51 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

My only gripe about AC2 is the AC10 sized convulsions they induce when hit. They're AC2s...

[Navy Sixes]

Jin Ma, on 18 September 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

people complain about AC2?

Yeah, there were a couple of threads that cropped-up today, complaints about Jags and autocannons in general, but as they went on they all started focusing in on AC2 builds.

I'm all for a serious discussion on the possible OP/UP of any given system; I've been griping about OP ECM for a while, now (Some agree with me; some don't. Some make good arguments, some don't. But that's a different thread). My point is that no one seems to be able to make any argument for AC2's OP other than, basically, "I got killed by them today, and I don't think that should be happening."

[Psilos]

As a lover of ac2s I pray they don't touch the heat/dps, but i could see rolling back on the cockpit shake and explosion graphic generated by the ac2, I can't see how its fun for any of the enemies i'm blinding because I do put my ac2 fire over your cockpit.

[The Boz]

DPS and range and slot economy aside, the shake/smoke/flash is ANNOYING AS HELL and completely shuts down the enemy retaliation if the attacker is in any way capable.

[Vassago Rain]

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

They're AC2s, for chrissake! 6 tons a piece, the dumbest heat in the game, no PP if your target is moving at all (let alone is half-way competent and knows to keep swiveling their torso) and they suck down so much ammo that to run more than two is to commit at the very minimum another 4+ tons to turning your mech into an unmanageable heat-beast with XL-engine-vulnerable STs and legs like boom-pinatas.

Each round does 2 pts of damage. You're really going to get on these forums and put your name next to a complaint about a weapon that does 2 pts of damage!?

People say DPS is OP. People say the smoke and shake are OP.

If you're trudging through the open, where the enemy can lay a steady stream of AC/2 fire into you, with all that smoke and shake and DPS, you've got whatever you have coming. There is a nerf for continuous AC/2 fire already. It's called terrain awareness.

What's next? Small lasers? LRM5s? SRM2s? Make your case; change our minds... we're all laughing listening.

They are already complaining loudly in each match about OP cheese ballistic boats. It's not gonna stop until all ballistics are worthless, and the most meta build is a 7 small laser XL 385 awesome.

[Navy Sixes]

The Boz, on 18 September 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

DPS and range and slot economy aside, the shake/smoke/flash is ANNOYING AS HELL and completely shuts down the enemy retaliation if the attacker is in any way capable.

I disagree. As I said earlier, you only get that good DPS out of a target standing still in the open. You are only going to get that DPS to the CT (or the obscured vision) if the target is standing still in the open and facing you. And as I said earlier, if you are standing still in the open and facing incoming fire, you deserve to get all tore up. As for the slots, we are again talking about a weapon that does 2 pts. of damage per hit. If an AC2 should be more than one slot, how many slots should an SRM2 be? How many slots should a medium pulse laser be? And range? AC5 is only 100m less and does more than twice the damage per round. I don't think 720m for 2pts. of damage is OP, when you consider the 6-ton-each (plus lots of ammo) weight cost. No other weapon weighs so much and delivers so little for a successful hit, except maybe LRMs, when you add in ammo, Artemis, BAP, TAG, and what have you. I digress...

But as you say, all that aside. I agree, the shake-n-smoke are annoying, but easily countered with some tactics. You start taking some serious AC2 fire, you don't turn to face it straight off, unless you're running something like an Atlas with stupid armor, and even then only if you're a *******-jack gunner/pilot. You find cover first, before all those little "pin-******" all over your arms and upper torso can add up. Then you start working on the shooter with whatever weapons you have. PPC or Gauss? Wait for them to stick their head up and ZAP. LRM's? Get a lock and make it rain. Brawler? Move in, from cover to cover. You don't need much precision to put an AC20 round through all that smoke and shake at 100m.

The difference between AC2 builds and the old alpha PP sniper meta is that even if an AC2 build gets a bead on you while you're closing, one, two, three, four, five, or even six shots are not going to core you through before you find some more cover. It will take even longer if you are moving fast and keeping your torso on a swivel.

I remember the first few games I played before ghost-heat. Step out from behind cover... sizzle. Holy {Scrap}! My CT armor is gone! I better get- sizzle. Dead.

That's OP.

Edit: Hey, when did "*******" become profane?

Edited by Tycho von Gagern, 18 September 2013 - 07:25 PM.

[PanzerMagier]

So here's a game that has already broken away from cannon and from TT and everything else coherent to MWO.

Why should the ac2 suck? Why should you put a weapon in the game that is gameplay-wise completely useless?
Point in case any weapon introduced here should not just be playable but also viable. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand the dynamics of a "game".

[Bagheera]

stevemac, on 18 September 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

all this nerf this nerf that I cant wait till the they bring collisions back in then you will see people screaming nerf

I'm going to go ahead and say it: Collisions, and by which you mean knockdown, is/are never coming back. The game's been around too long without them, too many players never experienced the game with knockdown, and the developers won't risk alienating them with that big of a change.

Also, 12v12 on Frozen City with Knockdown. It's already a ****-show on that tiny map. With Knockdown it will look like an episode of the Keystone Kops on Ice.

The Boz, on 18 September 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

DPS and range and slot economy aside, the shake/smoke/flash is ANNOYING AS HELL and completely shuts down the enemy retaliation if the attacker is in any way capable.

Yeah, except that it doesn't. Impulse values right now are basically a joke, a token hold-over to a time in closed beta when impulse, smoke, and flash were actually viable things to do to an enemy. It used to be worth using an AC20 outside it's effective damage range just for the fear imposed by the high impulse value. Now it's a waste of a round. Count your blessings on this one - you don't want to see what actual shake/smoke/flash blindness is like.

Edited by Bagheera, 19 September 2013 - 06:13 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

I thought people would complain that they are ******, only useful against pros vs bads and people that really like narcoleptic dakka.

[Ahja]

The easy answer to the posters question is YES. If not for forum crybabies/trolls the Dev's would never have the excuse to not fix things that need fixing. I do see what you are trying to do poster however your effort is lost on them all.

[Homeless Bill]

I'd like to think I'm pretty civil and open-minded most of the time. Even if I don't agree with your opinion, I respect it. But not with AC/2s. If you think they're OP, you're bad. Period.

[The Boz]

Tycho, your post is laughable because you have no arguments. Here, let me destroy it now...

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

I disagree. As I said earlier, you only get that good DPS out of a target standing still in the open. You are only going to get that DPS to the CT (or the obscured vision) if the target is standing still in the open and facing you. And as I said earlier, if you are standing still in the open and facing incoming fire, you deserve to get all tore up.

Two things.
1. You don't have to be standing still and in the open in order to be attacked by an autocannon.
2. "That laser-based mech is attacking a ballistics mech! The audacity of that guy! KILL THE HEATHEN! The proper way to engage an autocannon is to torso twist while taking damage to all sections and dealing zero damage in return, and hope your friends take care of whoever is bothering you! If you resist, you deserve to die!"

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

As for the slots, we are again talking about a weapon that does 2 pts. of damage per hit.

Two points of damage, twice per second. DPS is 3.85. Takes up a single slot.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

If an AC2 should be more than one slot, how many slots should an SRM2 be?

AC2 has higher DPS, longer range, reliable mid- and short-range pinpoint damage, with a bullet speed that is over 6x that of an SRM.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

How many slots should a medium pulse laser be?

Again, the MPL has lower DPS, higher HPS, lower range, etc.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

And range? AC5 is only 100m less and does more than twice the damage per round.

And has lower DPS, lower range, larger and heavier gun, etc. Your point?

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

I don't think 720m for 2pts. of damage is OP, when you consider the 6-ton-each (plus lots of ammo) weight cost. No other weapon weighs so much and delivers so little for a successful hit, except maybe LRMs, when you add in ammo, Artemis, BAP, TAG, and what have you. I digress...

Because it's totally not about the DPS, it's about the damage per hit, right?
Dude. This isn't tabletop.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

But as you say, all that aside. I agree, the shake-n-smoke are annoying, but easily countered with some tactics. You start taking some serious AC2 fire, you don't turn to face it straight off, unless you're running something like an Atlas with stupid armor, and even then only if you're a *******-jack gunner/pilot.

Excellent tactical response! You come under fire from an AC2, you have two choices:
1. Fight back. Hard to do if the attacker isn't mentally deficient as it is impossible to maintain a bead on a moving target through the flashsmokeshake of AC2s hitting you every 0.52 seconds.
2. Run away. Because it's totally balanced that some weapons make people run away while others do not.
Yeah...

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

You find cover first, before all those little "pin-******" all over your arms and upper torso can add up. Then you start working on the shooter with whatever weapons you have. PPC or Gauss? Wait for them to stick their head up and ZAP. LRM's? Get a lock and make it rain. Brawler? Move in, from cover to cover. You don't need much precision to put an AC20 round through all that smoke and shake at 100m.

All this is written from the perspective of a player attacking a stationary turret that is incapable of rational thought.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

The difference between AC2 builds and the old alpha PP sniper meta is that even if an AC2 build gets a bead on you while you're closing, one, two, three, four, five, or even six shots are not going to core you through before you find some more cover. It will take even longer if you are moving fast and keeping your torso on a swivel.

This is the ONLY situation that torso twisting works.

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

I remember the first few games I played before ghost-heat. Step out from behind cover... sizzle. Holy {Scrap}! My CT armor is gone! I better get- sizzle. Dead.

That's OP.

"Yeah, this thing isn't OP because there was this one thing that was totally more OP than this so this isn't OP at all."

And in closing, I'd just like to reiterate my point.
AC2 has great range and DPS. Working as intended. They also have the shakeflashsmoke effect that prevents return fire. NOT working as intended.
The purpose of my post was to defeat arguments that are unsound, because I can't stand them.

Edited by The Boz, 19 September 2013 - 10:37 AM.

[Hexenhammer]

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

They're AC2s, for chrissake! 6 tons a piece, the dumbest heat in the game, no PP if your target is moving at all (let alone is half-way competent and knows to keep swiveling their torso) and they suck down so much ammo that to run more than two is to commit at the very minimum another 4+ tons to turning your mech into an unmanageable heat-beast with XL-engine-vulnerable STs and legs like boom-pinatas.

Each round does 2 pts of damage. You're really going to get on these forums and put your name next to a complaint about a weapon that does 2 pts of damage!?

People say DPS is OP. People say the smoke and shake are OP.

If you're trudging through the open, where the enemy can lay a steady stream of AC/2 fire into you, with all that smoke and shake and DPS, you've got whatever you have coming. There is a nerf for continuous AC/2 fire already. It's called terrain awareness.

What's next? Small lasers? LRM5s? SRM2s? Make your case; change our minds... we're all laughing listening.

I ridiculed the AC/2 haters back before the gun was nerfed. Pretty soon the MG will get nerfed because it's to loud and to threatening.

[Navy Sixes]

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

1. You don't have to be standing still and in the open in order to be attacked by an autocannon.

True. But that's not what I said, is it? Let's review:

Tycho von Gagern, on 18 September 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

...you only get that good DPS out of a target standing still in the open. You are only going to get that DPS to the CT (or the obscured vision) if the target is standing still in the open and facing you. And as I said earlier, if you are standing still in the open and facing incoming fire, you deserve to get all tore up

A ballistic weapon can attack a target while moving. Any weapon can attack anyone while they're moving. That has nothing to do with anything I said. Unlike other ballistics (or PPCs) the AC2 cannot inflict its entire DPS on a given hit box unless the pilot can keep the weapon trained on the same location continuously. Not an easy thing to do on a fast moving, torso twisting mech, and kind of pointless on a slow moving, torso-twisting, and heavily armored mech... we are talking about 2 points per hit, after all.

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

2. "That laser-based mech is attacking a ballistics mech! The audacity of that guy! KILL THE HEATHEN! The proper way to engage an autocannon is to torso twist while taking damage to all sections and dealing zero damage in return, and hope your friends take care of whoever is bothering you! If you resist, you deserve to die!"

I'm trying to kill every red triangle out there, Boz, laser-based or otherwise. They're trying to kill me. What're you doing? I've seen plenty of beam-weapons kill AC2 mechs. And finally, we tell all new players not to wander off, to stay with the group, to look out for each other. We tell them that because getting caught out on your own is a bad place to be. If your out on your own in a big, slow mech (Tell me you're not getting greased by AC2 mechs in a fast light, Boz! Is that why you're upset?) and your teammates aren't helping you, a little flash and shake from an AC2 are the least of your problems.

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Two things.

So, that was two, right?...

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Two points of damage, twice per second. DPS is 3.85. Takes up a single slot.

AC2 has higher DPS, longer range, reliable mid- and short-range pinpoint damage, with a bullet speed that is over 6x that of an SRM.

Again, the MPL has lower DPS, higher HPS, lower range, etc.

And has lower DPS, lower range, larger and heavier gun, etc. Your point?

Woah, Boz! Lot of number-crunching for someone who can't seem to count to two... I'm impressed. But your logic sort of defeats itself. You complain about the AC2s range, then go on to say it's PP is only "reliable" at "mid-and-short range." So is its range a problem or not? Are you complaining about taking 2 point hits scattered all over your mech at 700m? I'd hate to see you get started on LRMs!
All of the above weapons weigh far less than an AC2, without ammo, except the AC5. And the AC2 chews through ammo way faster than an AC5, so you have to pack more. Furthermore, there are only so many ballistic hardpoints to go around, so if you're looking for PP damage from a ballistic, AC-anything-besides-a-2 is the way to go.

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Excellent tactical response! You come under fire from an AC2, you have two choices: 1. Fight back. Hard to do if the attacker isn't mentally deficient as it is impossible to maintain a bead on a moving target through the flashsmokeshake of AC2s hitting you every 0.52 seconds. 2. Run away. Because it's totally balanced that some weapons make people run away while others do not. Yeah... All this is written from the perspective of a player attacking a stationary turret that is incapable of rational thought.

1) If your idea of 'fighting back' is standing in the open by yourself and engaging a target that already has a bead on you... Again, a little smoke and shake are the least of your problems.
2) I never said run away. I said find cover. Do you think they are the same thing? Could be you're on to the source of the trouble, here... Maybe the problem is that some weapons make some people run away while some people find cover and fight back..

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Because it's totally not about the DPS, it's about the damage per hit, right? Dude. This isn't tabletop.

How can it be about DPS unless you are actually hitting the target with that damage per round? You're kind of hung-up on DPS, Boz. AC2s DPS looks good on paper, but you yourself said it can't pinpoint at range. Unless the target stands there and takes it, there is no way you are going to get that DPS for more than 4-6 rounds, and almost none of it will be PP if the target is moving its torso, whatever the range. So if we're talking 2 points of damage peppered over a moving, torso-twisting target heading for cover... how is that OP? If we're talking a dumb*** that stands in the open facing incoming fire, why is it OP to expect them to fail?

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

This is the ONLY situation that torso twisting works.

You should always practice torso twisting. Always.

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

"Yeah, this thing isn't OP because there was this one thing that was totally more OP than this

So, to be clear, you're saying the only thing more OP than a four AC2 Jag is a 6 PPC Stalker... really!?

In conclusion,
The AC2 is a supression weapon. It doesn't do a lot of meaningful damage if you find cover. All that impulse is built in to make the enemy keep thier heads down and use more sophisticated tactics than standing there trying to shoot back at it. Your post makes it clear that you don't want to develop sophisticated tactics, as you equate finding cover to running away. I can't help you now, nor will I be able to help you see the folly of your next complaint against any weapon that has the OP nerve to kill you while you stand there getting shot.

The Boz, on 19 September 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

The purpose of my post was to defeat arguments that are unsound, because I can't stand them. Here, let me destroy it now...

Argument not destroyed.
FAIL

[Monky]

When people are screaming to nerf everything, that is how you know a state of balance is approaching.

[Grym]

I dont feel AC/2s damage wise are OP.

However on more than a few occasions ive died because i was running into a rock and not moving. I couldnt tell i wasnt moving some of the time, and other times i couldnt see the thing in front of me because my screen was shaking so bad.

Even with the screen shake i dont feel they are THAT OP. Annoying as stated by others above. But i would have to reference LRM screen shake with AC/2 shake. It just makes some situations not fun. I would rather run into an AC2 boat than a dual gauss/ac20 build.

But in all seriousness, have people given up on complaining about dual gauss/ac20? I thought for sure that would be the next up to the nerf bat plate.

[TexAce]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 18 September 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

I had been adamantly against PPC+Gauss all 5 months of its dominance, and before that I was against SRMpocalypse where the Skillcat was the OP mech to run. You could say I was a complainer, but I didnt see it like that because what was actually happening.

Now, nothing is extraordinarily overpowered. It's people bitching just for the sake of bitching. Before we had legitimate gameplay balance problems where it seriously effected the meta and how the game was played. Now we have bad idiots who cry all day on the forums, and rate the game 0/10 on metacritic for the sole reason that they're mad they cant be effortlessly winning games with EZ mode strats.

This games community is seriously, the f.ucking worst.

QFT

[The Boz]

WOW! Your response is RIFE with ad hominems and strawman tactics!
I must have hit a nerve...

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

A ballistic weapon can attack a target while moving. Any weapon can attack anyone while they're moving. That has nothing to do with anything I said. Unlike other ballistics (or PPCs) the AC2 cannot inflict its entire DPS on a given hit box unless the pilot can keep the weapon trained on the same location continuously. Not an easy thing to do on a fast moving, torso twisting mech, and kind of pointless on a slow moving, torso-twisting, and heavily armored mech... we are talking about 2 points per hit, after all.

The disadvantage could easily be shown to be an advantage as well. With a fast firing weapon, you can always exploit every moment that the enemy exposes the hitbox you're going for. No wasted DPS waiting for the chance that may not come, and you can always prioritize two areas, leaving the enemy with a damned choice. And 2 points per hit adds up fast.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

I'm trying to kill every red triangle out there, Boz, laser-based or otherwise. They're trying to kill me. What're you doing? I've seen plenty of beam-weapons kill AC2 mechs. And finally, we tell all new players not to wander off, to stay with the group, to look out for each other. We tell them that because getting caught out on your own is a bad place to be. If your out on your own in a big, slow mech (Tell me you're not getting greased by AC2 mechs in a fast light, Boz! Is that why you're upset?) and your teammates aren't helping you, a little flash and shake from an AC2 are the least of your problems.

Why the insinuation that I am upset? OR that I'm constantly being greased by AC2 mechs?
Are YOU upset that your ego is under attack because people are calling your favorite weapon OP?
Is that why you're all defensive all of a sudden?

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

So, that was two, right?...

Yes, that is two. There was one, and then there was two. What part confuses you?

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Woah, Boz! Lot of number-crunching for someone who can't seem to count to two... I'm impressed.

Thanks for yet another attack. How did you even get to the delusion that I can't count to two?

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

But your logic sort of defeats itself. You complain about the AC2s range, then go on to say it's PP is only "reliable" at "mid-and-short range." So is its range a problem or not? Are you complaining about taking 2 point hits scattered all over your mech at 700m? I'd hate to see you get started on LRMs!

The weapon still deals full damage at a very long range, and the projectile is still faster than most others. But yes, the weapon is most reliable at up to 500 meters. So?
Being less-than-perfect at something does not mean it is useless at other things. ESPECIALLY if it is better at those other things than half the other weapons in the game.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

All of the above weapons weigh far less than an AC2, without ammo, except the AC5. And the AC2 chews through ammo way faster than an AC5, so you have to pack more. Furthermore, there are only so many ballistic hardpoints to go around, so if you're looking for PP damage from a ballistic, AC-anything-besides-a-2 is the way to go.

So why did you even mention them if you can't even compare them?
Also, I don't know about you, but I don't have a problem aiming at a specific hitbox at 500m and less, unless it's a laterally-moving mech at 75+ kph.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

1) If your idea of 'fighting back' is standing in the open by yourself and engaging a target that already has a bead on you... Again, a little smoke and shake are the least of your problems.

I never said, nor implied, that you need complete exposure and target fixation in order to fight back. However, it is still impossible to fight back from behind cover...
Things that are fighting back: shooting at the enemy.
Things that are not fighting back: torso twisting away from the enemy while finding cover.
Torso twisting only works if you are trying to close a distance before you get in range of your weapons, and cover isn't available. In a fight, torso twisting only works on those rare few alpha-strike-every-four-seconds mechs that can afford to have three and a half seconds of 0 damage output against an enemy that is constantly pumping damage into them.

END OF PART ONE, BECAUSE THE FORUM IS BEING STUPID.

Edited by The Boz, 19 September 2013 - 03:05 PM.

[The Boz]

PART TWO, BECAUSE THE FORUM, IRONICALLY, CAN'T COUNT TO TWO WHILE COUNTING QUOTE TAGS.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

How can it be about DPS unless you are actually hitting the target with that damage per round? You're kind of hung-up on DPS, Boz. AC2s DPS looks good on paper, but you yourself said it can't pinpoint at range. Unless the target stands there and takes it, there is no way you are going to get that DPS for more than 4-6 rounds, and almost none of it will be PP if the target is moving its torso, whatever the range. So if we're talking 2 points of damage peppered over a moving, torso-twisting target heading for cover... how is that OP? If we're talking a dumb*** that stands in the open facing incoming fire, why is it OP to expect them to fail?

If you are having trouble hitting a target at 500m with a projectile that has a quarter second travel time, you need help. The DPS looks good on paper, and it looks good in game too. AC2s have a wonderful combination of low slot use for high DPS and high range, they have been my go-to AC of choice for over a hundred games in a row now.
And once again, we are NOT talking about a dumb*** that stands in the open and facetanks incoming fire... However, the AC2 will, in a duel, still pump out a LOT of damage WHILE reducing the damage that the enemy is capable of pumping out because of the disorienting smokeshakeflash. Yes, your cursor stays where you left it in spite of the shake, but that doesn't matter at all if you AND your target are both moving.
So, if you are facing a mech that is NOT a stationary turret, and you yourself are NOT a stationary turret, and the enemy has an AC2 or two, and you do not, we are back to two outcomes:
1. Get out of the line of fire. Find cover, see if you can find a way to reengage the target at your terms.
2. Try and fight back. You can torso twist while doing 0 damage and taking damage to random sections, or you can deal damage unreliably to random sections while you take pinpoint CT damage.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

You should always practice torso twisting. Always.

Only a sith deals in absolutes.
Hell, your own argument defeats itself here! Why isn't the AC2 mech torso twisting? Also, not all mechs can torso twist fast enough for it to matter.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

So, to be clear, you're saying the only thing more OP than a four AC2 Jag is a 6 PPC Stalker... really!?

No, I am paraphrasing your own comments. And I never mentioned a 4AC2 Jager OR a 6PPC Stalker.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

In conclusion,
The AC2 is a supression weapon. It doesn't do a lot of meaningful damage if you find cover.

Not a unique weakness; no weapon does meaningful damage if you find cover.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

All that impulse is built in to make the enemy keep thier heads down and use more sophisticated tactics than standing there trying to shoot back at it.

And that is precisely what I am going at. No other weapon in the game has the same "seek sophisticated counters or die" effect as this one. And out of those weapons, the AC2 has the fewest number of available counter tactics.

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 September 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Your post makes it clear that you don't want to develop sophisticated tactics, as you equate finding cover to running away. I can't help you now, nor will I be able to help you see the folly of your next complaint against any weapon that has the OP nerve to kill you while you stand there getting shot.

I want sophisticated tactics, but the AC2 trades in nothing for its ability to MANDATE sophisticated tactics, while still LIMITING those same tactics.
Argument destroyed. Again.
You fail. Good day, sir.

[Psikez]

The lack of understanding of how and when to torso twist in this thread is disturbing

Edited by Psikez, 19 September 2013 - 03:26 PM.