28 replies to this topic

[MeatForBrains]

According to some Battletech novel's I've read. The autocannons shoot a stream of rounds very quickly in a burst. It's not a single shot round.

If it was limited to 5 rounds, and had an extremely tight cone of fire, it would make the LBX more viable and set it apart from the Gauss. Because really, from what I have read the difference in an LBX and an AC is the ammo loaded into it.

Super fast rate of burst fire. Cycle times apply between bursts.

AC2 - 2 rounds (1 damage each?)
AC5 - 5 rounds (1 damage each?)
AC10 - 5 rounds (2 damage each?)
AC20 - 5 rounds (4 damage each?)
LBX - instant shot
Gauss - stays the same
PPC - other balance options not discussed here.

[Stoicblitzer]

there is no hope. buy a phoenix package.

[Rizzelbizzeg]

That would feel weird when we've been shooting single big shells this whole time IMO. However, I'm not opposed to having like different manufacturers of weapons where some of the manufacturers use the single shells and some use the burst shot. Diversity is good

[Theodor Kling]

The novels and TRO fluff actually tell us, that SOME ACs fir bursts , of different lengths and calibres. And your idea is only one of many possible options for a manufacturer. I think the AC20 article on sarna actually quotes the existence of single shot AC20s , although as an oddity.
So single shot AC2s exist. It just so happens that we have only those here. So far ...we can always hope for diversity of different manufacturers.
If we didn't have pinpoint accuracy anyway, the different models would also diversify there... you can't tell me that the long barrelled AC on the back of a Marrauder and the sawn of stump of a barrel on a Centurions arm have the same shooting characteristics

[Thuzel]

This is a fantastic idea, but PGI.

[Purlana]

Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings, with Autocannon/20s doing massive damage while having very short range. An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, and causing higher damage per shell. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.

[Braggart]

Rizzelbizzeg, on 09 July 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

That would feel weird when we've been shooting single big shells this whole time IMO. However, I'm not opposed to having like different manufacturers of weapons where some of the manufacturers use the single shells and some use the burst shot. Diversity is good

single shell would always be better.

I personally wish that ACs functioned like the MG. As long as you hold the controls, you fire, but the DPS is spread over time, and over a mech, which allow for mechs to put out serious damage, but be require to keep their aim on a mech at all times. No popping over a heal and letting 2 AC 20s go and falling back. Instead if you want the most out of your ACs you gotta get in range and keep those rounds flying.

[MustrumRidcully]

Braggart, on 09 July 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

single shell would always be better.

I personally wish that ACs functioned like the MG. As long as you hold the controls, you fire, but the DPS is spread over time, and over a mech, which allow for mechs to put out serious damage, but be require to keep their aim on a mech at all times. No popping over a heal and letting 2 AC 20s go and falling back. Instead if you want the most out of your ACs you gotta get in range and keep those rounds flying.

Not always. But the mutli shell version needs a DPS buff, because otherwise, it's just worse.

My approach to try to balance such differences might be to use damage output over 10 seconds, expressed as DPS figure, should be the same.

AC/2:
DPS: 2 damage per 0.5 seconds = 4
DPS10: 42 damage in 10 seconds = 4.2

AC/20:
DPS: 20 damage per 4 seconds = 5
DPS10: 60 shots in 10 seconds = 6

PPC:
DPS: 10 damage every 4 seconds = 2.5 DPS
DPS10: 30 damage in 10 seconds: 3 DPS

So a hypothetical AC/20 that fires 1 shot per second would need to deal 6 DPS10, or 60 damage in 10 second or 5.45 damage per shot.
DPS: 5.45 damage every second: 5.45
DPS10: 60 damage in 10 seconds: 6 DPS

It could very well be that DPS10 is still too long a time frame to balance for. Maybe DPS 5 or DPS 7 would work better. as it is, you would only be able to become equal to the base weapon after 10 seconds, and surpass it if you fire for more than 10 seconds. And this requires uninterrupted fire at full recycle rate. 10 seconds in a direct firefight is actually pretty long.
A 6 ML Mech would already have dealt 90 damage in that time, which can blow off an arm, leg or sometimes even a side torso.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 09 July 2013 - 08:10 AM.

[Purlana]

Ammo values per ton and heat values would need to be changed if you want this...

Edited by Purlana, 09 July 2013 - 08:13 AM.

[Braggart]

MustrumRidcully, on 09 July 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

Not always. But the mutli shell version needs a DPS buff, because otherwise, it's just worse.

My approach to try to balance such differences might be to use damage output over 10 seconds, expressed as DPS figure, should be the same.

AC/2:
DPS: 2 damage per 0.5 seconds = 4
DPS10: 42 damage in 10 seconds = 4.2

AC/20:
DPS: 20 damage per 4 seconds = 5
DPS10: 60 shots in 10 seconds = 6

PPC:
DPS: 10 damage every 4 seconds = 2.5 DPS
DPS10: 30 damage in 10 seconds: 3 DPS

So a hypothetical AC/20 that fires 1 shot per second would need to deal 6 DPS10, or 60 damage in 10 second or 5.45 damage per shot.
DPS: 5.45 damage every second: 5.45
DPS10: 60 damage in 10 seconds: 6 DPS

It could very well be that DPS10 is still too long a time frame to balance for. Maybe DPS 5 or DPS 7 would work better. as it is, you would only be able to become equal to the base weapon after 10 seconds, and surpass it if you fire for more than 10 seconds. And this requires uninterrupted fire at full recycle rate. 10 seconds in a direct firefight is actually pretty long.
A 6 ML Mech would already have dealt 90 damage in that time, which can blow off an arm, leg or sometimes even a side torso.

I'll make it quite simple. They have already tried what you are talking about. Its called lasers. They changed lasers to a DPS weapon, instead of instant. All that did is make the other Instant single location weapons the best weapons. Which is why Guass/PPC/AC20 are the best weapons in the game. Doing all that work for other kinds of autocannons would be pointless, as they would always be worse. 20 damage in 1 spot, or 30 damage spread across 3 or 4...............which is better. 20 in 1 spot of course, destroying a portion of a mech as quickly as possible is the priority, if its the CT even better.

DPS will never ever be favored as long as I can frontload enough damage into 1 section of your mech to crush it.

Edited by Braggart, 09 July 2013 - 08:19 AM.

[ShadowbaneX]

Purlana, on 09 July 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Ammo values per ton and heat values would need to be changed if you want this...

No they wouldn't.

[FactorlanP]

Braggart, on 09 July 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

I personally wish that ACs functioned like the MG. As long as you hold the controls, you fire, but the DPS is spread over time, and over a mech, which allow for mechs to put out serious damage, but be require to keep their aim on a mech at all times. No popping over a heal and letting 2 AC 20s go and falling back. Instead if you want the most out of your ACs you gotta get in range and keep those rounds flying.

I believe you are describing a Rotary Auto Cannon, or RAC.

I really wish that PGI had went with the bursts, like the OP suggests. It would help to solve the pin point damage issue with multiple AC20s.

PPCs would still need to be addressed, but I believe that they could be fixed by putting them back up to their original heat values.

Purlana, on 09 July 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Ammo values per ton and heat values would need to be changed if you want this...

No, each round in a ton of ammo would be considered a "cassette" containing enough rounds to fire a single trigger pull's burst.

I believe the term cassette is used frequently throughout the novels.

[Purlana]

FactorlanP, on 09 July 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

I believe you are describing a Rotary Auto Cannon, or RAC.

I really wish that PGI had went with the bursts, like the OP suggests. It would help to solve the pin point damage issue with multiple AC20s.

PPCs would still need to be addressed, but I believe that they could be fixed by putting them back up to their original heat values.



No, each round in a ton of ammo would be considered a "cassette" containing enough rounds to fire a single trigger pull's burst.

I believe the term cassette is used frequently throughout the novels.

Not really, because your DMG is now spread out. What is the difference between your new AC, and the medium laser? You just changed the AC/20 into a medium laser with different heat / weight / DMG values.

Edited by Purlana, 09 July 2013 - 08:32 AM.

[General Taskeen]

Purlana, on 09 July 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

Not really, because your DMG is now spread out. What is the difference between your new AC, and the medium laser? You just changed the AC/20 into a medium laser with different heat / weight / DMG values.

The burst fire UAC's and rapid fire RAC's in MW:LL hit pretty hard and they are not like lasers at all. If you shoot once, for instance with a UAC/10, you expend 3 shells, but they fire so rapidly that they are basically on top of each other, so the spread is very little unless they are moving.

A laser is always a hitscan and beam duration, which is nothing like a rapid firing gun that is programmed to shoot individual shells with various velocities and range.

Edited by General Taskeen, 09 July 2013 - 08:44 AM.

[Braggart]

General Taskeen, on 09 July 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

The burst fire UAC's and rapid fire RAC's in MW:LL hit pretty hard and they are not like lasers at all. If you shoot once, for instance with a UAC/10, you expend 3 shells, but they fire so rapidly that they are basically on top of each other, so the spread is very little unless they are moving.

A laser is always a hitscan and beam duration, which is nothing like a rapid firing gun that is programmed to shoot individual shells with various velocities and range.

This isnt about Ultra, its about why would you ever take an AC that spreads its damage over one that deals it all to 1 location.

[mike29tw]

Braggart, on 09 July 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

This isnt about Ultra, its about why would you ever take an AC that spreads its damage over one that deals it all to 1 location.

So basically you don't like it because it sounds inferior than our current ACs, am I right?

[Ph30nix]

i first learned to love the AC in MW3, and they used short bursts.

there is a bigger problem though that needs to be fixed first.

Of all the weapons in the game only the ac/20 (dual'ed) honestly FEELS like your doing damage. Everything else just feels like your pecking away for way to long.

Note i said "FEELS like" and yes 4-6 ppc's can lay some hurting as well but even those compared to 2 ac/40's or 2 guass even just doesnt FEEL like its doing the same damage. I dont know if that make sense or not but there it is.

[Purlana]

mike29tw, on 09 July 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

So basically you don't like it because it sounds inferior than our current ACs, am I right?

Don't you think brawlers have suffered enough? First we replace SRMs with feathers, and now you want weaker AC/20s? Why don't you just give me a pillow, this way when I get up to a Stalker I can have a pillow fight with him.

Edited by Purlana, 09 July 2013 - 08:59 AM.

[Ph30nix]

Braggart, on 09 July 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

This isnt about Ultra, its about why would you ever take an AC that spreads its damage over one that deals it all to 1 location.

if the burst is quick enough (MW3 was fairly fast) slow/stationary targets would still feel the same hammer most of the time for faster/smaller mechs they would still take serious damage but it wouldnt be an insta gib.

and all of this would be negated by pilot skill which should always be a factor.

[mike29tw]

Purlana, on 09 July 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

Don't you think brawlers have suffered enough? First we replace SRMs with feathers, and now you want weaker AC/20s? Why don't you just give me a pillow, this way when I get up to a Stalker I can have a pillow fight with him.

No need to freak out, just trying to grasp why Braggart' dislike it.