8
Profiteer, on 07 August 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:
OLD: I'm in a good 4-man in 8 vs 8. Our 4 pugs are terrible and do little. Our 4-man has to put out enough firepower to kill 8 mechs.
NEW: I'm in a good 4-man in 12 vs 12. Our 8 pugs are terrible and do little. Our 4-man have to put out enough firepower to kill 12 mechs.
NEW: I'm in a good 4-man in 12 vs 12. Our 8 pugs are terrible and do little. Our 4-man have to put out enough firepower to kill 12 mechs.
This, exactly
Cabusha, on 07 August 2013 - 02:42 PM, said:
I've been running 4 tons of ac20 ammo for months now in my wang, and it does just fine in 12 man. Normally I either lose the arm early or finish the match with a round or 2 to spare. Feels fine.
I agree, AC20 does fine with 4 tons. Doubling ammo would really add that much to the 20. However, mechs that rely on the smaller caliber ACs are at a huge disadvantage. See my reply below please.
Joseph Mallan, on 07 August 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:
Ammo is suppose to be limited, an run out in battle if not used wisely. Why do you think Mercs in Canon preferred energy rich builds.
Im tired of the "canon" arguments. JFC, we are so far away from canon now, you can stop with that argument any day now.
Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 07 August 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:
TT stock builds usually bring 1 or maybe 2 tons of ammo per gun or launcher ....
/snip holy wall of text
/snip holy wall of text
Levi, you hit the crux of the issue pretty much head on.
Joseph Mallan, on 07 August 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:
Simple fix reduce armor t 150%. Problem solved.
Yeah, I seen your later post about being sarcastic, but really? Why even put that out there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My take on ballistics and why they need doubled ammo has always been this:
In canon the ammo counts were balanced against the armor. We now have doubled armor. It takes twice as many shots to kill a mech. Doesnt matter if you have a "team" you can depend on. I very seldom run a pure ballistic build anymore unless Im running in a group. I dont consider a PUG group to be a "team". Most of them are too busy with their helmets and licking the windows on the short bus.
Ballistics have travel time, you have to lead them, and the convergence can get screwed up quite easily. They helped travel time alot, so its less of a factor. You still have to lead your targets though and because of this, convergence can get really screwy when your aiming at a target 200m away, but your reticule is targeting (read convergence is set at) the ground at 500m.
In spite of what most people think, ballistic builds still can have heat issues. Look at the Jagers and Phracts for evidence. Mechs that are designed to run 3-6 ballistic weapons. They will over heat very easily. An Ilya with 3 UAC5s, a Jager with 4 ballistic weapons (4 AC2s, or 2 AC2s & 2 AC5s), or a Phract 4X all are prime examples of mechs that can and will overheat quite easily if you push them too hard. Especially when your adding in your 2-3 MLs to increase your damage to compete with the Alpha firing face rollers.
When you start to carry more than a pair of ACs, ammo is more of a concern. They are your primary weapon. You start and end the fight with them. When the ammo is gone, your done. Look at a Phract 4X, Ilya, and Jager DD as prime examples.
AC20s and gauss are less effected by this as they are high point damage weapons. Fire one shot and its 15/20 damage. Cover up, and fire again in 5 seconds. The guy thats running smaller calliber ACs has to take multiple shots to be as effective, and because of this they often have to fire on the move which decreases accuracy a great deal and damage is spread across multiple locations.
Lighter mechs like mediums and lights are heavily hit by the lowered ammo counts. A Hunchy with an AC20 you can get 3, maybe 4 tons of ammo, and you really have to sacrifice to build it. Cents have the same problem. They simply have to give up too much to run the big gun. You cannot sacrifice speed on a medium because you will get insta gibbed right now. Mechs like Cicadas, Spiders, and Ravens really get hosed because AC2s are really heavy, and trying to carry enough ammo to even run a single AC2 (which I consider to be worthless, AC2s need to be run in pairs) is an exercise in futility. It might be possible to run a pair of AC2s with 2 tons of ammo if ammo counts were doubled. Right now you need 3-4 tons to make a pair of AC2s run a match.
The other problem is that PPCs are still far too good. I honestly cannot find a build where a pair of PPCs does not out perform a pair of AC10s or lower. Ive tested this on mechs that have the capability to run the same build, just switching the weapons. The PPCs always out perform the ballistics, always. I ran 2 ERPPCs on a Quikdraw last night. 20 DHS and its really hard to overheat the mech, giving me excellent sustained DPS and a decent alpha from 0 to 1000m. Honestly the only thing I can find that even close to a pair of PPCs is my Phract 4X with 4 AC5s and that relies heavily on ammo count to be effective.
Energy weapons are more effective over time. They hold nearly every advantage over ballistics by the end of the game. Dont give me the "add another ton" answer. Most mechs dont have the room to spare for another ton of ammo. They are maxxed out in everyway, engine, weapons, heat sinks. Id also be willing to bet that those that give that answer run primarily energy builds, with ballistic backup.
Everyone may not agree that ammo needs to be doubled and thats fine. However, doubling ammo counts for ballistic weapons is not going to HURT anything. It will actually encourage build diversity I feel because people will need to make a smaller investment tonnage wise to run different configurations of guns, instead of being vested in a single caliber. It can also allow people to run better backup weaponry for when they do run out. Lets not forget those that want to play full on ballistic mechs can actually be effective the entire match.
