269 replies to this topic

[Galenit]

Kin3ticX, on 29 November 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

Look at the damage per ton.

AC10 540M = 9 Damage........... 135 damage per ton
AC20 540M = 10 Damage......... 70 damage per ton

AC10 600 meters = 8.33 damage...... 124.9 damage per ton
AC20 600 meters = 7.78....................54.4 damage per ton

AC10 700 Meters = 6.67................100 damage per ton
AC20 700 Meters = 4.07..................28 damage per ton

I dont know how you do your math and i dont know who do you can come to numbers around 100 damage a ton using a weapon that does a max of 20 damage with 14 tons or a weapon that does a max of 10 damage with 12 tons?

Let me try it for you:
270m
10 damage / 12 tons =0.83 d/t
20 damage / 14 tons =1.4 d/t

540m
9 damage / 12 tons = 0.75 d/t
10 damage / 14 tons = 0.71 d/t

700m
6.67 damage / 12 tons = 0.56 d/t
4.07 damage / 14 tons = 0.29 d/t

avarage damage/ton for ac 10 / ac20 up to 700m using 270m, 540m, and 700m shots as reference:
ac10 0.71
ac20 0.8

Depending on this i can say, the ac 10 nearly obsolente, it has a small niche between ac 20 and ac 5 at a range around 600 to 800m where it is better then the other to weapons. But you can take an uac 5 instead for the same effect ...

Ecto Cooler, on 30 November 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

So let's say we listen to the OP and nerf the AC/20, tomorrow he'll be starting a thread to nerf the AC/10. It's a vicious cycle that never ends.

I don't understand how I read so many, "Nerf this!" threads daily. Do people not have any foresight?

Its a problem over the whole ballisticclass (ac class is more matching) that messes up the balance between ballistic weapons (ac10 / ac20) and ballistic weapons vs energy and missileweapons.

Look at the numbers on the weapons page from the wiki.
Then imaginen (if you cant do that, make a cheap sheet with the changed numbers for youself) ballistics with only 2x range and look again at the numbers and you will see the overall ranges will match a lot better and the ballistic ranges will be consistence to each other.

Then you have variety, you have to choose between ac 20 for heavy punch or ac 10 for more range and that is an improvement over the just take the ac 20 it can do both ...

Do people see that?
No, often they dont see a patter when i mark it with colors in the sheet and nearly never they see a patter when they look at the raw numbers ...

Edited by Galenit, 30 November 2013 - 02:32 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Galenit, on 30 November 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:

I dont know how you do your math and i dont know who do you can come to numbers around 100 damage a ton using a weapon that does a max of 20 damage with 14 tons or a weapon that does a max of 10 damage with 12 tons?

If I am not mistaken, it's about ammo efficiency, basically. 1 ton of AC/20 gives you 7 shots. If you fire those shots at 540m range, you deal 70 damage with 1 ton of ammo. The AC/10 has the better deal here.

It's one faced to take into account when discssuing AC/20 and AC/10. But it's not the only one.

[Jakob Knight]

Hehe.....I predicted this would happen.

So, now that other weapons have been nerfed into non-use, it's time for the weapon that ended up being used more afterwards to be 'too good'. People always want whichever weapon happens to kill them to be nerfed because they are 'too good'. Bah!

Quite distasteful, especially when the AC/20 was -designed- to be a mech-killer at short range, and is actually -beaten- in damage output by such 'inferior' weapons as UAC/5s and AC/2s in actual game play (due to rate-of-fire, range, and number able to be mounted).

Finally, when a stationary light mech at short range takes two AC/20s fired together onto it's back and only suffers yellow damage to its armor (as happened in the match I was just in), I'd say AC/20s might need to be tweeked -upwards- if anything. Obviously they aren't doing their job. A bug? Perhaps. But knowing the bug is in place, the weapon must be adapted to overcome this, as no light mech should ever be able to take that kind of directed damage under any circumstances. That it can is evidence towards the need for the weapon to do enough damage to overcome whatever the Devs put into the game to prevent light mechs from dying when they should (which happens all the time when Locusts do not die immediately when taking the fire of 20+ points of damage -anywhere-, be it from lasers, cannon, or missiles).

Edited by Jakob Knight, 30 November 2013 - 06:23 AM.

[Cimarb]

Range could definitely be adjusted to balance the ACs out, I agree, but the more important balance is between the single-hit weapons and the damage-over-time/spread weapons. While some people are obviously going to defend their go-to weapons,this imbalance is causing the majority of the issues with weapons right now. Until it is fixed, range and heat changes are going to have very little benefit to balance as a whole.

Jakob Knight, on 30 November 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Finally, when a stationary light mech at short range takes two AC/20s fired together onto it's back and only suffers yellow damage to its armor (as happened in the match I was just in), I'd say AC/20s might need to be tweeked -upwards- if anything. Obviously they aren't doing their job. A bug? Perhaps. But knowing the bug is in place, the weapon must be adapted to overcome this, as no light mech should ever be able to take that kind of directed damage under any circumstances. That it can is evidence towards the need for the weapon to do enough damage to overcome whatever the Devs put into the game to prevent light mechs from dying when they should (which happens all the time when Locusts do not die immediately when taking the fire of 20+ points of damage -anywhere-, be it from lasers, cannon, or missiles).

That is one silly way to look at things. Something is broke, so let's break something that isn't to "fix" it... I hope I'm reading this wrong, but I don't see how I could be.

[Kin3ticX]

Galenit, on 30 November 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:

I dont know how you do your math and i dont know who do you can come to numbers around 100 damage a ton using a weapon that does a max of 20 damage with 14 tons or a weapon that does a max of 10 damage with 12 tons?

Let me try it for you:

I don't need you to try it for me.

[Lightfoot]

I like the AC10 better for the range and fire rate. More damage than the Gauss Rifle. I have a Victor that could take the AC20, but I use the 10 and some lasers instead.

I am tired of nerf this nerf that anyway. It's just diminished MWO's gameplay which was better last March. Much better. I suppose when nerfs are applied no one involved can say boy we really messed up, hurray! Right? uh-yep.

.....By the way, the AC10 has a fire-rate almost double the AC20 at 2.5 seconds and the AC10 gets a nice weapon knock to disrupt the aiming of targets along with that. I noticed everyone had Damage/ton charts up there, but no one was adding the DPS into it. The real number you want is DPS/payload ton, which could include ammo and heatsinks.

There is one more caveat that MWO has yet to put into play. Map enviornment. Once players know the map they are dropping on these loadouts become either tactically correct or the reason one team lost the match. So the idea of trying to balance any weapon at this time is basically just bleeping with love. Like the Gauss Rifle super-nerf. No one knows how the Gauss will perform on medium range to close range maps vs more functionally adapted ACs yet. It's never been put to the test to see what the balance is. Quite likely no one would take a Gauss to that battle, but it's too late to test that now, the whiners got their nerf in.

Edited by Lightfoot, 30 November 2013 - 01:51 PM.

[East Indy]

I've definitely noticed an uptick in dual-AC/20 Jagermechs, but they don't seem to be affecting match results.

[Svidro]

AC10s also have the advantage of allowing an XL engine when mounted in a torso slot, without weighing in at 16 tonnes (two AC5s). Has worked well in a shadow hawk, at least for me.

Looking at the numbers, seems like smurfy has 600/1800 max range on the UAC5, but a 620/1700 max range on the AC5? Oops? Or am I misreading something

[MustrumRidcully]

Svidro, on 01 December 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

AC10s also have the advantage of allowing an XL engine when mounted in a torso slot, without weighing in at 16 tonnes (two AC5s). Has worked well in a shadow hawk, at least for me.

Looking at the numbers, seems like smurfy has 600/1800 max range on the UAC5, but a 620/1700 max range on the AC5? Oops? Or am I misreading something

That's correct in the sense that PGI chose this numbers. They buffed AC/5 range. Why the max range doesn't follow the usual formula and is inconsistent with both previous and new range I have no idea.

[Svidro]

Thanks, I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised.

[anonymous161]

ac20 isn't broken I just want more weapon choices, more mechs that cover different roles, right now the game is pretty damn stale and small, the maps are not very large you have the one snow level that has good size but you will end up with either long boring games just looking for the enemy, or fast bs capping game.

We need more mechs, new weapons that dont make what we have useless just different. More weapons that cause different kinds of damage, like causing their mech to heat up or maybe cause it to have poor aim like the shaking in a way. This game had huge potential, hell I'd love to see this done on the next gen with the latest graphics engine to implement better physics and support *gasp* 64 players on nice big maps, have a great new story that lets you form up teams either with real players or like previous games ai buddies that are useful! Oh my would I be a happy mechwarrior fan...

Sadly this will never happen and what we have is..this. It's all we have and yes I do still play the older games but I've hungered for a true next gen mechwarrior experience for many years and this aint it! This sucks to be honest!

[anonymous161]

I also think it sucks how so many people use the jager dual ac20 mechs. It's just annoying and boring. I haven't been steam rolled by them as they are fairly weak but they chose to go for the quick and easy kill than slugging it out. Thats their right of course but makes the game rather lacking in fun.

[1Sascha]

Quote

That is just a foolish notion. Dual AC 20 should make shorter work of the enemy than other weapon combos. It is after all 2 of the biggest guns in the game.

Yup.

Dozier, on 27 November 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Leg them or side torso shot from range. Problem solved, next.

Yup²

2xAC20 = pretty situational build and useless at anything above med-range. Even on a smaller map like Forest Colony or River City you can either stay out of its way or try and snipe it from a distance. The guy will be slow, he'll have ammo stored in vulnerable locations, he has to deal with the less-than-stellar trajectories of his cannons, he'll suffer from looooong reload-times, etc.
If you try and rush a guy you know has a dual set of the biggest gun in the game, then it's your own fault if you get blown to tiny little bits.

And besides: Through its very characteristics, the AC20 is "nerfed" enough as it is, IMO.
It produces a lot of heat for a ballistics-weapon.
It packs a tiny amount of shots per ton
It recycles veeery slowly
It weighs a lot and uses a lot of slots - so much so that even a lot of bigger Mechs can't mount it (like almost all Highlanders)


S.

Edited by 1Sascha, 02 December 2013 - 02:35 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

East Indy, on 30 November 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

I've definitely noticed an uptick in dual-AC/20 Jagermechs, but they don't seem to be affecting match results.

In my games, I'm seeing them rofling pretty much anything they face. If I happen to be in an lrm mech-they are first target until they are dead.

[Joseph Mallan]

kamiko kross, on 02 December 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:

In my games, I'm seeing them rofling pretty much anything they face. If I happen to be in an lrm mech-they are first target until they are dead.

So... you are using a in game counter to the dual AC20. Thank you sir. For playing the game and not asking for a Gimme!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 02 December 2013 - 05:25 AM.

[Ecto Cooler]

Darth Bane001, on 02 December 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

I also think it sucks how so many people use the jager dual ac20 mechs. It's just annoying and boring. I haven't been steam rolled by them as they are fairly weak but they chose to go for the quick and easy kill than slugging it out. Thats their right of course but makes the game rather lacking in fun.

If they're weak and easy to kill, as you admit, it sounds like they're not a problem. A trade-off between firepower and survivability -- that's balance.

You can't then claim it's annoying and boring, because as you said -- people can play how they want. People have fun in different ways and styles of play. If AC/40 Jagers are inconsequential to how you play, who cares?

[Joseph Mallan]

Ecto Cooler, on 02 December 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

If they're weak and easy to kill, as you admit, it sounds like they're not a problem. A trade-off between firepower and survivability -- that's balance.

You can't then claim it's annoying and boring, because as you said -- people can play how they want. People have fun in different ways and styles of play. If AC/40 Jagers are inconsequential to how you play, who cares?

If only level heads like yours Could prevail!

[Randalf Yorgen]

would love to see the old ammo values brought back, then AC users would have to choose a little more carefully when to pull the trigger. Also changing the reload times would be good as well. AC20 = 10 seconds AC10 = 7seconds AC5 = 4 seconds AC2 = 1 second. This gives the AC2 and AC 20 the same DPS over 10 seconds The AC 5 gets a slight boost to 25 in 10 and the AC10 becomes the best with 30 points in 21 seconds. Restore the old ammo values and no one will be able to sit there and dakka dakka for the whole 15 minutes AND people will have to bring back-up weapons like Medium Lasers and what not.

Ran 5 matches in a row lastnight where there were between 3 and 8 ac40's on the other team and none of the names were the same. It is a little out of control at this point.

[Joseph Mallan]

Randalf Yorgen, on 02 December 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

would love to see the old ammo values brought back, then AC users would have to choose a little more carefully when to pull the trigger. Also changing the reload times would be good as well. AC20 = 10 seconds AC10 = 7seconds AC5 = 4 seconds AC2 = 1 second. This gives the AC2 and AC 20 the same DPS over 10 seconds The AC 5 gets a slight boost to 25 in 10 and the AC10 becomes the best with 30 points in 21 seconds. Restore the old ammo values and no one will be able to sit there and dakka dakka for the whole 15 minutes AND people will have to bring back-up weapons like Medium Lasers and what not.

Ran 5 matches in a row lastnight where there were between 3 and 8 ac40's on the other team and none of the names were the same. It is a little out of control at this point.

maybe you should look at it as preparation for Hunchback IICs! Only AC40 Jager's can't rapid fire 50 ton Mech that can throw 40 damage at you every few seconds!!! Oh wait ghost heat Made this a self destruct option!!! Stupid has ruined another tough Mech.

[anonymous161]

Just because they can be killed with the right team using their mechs like they should doesn't mean they can be annoying as hell, it's just a cheap way to play when you have half a dozen users on the other team just spamming ac20's it's a bit out of control. They dont really break the game but it's just not that much fun always going against the same kind of builds.