (2000, the easiest to aim travel-time weapon shy of the AC/2) damage buffed PPC that has a refire on par with a medium autocannon.

So don't you dare go blaming PGI's massive overbuffs and overnerfs on the community. If they decide enough people don't like something they will savage it beyond repair, and occasionally at random they'll massively overpower something and then not fix it. But nobody wanted what we got.

PanzerMagier, on 01 July 2013 - 03:36 AM, said:

I see plenty of ballistics users out there of Ac5's utlra5's ac2's. And they're doing quite fine. However, I'm seeing dimwitted 4 year old's piloting quad ppc boats and they're doing better than most veteran pilots, not because of skill but because of broken gameplay mechanics. Complain about things that are broken. Not about things that might be or just plainly isn't.

The quad AC/2 boats are way way way too hot to be effective. The only reason they are popular is if you set them up to macrofire, they are loud and noisy and full of - as people put it - "Dakka." They hit targets and shake them around a lot and make tons of noise, too.

Veteran pilots will ignore it, aim, and murder the things two salvos later.

Their usefulness and commonality are not linked, whatsoever. The AC/20 Jagger is better, and that thing is completely flimsy - at least it can do serious damage and not just "shake people up."

Edited by Victor Morson, 01 July 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[superteds]

don't really think there's anything particularly wrong with the AC family. little tweaks here and there, but nothing that needs PGI to apply yet another ham-fisted balance pass to.

[Roland]

Upgrade the LBX-10's damage to 1.5 per pellet.